A. SCRIPTURE (1972)

The CRCNA's position on Scripture has been largely covered already in the above discussions. (The pamphlet produced by the study committee and adopted as the official statement of the CRC's position on the doctrine of Scripture, "The Nature and Extent of Biblical Authority," has been translated into Japanese and was published in the periodical of the Reformed Theological Society.)

B. EVOLUTION (1949 & 1991)

The CRCNA did not independently articulate a position on the matter of evolution, but acted in concert with other Reformed churches in the Reformed Ecumenical Synod of 1949, which adopted a series of statements which underscore the necessity of insisting that the revelation in Genesis 1 and 2 is historical in character and a completely trustworthy, though not exhaustive, description. The RES statement rejects any teaching which leaves no role, or only an incidental role, for God using so-called natural processes. At the same time, the church is cautioned from making unwarranted pronouncements in the field of natural science based on the very limited data given in Scripture. The CRC synod of 1953, while expressing appreciation for the RES statements, declares them inadequate on the matter of defining a Reformed understanding of the events and of creation over against "theistic evolution" and dialectic theology which separates "God's Word" from the written record.

Further developments in the CRCNA position on evolution are found in the discussion revolving around the nature and extent of biblical authority in the late 1960's and early 1970's and in the controversy over the teachings of three Calvin College professors (Young, Menninga and Van Til, especially the latter in his book, The Fourth Day) in 1991. At first reading, "Report 44" on Scripture affirms a conservative evangelical position and the historicity or "event character" of what is described in the early chapters of Genesis. However, later guidelines appended to the report have been seen by many as undercutting this position, allowing for Van Til et al to posit evolutionary forbears of the human race and God's use of natural processes to create some species out of others (commonly called "theistic evolution"). Synod has not taken any official position in these discussions on the length of the "days" of creation or the antiquity of the earth. And even though the positing of any theory of evolutionary forebears of the human race has been declared to be an unacceptable position, synods have appended addenda to the relevant decisions calling for academic freedom and tolerance which create enough ambiguity to allow such positing to continue to occur in actuality.

C. NEO-PENTECOSTALISM (1973)

The Pentecostal Movement began in the late 19th Century mostly among materially poor and relatively uneducated believers and was both a reaction against the spiritual dryness resulting from rationalistic liberalism and a new assertion of the emotional spirituality long present among former slave and rural communities. As the preaching in mainline churches continued on into the 20th Century to stray from faithful proclamation of an authoritative Word of God, many Christians began to seek consolation in small groups of like-minded believers with whom they would meet for Bible study and prayer. The phenomenon is very reminiscent of the formation of conventicles in the Netherlands in the early 19th Century. Many in these groups began to claim experiences which they described as the baptism of the Holy Spirit, a "second blessing" distinct from their conversion, and phenomena like speaking in tongues, healings, freeing from demonic possession or oppression, revelations from God by way of "words of wisdom," special guidance or prophecy, and new vitality in their walk with God. The groups were sometimes comprised of particular communions (i.e., Presbyterian, Lutheran, or Catholic), and sometimes transcended denominational borders, especially on college and university campuses. In the 1960's and 1970's the phenomenon became a movement which was sometimes referred to as neo-Pentecostalism (especially by those who were critical of the extremes of the old Pentecostalism which were often present in these groups) and sometimes as the Charismatic Movement (especially by those who had experienced the blessing of the filling the Spirit and had received "charismata"--spiritual gifts like tongues, etc.). Some members of the Christian Reformed Church also became involved to some extent in this movement, and this called for the church to respond, which it did at the synod of 1973.

Synod 1973's decisions are 5-fold. First is the preamble section. Here it is first noted that churches have indeed sometimes failed to be the joy-filled and Spirit-led fellowships they should be and that members have often failed to experience their salvation. This is an old theme which echoesthe early Pietism of the Dutch Reformed in the late 18th Century. On the other hand, the preamble notes that this does not mean that "attitudes, practices and teachings" of neo-Pentecostalism can or should be embraced by the churches, since these are contrary to the teachings of Scripture and the Reformed faith. These rejected things include:

a. the teaching that baptism with the Holy Spirit is a second blessing distinct from and usually received after conversion;

b. a yearning for and seeking after extraordinary, spectacular gifts of the Spirit, viewing these as primary evidence of Spirit-baptism;

c. a low regard for the church for not possessing those gifts which the neo-Pentecostal especially treasure;

d. an atomistic and private way of interpreting Scripture that ignores the literary, historical nature of the Bible as well as its redemption- history focus;

e. a practical separation of the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of individuals from the saving work of Christ in the world; and

f. a reduction of the scope of the gospel to the salvation and empowerment of the individual, and the neglect of the outward-looking kingdom perspective.

Based on this preamble section, synod's decision then addresses counsel to the churches and to the "neo-Pentecostals among us," and then makes statements concerning neo-Pentecostalism and office-bearers as well as concerning rebaptism, a phenomenon which often accompanied neo- Pentecostalism.

