From Reformed to secularized churches? (3)


We continue our discussion of De doorgaande revolutie (The on-going revolution) by Prof. Dr. G. Dekker on the developments in the Reformed Churches (liberated) (RCNlib) in the period from 1970 to 2010.

Enormous change

The previous article dealt with the so-called ‘on-going reformation’ which, after the Liberation of 1944, extended through to the areas of life in which church members moved during the week. This on-going reformation was incompatible with the co-operation with members of other denominations in relationships whose foundation was Scripture and confession. Prof. Dekker describes how in the 1980’s and 1990’s more openness arose. Eventually, around the turn of the century, this openness also arose towards the synodicals, who merged into the PKN in 2004.

From an attitude of on-going reformation it changed to an ecumenical formation with those who were earlier judged, in 1989, as having lost their reformed character. This openness has broadened in recent years, even to organized ecclesiastical consultation with Baptists, Mennonites and Roman Catholics.

We also note here that not only do they pass over the consequences of the Liberation of 1944 (synodicals), but also over that of the Separation of 1834 and the Secession of 1886 (protestant-reformed), the Synod of Dordt of 1618-1619 (remonstrants) and the Great Reformation of the 16th century (Roman Catholics, Anabaptists).

 

How can this enormous change in the last 25 years be explained? In order to answer this question, we must look at the development of openness that has come about, on the one hand in the churches with regard to the CGK and the NGK, and on the other hand the developments in the G-organizations (RCNlib-organizations) and schools (in our articles we refer to both of them together as ‘G-organizations’) in relation to those from other churches.

Of course these two lines of development have everything to do with each other. Although Prof. Dekker firstly deals with the interdenominational relationships and then continues with the developments within the G-organizations in the systematic classification in chapter 4 of his book, we prefer to start at the openness of these organizations, since we are convinced that this is the starting point of the process described by Prof. Dekker.

Isolation

In the period after the Liberation of 1944, church members established their own associations and organizations, published own magazines – including an own newspaper (Gereformeerd Gezinsblad, later called Nederlands Dagblad) – and founded an own political party (Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond). This was followed later on with school associations and liberated-Reformed schools. All of this happened within the framework of the on-going reformation of the church.

Dekker notes, via a citation, that founding their own liberated organizations became more urgent and more obvious when, in the eyes of the liberated-reformed members, the existing Christian organizations started to lose their Christian identity (p. 49).

 

There was a close relationship between the churches, which is apparent in the publishing of the weal and woe of all the associations and organizations in the church yearbooks. Initially there was also a strong involvement of the church members towards their organizations.

 

This did bring on isolation. An isolation they did not wish to ‘glorify’, but to accept as a result of a consistent attitude of faith.

Dekker calls this isolation ‘the result of their own views and their own striving.’

He quotes a statement by Prof. Douma (in: Het vuur blijft branden, 1979, p. 332):

The isolationism threatens us time and again when we are unable to reach the maximum (cooperation within the church) for the concretization of our task in the world and then not being satisfied with the optimum (cooperation based on ’a program’, or simply ‘on certain issues’) with what there is to achieve.

Antithesis and call

When discussing this important topic we wish to draw attention to the fact that we find something lacking in the assessment of Prof. Dekker and the isolation observed by him. On the one hand we find lacking, the notion of the Scriptural antithesis with the world, and on the other hand, the call to the believers to join the true church.

The Lord Himself sets the antithesis between the faithful followers of His Word and the world, which does not follow Him. This antithesis arises where God’s Word is kept pure and is followed, and which confronts itself with the world. Such antithesis brings the believers into isolation. Ecclesiastical separation from others certainly touches the content of God’s Word. Uniting with those who deviate from God’s Word therefore harms the Word of God. Furthermore, doctrine and life should be one. Co-operation affects the God-willed antithesis. That is one factor.

The other factor concerns the call to believers who are not members of the church, believers with whom you would like to co-operate. The discord among believers can only be solved by calling faithful members of unlawful denominations to join with the true church. Remaining in such communities implies tolerance of false doctrine and participation in the sins of others (1Tim. 5:22). Only when we bend our necks together under the yoke of Christ (Art. 28 BC) can we, as believers, co-operate in order to propagate God’s Word in word and in deed.

 

In the abovementioned citation of Prof. Douma, it is therefore incorrect to consider a union, in which one is united on the basis of ‘a program’ or on ‘certain issues’ as being ‘optimum’ (as the best solution).

