Thanks for giving *cino folks a chance to weigh in on this issue, Dr. Schaap. I certainly have my share of opinions on the CRC and its potential demise, but I’ll try to keep my post focused.
Although I agree that powerful external forces related to postmodernity have significantly weakened religious institutions in general and the CRC in particular, I believe that the survival of the denomination depends largely on internal factors. I would not be surprised if the denomination did not exist in 50 years, and given my experience in various CRC congregations I meet the decline with mixed feelings. On one hand I have been pretty disappointed with what I perceive to be the denomination’s current trajectory, but on the other I feel that the CRC is uniquely poised to play an important role in the church and the world. And I believe that the CRC’s survival as a denomination depends at least in part on whether it has anything important to offer to the religious landscape.
Historically, the Christian Reformed Church has often managed to straddle the divide between mainline and evangelical Christianity. As the chasm between "liberal" and "conservative" Christians continues to grow, alienating many (especially members of Gen X and Y) in the process, the CRC has the unique opportunity to speak prophetically into the divide with a reformational vision. At its best, the Reformed tradition presents a compellingly holistic gospel, tears down the problematic divide of sacred/secular, offers an inspiring call to justice and peace, and reconciles heart, mind, and hands. I am convinced that many people in our generation, both inside the church and elsewhere, are crying out for such a vision. Turned off by the exclusivistic/pietistic/judgemental/individaulistic/jingoistic/literalistic/escapist/imperialistic (need I go on?) rhetoric they get from the right and the uninspiring shrug from the left, they are looking for something more compelling. Though the CRC is certainly not alone in its propensity to introduce people to faith they can get excited about, it could be a viable part of a growing and exciting movement.
Unfortunately, however, this is not what I see happening. At the margins of the denomination are people who are getting excited about taking care of the earth, fighting racism and poverty, welcoming the stranger, renewing liturgy, inculturating the faith in a postmodern context, bringing faith to bear in all aspects of life, and in general incorporating themselves in the narrative of the gospel. The vast majority of CRC congregations, institutions, and individuals, on the other hand, seem instead to be intent on either parroting mainstream evangelicalism or resurrecting a doctrinairian and insular version of the Reformed faith from a bygone era. If the denomination as a whole continues to pursue either of these trends, it is bound for failure. On the first count, the CRC simply cannot compete. Why do badly what a host of other churches do well? Very few communities in North America lack for Willow Creek style Bible churches and their derivatives (many of whom are also denominational churches that have lost their distinctiveness), and CRC people just don’t tend to be as good at evangelistic Super Bowl parties, Purpose Driven Life Sunday school classes, and CCM laser light shows. Moreover, some research indicates that the Bible church model is no longer fairing so well. Like the CRC, many mainstream evangelical churches are comprised mostly of baby boomers and struggle to recruit the under-40 crowd. On the second count, the denomination has more of a chance of survival if it pursues the doctrinairian model, but only as a small fundamentalist sect. As North Americans of Dutch Reformed background continue to assimilate, the CRC will be able to retain only the most die-hard of its children if it insists on weekly preaching from the Catechism, males-in-gray-suits-only consistories, and thoroughly modernist epistemology. For the non-Dutch, there are plenty of other fundamentalist churches to choose from, so why be an ethnic fundamentalist in someone else’s ethnic ghetto.
While it is true that spirituality is increasingly uncoupled from religion, that institutions in general have lost salience, and that individualism is a powerful cultural force, I still think that organized religion will continue to exert influence well into the future. We are in many ways a post-theological culture. 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. The fact that major battles underway in the CRC are ?political? rather than ?theological? doesn’t disturb me. Issues of ethics, organization, and justice are just as spiritual as issues of systematic theology. Despite the weakening importance of theology and the growing importance of politics to religious identity, institutions still have a role to play. The church itself is not disappearing. Nor are particular ?brands? of Christianity?even if denominationalism as we know it is in a state of decline. We are communal creatures who yearn to share, grow, and fellowship with others, especially around our deepest values. We are also boundary-creating creatures. As a number of sociologists argue, ecumenical efforts are in some ways doomed to fail because they attempt to eliminate the ?other.? Strong group identity depends upon a sense of being distinct from everybody else.
The CRC has the resources and potential to offer a distinct and prophetic voice to the rest of the church and to culture. It has the opportunity to model servanthood and bring healing to a broken world in a unique way. To do this, it need not be elitist, enclaved, or culturally/ethnically homogeneous. In fact, all of these tendencies have seriously impeded the effectiveness of the church’s witness, in my estimation. My husband and I don’t go to a CRC church right now, largely because our faith trajectory doesn’t seem to be in step with the beat of the CRC drum. There are many people like me who were raised in the CRC but no longer find ourselves at home in the denomination. Though I’m sure the denomination’s inability to retain its youth is troubling to its leaders, I hope they find solace in the fact that most of us continue to identity ourselves as disciples of Jesus. I have hope that the CRC will embrace the aspects of its tradition that could breathe new life into the church and meet needs in the world. I have hope that the denomination will reform and thrive. I even have hope that some day we could proudly belong to a CRC. But if none of this comes to fruition, as others have said, I trust that the church itself will endure and that within it somewhere will be a place for each of us.