In its counsel to the churches, synod reaffirms the teaching that all believers receive the baptism with/in the Holy Spirit at the time of regeneration/conversion and rejects the second-blessing teaching as deserving of censure. Synod urges the churches and believers to live in close fellowship with the Spirit and vigorously pursue the fruits of the Spirit in their lives. While warning against unwarranted excesses and disorderliness, the synod "calls the churches to recognize that Christ through his Spirit sovereignly distributes his gifts to the body of believers when and where he wills, and that he empowers the members of the church in every age with whatever gifts he judges necessary for building up his body [my emphasis]." Therefore, the churches are urged "to provide within their communal fellowship for the free exercise of all genuine gifts of the Spirit" according to the rule of I Cor. 14:33 and "full opportunity for kingdom service in ministries appropriate to the gifts received by the members."

Addressing those who have embraced neo-Pentecostal teaching, synod admonishes them to recognize the "giftedness" of all members of Christ's church and not to assume presumptuously that the Spirit can only work in a way consistent with neo-Pentecostal understanding; challenges them to discern what is the true working of the Spirit and to use their gifts in service to the body of Christ; calls them to diligent study and application of the Scripture and so to honor the Spirit as the giver of the Word instead of seeking after extraordinary gifts; reminds them that in matters of guidance the Spirit has spoken in his Word and that seeking after signs and special words of revelation while disregarding the Word is offensive to God and harmful to us; warns them against being led astray by false teachers touting signs and wonders (II Thes. 2:9) and to discern occult influences among certain charismatic communions; and urges them to submit themselves to the order, structure and apostolic teaching of the church, i.e., to seek always the welfare of the church (I. Cor. 3:16-17).

Regarding office-bearers, synod rules that any office-bearer who holds the "second-blessing" should be deposed from office, since that teaching is contrary to the Scripture and Reformed confessions. It further urges those who tend to other features of neo-Pentecostalism while denying the second-blessing teaching, that they should exercise restraint and conduct themselves in such a way as will be for the welfare of their congregations.

It is noteworthy that the position adopted by the CRCNA in these decisions respects the freedom of the Spirit to operate within the churches by dispersing the full range of gifts as are described in the New Testament. The issues of the finality of the Scriptures and their comprehensiveness and sufficiency as God's revelation are not addressed, but this is certainly implied and already expressed plainly in the Confession of Faith. However, the CRC's position is one of cautious openness to the present day existence of tongues, gifts of healing, and so forth, but calling on the churches to recognize that the areas of tongue speaking, faith healing, and exorcism are often occasions for error and excess and so should be treated with special caution. God's counsel and guidance are to be sought through diligent use of the Scriptures according to sound principles of interpretation. "The Spirit may indeed guide us at times in strange and wonderful ways"; yet to seek these is to leave oneself vulnerable to subjective whims and self-deception and possibly even to demonic influences. Recently, as a result of these directions, special worship services focusing on praise or healing are held from time to time in many congregations. In this sense, the CRCNA is incorporating some of the spiritual riches of the charismatic movement.

The positions adopted in 1973 are well considered and balanced and take a great deal of scriptural data into account. The Orthodox Presbyterian Church has taken a much narrower view of the present-day working of the Spirit, citing WCF Ch. I Art. I, which says that the "former ways of God's revealing His will unto his people" have ceased. The OPC understands this to mean that the extraordinary gifts like tongues, healing and guidance are in the purview of the Confession here, and these gifts are no longer present. There has been at least one case where a minister of the OPC who was disciplined for his "charismatic" views was received into the fellowship of the CRCNA as an office- bearer in good standing (Arnold Kress), and this has caused some friction between the two churches. There is apparently also a difference between the CRCNA and the RCJ on this point, the RCJ's position being similar if not identical to that of the OPC.

D. ABORTION & BIRTH CONTROL (1972 & 1936)

While the title here is presented in the order in which it appears in the booklet, "Synodical Decisions on Doctrinal and Ethical Matters," in fact the CRCNA's position on birth control is the earlier one and provides at least in part the context for its position on abortion. The 1936 synod extensively addressed the matter of artificially limiting family size, declaring it contrary to God's purpose for marriage. While refusing to declare just how many children a Christian couple should seek to bring into the world and so to fulfill the "cultural mandate," synod takes the position that, besides the companionship of the husband and wife, the procreation of children is a primary purpose of marriage and the duty of Christian parents, and they should consider it their responsibility "to produce as large a number of children as is compatible with the physical, mental, and spiritual well-being of the wife and mother on the one hand, and of the children on the other." A somewhat "puritanical" sexual morality pervaded the church in these days, and the synodical decision reflects this when it decries use of the marriage relationship for selfish indulgence, i.e., seeking sexual fulfillment and pleasure without any intention to beget children. And while attitudes towards sexuality have certainly changed, the 1936 position remains the official position of the church. Indiscriminate dissemination of contraceptive information (and, presumably, devices) is pronounced evil, and large families are encouraged. While in some corners of the CRCNA this official position is perhaps regarded now as quaint, in other parts of the church it is vigorously held even today.

