Regional Synod of Canada - Reformed Church in America

Pioneer Christian Monthly

Date - Jan/95

Contributor - John Moerman

Title - The Use of Scripture in Making.Moral Decisions

Topic - Reformed Church

GENERAL Synod voted to send the Theological Commission's Report (hereafter named CT) to congregations for study. We must take this decision and request for "study" seriously. Much is at stake for our churches. It is bad enough to fight issues with secular Governments, but it becomes incredibly sad when a number of the same issues surface in one's own Denomination. Simply stated, it comes down to Divine absolutes.

Background Information:

It was an overture of the Synod of New York in 1992 that asked for the study. The reasons given are: (GSM. p. 470)

1. "The church is faced with many complex moral and ethical decisions.

2. The church, naturally, seeks guidance from Scripture.

3. As Reformed Christians, to make moral and ethical decisions is foundational and must be addressed if we hope to have fruitful discussions concerning particular questions which face us a people of God at the end of the 20th century."

In light of the Scriptures we all have, and the gift of discernment given to all born from above and filled with the Spirit, we wonder whether such a "study" was called for in the first place? Are we placing RCA members among the "ignorant masses" of Medieval Roman Catholicism? And if not, would God's requirements and directions with regard to the sanctity and holiness of life be any different today than for people living during bible times?

The Scriptures are as timely today as they always have been. God's Word says what it means, and it means what it says. Let us not make today's moral and ethical decisions more complex and difficult than they really are.

It is clear that God wants our total surrender, death of the old nature, sanctification, worship, and service of Him. Through Christ we have been recreated in true righteousness, knowledge, and holiness (Rom. 6:1213; 1 Cor. 1:30; Ephes. 2:10, 4:13; 2324; Col. 3:10; etc.). Paul urged the church to follow Christ and his own example (1 Cor.4:16; Phil. 4:8-9). We must not rest "until Christ is formed in us" (Gal. 4:19). We simply are to do whatever is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, and admirable..."

The Synod of 1994

Last year the CT presented to Synod their Report. However, delegates rejected it for the following reasons;

1. "The language is imprecise at various points.

2. Report is weak in its discussions of the role moral absolutes play in transcultural values.

3. Report is weak in its discussion of the Bible as a direct source of moral direction.

4. Report in its present form and language is difficult to use in a congregational setting." (GSM 1993, p. 427) Part of our critique is that the 1993 reasons for rejection also stand for the new Paper the CT presented to this year's Synod.

Unacceptable for the following reasons:

A. The 1994 Report of the CT begins by pointing out that, "All moral decisions must be made in the light of Scripture." Yet, immediately the CT goes on to say, "Christians disagree on how the Bible is to play this central role and how it is to be interpreted in the process of Christian moral decision making." This is the CT's introduction to the "On the one hand ... on the other hand..." At the same time leading to a wrong use of Scripture in making moral and ethical decisions.

B. Sometimes the Report hints at a high view of Scripture, only to, in the next paragraph, give proof of a low view of Scripture. This is not the kind of "guidance we are seeking from Scripture"! "Guidance" was one of the Synod of New York's reasons for requesting the study. Evangelical Christians reject a low view of Scripture. The Report tries to say two things of an opposite nature at the same time. But who can sit on both sides of the table at the same time? Jesus warned against trying to serve two masters.

C. The Report nowhere states what hermeneutical (interpretive) principle the CT employs. It appears to be the selective analogy of Scripture, rather than the henneneutical principle of the comprehensive and clear analogy of Scripture. The selective principle of analogy of Scripture undermines the established girders of bible truth and authority. This way we miss out in the Old Testament's "This is what the Lord, the Almighty says ..." Even as the New Testament's "Truly, truly, I say unto you..."

This way the RCA can be loud on God's love, while silent on God's wrath. This way we can maximize mercy, while minimizing sin. This way we neutralize the authority of Scripture. This way the RCA would act like the world, saying, "If it feels good, it is okay. Just do your own thing." This way it is easy to follow the voice of the hireling rather than the voice of the Good Shepherd. Our Lord Jesus warned us to watch out for false prophets. Let us also call to mind what Satan said to our first parents: 'Has God really said ... ?"

This he still tries to whisper in people's ears. Satan still disguises himself as an angel of light. (2 Cor. 11: 14) Conversely, the Lord Jesus simply said, "It is written ... (Luke 4 and Matt. 4). V%Thy is the CT shying away from the "It is written" analogy and interpretation of Scripture? The RCA must return to the immutability of Scripture.

D. Today's moral situation and spiritual condition can be compared with that of Noah's, Lot's, Jonah's (Nineveh), and Jesus' time. We can also go to the issues Paul wrote about in Rom. 1. The "spiritual warfare" is not diminishing. If anything, it is increasing. Let us not unwittingly become part of it. It is the unbelief of "the end of the 20th century" (Synod of New York) the CT should have addressed! They chose to look the other way. They chose to move on the slippery slope of today's relativism of all things. This has become the paragon of the CT endeavours. Witness this Report, and also their defence of last summer's "Task Force" paper on homosexuality.

E. The 'diverse cultural context" of a few Bible passages are lifted out of the context at the expense of what the Report should have been dealing with.

