Editors, TORCH AND TRUMPET, Grand Rapids, Mich.
A salute to Mrs. Vanden Heuvel for her well-written article re the “underground church” in the May issue of your magazine. She deserves tribute for her courage and forthrightness.
I must confess, I can’t understand how the faculty of Calvin Seminary and the Board of Trustees can even consider a man like Prof. Koops for an appointment to the Seminary. It beats me. Prof. Koops has been showing his colors for a long time already (cf. e.g. Reformed Journal, Nov. ’68), and when a man so clearly violates the creeds and Church Order of the Chr. Ref. Church, he surely has no place in the Seminary, of all places.
One more thing: The Committee for closer relations with the O.P. Church reports in the Agenda of synod that the similar Committee of the O.P. church “received from the member churches many statements reflecting serious misgivings concerning the theological and ecclesiastical positions being taken by pastors and teachers in the Chr. Ref. fold.” This seems to be the main stumbling-block now on the road to further progress. I have just one question: Can you blame the O.P. churches for feeling as they do when men like Prof. Koops teach and write as they do? Let’s forget about closer relations with the O.P. Church (and the Canadian Reformed for that matter) until we clean our own house first.
J. TUININGA
A salute to Mrs. Vanden Heuvel for her well-written article re the “underground church” in the May issue of your magazine. She deserves tribute for her courage and forthrightness.
I must confess, I can’t understand how the faculty of Calvin Seminary and the Board of Trustees can even consider a man like Prof. Koops for an appointment to the Seminary. It beats me. Prof. Koops has been showing his colors for a long time already (cf. e.g. Reformed Journal, Nov. ’68), and when a man so clearly violates the creeds and Church Order of the Chr. Ref. Church, he surely has no place in the Seminary, of all places.
One more thing: The Committee for closer relations with the O.P. Church reports in the Agenda of synod that the similar Committee of the O.P. church “received from the member churches many statements reflecting serious misgivings concerning the theological and ecclesiastical positions being taken by pastors and teachers in the Chr. Ref. fold.” This seems to be the main stumbling-block now on the road to further progress. I have just one question: Can you blame the O.P. churches for feeling as they do when men like Prof. Koops teach and write as they do? Let’s forget about closer relations with the O.P. Church (and the Canadian Reformed for that matter) until we clean our own house first.
J. TUININGA