Having come to this position on birth-control in general, it naturally follows that the CRCNA would oppose artificially induced abortion. But abortion was not an issue until the mid-1960's, and the position articulated on abortion in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision legalizing abortion was not made in the context of the cultural mandate but in the context of the 6th commandment, "Thou shalt not kill." The statement on abortion adopted in 1972 declares that a human being exists from the point of conception on, and the wanton destruction of that life is a violation of the 6th commandment. Yet, artificially induced abortion might be an allowable option only "when the life of the prospective mother is genuinely threatened by the continuation of the pregnancy." This very strong and "pro-life" position has never been changed, and overtures to synods calling for stronger or more detailed statements have always been refused. For example, requests have come to synods to make judgments which specifically state the unacceptableness of abortion in cases of incest resulting in pregnancy or when it has been determined that congenital defects are present. Synod has always pointed back to the very simple but comprehensive condemnation of abortion in 1972.

In a recent book on medical ethics, Hessel Bouma has suggested that this position is overly simplistic, and his expression of doubts about instances in which abortion might be an acceptable alternative for Christians have raised storms of protest by pro-life activists in the churches, particularly in Classis Wisconsin, which is calling on synod in 1997 to produce a new statement with clear biblical grounds to bring about greater consensus and uniformity among the churches, and Classis Heartland, which is calling for Bouma to be censured.

It should be pointed out too that synod's guidelines on abortion call on Christians to be compassionate towards those who feel the need to escape from "unwanted" pregnancies and to offer counseling, sheltering and adoption services to prospective mothers in difficult situations. CRC members have an excellent record in this area, a fruit of which is the widely known and much-trusted Bethany Christian Services. There is also good CRC participation in anti-abortion protests and pro-life political activities.

E. CHRISTIAN EDUCATION (1955)

The CRCNA's commitment to educating her children in parent-controlled schools operated from the perspective of a Reformed world and life view is well known and can be traced back to pre-Afscheiding times in the Netherlands. State control of the churches was an initial issue, but the matter of state control of educational institutions also became a point of contention with the seceders. Devoted (and usually pietistic) parents did not want their children led astray into false theologies or life-styles incompatible with their convictions, and so children were withdrawn from government schools and placed in schools operated by like-minded believers. While this created the very real dangers of provincialism and escapism (and was, incidentally, contrary to the laws of the land), parents felt it their covenantal obligation to take responsibility according to the scriptural admonition for raising their children in the fear and knowledge of the Lord, no matter what the cost. This issue was also mentioned by at least one of the churches seceding from Classis Holland to form the CRC; i.e., the RCA of the East was criticized for failing to establish Christian day schools and for entrusting its children to government schools. In the minds of the seceders, this too showed that the RCA was less than a true Reformed church should be.

Early statements about the necessity and desirability of distinctly Christian day-school education were made by the synods of 1870, 1881, 1892 and 1898, and the growing consensus that is expressed in these minutes is that "Christian education based upon Reformed principles is a requirement for Reformed Christians" (my emphasis). The obligation of Christian Reformed parents to educate their children in Christian schools was tied decisively to their baptismal vows, where they promise to do all in their power to instruct their children in the Reformed faith. This obligation is first of all parental, with the family being envisioned as having from God the authority and mandate to educate its own, but secondarily falls to the covenant community (i.e., the church) as well. Local churches are expected to establish within their membership a voluntary society for the promotion of Christian day schools, especially elementary but also secondary schools, and even colleges and universities. Ministers are charged with promoting Christian day schools with all their might, and elders are expected to make an issue of Christian education in their pastoral oversight and family visiting.

In 1955 a committee appointed to study the matter of Christian schools gave a comprehensive statement to the denomination which sets forth the Christian Reformed consensus on the need for and philosophy of Christian schooling. While the basic responsibility for day-schooling is placed firmly with the parents, the church's responsibility for catechesis and for supporting Christian day schools is also set forth. The fact that state schools are undergirded by a fundamentally religious world and life view which is termed "secular" and therefore not neutral and quite possibly anti-Christian is also pointed out. Finally, the stand is taken that the church itself should not be in the business of operating the schools or other youth organizations, but should only give moral (and sometimes financial) support to these parent-run or voluntary organizations.

This report of 1955 represents not the breaking of new ground but the statement of the consensus in the denomination which, while eroding here and there, still exists today. Members of the education societies of Christian Reformed communities have organized themselves over the years and gradually opened themselves to cooperation with other Christian groups seeking more God-fearing educational options. One well-known result is the organization called Christian Schools International, which gives logistical support and encouragement to and produces curricular materials for Christian schools. CRCNA leadership in this organization as well as in many community Christian schools in which non-CRC folks participate is well- known and acknowledged by most with much appreciation. Christian day schools, especially at the elementary level, are found in nearly every community where there is a Christian Reformed Church. Christian Reformed people not only operate the denominationally owned Calvin College and Seminary in Grand Rapids, but also have established through voluntary societies the Reformed Bible College (Grand Rapids), Dordt College (Northwest Iowa), Trinity Christian College (Chicago), the Institute for Christian Studies (Toronto), the King's University College (Edmonton, Alberta) and Redeemer College (Ancaster, Ontario). This shows an enormous commitment to Christian and Reformed education in which the CRCNA's contribution is far out of proportion to its small size.

