In view of the increasingly closer relationships between our Christian Reformed Churches and the Reformed Church in America as well as our concern about the Reformed faith in general, our readers should be acquainted with the RCA’s proposed new confession and the issues involved in its adoption. Rev, Jerome Julien, long-time secretary of the Reformed Fellowship and now pastor of the First Christian Reformed Church of Pella, Iowa, provides us with this careful analysis of the important document.

When the General Synod of the Reformed Church in America meets this summer one matter before them will be the adoption of the new Confession of Faith, Our Song at Hope. If adopted, it will be used along side of the present confessional standards: the Heidelberg Catechism, the Netherlands or Belgic Confession and the Canons of the Synod of Dordt. Since this new confession came before the churches of that denomination in 1974, it has met mixed reactions. Some have hailed it as a fine statement of faith. Others have strongly disagreed with it.

Our Song of Hope is a unique confession, written in poetic form and arranged as a song. There are twenty-one stanzas, each having eight lines. These stanzas are arranged under seven different general themes such as “Hope in the Coming of the Lord,” “Our Song in a Hopeless World,” “Jesus Christ Our Only Hope,” “Our Hope in God’s Words” and so on. These stanzas are preceded by a refrain and followed by a prayer.

Ordinarily an “outsider” to a denomination is “on thin ice” when he presumes to be critical of that denomination’s inner working. If, perhaps, he is of the same family of denominations his criticisms might be accepted, though usually they are not. However, J have no reservations in giving a brief and sketchy analysis of this proposed confession because the Reformed Church in America has asked for it. Marion de Velder, former General Secretary for the Reformed Church, wrote, “We hope for the widest circulation and use of OUR SONG OF HOPE ‘to encourage many in all the churches of Christendom as well as those beyond the walls of the churches to participate in the process and make their suggestions’” (Our Song . . . , p. v). Dr. Eugene Heideman, secretary of the committee producing the document, also invites outsiders to do this, in the introduction to his exposition of the confession (Our Song . . . , p. 2). Therefore with complete freedom a critique is offered.

Is a new Confession necessary?

But before we go any further we should ask, why a new confession? Is a new confession necessary or justified?

To answer these questions we must first consider why the Church has confessions at all. Obviously, the Church does not have them to place them above the Word of God in importance. Instead, being summaries of the various teachings contained in the Bible, they help the Church teach the truths of Scripture, defend these truths against heresy, sense a oneness in the faith and give a testimony of this truth to the world. A. A. Hodge wrote in his Outlines of Theology (p. 112): “The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament having been given by inspiration of God, are for man in his present state the only and all-sufficient rule of faith and practice. This divine word, therefore, is the only standard of doctrine which has any intrinsic authority binding the consciences of men. All other standards are of value or authority only as they teach what the Scriptures teach.’” He goes on to point out that since men find it helpful to have things put in a logical and orderly fashion confessions will be written. In this activity the Church has often been busy.

When is a new confession justified? Dr. Cornelius Van Til in his Junior Systematics syllabus indicates when a new or more specific formulation of the truths of Scripture must be made. He writes, “. . . it is not until Systematic Theology has progressed beyond the creeds that the creeds will themselves be revised” (p. 4). Continuing, he points out that there is no value in or justification for a statement of faith which would be more vague than one presently used.

In other words, there is reason to develop a new confessional statement only when it becomes necessary to clarify and explain more thoroughly the teaching of Scripture. It was for this reason that the Reformed Confessions were penned in the decades following the Reformation.

Dr. Heideman justifies Our Song . . . by writing, “Much has happened since the days of the Reformation; we face problems of our own” (Our Song of Hope, p. 15). He is saying that the Reformation Confessions arc inadequate today because, expressing the faith of the Church, they do not express the hope of the Church.

Is the proposed Confession an Improvement?

If we grant that Dr. Heideman is correct in stating that there is a need for a further, up-to-date confession, then Our Song . .. must be scrutinized as to whether it fits the qualifications of new confessions. Is Our Song . . . a more precise confession? Does it go beyond the confessions of the Reformation?

The best way to answer these questions is to look at Our Song . . . itself. Since the purpose of Our Song . . . , according to Rev. de Velder, is to express our “Christian faith in our contemporary world” a number of points must be included. It cannot focus, for example, on the sovereignty of God in salvation as do the Canons of Dordt. Its scope must be broader.

On the Trinity

The basic Biblical and Christian teaching of the Trinity must be present if this creed is to express the Christian faith in our world. All the way through we. read of “God,” “the true Son of God” or “Christ” and “the Spirit.” The only reference to the Trinity as such comes in the opening portion which is called the refrain. There we read:

Our God loves His world, He called it into being, He renews it through Jesus Christ, He governs it by His Spirit.

In an appendix we are told that these lines refer to the Belgic Confession, Articles 8–11, several of which deal with the Trinity. When I read the words of Our Song . . . many questions come into my mind. But when I read the Belgic Confession I can only label Our Song . . . as vague. It gives no new insights; it offers no greater precision of statement.