 

God demands obedience in all areas of life. That is where it comes down to. This requires submission to the Word of God. That also implies being a member of the church which is gathered by Christ. That therefore, requires a call to all those who should be there, but are not members yet. But it also brings along estrangement, slander and scorn. Isolation is part of the suffering of the church.

GPV

When considering the development of the ChristenUnie (Christian political party) into which the GPV merged in 2000 we found that with this ‘optimal approach’ politicians allowed themselves to make ‘optimal compromises’ in practical politics. But this meant a departure from the truth of God’s Word. This was most clearly reflected during the participation of the CU in the cabinet in the years 2007-2010. This participation also included, in practice, that one had to accept the responsibility for the current abortion and euthanasia policy, even when they themselves would have liked to reverse this. As for the foundation, the CU also made a turn. New members are no longer required to express approval with birth papers (Forms of Unity), but merely with a political conviction that emanates from this range of ideas. (website CU). Thus one has, in the GPV and the CU, by following the suggestion of Prof. Douma, lost its isolation and with that also lost the binding to the pure Word of God.

 

Prof. Dekker leaves the demand for antithesis too much beyond scope. That is why Dekker’s judgment of the G-organizations is not correct. His essay does not connect up with the deepest motivations of these organizations. These motives are namely directed at falling back onto the Word of God, that is preserved within the communion of saints, this for the calling that the church members have with regard to society.

 

This deeper fundamental layer of motivation for reformed life in the first period after the Liberation is essential for understanding this. In this way it can also be understood in what way the developments, with regard to openness, went hand in hand with the letting go of this Scriptural antithesis.

How it started

Already in 1994 Prof. Dekker pointed to the opening of the GPV for members from other denominations, as a sign that they were possibly moving onto a slippery slope. In his most recent book he also discusses the development within the Gereformeerd Gezinsblad/ Nederlands Dagblad (ND), p. 51. From the beginning, this newspaper stood on the foundation of the on-going reformation. However, so Dekker writes, in the beginning of the 1990’s there was a change in the statutes: editors no longer needed to be members of the RCNlib. This does not pass unnoticed. In the yearbook of 1993 Dr. W.G. de Vries wrote that in this manner confession and church are, in a certain way, disconnected from each other. In 1992 Prof. Kamphuis wrote in De Reformatie that the ND has emphatically cut the bond with the church of Christ and has placed itself ecclesiastically on neutral ground. But, writes Prof. Dekker, ‘the development continued. The subtitle of the newspaper changed from gereformeerde krant voor christelijk Nederland (reformed newspaper for the christian Netherlands) into christelijk betrokken (confessionally involved). Now it appears that also many non-liberated reformed people read the newspaper.’

 

So Prof. Dekker places the beginning in the early nineties. Yet, the change of course should be dated earlier, namely, fairly simultaneously with the discussion about the abovementioned merging of the electoral list of candidates of GPV and RPF. Prof. Dekker does discuss the proposal of the ND editors of 1982 to publish two editions of the ND, each having a different page on ‘church news’: one edition for the liberated-Reformed Churches (RCNlib) with church news from these churches and the other edition with other church news. This already had to do with the clear change of course within the editorial board. Prof. Dekker mentions that this proposal was rejected by the subscribers. But what he obviously was not able to notice was that the editors very quickly came up with an alternative, but without consulting the subscribers. A page with mixed church news was published.

In an article, ‘Samen aan het ene front’ (Together on the one front) issued in 1983, the former editor in chief, J.P. de Vries argued ‘that we should stand together with other Christians at one and the same front. Therefore, we should appeal rather than confront and therefore, we should work together (citation from Laten we ons bekeren, LWVKO, 2003).

So together, the GPV and the ND, were in the forefront in the change of course.

 

In other G-organizations the same process also became visible, not to forget the schools. Dekker writes about the schools: the bond of family-school-church (the triangle-thought) which was considered unbreakable, was given up in the course of the 1990’s (p. 53). He quotes from the yearbook of 2002, that besides this, it was observed that ‘also within our churches, reformed education is no longer a matter of course.’

They wanted openness instead of isolation, but in this way they lost the bond with the confession of the church. Synthesis instead of antithesis. Thus the developments within the G-organizations have been catalytic in the process of openness of the liberated churches in comparison with other denominations.