F. SABBATH (1881 & 1926)

The issue of "sabbath observance" has come up repeatedly in the history of the CRCNA, as it had arisen also long before the CRC was established in discussions between the Reformers. Given the strongly pietistic element in the CRC especially evident in the early days, it should not surprise anyone that the CRC's stand on the keeping of the "sabbath" is rather strict; in fact, it is nearly legalistic. While it is well known that John Calvin seemed to regard sabbath/Sunday observance as one of the shadows which passed away with the advent of the Christ, the understanding that the sabbath commandment contains both a ceremonial as well as a moral element was codified by the Synod of Dort in 1619, and this understanding is the CRCNA's official interpretation of this matter. The synod which gathered in 1881 made this unmistakably clear when it adopted the decisions of Dort regarding Sunday-keeping as its own. In 1926, synod again noted that the interpretations of 1881 are the CRCNA's official interpretation of her confessions in regards to this matter and as such are binding upon all members.

To summarize briefly what this interpretation states: the moral element of the sabbath commandment is the observance (solemn hallowing) of Sunday each week; on that day all Christians must rest from all "servile works, except those which charity and present necessity require; and also from such recreations as interfere with worship." Synod of 1940 noted that there was some departure taking place in the membership of the churches from this strict rule, and moved to underscore that no such departure should occur among office-bearers, and consistories are called to exercise mutual censure in regard to this matter.

The designation of what constitutes appropriate "rest" and the judgment as to what "recreations" interfere with worship and undercut the due "hallowing" of the Lord's Day, have been the occasion for much judgmentalism and hair-splitting casuistry as well as intergenerational conflict. While synod called on the churches again in 1974 to resist the onslaught of secularization which threatened the appropriate celebration of the Lord's Day, there has arisen a variety of practices among members of the CRC at which an earlier generation would have surely been appalled. Attendance at and even participation in Sunday concerts and sports events are tolerated more and more, as is shopping, dining out and many other "non-essential" activities, including often Sunday employment in various enterprises.

The somewhat predictable result of this phenomenon is a drastic shrinking of attendance at evening worship services, which is truly lamentable. While this is the subject of much fretting and hand-wringing, there does not appear to be much that can be done at this point to return to the old ways, despite the church's official position, which has not changed. In 1996, the Church Order was finally and grudgingly revised to reflect this reality and to allow for the possibility of no evening service at all, as is in fact the case in some churches. Other churches have used this phenomenon to creatively experiment with the evening service time, having "contemporary" services, small group satellite meetings, and so forth.

G. WAR & PACIFISM (1939 & 1973)

The matter of the CRCNA attitude towards war was raised mainly in the context of service in the military on the occasion of the two great "world" wars. Abraham Kuyper had held that America had been founded on biblical principles and was God's instrument in some sense for accomplishing his purposes on earth, particularly in providing a place for the church and Reformed principles to flourish. The CRCNA itself had grown in this land of freedom and benefited from finding itself in the land of democracy. As it emerged from its "Dutchness" and became more Americanized, CRCNA members became loyal citizens of the nations of the US and Canada. They were led to distance themselves to some extent from their Dutch roots and affirm their loyalty to their countries during the two wars where the "Deutsch" were the enemy. It had been declared honorable and right to sign on to military service, and the CRCNA sought membership in ecumenical organizations to enable her pastors to serve as military chaplains. There was a basic consensus that nations as well as individuals had the right of self-defense, and that to fight or to serve in the armed forces for this purpose did not conflict with Christian faith.

The issue was raised at the synod of 1936, however, as to the duty of Christians in cases which might be termed wars of aggression. The matter was committed to study for several years and the issues of pacifism and militarism were addressed in a decision of synod in 1939. The decision of 1939 affirms the duty of both individuals and governments to seek the resolution of all disputes through peaceful means, affirms the right of self-defense and the necessity of the governments of the world to arm themselves for this purpose ("to perform its God-given duty in a sinful world"), and condemns as a great evil any war for national aggrandizement. The decision also condemns pacifism (which is defined as the refusal to bear arms under any conditions). The duty to seek peace "should at no time be used to cancel his [the Christian's] equally solemn duty to defend his country against the attack of the aggressor, to protect the weak in the international family from the wanton assault of the strong, and in general to promote justice and fair dealings between nations of the world." The pacifist use of Matt. 5:38-39 is condemned also; synod says that this text refers to personal relations among members of God's kingdom and is a repudiation of the appeal to Old Testament laws of retaliation cited by some seeking personal revenge. On the contrary, says this decision, it is our "Christian duty to ward off an assault upon our life" and "to protect our loved ones from such an assault." Synod also mentions the matter of just and unjust war, affirming that both exist. Romans 13:1-5 and Belgic Confession Art. 36 are cited to show that God has indeed approved of governments arming themselves and using the "sword" for the God-ordained purpose of protecting the weak and enforcing justice among their citizens and also for the protection of their citizens from outside aggression. Furthermore, the duty of citizens to obey their government also "involves answering the government's call to arms for the protection of the nation."