On the Scriptures

No confession would express the faith of the Church without speaking on revelation and inspiration. This would be especially true today since it is on this field where battle is being done; it is in this area of thought where precision must be sought. Does Our Song . . . help? It says, “He speaks to us now through His inspired Scriptures” (stanza 1). Why not “in His inspired Scriptures”? In the commentary on Our Song . . . , Dr. Heideman points out that the important question is “Do we hear God speaking when we read this book?” This is a subjectivism and one wonders whether it is an attempt to confessionalize neo-orthodoxy. Stanzas 6–8 do not remove this suspicion.

On Sin

Sin is another subject which must be included in an up–to–date confession. Stanza 2 puts it this way:

We know Christ to be our only hope. We have enmeshed our world in a realm of sin, rebelled against God, accepted man‘s oppression at man, and even crucified His Son. God‘s world has been trapped by our fall, governments entangled by human pride, and nature polluted by mankind’s greed.

What of the guilt and pollution which is ours through sin? What of sin‘s death? Is there a reason why Adam and his transgression are not mentioned? Is not original sin to be reckoned with, as well as actual sin? True, that “we have . . . rebelled against God” is mentioned, but the sentence’s emphasis seems to be on only present rebellion, not the original rebellion of Adam against God. Do the words, “we refused to live in the image of God” really express our condition, as Dr. Heideman suggests? He says that these words mean that we have denied “the very nature which God gave us from the beginning” (p. 24).

About Christ

Even the statements about Jesus Christ are vague! Is it quite correct to say, “He was born of the virgin Mary, sharing our genes and our instincts . . .” (stanza 3). An instinct is “the innate aspect of behavior that is unlearned . . .” according to the dictionary. Are not our instincts sinful, too? Or, is there no such thing as the total corruption by sin? If there is no such thing as total corruption by sin then the Scripture is wrong and so are our confessions. If there is such a thing as total corruption by sin then Jesus partook in that, tool I would hope that neither would be the view of Our Song. . . Nevertheless, the vagueness of the new confession allows any view, it seems!

Why did Jesus come? This is also an important question in any age, not the least in ours. The confession states:

Jesus Christ is the hope of God’s world. In His death, the justice of God is established; forgiveness of sin is proclaimed. On the day of His resurrection, the tomb was empty; His disciples saw Him; death was defeated; new life had come. God’s purpose for His world was sealed.

Does this statement say enough—does it even say the truth—about so central a Biblical truth as the atonement? After all, what is the Christian faith without the death—and resurrection, too—of Jesus Christ? Missed here is the emphasis on the satisfaction of God’s justice. Instead, the emphasis seems to be on something like a “moral influence theory” of the atonement—heresy in the light of Biblical teaching. The commentary on this stanza warns against an emphasis on either a “universalism” or election!

Regarding the Lord’s Return

When it comes to the return of Christ, this confession is also vague. It states (stanza 9):

In each year and in every place we expect the coming of Christ’s Spirit.

This coming the commentary relates to the Second Coming of Christ. You can read this any way and be in trouble. Is the return of Christ only the coming of His Spirit? There have been those who have believed this. Yet, we have always emphasized a personal, literal, visible return of Jesus because this is what Scripture teaches. If‘, on the other hand, we are told that the commentary is incorrect in relating this to Christ’s return to what does it refer? Is this statement on target if it is to mean something about the work of the Holy Spirit?

Later (stanza 21), there is another statement about Christ’s return. It says:

God will renew the world through Jesus. He will put unrighteousness out, purify the works of men’s hands, and perfect their fellowship in Himself. He will wipe away every tear; death shall be no more. There will be a new heaven and a new earth, and His creation will be filled with His glory.

At first reading these words are rather beautiful. But for a confession are they sufficient? Are they specific enough? Do they go beyond what has already been written in our confessions? The answer to this is “no.” In fact, they only confuse the issue, and intentionally, too. Dr. Heideman writes in the commentary: “When we read the great passages in Scripture dealing with the coming of Christ on the Great Day of the Lord, we often quarrel about their precise meaning.” Some, he continues, want to emphasize the symbolic meaning, others the literal meaning. “Our Song of Hope does not want to leave the impression that these differing ways of understanding the words of Scripture are unimportant. It sees value in each position and sometimes speaks one way, sometimes another. We are conscious of the weakness of our understanding and wait upon the Spirit of the Lord for wisdom” (pp. 76f). Certainly this confession has not clarified an important Biblical teaching. It has only allowed it to become more vague. And in the day of Hal Lindsey’s Late, Great Planet Earth who needs vagueness!

Besides lack of clarity on the return, there is lack of clarity concerning the judgment. Is it quite correct to put it, as does stanza 5:

In the age to come, He is the judge, rejecting unrighteousness, isolating His enemies to hell, blessing His new creation in Christ.

Is there a softening of judgment here? Is it only “isolation” or is it “condemnation”? Why does this confession seem to deliberately side-step being specific?

