Can We Change With The Now Without Severing Ourselves From The Past?

Rev. Christopher Gordon (click here for a bio) has recently written a sincere, lamenting appeal to those Reformed denominations in North America to not go the way that many churches from his own denomination have gone. In order to correct past errors and wanting to fit in the evangelical scene as well as being relevant to the world, many churches in his denomination, which is the Christian Reformed Church (CRC), have left their reformed roots in order to be inclusive and sensitive to the social justice issues that exist in the world while forgetting what the Bible teaches about personal morality and sins. The CRC began by being Reformed in its theology and exclusively Dutch in the ethnicity of its members. But with trying to shed the ethnic and other ways of being exclusive which was part being members of their denomination, they seem to have, in general, also jettisoned its Reformed theology from many of their churches.  And thus, as a result, many churches in the CRC have passed by being evangelical to being more like the mainline denominations without passing the proverbial go and without collecting $200. Rev. Gordon wrote about the current plight of many churches in his denomination in the CRC in an article posted by Reformation 21 (click here for the article).

According to Rev. Gordon, the following signs are the result of the shedding of its theological exclusivity in order to become more relevant:

1. The Abandonment of the Authority of Scripture
2. The Abandonment of Reformed Principle of Worship
3. The Abandonment of the Sabbath and the Second Worship Service
4. The Abandonment of Gospel-Centered Expository Preaching
5. The Abandonment of God Assigned Roles in the Church (Women's Ordination)
6. The Abandonment of Moral Standards for Her Members    

Before going on with reporting on Rev. Gordon's concern, we should examine the above signs. It is true that there has been an abandonment of the authority of Scripture in many churches. It is rather easy to see that abandonment in liberal churches that claim to find fault with and errors in the Scriptures. 

But there is also a weakening in the authority of Scripture in the conservative Reformed churches as well. That weakening, however, is expressed in a more subtle form. For when we look at the abandonment of the Reformed Principle of Worship, we find that that principle is sometimes based more on the confessions of the Reformed churches than on the Scriptures. And here we should note that because these confessions are aids to interpreting the Scriptures, these confessions have the same place in Reformed churches that the traditions of the Pharisees had for those Jewish religious leaders (click here for Jesus's challenging of those traditions). Those traditions were also interpretations of the Scriptures. So when Jesus warned the Pharisees about replacing God's Word with the traditions of men, He was speaking to all groups throughout time which put their own traditions on too high a pedestal. To not see our confessions as being our own version of the traditions of the Pharisees is perhaps due to our reluctance to admit that our confessions have errors just as the traditions of the Pharisees had errors.

And nothing provides a better example of the Reformed confessions acting as the traditions of the Pharisees like the emphasis on the Christian Sabbath. For many of the Reformed confessions command us Christians to observe the New Testament Sabbath in a very similar way in which the Old Testament Sabbath was observed. However, this contradicts what Paul wrote in Romans 14 (click here) and Colossians 2 (click here). When I brought up these Scriptures to a Reformed theologian, his response was to read the theology of a certain person. He just contributed to making the point I am making.

According to Rev. Gordon, the beginning of the end for many churches in his denomination seems to have occurred when the worship in his denomination's churches began to imitate the kind of worship in evangelical churches. And though I have respect for Rev. Gordon's concerns and his appreciation for the Gospel and the carrying out of the Great commission, I have to disagree with him on that point. The beginning of the end for many CRC churches was rooted in its own beginning. Remember that the CRC churches were very ethnically, culturally, and theologically exclusive.  It was a denomination where the members of its churches took care of its own and initially saw social justice issues as distractions, if not compromises, to the Gospel. Social Justice was totally seen as a liberal concern, not a Reformed one. That is where the descent to the current state of many CRC churches began.

How is it that the CRC's beginning allegiances led to becoming the opposite of what it began as? From Rev. Gordon's description of how the CRC has become tolerant of what it once opposed and intolerant of what it had embraceh, what both its beginnings and current state have in common is an all-or-nothing approach to its addressing of issues. So as the CRC was once solidly Reformed and totally opposed to any comprising of its traditions with evangelicalism and the world, it has now wholly accommodated to evangelicalism and the world and thus has rejected its Reformed roots in doing so.