However, there is one restriction on the Christian's duty to obey the government in this or any other matter, i.e. when to "obey men is to disobey God." What might such circumstances be? The example of the 1834 Secession leaders' refusal to cease their preaching despite being so ordered by the government of the Netherlands is cited as one example. The following sentence also appears: "Korean and Japanese Christians who today [1939] are ordered by their government to perform acts of worship in the shrines of a false religion have, according to Christian standards, the right and the duty to disobey." In such cases, the Christian must obey God rather than men, regardless of the consequences. Thus in some circumstances the right of "conscientious objection" is affirmed, but the circumstances are very limited indeed. Conscience is NOT the last court of appeal for the Christian, but rather the Word of God is. Blanket objection to all wars has already been shown to be unscriptural. Furthermore, individual Christians should not presume to be judges of the justness of warfare as he cannot possibly have adequate grounds and information for making such a judgment. However, the decision of 1939 recognizes the possibility of some cases where a Christian might have "intelligent and adequate grounds to be convinced that the given war to which he is summoned is an unjust war." In such a case, the decision supports one who resorts "to passive resistance and to refuse to bear arms in that given war."

Remember that this discussion and decision took place in the context of the late 1930's when the European war was already in progress and the Japanese Empire was expanding its grip on the countries of Asia. World War II was on the horizon. America was pursuing an isolationist foreign policy but was supporting countries (particularly England) who were coming under attack from Hitler's Reich. It is not stated in the decision anywhere, but the obvious implication is that should the US and Canada enter into the fray, it would be a just war and Christians would be obliged to lend their whole-hearted support to their governments. The pacifism which was on the rise in some circles was condemned as the result of faulty (liberal) biblical interpretation. Again it is not explicitly stated, but the liberal churches had by and large capitulated to the governments of Germany and Japan, not only refusing violent resistance against the horrific crimes which were being committed but in fact even at times justifying and even participating in these! The only particular item explicitly mentioned is the above-cited one in regards to the position of Japanese and Korean Christians, whose religious freedom was being stolen.

The matter of war and pacifism was raised again in 1969 and in 1973 in the context of the Vietnam conflict. On both occasions, the synods reaffirmed the soundness of the 1939 decisions and gave their support to "selective conscientious objectors." Synod also took the step of sending copies of the 1939 decision to the President and members of Congress. Furthermore, in 1973 synod requested that the U.S. government adopt a policy of amnesty towards those who conscientiously objected to service in the Vietnam conflict and had therefore been deprived of civil rights, were incarcerated or in exile. Without making a judgment concerning the justness or unjustness of the Vietnam War, the synod simply urged the U.S. government to grant loyal but objecting citizens freedom to follow their consciences in this difficult matter by granting them amnesty. Note that the U.S. approves of conscientious objection on the basis of pacifist religious principles (the classic case being the Quaker/Mennonite one where pacifism is part of the creed), but not the selective objection to certain conflicts on the basis of the judgment by individuals that such wars are not just. Synod in this matter supports a position at odds with the laws of the USA.

H. MISSIONS (1953 & 1977) (Note: much of this is material gleaned from the above syllabus)

The first hint of missions consciousness in the CRCNA is found in the minutes of Classis Holland (of the RCA) and predates the actual founding of the denomination. It is a decision of classis in 1852 to undertake mission work to the "pagans," meaning their Indian neighbors. This small beginning is actually quite significant, as it shows the commitment to missions and understanding of its importance even at a time when these small immigrant churches were living in a situation of poverty. During the latter half of the 19th Century, small, almost token efforts of outreach were carried on,, and these mostly involved the sending of an ordained person to evangelize Native Americans. Since, logistically speaking, it was deemed next to impossible for the CRC to organize its own foreign missions society in the early years (the 19th Century), funds were regularly collected and sent to the Dutch churches (and also some to the United Presbyterian) to support their missions programs.

In 1896 the GKN synod met and adopted a new missions policy, stating that mission outreach was the responsibility of the churches and not of individuals or societies of volunteers. The policy states further that missionaries should be called by local churches and sent out by agencies of mission cooperation on a synodical level and that missionaries should be educated as ministers serving the home church and also have training in the social customs, religions and language of the people to whom they are sent. This policy was adopted and prevails in the CRCNA today and represents the common thinking of most conservative, Reformed churches.

The period from around 1925 until the beginning of W.W.II is the most c Reformed principle of worship: God speaks and we respond.the balance be tween the intellectual and emotional aspects of worship. urally more biblical) brand of the faith. The denominational broadcast known as the Back to God Hour was officially launched by the synod of 1939.

