This again was part of a CRC-Voices discussion, hence the names I left in.

I was responsible for the subject heading and I stand behind the question. In our system of ecclesiology confessions are foundational documents. It is the deepest level of the confessional church. Tinkering with the foundation should be done with care and talk of adding a new confession in 3 years should, if we are taking seriously what we say we take seriously, should have the utmost attention.

Now David you were right in asking the question “how should the BOT/ED approach this whopping “gift” that has been placed on their collective desk?” The BOT/ED already have lots of good and important things on their desks. They have agency collaboration and governance. They have the “healthy church” priority which has been, like Belhar, another submarine lurking below the surface of the CRC’s collective consciousness. Many of you probably don’t know that the denomination has been working on a “centre” of sorts to help resource CRC congregations to foment health. There is an economic downturn that has impacted all of the agencies, some of them severely. There are lots of things going on. Now we have a recommendation for a 25% increase in confessional real estate. Is this adding a new foundation making room for a new addition? How are we to think about it? It is a leadership moment if there ever was one. We haven’t added a confession in almost 400 years and pop! Here we have another.

Yes David, you are right. How will the BOT/ED approach this? I don’t know that they know. There are options like the ones you laid out before us. Is their priority adoption? Is their priority process? Is their priority embrace? Is their priority defeat? Should they be impartial arbiters of the process or advocates?

That’s what’s behind the subject line. They might say “we have lots of more important things on our agenda. We’ll let IRC run the charge on the Belhar.” If that is their response I’d suggest that our self-identity as “confessional church” would be very low.

One of the ways the CRC has been distinct from the RCA has been its confessional awareness. What Synod’s putting the Belhar before us has done is put a thermometer in our mouth to find out “at what temperature is the CRC’s confessional awareness today?” This is what we will see.

This is also a test case for the revision of the denominational leadership that had taken place a bit ago. We now have an Executive Director, no longer a Stated Clerk/General Secretary and a Director of Ministries (I don’t know if I have those job titles right) back when we had the Peter Borgdorf and Len Hofman / David Engelhard combos. Our new structure has an “Executive Director” and a “Director of Denominational Ministries”. Their combo was to have the ED be the visionary leader and the DDM the manager. Jerry’s big emphasis has been the healthy church priority. The idea was to strengthen the grass roots foundation (local churches) through providing “services”. The DDM was to manage the agencies and achieve collaboration. What Synod has done by putting the Belhar up does is radically shift which foundation all eyes are upon. The CRC had spent the last few years looking at the church’s practical foundation. Now it’s focus is on our confessional foundation.

I would assert that in fact this may be a tipping point, one which took place in the broader church when the air started leaving the seeker-church balloon (“healthy church” is Saddleback language) and the emergent and the young-and-Reformed movements started to gain traction. The twist is that the Belhar comes from Africa also bringing into focus the rise of the impact of “world Christianity” onto the CRC scene. What Synod has done is marked the fact that the CRC is following in the progression from the pragmatic to the confessional. What the Belhar will do, however, is perfectly energize the flashpoints between the transformational (emergent) and the confessional (young-and-Reformed) and those already in the CRC subculture economy who naturally align with those forces. This is a fresh fight where the ecclesiastical descendants of the WICO wars can take their turn at the game.

I draw your attention again, back to Schaap’s 150th piece:  Our fights are no longer our own.

The CRC has just spent the last 40 years attempting to retool from the confessional (we are a distinctively Reformed witness to Jesus Christ) to the pragmatic (creating fully devoted followers of Jesus Christ) only to find the broader church culture has switched the focus back to the confessional. pvk