The October issue of The Outlook brought together several articles around one theme. The Board of Reformed Fellowship intends to publish more thematic issues from time to time.

With Rev. Kloosterman I am grateful that we had the opportunity to write, to publish, and to read several articles dealing with catechism preaching. May our interaction with one another contribute to better catechism preaching today. As Rev. Kloosterman indicates, his response to my article should not be seen as a disagreement about the necessity of catechism preaching. On this we are fully agreed. Where we seem to have some disagreement is on the construction of the catechism sermon how the catechism sermon is to be structured.

In my article, I tried to persuade the readers that in preparing a catechism sermon, the preacher first ought to locate a pertinent Bible text related to the particular catechism question and answer for that week. He ought to study that Biblical text with all the tools at his disposal-lexicons, commentaries, sermonic helps, etc. From that study of the Biblical text, a sermon outline gradually will emerge. He then will incorporate the catechism materials into his sermon outline to explain the Bible text further or to assist in the application of that text to the faith and life of the church members. But the starting point and the outline of the sermon ought to rise from the Scripture text, not the catechism text.

Rev. Kloosterman fears that by using this method of constructing the catechism sermon, I am setting the Scripture against the Catechism. I am not intending to do so, but I realize that I leave myself open to this charge. So let me respond.

We all know Christians who claim, “No creed but Christ; no book but the Bible!” No pastor within the Christian Reformed Church could agree with such a claim. As one who has signed the Form of Subscription without any mental reservations, I heartily believe that our church’s confessions “do fully agree with the Word of God.” To the best of my knowledge, no teaching found within the Heidelberg Catechism disagrees with the Bible’s teaching. If I thought otherwise, I would surely bring the matter up by way of a confessional difficulty gravamen. The Heidelberg Catechism accurately represents the Bible’s teaching on the specific matters addressed in the various questions and answers.

Having said this, however, we must also agree that the Scriptures are not to be equated with our confessions. The former is a product of God’s activity; the latter is a product of man’s activity; the former is inspired; the latter is not. The former is infallible; the latter is not. To the question, then “what shall we preach?” the answer is, “The Word of God. Sola Scriptura.” Even though the Heidelberg Catechism fully agrees with the Word of God, yet it is not the Word of God. That is why I stress using the Bible text as the basis for constructing the outline of the catechism sermon and then to bring in the text of the Catechism where it further explains and applies that Word to the hearers. Start with God’s Word and bring in man’s word along the way. It seems to me that this method of writing a catechism sermon keeps our focus on the Bible text which should be the focus for all good preaching.

Now there are two sections of the Heidelberg Catechism that lend themselves to developing sermon outlines directly from the catechism answers themselves. I’m thinking of the sections on the Ten Commandments and on the Lord’s Prayer. These sections are based directly on specific Bible texts. For example, “You shall have no other gods before me” is found in Exodus 20:3 in the Bible and is explained by Question 94 in the Catechism; “Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name” is found in Matthew 6:9 in the Bible and is explained in Questions 120–122 in the Catechism. The catechism answers given in these two sections directly explain and apply specific Bible texts. So I would have no problem taking the main points of my sermons on the Ten Commandments and the Lord’s Prayer directly from the catechism answers.

I would have a problem, though (and I suspect many listeners to catechism sermons have this same problem) developing a sermon outline based, say, on Question 80: “How does the Lord’s Supper differ from the Roman Catholic mass?” First of all, where is the preacher going to find a text to hook this sermon on? He might go to the Scriptures dealing with the institution of the Lord’s Supper or the meaning of the Lord’s Supper, say Matthew 26 or I Corinthians 11. But if he slavishly follows the outline of Question 80, his sermon outline will look like this: I. The correct meaning of the Lord’s Supper, II. The incorrect meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This outline does not do justice to the text or to the context of either Matthew 26 or I Corinthians 11. Is Question 80 then contrary to what the Scriptures teach? No, not at all. The Scriptures teach that Jesus’ sacrifice is once for all, not a ritual to be repeated on an altar, as the Romanists teach. But my point is that Question 80 in particular does not give us a sermon outline from Matthew 26 or I Corinthians 11, or, to the best of my knowledge, from any other specific Bible text. To use Question 80 as the outline of a sermon on Matthew 26 or I Corinthians 11 is, in my opinion, a violation of those particular Bible texts and a violation of what preaching ought to be.

Perhaps these comments will help to clarify the main point of my earlier article. I appreciate Rev. Kloosterman’s comments; they have forced me to think through the issues further. And I admit that I am new at preaching and at preaching catechism sermons. Perhaps I am misconstruing the whole matter. Let me encourage other readers and preachers to submit their reactions. We can all learn from each other. The worst thing that could happen is if we simply gave up on catechism preaching altogether. My goal, and that of Rev. Kloosterman, is to encourage better catechism preaching. With that as our common goal, I trust that we can endure some differences of opinion on how to best achieve that goal.