Building from the base of sound Reformed orthodoxy and maintaining its distinctive piety, the CRC thus began to look outward and started to share its riches with the world around. With theological consolidation completed and the mission precedents established, the CRC was poised for vigorous expansion in the post W.W.II period. The missions program of the church expanded very rapidly during this period. As the second wave of immigration was proceeding apace, there was also a feeling of establishment as a denomination come into its own with a mission to accomplish.

New mission projects were opened in Africa, Latin America and Asia during the 50's, including the countries of Sri Lanka, India, Taiwan, Japan, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Cuba, Liberia, Australia, and New Zealand. More often than not, work was undertaken to assist Reformed churches which already existed in these countries, and in some cases the work consisted of loaning pastors to churches with a shortage (this is especially true of the work in Australasia and South America). However, this was a glorious time for the CRC in terms of meaningful evangelistic work. Home missions was still largely preoccupied with organizing congregations for new immigrants, but the focus at home also began to shift toward evangelistic outreach towards all peoples, not just those of Dutch ethnicity. The Indian mission work also continued under the supervision of the foreign missions board. The momentum of expansion continued into the 60's as well with new fields in Central America (Honduras) and Asia (the Philippines) being opened and the work in Nigeria expanded even further than before.

The 50's saw a new thrust begin in the home missions thinking of the church to reach outside of ethnic borders to preach the gospel of salvation to all the church's neighbors. This kind of domestic mission activity was so unusual in the CRCNA up to this point that one historian of the church calls home missions a "new frontier!" New ground was indeed being broken as the CRC turned more and more outward and extended arms of welcome to the world, offering its riches in Christ to all. In this environment, R.B. Kuiper (a son of the CRC now teaching at Westminster Seminary) penned his well-known volume, God-Centered Evangelism. Kuiper calls the Reformed churches to do evangelism in a way worthy of Reformed distinctives (like their understanding of the sovereignty of God and the work of the Spirit), and not simply to imitate the revivalism and Arminian approaches of the more shallow evangelical churches. Evangelistic activity is by no means a forte of the CRC even today, but much growth has taken place from these starts in controversy, and the present-day situation is far advanced in comparison to the efforts in this period.

R.B.Kuyper had drawn up the guidelines for Reformed evangelism. During the late 60's and early 70's, James Kennedy of the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church developed the program. CRC Home Missions began to promote this vigorously in its "Key '73" evangelism thrust and developed a curriculum using Kennedy's materials to train CRC lay persons and pastors alike in a technique of Reformed outreach and discipleship. Many criticized it as gimmickry, but for others this program met a need for practical education in how to do personal evangelism. The program involved neighborhood visitation during which a memorized presentation of the basics of the gospel would be presented. The "door-to-door sales" approach is a little obvious, but this was far better than the little which was being done in many places. Many churches used the program in the 70's, and many CRC members became involved in neighborhood canvassing. This activity had the subtle effect of raising the consciousness of the church members as to their vocabulary and "churchy" style which could often be obstacles to new people coming to visit their churches. "User friendly" is a term born of the personal computer boom, but efforts began around this time to make church services more transparent and understandable for seekers, more "user-friendly!" The "Evangelism Manifesto" adopted by the 1977 synod reflects this new and growing consciousness in the CRC.

The "Church Growth Movement" of the 1970's came to have a great deal of influence in the CRC, perhaps because of close contact between its proponents at Fuller Theological Seminary and CRCNA leaders like James Daane and Lewis Smedes, who also served as professors at Fuller. In recent days, this influence has become pervasive in the thinking of the CRHM staff, and many experiments (for example use of telemarketing and other non-traditional strategies) and Church Growth School materials are being promoted in the launching of new church development projects, and this is contributing to a new diversity in the CRCNA with non-Dutch, ethnic congregations being rapidly added to the denomination. This can be seen in the creation of Classis Pacific Hanmi (Korean) in 1996.

With the expansion of CRWRC's activities to include long-term development work in many "third-world" countries where CRWM staff were also present, a somewhat artificial division between "Word" and "deed" outreach sometimes arose, and on some fields, tension between the two agencies' staff created the need for special measures to assure cooperation and the carrying out of one holistic outreach effort. This led to the creation of the "World Ministries Board" in 1987, a board which was given the authority to oversee both agencies' operations, particularly where each had posted personnel to the same overseas locations. CRWM's "Mission Order" was discarded and a rewritten constitution and administrative structure were adopted to help to make the two agencies' structures and operations more compatible and more susceptible to integration, but the results of these changes have been mixed. The creation of the World Ministries Board foreshadowed larger changes which are presently taking place in the oversight and coordination of all the denomination's agencies, with a beefed-up interim committee of synod (now called the Board of Trustees) and an Executive Director of Ministries office being given a very strong mandate to streamline the denominational bureaucracy and coordinate the work of all its agencies to accomplish the "one mission" of the church.

I. DIVORCE & REMARRIAGE (1956 & 1975)

Issues concerning marriage, divorce and remarriage came to many synods from as early as 1890. The decisions, while universally condemning divorce, mark a basic change in position on the permissibility of remarriage and the status of those in such second marriages. The change in position took place in 1956.

