I have just read another of Rev. Clarence Boomsma’s discerning articles in The Banner on “The CRC—What Is Happening to Us?” With good reason the writer, who served as president of the CRC Synod of 1972, is being commended for what he has to say. Like an experienced and competent physician or surgeon, Rev. Boomsma has been laying his finger on the ailment or ailments of a seriously sick patient—in this case, the CRC He reads the symptoms aright and his diagnosis is beyond dispute. So far, so good. Thus, thank you to Rev. Boomsma as a diagnostician for a job well done.
But, as these articles appear one after another in the official organ of the CRC, am I the only one to experience a growing impatience in waiting for the writer’s prescription for the cure for this seriously ill patient? A diagnosis may be ever so correct and brilliant; but, if the diagnosis goes on and on, the bystanders at the bedside will soon say, “But what can be done? Is there a cure for a malady like this?” Members of the family know that time is of the essence, and they are straining to hurry to the pharmacy for the needed remedy before the patient dies.
Now it may be that Rev. Boomsma will have gotten up to prescribing a cure before these lines of mine appear in print. It would seem to be time for it. But, meanwhile, allow me to ask you to consider polarization as a prescription, at least, to help combat the ravages of the disease that is being described in this ongoing series of articles about the CRC.
A Gem from Scripture – Polarization, or the drawing together of those determined to be true to God and His Word in a time of spiritual deterioration, may conceivably be challenged as being contrary to the spirit of Scripture. However, the same Bible that prescribes peace, harmony, and unity in the church, also lays it down as a rule, “Shall two walk together, except they have agreed?” (Amos 3:3).
However, the gem from Scripture that I have in mind to illustrate the warrant for polarization when apostasy threatens is found at the close of the Old Testament. In Malachi 3 we find the following about the wayward people of Israel and the God-fearing remnant among them. The spiritual condition had deteriorated to a sad state of affairs. We read:
“Your words have been stout against me, saith Jehovah. Yet ye say, What have we spoken against thee? Ye have said, It is vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept his charge, and that we have walked mournfully before Jehovah of hosts? and now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are built up; yea, they tempt God, and escape” (vss. 13–15).
Israel was on a toboggan of apostasy!
Now notice what follows:
“Then they that feared Jehovah spake one with another; and Jehovah hearkened, and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before him, for them that feared Jehovah, and that thought upon his name. And they shall be mine, saith Jehovah of hosts, even mine own possession, in the day that I make; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him. Then shall ye return and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not” (vss. 16–18). For everything there is a time and season obviously, also for polarization!
A Just Cause – To polarize in the CRC or in any other denomination for no just cause would be divisive, irresponsible, contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture, and therefore completely indefensible. However, not to polarize when the time is at hand is to aid and abet the infiltration of apostasy by one’s failure to take a united stand against it. Those who fail or refuse to have any part in this, while at the same time insisting that they are staunch conservatives, would he well-advised to be reminded again that apostasy does not come in on hobnailed boots hut on velvet slippers.
Well do I know that there are those who seem to get great satisfaction in making a caricature of the conservative, in setting him up as a straw man and then pummeling him into a ridiculous pulp. Such irresponsible attacks get us nowhere except to make a bad matter worse. An out-pouring of haughty disdain for conservatives, whether it appears in print or elsewhere, should not frighten anyone armed with the sword of the Spirit. Ridicule may be the price the conservative has to pay in identifying himself for what he is, but the cause is worth it. Such ridicule may very well be a compliment when viewed in its proper light.
Of course, the bona-fide conservative will exercise all due caution not to go around with a chip on his shoulder; neither will he be quick to jump into the fray and to do battle when the issues involved concern only what is merely traditional, some pet notion, prejudice, or the adiaphora (matters of indifference). Polarization is a defensible posture only when one’s cause is worthy in the light of Scripture.
