Dr. Herman Wiersinga is a campus pastor of the Gereformeerde Kerken in the Netherlands (RCN – Reformed Churches in the Netherlands). The doctrine of the Atonement is frequently referred to as “the heart of the gospel.” When Dr. Wiersinga attacked this doctrine and denied that the suffering and death of Christ was a payment for the sins of His people, there were repercussions—and, of course, rightly so.

Following is an excerpt from the 1976 Acts of Synod pertaining to this matter as it was under consideration at the CRC Synod last June:

“Background: Communication 11, A contains a translation of the action taken by the Synod of GKN (Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland) dealing with the views of Dr. Wiersinga. The Synod declared that Christ, ‘in the suffering and death which he underwent, bore in our stead the divine judgment on human guilt.’ This the Synod declared, ‘is an element of the confession of the church of such an essential nature that a doing injustice to it and contradiction of it is not admissible for the church.’ The Synod also indicated that it expects the consistory of Amsterdam to act in the light of this declaration, and made provisions for this declaration to be made public.”

Thereupon the 1976 CRC Synod decided to “request the Stated Clerk to write the Synod of the GKN expressing joy and appreciation for Its significant action, upholding the confession of the churches and the unity of the church in confession . . .” ( pp. 40, 41 1976 Acts of Synod).

The sequel to this is found in the first item of news about recent developments in the Dutch Churches as herewith given. These news items arc furnished by the Reformed Ecumenical News Exchange of December 7, 1976.

Wiersinga’s Consistory comes to his defense – The consistory of the Reformed Church of Amsterdam sent a letter to the Synod of the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands (n CN) expressing consternation at the latter‘s statement that the views of Dr. Herman Wiersinga on Christ’s atonement are inadmissible. The Amsterdam consistory claims that despite important differences, there is nevertheless far–reaching agreement on essential points. “In view of this agreement and unity in the faith, the consistory accepts Dr. Wiersinga in trust as its minister of the Word and believes that his views are admissible within the bounds of the confession, namely as a contribution to the discussion concerning the meaning of the atonement.” The consistory also challenged the Synod’s characterization of Wiersinga‘s views as a “threat to the unity of the faith.” Part of the Synod‘s recent judicium expressed confidence that the Amsterdam consistory would see to it that no denial of the Reformed doctrine of the atonement would occur in Wiersinga’s ministry. The consistory obviously would have no part in this.

The RCN [Reformed Churches in the Netherlands] Synod of November 24 responded that the letters of the Amsterdam consistory proposed no new arguments in favor of Wiersinga‘s doctrine. Synod referred the consistory to a Synodical committee to discuss the possibility of framing an appeal to the next Synod (1977) to revise its earlier judicium.

Reacting to the letter of the Amsterdam consistory, Dr. Herman Ridderbos (Gereformeerd Weekblad) expresses his consternation at the attitude of the consistory. Reminiscing, Dr. Ridderbos pointed out that this same church that now expresses alarm at the idea of having to discipline someone who challenges the doctrine of the atonement was one of the leaders in the Reformation of the Dutch church during the last half of the 19th century. During that period, the Amsterdam consistory required everyone coming to the Lord’s Supper to express their accord with Paul’s confession regarding the atonement of Christ, “Who was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification.”

Protests against Kuitert’s writings justified – At its November 24 session, the Synod of the RCN received a report from its Commission “Church and Theology” which sustained the objections that came out of the churches against the writings of Prof. H. M. Kuitert. According to the Commission, Dr. Kuitert does not sufficiently differentiate between general and special revelation in the Holy Scriptures. It questioned whether ascribing equal rights to all participants in the religious market (academic freedom in theology) is consistent with the command to preach the Gospel with finality and force.

The Synod, however, emphasized that its acceptance of the Commission’s report does not indicate agreement with the objections. Such a judgment cannot come until the Commission has finished its study on the nature of biblical authority. Kuitert, as in previous discussions, claimed to have been grossly misunderstood. “Theology is a science and as a result its problems can never be thoroughly discussed at a Synod.”

Reformed Churches in the Netherlands reassess membership in RES – Two of the RCN delegates to the Cape Town Reformed Ecumenical Synod in August recommended to the Synod of their church that it withdraw from the RES. The other four members of the RCN delegation argued for continued membership.

The Cape Town RES restated its conviction that dual membership in the WCC [World Council of Churches] and the RES is inconsistent. It also exerted pressure on the RCN to deal with what it sees as alarming developments in the RCN especially with regard to theology and discipline.

Rev. A. Vos, director of the RCN Mission Center and Prof. L. Schuurman questioned the role of the Reformed Ecumenical Synod in the midst of other ecumenical organizations. They suggested that the RES assumes greater authority over its member churches than can be derived from its constitution. Moreover, the membership of the RCN in the RES is an obstacle to some churches that should be members in the RES because the latter is their only ecumenical contact, they magnanimously argued.

The majority, however, felt that it was important for the RCN to maintain contact with the churches in the RES, the only place where the RCN has contact with many of these churches. Moreover many problems plaguing the RCN will increasingly become problems for other RES member churches.

The RCN Synod decided to maintain its dual membership in the RES and WCC. But it refused to accept their dual membership as being “inconsistent.” The Synod also accepted the invitation of the RES to discuss through its Interim Committee once more the problems between the RES and the RCN.