The early decisions (1890, 1906, 1908) affirmed that adultery is the only biblical ground for divorce, and that those who remarry after unbiblical divorces are living in a condition of continual adultery. The synod of 1947 adopted extensive statements, particularly concerning the "readmission of divorced and remarried persons" to church membership. Synod's guidelines were very strict and upheld the traditional position that those who divorce unbiblically (or who are the "guilty party" in a biblical divorce) cannot be members of the church unless they are reconciled to their former spouse or live in celibacy, unless such divorces/remarriages took place before the parties were converted and were ignorant of biblical teaching. Remarriage constitutes an adulterous relationship; therefore, that relationship must be forsaken as sinful. However, when these relationships were formed before conversion, the church would recognize the relationship at the time of conversion as the marriage to be sanctified and continued. Former marriages were to be ignored, as was the explicit policy on mission fields. (Note that the problem of polygamy was also dealt with here; on the basis of Titus 1:6, polygamy is deemed unacceptable in any convert. He must live from the point of conversion onward with only one wife.)

In 1952 a study committee was appointed to reexamine the Scriptures to determine whether second marriages of divorcees constitute continual adultery. Perhaps the issue was raised here as the church came under pressure from the surrounding culture which had become much more inclined to accept and practice divorce and remarriage. At any rate, in 1956 the previously held position was substantially revised. While urging the churches to guard the sanctity of marriage, synod states that there are no substantial or conclusive scriptural grounds to assert that such relationships constitute continual adultery or to demand that for readmission to membership of a divorced person the cessation of such a marriage must be required. The only ground will be true repentance and a period of probation where the sincerity of that repentance is confirmed.

The divorce problem in the U.S. continued to grow. In response, counseling guidelines on marriage were presented to the synod in the 70's (and passed on to the churches for reaction). These were adopted in 1980 to give guidance to pastors and consistories handling these difficult matters. In the first section which presents the teaching on marriage, the acceptability of singleness is affirmed along with the biblical demands for exclusivity and permanence in the marriage relationship. Permanent unity of the partners throughout their lifetime together is possible because of Christ and is demanded of his disciples. That Scripture in general and Christ in particular teach the permanence of marriage is unambiguously clear.

Not so unambiguous, according to the next section, is the Bible's teaching on divorce and remarriage. Substantial space is given to exegete the texts of Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 as well as I Corinthians 7:10-16. Analyzing the "exceptive clause" ("except for unchastity") of Matt. 19, the report states that "Scripture never intends to provide persons with justification for divorce, but rather seeks always to encourage and maintain the permanence of marriage." Jesus' standards thus exceed the "righteousness of the Pharisees," who tried to justify divorce for all sorts of reasons. The fact of unchastity (any sexual relationship/activity outside the marriage bond) does not in itself require divorce; however, it is certainly an occasion when divorce may take place. In such an instance, the Scriptures are ambiguous as to whether or not an ensuing remarriage is an adulterous relationship. Citing the analogy of Scripture, the importance of repentance, forgiveness and reconciliation in the Christian community are noted. We are obliged "to love and forgive as we have been loved and forgiven by God." When repentance is not present, forgiveness cannot be granted and reconciliation cannot take place. Community is broken; divorce takes place. In such a case, Jesus does not "apply his condemnation upon the subsequent remarriage of the one who did not commit adultery."

The I Corinthians 7 passage speaks more to the issue of divorce and remarriage in other circumstances. Paul commands that "if the wife does separate from/divorce her husband, she should either remain single or be reconciled to her husband." Some argue that this is universally true; others disagree. Jesus seems to permit exceptions at least in the case of unchastity by one of the partners. Paul may be granting exceptions also in the case where an unbelieving spouse abandons a Christian wife or husband; the believer in such a case "is not bound" (to the marriage relationship). This is basically Calvin's understanding as well as the position taken by the Westminster Confession (Art. 24, sect. 6). The guidelines state only that Paul is not explicit in I Corinthians 7 as to the permissibility of remarriage in such instances of desertion by unbelieving spouses. The bottom line emphasized in these first two sections is the Bible's unequivocal teaching concerning God's intention that the marriage bond be permanent, that human conduct can in such instances dissolve this bond, and that in all cases Christian must strive for forgiveness, reconciliation and restoration.

The third section contains the actual guidelines for the churches. There are first listed some central teaching of Scripture regarding marriage which should be promoted in the church. Regarding ministry to those whose marriages are in a time of crisis, the guidelines call for a vigorous ministry which seeks to reconcile partners, giving hope for God's empowerment to fulfill the vows of husband and wife and to achieve restoration of a healthy marriage bond and warning of the consequence of refusing to reconcile. In some cases, the exercise of church discipline may be helpful or necessary in this process. In the guidelines regarding ministry to those persons who have divorced, the statement is made that "marital breakdown and divorce does not by itself mean the loss of church membership." This is the post-1956 position. Patient and tender ministry to the divorced is called for, recognizing the depth of hurt and the complexity of the relationships which are involved; however, where overt sinful conduct without repentance is apparent, the church should condemn forthrightly and exercise the means of discipline. Concerning remarriage, the guidelines state that the church must be cautious not to issue prohibitions of remarriage in cases where the Scripture do not (i.e., after divorce caused by unchastity and abandonment when one is not the offending party).