Let’s have it then: what is our just cause? Simply this: “Faith of our fathers, holy Faith! We will be true to thee till death.”
That’s what we read in Jude 3, 4: “Beloved, while I was giving all diligence to write unto you of our common salvation, I was constrained to write unto you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints.”
The “faith” of which Jude speaks is not the act of faith but rather the object of our faith—the sound doctrine or teaching of Scripture. Although not on a par with Scripture, our doctrinal standards—the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dordt—we believe to be a true and helpful summary of this sound doctrine of Scripture. It is for this “faith” that we are to contend earnestly.
It cannot be said too often that it is precisely at this point -what a person believes about the Bible that liberals and conservatives always come to a parting of the ways. And it is therefore also precisely at this point that issues disturbing the peace of the CRC give rise to serious controversy. It is the Bible as the Word of God that is at stake repeatedly as controversy arises about issues, one after another; the authority, the infallibility, the inerrancy of Scripture; creation or evolution; the historicity of the early chapters of Genesis; the extent of God’s saving love; ecumenical involvements and affiliations; women in church offices; preaching of the Word; close versus open Communion; the charismatic movement or Neo-Pentecostalism; lodge members in the church; and so on, and so on. As these controversies arise one at a time, it may be possible to play down the seriousness of them for an unwary constituency. but let’s not be fooled. The alert and informed conservative should be able to see the over-all design of the father of lies as well as the pattern in what he is doing.
It is the Bible as the authentic, inspired, infallible, and inerrant Word of God that is at stake. Satan knows only too well that, when he once succeeds in shaking our hold on Scripture, the rest is easy. That’s why Satan began his attack on God’s Word already in Paradise when he cornered Eve with his diabolical question, “Yea, hath God said . . .?” That was the beginning of the so-called “New Hermeneutic”!
Furthermore, the seriousness of tampering with Scripture is pointed up once again at the very close of the Bible when the Lord warns in no uncertain terms against the evil of adding to or taking away from “the words of the book of this prophecy” (Rev. 22:18, 19). Certainly, our Lord Jesus was speaking also of Scripture when He said to the church in Philadelphia, “Hold fast that which thou hast, that no one take thy crown” (Rev. 3:11 ).
And so we rally around the Word—not around any man, whether he be Paul or Apollos or Cephas. That’s the polarization we advocate, something that is always written large in the history of every reformation of the church. And for this no apology is needed.
To “contend earnestly” and to “hold fast” we must meet together, talk together, walk together, and act together. United we stand, and divided we fall. United around the Word we have the living God at the center, above and below us, and everywhere round about us. “If God is for us, who is against us?” (Rom. 8:31). The closer we draw to the Word, the closer we draw to each other.
Polarization as Prelude – By telephone and from correspondence I have been made aware that, in advocating polarization rather than secession as our present course to follow, I have touched a sensitive nerve. Both agreement and disagreement have been expressed, at times in no uncertain terms. Hopefully, it may clarify matters if it be pointed out that I am not pleading for polarization as an end in itself hut rather as a prelude to something else to come.
A well-informed and interested correspondent—a minister in another denomination who suggests: “better not mention my name”—has misgivings about the wisdom of polarization. He writes:
“‘Polarization,’ as you call it, runs the danger of turning the CRC into, what they call in the Netherlands, a ‘modaliteiten Kerk’ [different modes or forms within one and the same denomination]. The ‘Concerned,’ or whatever name they choose, are fighting for their place in the church, but in the meantime do not take the ultimate step of obedience; call the church back, in word AND DEED, to the Word of God in accordance with the Reformed Creeds. Thus the Hervormde Kerk became a ‘modaliteiten kerk,’ in which there is place for everyone. I believe it would be detrimental if your struggle in the end would result in a similar confusion. It would prevent the emergence of a truly Reformed Church (with which we then could unite).”