Janel
Feb 14 2007
06:46 pm
Thanks for giving *cino folks a chance to weigh in on this issue, Dr. Schaap. I certainly have my share of opinions on the CRC and its potential demise, but I’ll try to keep my post focused.
Although I agree that powerful external forces related to postmodernity have significantly weakened religious institutions in general and the CRC in particular, I believe that the survival of the denomination depends largely on internal factors. I would not be surprised if the denomination did not exist in 50 years, and given my experience in various CRC congregations I meet the decline with mixed feelings. On one hand I have been pretty disappointed with what I perceive to be the denomination’s current trajectory, but on the other I feel that the CRC is uniquely poised to play an important role in the church and the world. And I believe that the CRC’s survival as a denomination depends at least in part on whether it has anything important to offer to the religious landscape.
Historically, the Christian Reformed Church has often managed to straddle the divide between mainline and evangelical Christianity. As the chasm between "liberal" and "conservative" Christians continues to grow, alienating many (especially members of Gen X and Y) in the process, the CRC has the unique opportunity to speak prophetically into the divide with a reformational vision. At its best, the Reformed tradition presents a compellingly holistic gospel, tears down the problematic divide of sacred/secular, offers an inspiring call to justice and peace, and reconciles heart, mind, and hands. I am convinced that many people in our generation, both inside the church and elsewhere, are crying out for such a vision. Turned off by the exclusivistic/pietistic/judgemental/individaulistic/jingoistic/literalistic/escapist/imperialistic (need I go on?) rhetoric they get from the right and the uninspiring shrug from the left, they are looking for something more compelling. Though the CRC is certainly not alone in its propensity to introduce people to faith they can get excited about, it could be a viable part of a growing and exciting movement.
Unfortunately, however, this is not what I see happening. At the margins of the denomination are people who are getting excited about taking care of the earth, fighting racism and poverty, welcoming the stranger, renewing liturgy, inculturating the faith in a postmodern context, bringing faith to bear in all aspects of life, and in general incorporating themselves in the narrative of the gospel. The vast majority of CRC congregations, institutions, and individuals, on the other hand, seem instead to be intent on either parroting mainstream evangelicalism or resurrecting a doctrinairian and insular version of the Reformed faith from a bygone era. If the denomination as a whole continues to pursue either of these trends, it is bound for failure. On the first count, the CRC simply cannot compete. Why do badly what a host of other churches do well? Very few communities in North America lack for Willow Creek style Bible churches and their derivatives (many of whom are also denominational churches that have lost their distinctiveness), and CRC people just don’t tend to be as good at evangelistic Super Bowl parties, Purpose Driven Life Sunday school classes, and CCM laser light shows. Moreover, some research indicates that the Bible church model is no longer fairing so well. Like the CRC, many mainstream evangelical churches are comprised mostly of baby boomers and struggle to recruit the under-40 crowd. On the second count, the denomination has more of a chance of survival if it pursues the doctrinairian model, but only as a small fundamentalist sect. As North Americans of Dutch Reformed background continue to assimilate, the CRC will be able to retain only the most die-hard of its children if it insists on weekly preaching from the Catechism, males-in-gray-suits-only consistories, and thoroughly modernist epistemology. For the non-Dutch, there are plenty of other fundamentalist churches to choose from, so why be an ethnic fundamentalist in someone else’s ethnic ghetto.
While it is true that spirituality is increasingly uncoupled from religion, that institutions in general have lost salience, and that individualism is a powerful cultural force, I still think that organized religion will continue to exert influence well into the future. We are in many ways a post-theological culture. 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. The fact that major battles underway in the CRC are ?political? rather than ?theological? doesn’t disturb me. Issues of ethics, organization, and justice are just as spiritual as issues of systematic theology. Despite the weakening importance of theology and the growing importance of politics to religious identity, institutions still have a role to play. The church itself is not disappearing. Nor are particular ?brands? of Christianity?even if denominationalism as we know it is in a state of decline. We are communal creatures who yearn to share, grow, and fellowship with others, especially around our deepest values. We are also boundary-creating creatures. As a number of sociologists argue, ecumenical efforts are in some ways doomed to fail because they attempt to eliminate the ?other.? Strong group identity depends upon a sense of being distinct from everybody else.
The CRC has the resources and potential to offer a distinct and prophetic voice to the rest of the church and to culture. It has the opportunity to model servanthood and bring healing to a broken world in a unique way. To do this, it need not be elitist, enclaved, or culturally/ethnically homogeneous. In fact, all of these tendencies have seriously impeded the effectiveness of the church’s witness, in my estimation. My husband and I don’t go to a CRC church right now, largely because our faith trajectory doesn’t seem to be in step with the beat of the CRC drum. There are many people like me who were raised in the CRC but no longer find ourselves at home in the denomination. Though I’m sure the denomination’s inability to retain its youth is troubling to its leaders, I hope they find solace in the fact that most of us continue to identity ourselves as disciples of Jesus. I have hope that the CRC will embrace the aspects of its tradition that could breathe new life into the church and meet needs in the world. I have hope that the denomination will reform and thrive. I even have hope that some day we could proudly belong to a CRC. But if none of this comes to fruition, as others have said, I trust that the church itself will endure and that within it somewhere will be a place for each of us.