The guidelines conclude with the important statement that reaffirms "the general biblical principle that divorce and remarriage constitute adultery," and yet urges the church to deal pastorally with those who fail to observe the biblical principle by refraining from legalistic judgmentalism and emphasizes teaching the biblical norms for marriage. The guidelines are somewhat ambiguous as to whether remarriage following divorce constitutes living in adultery, and give to the consistories involved the authority to deal on a case-by-case basis with those having marital difficulties. But these consistories are urged to call "persons contemplating remarriage to an examination of their intentions in the light of the biblical teaching concerning reconciliation with the former spouse, the possibility of the single life, and remarriage," and to counsel "firmly against any remarriage that conflicts with the biblical teaching concerning marriage and divorce."

J. ESCHATOLOGY (1918)

The "Maranatha Controversy" of the early 20th Century was the occasion for the CRC's only official rejection of dispensationalistic views of history. This theology was becoming more and more popular among evangelical churches at the time. According to this way of reading Scripture, there were two ways of salvation and two peoples of God. One could be saved by being born Jewish or by believing in Jesus as Savior. Since the Jews had rejected Jesus as their Messiah, God provided an interim period, the "time of the Gentiles," during which salvation by grace through faith would be offered to the nations. After this period, Jesus would come again, this time to be accepted by the Jews, and he would proceed to set up his millennial kingdom on earth. Meanwhile the church (made up of Gentile believers) would have been raptured off the earth to heaven. After the end of the millennium, the final judgment would come. This view of things was rejected implicitly in the judgment in 1918 condemning the views (which were of a dispensational nature) of Rev. Harry Bultema.

What then is the CRC view of eschatology? In fact there is not one view, but several. The view held by the great majority of CRC members concerning the so-called "millennium" (the 1,000-year reign of Christ) is commonly called "a-millenialism." The "a" means "not." In other words, the 1,000-year reign mentioned in the book of Revelation is not taken literally, but is considered to be figurative. Jesus in fact is reigning now, and during this time after his ascension his reign is announced to the peoples of the earth (including the Jews) who are invited and commanded to recognize him as Lord and Savior This is the clear prediction of the Old Testament prophets and not an interim unforeseen by them or the Lord (see Luke 24). After this period of history (called the "latter days" in other Scripture verses), Jesus will return in his glory as described in places like Matthew 24, I Corinthians 15, I Thessalonians 4 , etc. This a-millenial view of eschatology is found clearly in former Calvin Seminary N.T. professor William Hendriksen's commentary on the book of Revelation, More Than Conquerors , as well as in Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology.

Another view of the end times is called "post-millenialism." In other words, the end of all things occurs after a 1,000 year period of an earthly kingdom of Jesus. In some instances, the millennial kingdom is seen as the result of the gospel succeeding throughout the world and effecting a time of prosperity and peace. Others see the millennium kingdom as being set up by Jesus' people after an intense period of tribulation. This post millennial view of things was common among the contemporaries of Abraham Kuyper (though Kuyper did not share this view) who had succeeded (they thought) in taking the reigns of political power in Holland and saw the same happening among the Reformed in South Africa. They also considered the USA a Christian nation and were entirely too optimistic about the future of this world. Evolutionary ideas also encouraged this kind of optimism about the future. This post-millenial view is perhaps less common in recent days. Note that the Belgic Confession specifically states that the second coming of Christ will be after the full number of the elect have been gathered (Art. 37). This means that during this millennium, Jesus himself will not be present to reign on earth; his second coming is after the millennium.

More recently there was a small stir over a book published by a well- known former CRC member, Harold Camping, director of a conservative, evangelical radio ministry based in California, in which he predicted from his study of the Scriptures that the world would end in October of 1994 (thus the title of his book, 1994). Camping and his supporters operate the radio network called "Family Radio," and he has advertised his book and his views widely among CRCNA members. This kind of phenomenon of predicting the exact time of the end is quite common among cults (notably the Jehovah's Witnesses group whose very detailed predictions have, of course, continually failed, as did Camping's), but recently it has also shown up among reputable denominations, much to their disgrace. Jesus himself predicted that this would happen and warned his disciples not to fall into such folly (see Matthew 24 and parallel passages); nevertheless it still happens.

K. OTHER MATTERS

For information only, other matters which are treated in the denominational publication, Synodical Decisions on Doctrinal and Ethical Matters, are as follows:

Common Grace

Conclusions of Utrecht

Amusements & Film Arts

Labor Organizations and Corporate Responsibility

Church & State

Homosexuality

Liquor Problem

Lodge & Church Membership

Race Relations

Capital Punishment

Dance & the Christian Life

Guideline for Office & Ordination

Evangelism Manifesto

Statement of Mission Principles

Judicial Code