catapult magazine

catapult magazine
 

discussion

The Death of the CRC?

Default

JSchaap
Mar 05 2007
07:53 am

I want to thank you all for your comments, not only because I find them helpful and instructive, but also because I’ve enjoyed hearing voices I’ve not heard for awhile. My intention in posting this question—as I announced—was simply to gather some information, not to engage in some spirited debate and certainly not to affix grades :D . However, I thought I’d just say a few things.

Norbert says: "Though I disagree with some of the stands my denomination seems to be making, I love that we are becoming more vocal. I don’t think we’re trading theology for politics. I think we’re trying to apply theology to politics. And while that may shake the church up a bit, I think it’s a healthy, necessary thing to do if we’re going to be salt and light."

The church (universal) has had problems determining its relationship to politics at least since the disciples, when Jesus said to be sure to give Caesar what he had coming, which didn’t make the question any easier. I’m not sure what flavor politics Norbert is talking about here, but it seems clear that evangelicals have been significantly mobilized since Reagan, and especially since George W Bush’s two terms. Whether or not that will continue is itself an interesting question and something just about everyone is watching these days as none of the three leading Republican Presidential candidates have quite the right stuff. Should Bush’s Iraqi surge be successful, perhaps his Presidency can be salvaged; but things aren’t looking good. He was, of course, a champion of many evangelicals. Will his problems make some Christians disillusioned with public life or greater interest in politics? Who knows?—but what seems clear is that things won’t remain the same as they were six years ago.

I’m not sure what flavor of political involvement Chris is touting here, but what’s clear is that not all Christians (even within the CRC) agree about what flavor of political action is necessary or desirable. But evangelicals do change (as they have vis-a-vis the environment—did you all hear Cal De Witt on [i:164cbdd004]Speaking of Faith[/i:164cbdd004] last month?). It does seem clear, however, that the CRC is quite unified in its political views today because many, many CRC members have adopted a political platform that begins with issues connected with abortion, issues of life. In terms of the future of the denomination, that may be good in that it shows a body quite unified. But it may be difficult in that the denomination’s political views are really the same as social issue Republicans—and hence no different than many millions of evangelical Christians. Corwin Smidt, et al, in [i:164cbdd004]Divided by a Common Heritage[/i:164cbdd004] (if you’re interested, a really enjoyable study) argue that nothing may be more hazardous to the health of what they call the Reformed heritage than its own wholesale absorption into the evangelical world.

Grant brings the word "reformational" into the discussion, a word that many, many members of the denomination probably wouldn’t recognize. My own feeliing is that as a denomination we have a right to exist independently only inasmuch as we offer something worthwhile to the great cultural discussions. I would also say that the unique contribution of the CRC, through the years, is "worldview" in general, and Kuyper in particular. Grant’s story about that church he knows where Mouw and Wolterstorff are quoted (BTW, have you heard Wolterstorff’s interview on the last Mars Hill?) is not unusual. Philip Yancey told me years ago already that he thought the CRC had a far, far greater influence on American Christianity than its own small numbers. I don’t think there’s any doubt on that score. Grant’s discussion of Pullman as a church that understands "struggle" is interesting, but I’m guessing, as he maintains, that most American churches (not to mention CR churches) wouldn’t identify or define themselves that way—that is, with that word. Might that change? I don’t know.

I’m not sure how to take Dan’s comments vis-a-vis the end of the world. Apocalypse is hot these days, of course (McCarthy’s new novel, [i:164cbdd004]The Road [/i:164cbdd004]is a terrific read, a book you won’t forget, by the way). And I’m quite sure that at almost every era of Christian history many believers were sure the end was close (my mother is sure too).

Aside from that, however, what Dan suggests is probably more true than he might guess. The CRCs power areas have often been in the rural Midwest, where people aren’t dying to live. This gets corny but hang on—should ethanol become an important means by which the US frees itself from the shackles of foreign oil, this whole region may boom in a way that no one could have guessed.

Dan’s absolutely right in suggesting that mucho bigger things may change drastically in the future as some cultural trends die and others arise. Oddly enough, even as the whole mega-church, independent church thing has grown, there has been a very vital "return" to basics, to established traditions. If that’s true, then it’s entirely likely that some of you may find yourselves studying Calvin in ways that you never guessed you might. Hmmmm.