This interested observer of our CRC also adds the following comment: “Your list [changes in the CRC] is not complete. Think of what your church sings. Singing, more than anything, can undermine the ‘gereformeerde ruggegraat’ [Reformed backbone]. Do away with Methodistic, pietistic hymns . . .” Who of us would deny that such singing, although officially kept out at the front door of the CRC, has little difficulty slipping in through the back?
However, I would like, in as far as possible, to put the mind of this correspondent to rest with respect to the polarization here proposed. I do not envision polarization as a permanent solution to the conservative’s problem in the CRC but rather as a prelude or precursor to what ought to follow. For liberals and conservatives to remain indefinitely in tension under the same denominational roof, whether the CRC or any other, will eventually become intolerable. Like Abraham and Lot and their herdsmen, it may eventually be better if they have a parting of their ways.
And why is this so?
– because islands of conservatism are bound to be inundated if the waves and winds of liberalism are indefinitely allowed to blow and swirl unchecked around them;
– because none of us live unto ourselves alone; we have a corporate responsibility as members of a denomination as well as our local responsibility within our individual congregations;
– because constant tension, infighting, controversy, and mounting preoccupation with differences among ourselves will finally lead to the frustration of spinning our wheels and of consuming our time and energy in mutual conflict without being able to get on with our mandate to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth;
– because the indefinite paying of financial quotas for causes that may come to forfeit our confidence, with the result that a our hearts will no longer be in such giving, will become a galling yoke and an intolerable situation;
– because we may not risk the eternal welfare of our children and grandchildren to the nurture of our mother church if retrogression continues and if we eventually find in her no intention of an unmistakable and unambiguous enthusiasm for the historic Christian faith.
Prelude to what? – Once again, I must ask for the patience of the reader in waiting for the conclusion of this matter, hopefully in next month’s issue. What remains to be said is something along the following lines:
– polarization is necessary for conservatives to give each other mutual support and encouragement in doing what the Lord requires of them. “Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend” (Prov. 27:17);
– polarization is needed to put on an all-out, diligent, organized, and prayerful campaign for reformation within the CRC so that we may be able to say in good conscience that, with God’s help, we have done what we could;
– polarization is of necessity the sine-Qua-non precursor to any secession that may be expected really to amount to something in the sight of God and man.
The Lord willing, more next time.
But, as these articles appear one after another in the official organ of the CRC, am I the only one to experience a growing impatience in waiting for the writer’s prescription for the cure for this seriously ill patient? A diagnosis may be ever so correct and brilliant; but, if the diagnosis goes on and on, the bystanders at the bedside will soon say, “But what can be done? Is there a cure for a malady like this?” Members of the family know that time is of the essence, and they are straining to hurry to the pharmacy for the needed remedy before the patient dies.
Now it may be that Rev. Boomsma will have gotten up to prescribing a cure before these lines of mine appear in print. It would seem to be time for it. But, meanwhile, allow me to ask you to consider polarization as a prescription, at least, to help combat the ravages of the disease that is being described in this ongoing series of articles about the CRC.
A Gem from Scripture – Polarization, or the drawing together of those determined to be true to God and His Word in a time of spiritual deterioration, may conceivably be challenged as being contrary to the spirit of Scripture. However, the same Bible that prescribes peace, harmony, and unity in the church, also lays it down as a rule, “Shall two walk together, except they have agreed?” (Amos 3:3).
However, the gem from Scripture that I have in mind to illustrate the warrant for polarization when apostasy threatens is found at the close of the Old Testament. In Malachi 3 we find the following about the wayward people of Israel and the God-fearing remnant among them. The spiritual condition had deteriorated to a sad state of affairs. We read:
“Your words have been stout against me, saith Jehovah. Yet ye say, What have we spoken against thee? Ye have said, It is vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept his charge, and that we have walked mournfully before Jehovah of hosts? and now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are built up; yea, they tempt God, and escape” (vss. 13–15).
Israel was on a toboggan of apostasy!