Why, for example, lift out of Scripture "cultural expressions" of:

1. Polygamy by patriarchs?

2. Meat offered to idols? (1 Cor. 8:4-13)

3. Not wear clothes of wool and linen together?

4. Braiding of hair. (1 Tim. 2:9)

5. Slavery during Bible times?

6. "Various ways in which couples in different cultures move toward marriage."

Remember, what we see in the Bible is what we are looking for. The above are not the issues we must deal with! The church has other kinds of "pollution" to deal with than those of water, soil, and air. Think of the following:

a. Abortion as "a service to women" ("therapeutic"!), while widely used as a form of birth control.

h. The evil of relativity vs. the blessings of absolutes.

c. The consequences of promiscuity, pornography, etc.

d. Membership/leadership in the RCA of practising lesbians and homosexuals. (The Scripture's call is to repentance, offer of forgiveness, and invitation to be set free from the power of sin.)

e. The incompatibility of RCA membership and Free Masonry. (Masonic Lodge)

f. Physician assisted suicide.

g. Genetic engineering.

h. The evils of gambling and lotteries, etc. Let us clearly and unequivocally hear from the CT what Scripture has to say in terms of these things.

From a 1991 questionnaire sent to RCA churches we have been informed of the following:

- 45% of our clergy consider the Bible the inspired word of God. (What about the other 55%?)

- 38% of RCA clergy are on the far left of the political spectrum

- 33% of RCA clergy favour genetic engineering.

- 59% of Eastern clergy favour homosexuality to be taught in public schools.

- 59% of Eastern clergy favour euthanasia.

- 44% of clergy favour abortion. (GSM. 1993, pp. 376-380)

Going back to Synod of New York's reason's to have the CT study "The use of Scripture in making moral decisions", we can't help but wonder whether this Report was to open the door for such values as held above.

F. Lacking in the Report is the inner testimony of Scripture itself. Please, carefully study in their context the following Bible passages and texts: Deut, 4:2, 12:32; Ps. 119:52-53, 89, 105, 144, 152, 160; Prov. 30:6; Isa. 40:8; Matth. 5:18; 24:35; Rom. 15:4; 1 Cor. 10:6-11; 2 Tim. 3:16-17; Hebr. 4:12-13; 2 Pet. 1:20-21; Revel. 22:18-19.

G. Nowhere in the Report do we find what Jesus had to say of Scripture. Yet, let us not ignore this. For our Lord often quoted the Old Testament. He never though took a "cultural setting" to undermine the rest of Scripture. Instead, He always fortified Scripture. (Matth. 5:17-48) Neither did Jesus ever take examples of tribal laws to weaken the moral and ethical decision making of his day. And we better not do so either. Rather, let us follow his example.

H. Apparently the CT has been looking and listening much to the world's view of things. These things are not what the RCA is to advocate. Quite the opposite! Of course, this is where the RCA has been for decades now. We only have to think of the push for Feminism, translating Bible and Confessions "in keeping with the contemporary importance of using inclusive language" (GSM 1990 p. 410), Liberation Theology, Muslim-Christian dialogue, Abortion, Homosexuality, Political-Social action, etc.

I. At no place in the Report do we find proof of the fact that the Reformed principle of "The Word of God is our only rule for faith and practice" is still held high. Please, read what the Belgic Confession states about the things the CT has been asked to study pertaining "the particular questions which face us as people of God at the end of the 20th century", and how up to date these old articles are. Make sure to read Art. 5 and 7.

Dangerous Statements

The CT makes some very dangerous statements such as:

"Rather than supplying a universal set of abstract moral rules which are equally binding upon all people in all cultures, the Bible challenges all people to live out - often in a variety of ways - the particular life which is theirs in Christ."

"It is less a matter of what rules we are to follow than of what kind of people we ought to be in light of the Gospel. Out of this sense of identity, and informed by the Leading of the Holy Spirit, Christians acquire the moral discernment which enables them to discover how it is they may glorify God in their distinctive historical and cultural setting."

'At the sane time, however, a believer neither restricts his or her own decisions to a repetition of specific moral mandates found in Scripture (for this would leave the believer without guidance in many areas of our modern world), nor does one feel bound to every moral directive of Scripture (for that would deny the diversity and historical character of the moral codes found in Scripture itself."

Conclusions:

1. This Paper opens the door still wider to mainline denominational philosophy and action, where pluralism and diversity, relevance, political correctness, progressivism, liberal ecumenicity, and left wing social justice will further dominate the RCA agenda. We must never forget that the prophetic word is not based on main stream thinking.

2. The church's acceptance of this Paper would drive the wedge of unbelief deeper into the already strong difference between bible believing and evangelical members of the RCA, and those in the liberal and mainline camp. It would also set the RCA further apart from the evangelical community of churches, such as the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada.

3. RCA theologians like those on the CT should function as "watchmen" which we read about in Ezek. 33: 1-11. May God not say of our theologians today, "I looked for a man who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on behalf of the land so I would not destroy it, but I found none ... (Ezek. 22:30-31)

4. It would have been very appropriate, seeing the moral and spiritual condition of our church and nation, that the CT would have called our church to repentance, with the words of the prophet Joel (1:13-15).

5. If this Report would be accepted, our Synod of Canada is duty bound to write a new Report for our Canadian members.

Please click the "Back" button of your browser to return to previous page.