Kirstin’s appreciation for different traditions is something lots of sociologists of religion say characterize your generation particularly—a penchant for what some call "cafeteria Christianity." And, inasmuch as I think she and Rob are moving soon (if they haven’t already) to a city in west Michigan, I’m quite sure that she’s going to find there a wide variety of congregations within the denominational family. In a way, what she’s talking about is already happening. Shoot, there are now five CR churches in the little town where I live; each of them different. The tough question is not only how wide can we stretch, but also how wide can we stretch and still be connected?

Her comments also prompt the question of "should"? Might we say that the Christian Reformed Church played a vital role in a certain people’s lives—Dutch-Americans, Dutch-Canadians—during their transition into American life, but now, like all ethnic churches, it will (and should) simply pass away? Perhaps God, in his great plan for his people, gave the denomination a mission that is now complete.

She also brings up Christian education, which has been, as she says, very significant in denominational life and history. Christian schools may well have made the CRC more insular, but they’ve also kept it together—and they’ve kept us thinking. An ex-[i:164cbdd004]Banner[/i:164cbdd004] editor, Andy Kuyvenhoven, once wrote that he never felt more inspired than when he’d have to speak at Christian school conventions because Christian school teachers really wanted to "be" Christian in their classrooms (in the interest of full disclosure, I’m a Christian school teacher).

That those Christian schools would be affected by a drift toward the evangelical right is understandable, of course. For those of us who really treasure the adjective "reformed," that drift is a loss.

Janel’s post is at once optimistic and pessimistic. I’m blessed by a ton of what she says, and I’m glad that she acknowledges the truth of what all of this suggests—that the denomination which gave most all of you birth offered something vitally strong to each of you somewhere along your various “trajectories.” What she says echoes what most of you do—and what I feel: that unless the CRC offers something unique in the constellation of Christian evangelical fellowships in this culture, it really has no future, nor should it. What all your posts illustrate—and what Janel’s nicely documents—is that it can, it has, and it could continue to. Will it? Ah, there’s the question.

It seems to me that people adjust to what seem new worlds by doing one of three things: by simply disowning the past, by accommodating changes thoughtfully and slowly, and by building a fortress and staying inside. Some parts of the CRC will do and have been doing all of the above. As for me, at least one old definition of “reformed” is, as you know “ever reforming.” By my estimation it’s vital and life-giving.

“We are in many ways a post-theological culture,” Janel says. “And I don’t think that is all bad. The Reformation arose out of a particular set of historical circumstances, and the circumstances which we confront raise different questions and call for a different set of answers.”

That too is interesting stuff. I have a friend who claims that the history of Christianity shows that just about every 500 years or so, God almighty simply changes the playing field. And while he never really tosses the players, he re-creates the way we play the game. That friend claims that in a Christian world that is post-theological, beauty may be the new medium by which he calls his own. In a way, I feel it in myself. Some of my own most treasured moments in the last five years have happened, all by my lonesome, in an environment most of you know—this particular fly-over, emerald edge of the Great Plains where I live, the open land and the big sky that crowns it, where God, day unto day, really never stops preaching (Psalm 19). I’d show you pictures, but I don’t know how to get them on the post :( .

Anyway, I’ve recently celebrated my 59th birthday. I’m indelibly stamped with a Sixties mentality, a true boomer. As the ancient among ye, it’s been good to hear y’all hold forth because my generation is about ready to play shuffleboard, if it hasn’t already started. And the positions of leadership in whatever denomination we bequeath you all, and within its institutions, will soon be passed to our sons and daughters. Like Laramy, I’m as reassured by your responses as he was by the worship conference at Calvin. Like Laramy, I once found myself in a place where, for the first time in my life, distinguishable roots were something I longed for. When I did, I came back—in my case to the CRC (I had been outside church doors for several years) and Dordt College (geesh! how much more tribal can one get!).

Regardless of what happens to the CRC and each of you, I am thankful that I feel in your responses, as well as in this medium, a deep commitment to what I think both you and I mean by the word “reformed.”

Blessings,

jcs