Now notice what follows:
“Then they that feared Jehovah spake one with another; and Jehovah hearkened, and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before him, for them that feared Jehovah, and that thought upon his name. And they shall be mine, saith Jehovah of hosts, even mine own possession, in the day that I make; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him. Then shall ye return and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not” (vss. 16–18). For everything there is a time and season obviously, also for polarization!
A Just Cause – To polarize in the CRC or in any other denomination for no just cause would be divisive, irresponsible, contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture, and therefore completely indefensible. However, not to polarize when the time is at hand is to aid and abet the infiltration of apostasy by one’s failure to take a united stand against it. Those who fail or refuse to have any part in this, while at the same time insisting that they are staunch conservatives, would he well-advised to be reminded again that apostasy does not come in on hobnailed boots hut on velvet slippers.
Well do I know that there are those who seem to get great satisfaction in making a caricature of the conservative, in setting him up as a straw man and then pummeling him into a ridiculous pulp. Such irresponsible attacks get us nowhere except to make a bad matter worse. An out-pouring of haughty disdain for conservatives, whether it appears in print or elsewhere, should not frighten anyone armed with the sword of the Spirit. Ridicule may be the price the conservative has to pay in identifying himself for what he is, but the cause is worth it. Such ridicule may very well be a compliment when viewed in its proper light.
Of course, the bona-fide conservative will exercise all due caution not to go around with a chip on his shoulder; neither will he be quick to jump into the fray and to do battle when the issues involved concern only what is merely traditional, some pet notion, prejudice, or the adiaphora (matters of indifference). Polarization is a defensible posture only when one’s cause is worthy in the light of Scripture.
Let’s have it then: what is our just cause? Simply this: “Faith of our fathers, holy Faith! We will be true to thee till death.”
That’s what we read in Jude 3, 4: “Beloved, while I was giving all diligence to write unto you of our common salvation, I was constrained to write unto you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints.”
The “faith” of which Jude speaks is not the act of faith but rather the object of our faith—the sound doctrine or teaching of Scripture. Although not on a par with Scripture, our doctrinal standards—the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dordt—we believe to be a true and helpful summary of this sound doctrine of Scripture. It is for this “faith” that we are to contend earnestly.
It cannot be said too often that it is precisely at this point -what a person believes about the Bible that liberals and conservatives always come to a parting of the ways. And it is therefore also precisely at this point that issues disturbing the peace of the CRC give rise to serious controversy. It is the Bible as the Word of God that is at stake repeatedly as controversy arises about issues, one after another; the authority, the infallibility, the inerrancy of Scripture; creation or evolution; the historicity of the early chapters of Genesis; the extent of God’s saving love; ecumenical involvements and affiliations; women in church offices; preaching of the Word; close versus open Communion; the charismatic movement or Neo-Pentecostalism; lodge members in the church; and so on, and so on. As these controversies arise one at a time, it may be possible to play down the seriousness of them for an unwary constituency. but let’s not be fooled. The alert and informed conservative should be able to see the over-all design of the father of lies as well as the pattern in what he is doing.
It is the Bible as the authentic, inspired, infallible, and inerrant Word of God that is at stake. Satan knows only too well that, when he once succeeds in shaking our hold on Scripture, the rest is easy. That’s why Satan began his attack on God’s Word already in Paradise when he cornered Eve with his diabolical question, “Yea, hath God said . . .?” That was the beginning of the so-called “New Hermeneutic”!
Furthermore, the seriousness of tampering with Scripture is pointed up once again at the very close of the Bible when the Lord warns in no uncertain terms against the evil of adding to or taking away from “the words of the book of this prophecy” (Rev. 22:18, 19). Certainly, our Lord Jesus was speaking also of Scripture when He said to the church in Philadelphia, “Hold fast that which thou hast, that no one take thy crown” (Rev. 3:11 ).
