Considering Church Unity and Separation From the Belgic Confession

Christ’s Call to Unity

The decisions of synod in recent years have caused a number of churches to wonder whether there was still a place for them in the CRCNA. While some congregations have left the denomination because they discerned themselves to be in a different place doctrinally on issues of sexuality, others see themselves largely in alignment with synod’s decisions about sexuality but express concern about potential implications of a renewed focus on confessional alignment.

As these churches consider their next steps, it is crucial that we take seriously Jesus’ prayer for unity that those who believe in him “may all be one” (John 17:20-21) and the apostle Paul’s charge to “make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit” (Eph 4:3). Throughout Christian history, we have confessed, “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church” as an essential truth grounded in the gospel. Any decision related to unity is not merely a matter of logistics or preferences or consensus or following church order. The unity of the Church is a gift of the Spirit that reflects the relationship that Jesus has with God the Father. One of the greatest challenges is that the unity of Christ’s church should be expressed at the local level, denominational level, and across denominations. Yet sometimes these are at odds with one another.

For churches in the Reformed tradition, a church’s relationship to the broader church has been directly tied to the "Marks of the True Church" from Article 29 of the Belgic Confession. It famously identifies that the true church has these three marks: 1) the pure preaching of the gospel, 2) the pure administration of the sacraments, and 3) the practice of church discipline. When applying this confessional teaching, it is important to recognize that it directly states, “We are not speaking here of the company of hypocrites who are mixed among the good in the church and who nonetheless are not part of it, even though they are physically there.” Rather, the doctrine of the true church is about “distinguishing the body and fellowship of the true church from all sects that call themselves ‘the church.’” This is not about individual people making decisions about attending individual churches, but how the “bodies” of churches relate to one another. Perhaps most relevant to churches discerning their next steps with the denomination is the statement in Article 29, “By these marks one can be assured of recognizing the true church—and no one ought to be separated from it.” This focuses the question to ask, “are any of the marks of the true church absent or marks of the false church present such that one body must separate from the ecclesiastical community with whom God has put them in covenant?" Both Scripture’s call to maintain unity and Reformed teaching on the marks of the church set a high theological bar for such separation.

At the same time, church history also shows that there are times when separation is unavoidable (including at the time of the Belgic Confession), because the broader church institution requires actions the local church(es) cannot in good conscience accept. Neither has to label the other a “false church,” but if specific actions are declared as necessary to prove the continuing marks of a true church (or face discipline) and these required actions conflict with the church’s mission and values, then separation may be justifiable and even necessary. The Reformed tradition has consistently recognized that obedience to Christ may, in some circumstances, require separation from the broader institutional church to preserve unity at a local level. This has been viewed not as a rejection of unity but as a tragic yet necessary, faithful action.

Current Implications for the Christian Reformed Church

The recent decisions of Synod have implications for the ways some congregations raise up, select, and ordain pastors, elders, and deacons. In particular, churches whose ministry contexts require leadership development pathways shaped by mission fields, cultural diversity, or non-Reformed backgrounds are experiencing a new tension in the way they develop such leadership. Often these leaders come from other theological traditions and have differing perspectives on what could be called “secondary doctrines,” but which are clearly taught in the Reformed confessions. The stated requirement (Church Order 2025 Article 5-a Supplement, p. 13-17) that Christian Reformed Churches are not allowed to install any pastor, elder, or deacon who has a pre-existing “personal difficulty with a point of doctrine contained in the confessions” (confessional-difficulty gravamen) presents a barrier for such churches to call qualified and gifted people into leadership who come from non-Reformed backgrounds.  

These potential barriers raise serious ecclesiological questions for congregations wondering how to be faithful within the Christian Reformed Church and faithful to Christ who has gifted them with these leaders in their midst. For any church who would acknowledge that the marks of the true church are still present within the denomination, Christ’s call to unity points toward remaining in communion even when doing so involves significant tension, limitation, or unresolved disagreement. And even if a congregation does believe that synod’s decisions have distorted the marks of the true church, this does not necessarily mean that it is compelled to separate. It may be possible for a church to engage in faithful discussion and clarification and find ways to accommodate differences. It may also be that congregations receiving a significant number of people from outside the Reformed tradition are challenged to consider new ways of sharing the doctrines of our confessions more boldly and encouraging belief in them. While some congregations may still find that these circumstances impede or undermine faithful ministry in their context, others may discover that what initially felt constraining becomes, over time, a catalyst for deeper formation and renewed commitment to the Reformed faith.

As we state in our Covenant for Officebearers, we believe that these Reformed expressions of the Christian faith “continue to define the way we understand Scripture, direct the way we live in response to the gospel, and locate us within the larger body of Christ," as we are “formed and governed by them.” We recognize and insist that the Christian life is not an individualistic pursuit, but that we are formed collectively, in conversation with other believers who have committed to live under the authority of God’s Word. Any decisions and deliberation on whether one body of the church "ought to be separated from" another cannot be taken lightly. In light of the Belgic Confession's teaching, separation cannot be because the church (at any level) is imperfect, but only when the marks of the true church are fundamentally compromised or when faithfulness to Christ and his Word makes continued union impossible. Holding this perspective keeps Jesus’ prayer and the Spirit’s gift of unity central, which calls us to careful, faithful, and principled deliberation in decisions of such weight and consequence.