From Reformed to secularized churches? (3)


We continue the 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 1970-2010.

Interaction

We have been able to determine that Prof. Dekker very accurately indicates the new openness towards other denominations and their members, as core of the revolutionary development within the RCNlib. Developments that are very aptly typified by him in the title of his book as ‘on-going revolution’.

These developments are in opposition to on-going reformation, that was first widely seen as the Scriptural mandate for being reformed in doctrine and life: ecclesia reformata simper reformanda (the reformed church must continually be reformed).

Prof Dekker observes that change to openness towards other denominations, not only in the Reformed press, Reformed organizations and Reformed schools, but also, since the 1990’s, in the search, as churches, for unity and cooperation with other denominations. This last process already shows the active approach towards a denomination, to which 25 years earlier, the reformed character had being denied (PKN). They even enter into relationship with denominations that have never been Reformed (Roman Catholic Church and others).

 

Prof. Dekker describes in chapter 4, to which he has given the salient title ‘The position in the Dutch society’, how this interdenominational process went. Here he includes both interdenominational and ‘social’ contacts. Obviously he, as sociologist, wants to put both developments into one category. It can also be that he wants to emphasize the mutual influence between all external (ecclesiastical and social) contact. Either way, the mutual interaction between the attitude of church members and the church government is undeniable. In our opinion the open attitude, which was already taking shape in the GPV (Reformed Political Party) and in the ND (Reformed Newspaper) in the 1980’s, had far-reaching influence in the ecclesiastical forming of opinions with regard to the interdenominational contacts. The latter initially and mainly began to take shape with regard to the Christian Reformed Churches (CGK) and the Netherlands Reformed Church (NGK).

Tolerance and Revolution

Prof. Dekker makes mention of the long period in which the liberated-Reformed Churches, already directly after the Liberation (1946), seriously sought contact with the CGK. This search for unity however constantly came to a deadlock because of the conditions set by the CGK, conditions that went above Scripture, as was determined, after seven synods, by the GS Hoogeveen in 1969. In this way the liberated-Reformed Churches were ‘prevented from entering the way to unity of ecclesiastical living together with the CGK’. At the same time, it became clear for this synod that there was an ‘ecumenical striving’ in the CGK towards ‘community practice with others’, which, according to the synod ‘was not according to the Reformed confession’.

Prof. Dekker however has a different view on this than the GS Hoogeveen, and also different to what we like. He sees these obstacles ‘not in the last place by the high standards set by the RCNlib for the possibility of dialogue and union’. (page 43).

It is particularly unfortunate then that Prof. Dekker summarizes what had taken place after 1969 in the contacts with CGK in only a few sentences. For it is precisely in these contacts that the on-going revolution first fully came to light as ecclesiastical initiative. He does still indicate that in the beginning of the 1980’s there was concern about the ‘increase in non-reformed ideas’ in the CGK, but does not mention that this had to do with the Scripture criticism, while GS Arnhem 1981 had pointed to the Scripture criticism of Prof. B. Oosterhoff. This synod still explicitly summoned CGK to choose for the truth and against the error.

 

Neither does Prof. Dekker make mention of the tolerance within the CGK regarding Scripture criticism, such as Dr. B. Loonstra publicly interpreted and defended this in his books since 1994. Dekker leaves all this unmentioned. We cannot imagine that he seeing the keen insights he has shown in other matters did not notice this issue of Scripture criticism. The consequence of his presentation is that he, in his appreciation of the development (last chapter) then does not come so far as to naming this revolution as being a revolution against Scripture. Nevertheless we do have to see it as such, for the openness towards others included unscriptural tolerance, which affected the Scripture and its authority. Therefore it concerned a tolerance which is an abomination to God, and against which our Reformed Confession warns us in Art. 7 and Art. 29 of the Belgic Confession.

That Prof. Dekker did not indicate it as such, does not mean that, in our opinion, he can put it down to the religion-sociological character of his study. It may possibly have to do with his own conviction. Until 2004 he was a member of the synodical Reformed Church and presently he is according to the Reformatorisch Dagblad of 28 Feb. 2013 a visitor to the meetings of the Amsterdam Students-ecclesia, in which, among others, the poet-theologian Huub Oosterhuis is involved. We will come back to his appreciation of the development later, when we discuss his last chapter.

Isolation abandoned

What Prof. Dekker does indicate, is the change in attitude: already in 1999 they ‘agreed upon a federative growth model in which both churches would grow toward each other in phases’. The fact that later on, the CGK consider that the RCNlib are (somewhat) overdoing things, only underlines the radical change in thinking and striving.

 

To this we ourselves add: in this striving there was no longer room to listen to the many appeals from within the churches, appeals pointing to the nature and cause of this, that were tabled at the synod of Zuidhorn 2002. Appealing to Scripture and confession no longer worked. Already in 2002 a kind of blinding occurred: the train had to and would continue. There was no way of stopping it. Prof Dekker: the self-selected isolation has been abandoned (page 45).

The same ecumenical striving with unscriptural tolerance has developed in the direction of the NGK. Prof. Dekker mentions that in the 1990’s discussions commenced with the NGK. The coming to unity of local churches is being stimulated. The fact that the confession speaks of one Church has been abandoned (page 46). In the meantime there are many congregations that have already merged with the CGK or the NGK.

Prof. Dekker does mention one important stumbling block for national union with the NGK, and that is the ordination of women to church offices. He does not go on to mention the existence of other errors, or the problem of binding to the confession in the NGK

In chapter 5 he elaborates on the matter of the woman in office. Also within the RCNlib a major shift has taken place. Prof. Dekker quotes: ‘It appears that there is support for female deacons’ and ‘the impression exists that people now want to go further’. In the new Church Order that has been submitted as draft to the churches, room has been created to possibly allow female deacons. Prof. Dekker himself concludes on page78, that ‘given the speed with which the opinions are developing at present, one can hardly expect anything else than that in time women may also become office-bearers in the RCNlib’.