And so we rally around the Word—not around any man, whether he be Paul or Apollos or Cephas. That’s the polarization we advocate, something that is always written large in the history of every reformation of the church. And for this no apology is needed.
To “contend earnestly” and to “hold fast” we must meet together, talk together, walk together, and act together. United we stand, and divided we fall. United around the Word we have the living God at the center, above and below us, and everywhere round about us. “If God is for us, who is against us?” (Rom. 8:31). The closer we draw to the Word, the closer we draw to each other.
Polarization as Prelude – By telephone and from correspondence I have been made aware that, in advocating polarization rather than secession as our present course to follow, I have touched a sensitive nerve. Both agreement and disagreement have been expressed, at times in no uncertain terms. Hopefully, it may clarify matters if it be pointed out that I am not pleading for polarization as an end in itself hut rather as a prelude to something else to come.
A well-informed and interested correspondent—a minister in another denomination who suggests: “better not mention my name”—has misgivings about the wisdom of polarization. He writes:
“‘Polarization,’ as you call it, runs the danger of turning the CRC into, what they call in the Netherlands, a ‘modaliteiten Kerk’ [different modes or forms within one and the same denomination]. The ‘Concerned,’ or whatever name they choose, are fighting for their place in the church, but in the meantime do not take the ultimate step of obedience; call the church back, in word AND DEED, to the Word of God in accordance with the Reformed Creeds. Thus the Hervormde Kerk became a ‘modaliteiten kerk,’ in which there is place for everyone. I believe it would be detrimental if your struggle in the end would result in a similar confusion. It would prevent the emergence of a truly Reformed Church (with which we then could unite).”
This interested observer of our CRC also adds the following comment: “Your list [changes in the CRC] is not complete. Think of what your church sings. Singing, more than anything, can undermine the ‘gereformeerde ruggegraat’ [Reformed backbone]. Do away with Methodistic, pietistic hymns . . .” Who of us would deny that such singing, although officially kept out at the front door of the CRC, has little difficulty slipping in through the back?
However, I would like, in as far as possible, to put the mind of this correspondent to rest with respect to the polarization here proposed. I do not envision polarization as a permanent solution to the conservative’s problem in the CRC but rather as a prelude or precursor to what ought to follow. For liberals and conservatives to remain indefinitely in tension under the same denominational roof, whether the CRC or any other, will eventually become intolerable. Like Abraham and Lot and their herdsmen, it may eventually be better if they have a parting of their ways.
And why is this so?
– because islands of conservatism are bound to be inundated if the waves and winds of liberalism are indefinitely allowed to blow and swirl unchecked around them;
– because none of us live unto ourselves alone; we have a corporate responsibility as members of a denomination as well as our local responsibility within our individual congregations;
– because constant tension, infighting, controversy, and mounting preoccupation with differences among ourselves will finally lead to the frustration of spinning our wheels and of consuming our time and energy in mutual conflict without being able to get on with our mandate to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth;
– because the indefinite paying of financial quotas for causes that may come to forfeit our confidence, with the result that a our hearts will no longer be in such giving, will become a galling yoke and an intolerable situation;
– because we may not risk the eternal welfare of our children and grandchildren to the nurture of our mother church if retrogression continues and if we eventually find in her no intention of an unmistakable and unambiguous enthusiasm for the historic Christian faith.
Prelude to what? – Once again, I must ask for the patience of the reader in waiting for the conclusion of this matter, hopefully in next month’s issue. What remains to be said is something along the following lines:
– polarization is necessary for conservatives to give each other mutual support and encouragement in doing what the Lord requires of them. “Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend” (Prov. 27:17);
– polarization is needed to put on an all-out, diligent, organized, and prayerful campaign for reformation within the CRC so that we may be able to say in good conscience that, with God’s help, we have done what we could;
– polarization is of necessity the sine-Qua-non precursor to any secession that may be expected really to amount to something in the sight of God and man.
The Lord willing, more next time.