Regarding the Holy Spirit

What about the work of the Holy Spirit? In a day of charismatic emphasis a precise formulation could be valuable, but again all we get is vagueness. Stanza 14 begins:

God’s Spirit leads us into Truth— the Truth of Christ’s salvation, into increasing knowledge of all existence.

What really does this mean? It continues:

He rejoices in human awareness of God’s creation and gives freedom to those on the frontiers of research.

We are overwhelmed by the growth of our knowledge. While our truths come in broken fragments, we expect the Spirit to unite these in Christ.

And the commentary shows that the Christian answer is not a Christian approach to all of life but the hope that on the Great Day when the refinement of judgment will take place all these bits and pieces of knowledge which we have will fall into place and the gold and silver aspects will remain.

Election

The only mention of election is that it is unto service. It says:

Christ elects His church to proclaim His Word and celebrate the sacraments, to worship His name, and to live as His disciples.

The reason for this election is so that the Church will act in the midst of the world as Israel did of old. Where is the idea of election by sovereign grace, according to God’s pleasure and for His glory? Where is the election which is unto salvation?

The Church and Means of Grace

There seems to be some confusion, also when it comes to the Church. We hear of “all Christ’s people” in stanza 7. This is explained in the commentary as “the unity of mankind.” Is this what the Church is? No wonder election is played down!

The means of grace are explained in a careless fashion, too. In explaining stanza 3, the commentary states, “We are willing in our baptism to be forgiven for our own individual sins . . .” (p. 25). Later on, in stanza 18 to be exact, we have a statement on baptism. Must this statement be understood in the light of the comment in Dr. Heideman’s commentary, or is this point also to be ambiguous with reason?

When it comes to the Lord’s Supper a whole new view is given. Stanza 19 states:

Christ places His Table in this world. He takes up our bread and wine to represent His sacrifice, to bind His ministry to our daily work, to unite us in His righteousness.

Explaining these words, Dr. Heideman paints out that in ancient times the people would bring their own bread and wine to the Table as a thank-offering. They were “accepted by the minister on behalf of Christ. This bread and wine was then consecrated, broken and poured out, and served to the people. The Supper thus became a vivid act in which the fruit of men’s hands was to be united to the ministry of Christ in the world. By using those materials, the people were reminded that Christ’s life and ministry had not been some kind of spiritual activity apart from the physical life of the world. Jesus Christ, true Son of God, had lived as true man, with a physical body and blood, which had been crucified on a cross. The physical elements consecrated at the Table recalled again and again the nature of Christ’s sacrifice” (p. 71 ). I ask you, is this an elaboration of the Biblical and confessional meaning of the Lord’s Supper, or is it a substitution?

Evangelization

Evangelization is explained in two ways. According to the commentary, it is the Holy Spirit working through social agencies for human justice! Of course, it is also explained as the proclamation of the good news. But you will notice that stanza 16 includes both emphasizes as being evangelization. In fact, both are apparently preaching!

The Spirit sends His church to call sinners to repentance, to proclaim the good news that Jesus is personal Savior and Lord.

He sends it out in ministry to preach good news to the poor, righteousness to the nations, and peace among mankind.

On Salvation

And salvation? What is it according to Our Song of Hope? In stanza 3 it is explained as:

Being united to His humanity, we know ourselves when we rest in Him.

Stanza 20 also makes some vague statements about it:

God saves the world through Jesus. Those who call on His name will have life. His hand reaches out beyond those who say “Lord” to the infants who live in the atmosphere of faith, even to the farthest stars and planets—all His creation.

Besides finding a lack of precision, am I reading into all of this a deadly, unbiblical Arminianism or is it really there?

Besides all of this vague theologizing, if this confession is adopted, the Reformed Church in America is adopting some pronouncements on social issues which not all in the IlCA would agree with, I would hope.

According to the commentary, stanza 10 allows for civil disobedience even if it is revolutionary ( p. 47)! The confession puts it in veiled language:

We must obey God rather than men, waiting upon His Spirit, filled with the patience of Christ.

Family planning is confessionalized!

He makes us the stewards of life to plan its beginning, to love in its living, and to care in its dying (stanza 13).

Abortion was apparently too hot of an issue to speak on.

Also in stanza 13 is a statement on divorce—though it is very soft!

He makes us the stewards of marriage with its lifelong commitment to love; yet He knows our frailty of heart.

Our Conclusion

Many more paints could be made and each of those already mentioned explained and criticized more fully. There are underlying suppositions here which are questionable. For instance, what really is the work of the Holy Spirit? However, we have seen enough of this confession to know it is vague, confusing and not an elaboration of confessional statements already held. The hope of the Church can only grow out of the faith of the Church. This is not encouraged in Our Song.

It is to be hoped that the Reformed people in the RCA will rise up against such a confessional statement as this! I, for one, could not and would not live with it. Thankfully, this is not before the Christian Reformed Church. Would that our Reformed brothers and sisters were not troubled by it, either. Nevertheless, since it is before that denomination a word from God’s Word is in order: “Contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3b).