The inability of many in the Reformed denominations to recognize that they could learn from liberal theologians without having to become theologically liberal compelled many people to choose between being either theologically reformed or theologically liberal. Because of how past Reformed theologians treated the social concerns of liberal theology, many in the CRC churches felt forced to choose one side or the other. And so the only catalyst that was needed to start churches to change from being totally Reformed to being more mainline was for people to experience disillusionment with how the CRC and its Reformed tradition addressed the problems its members saw in the world. If the CRC and its Reformed tradition did not provide an adequate solution to those problems, many felt that the CRC and the Reformed traditions had failed them and thus had to be left.

So the above states the problem. So now for a proposal that allows Christians to be both more relevant and remain faithful to what the Scriptures teach and what is preached in the Reformed traditions. If you have ever talked to a Reformed theologian, you will find that models of thought are extremely important in how we look at the world. Sometimes these models of thought take precedence over the Scriptures and that is merely a repeating of our using our traditions to replace the Scriptures. So hopefully, I can present a model of thought that would prevent other Reformed churches from at least partially following the path that Rev. Gordon is warning us about without violating the Scriptures. And the first thing to note about that model is that it is not complete, it can be added to or modified.

If we want to speak in the present without severing all ties with the past, we have to acknowledge the following: 1) that our Reformed confessions have errors and omissions in them; and 2) that we can learn from the insights of liberal theologians.

Next, we need to acknowledge that we live as exiles in the world. However, our current plight has both similarities and differences with what the Israelites who were exiled during the Babylonian Captivity. The Jews were were living in exile then as well, but they were not looking to expand their community by converting the citizens of their captives. The Great Commission commands us to expand our community by preaching the Gospel. And we should note that we need to keep from the Reformed confessions whatever is Scriptural and be willing to toss out the rest.

After that, we need to realize that we have two tasks to accomplish as we represent Christ while living in the world as exiles. The first task is to carry out the Great Commission. That carrying out the Great Commission means that we have to preach repentance from sin and to have faith in Christ to be saved from the penalty of our sins. At the same time, we need to learn how to share society with all sorts of unbelievers as equals. That means that we need to collaborate with all sorts of unbelievers in order to determine how we can have a relatively just society where Christians live with all sorts of unbelievers as equals. The moment we strive to gain a place of supremacy over unbelievers in society regardless of the reason, we give unbelievers an unnecessary reason to want to reject even hearing about the Gospel.

When preaching the repentance from sin while carrying out the Great Commission, we can neither afford to preach solely about personal sins nor solely about corporate sins. For to neglect preaching about either kind of sin hurts our opportunities to carry out the Great Commission. When we excuse the personal sins of our own members, we act as hypocrites. When we fail to confront corporate sins, we not only fail to comfort the victims of corporate sins, we fail to preach repentance to each person who plays their own part in the committing of those corporate sins. In other words, working for Social Justice means more than giving comfort to the afflicted, it also includes challenging the perpetrators of social injustice to repent. This is how working for Social Justice can play a role in carrying out the Great Commission. Not that all challenges to perpetrators of social injustice will call on people to also believe in Christ, but it can include that. But regardless, to not work for Social Justice is a way to choose not to be a neighbor to the people we come across who are victims of social injustice. Such is being disobedient to God and can tarnish the reputation of the Gospel. For once we call ourselves Christians, everything we do and don't do becomes associated with the Gospel in the eyes of the unbeliever.

Finally, when carrying out the Great Commission, that is when preaching repentance both from personal sins and corporate sins, we must do so as the publican  prayed in the parable of the two men praying (click here for the parable about the publican and the Pharisee). That is we preach repentance both to those who are committing personal sins and those participating in corporate sins as fellow sinners who have visited injustice on some whom we have come across. For when we carry out this Great Commission as publicans, we carry it out recognizing the members of our audience as fellow sinners and ourselves as needing forgiveness of our sins.

The above model of thought, I believe, could contribute to all Christians, not just Reformed ones, to always be relevant in the world without severing our ties with the past.