Steve Van Zanen

Most of the work on these principles was done by Karl Westerhof of CRWRC.

Hi Karl,
You guessed it. I didn't write this article. I've now added Kate Kooyman's name and organizations to the header. Thanks for proofing me! Steve

Thanks, Bill, for your thoughtful contribution. There certainly are a variety of views within the Christian and the Reformed communities on what sorts of issues the church (as institute) ought to try to speak to. Some would say that it is imperative for Christians to advocate for the cause of justice, but that this activity should always be organized outside the church as an institution (through the Association for Public Justice or similar organizations). Others see a big role for the Church in advocacy because justice is central to the Kingdom and the Church is a Kingdom outpost.

My own sense is that the Church ought to choose its advocacy causes carefully. Both US law and good sense point in the direction of not "advocating" for particular candidates who are always a mix of good and bad character traits and issue positions. Very complex issues create some of the same dynamics. Choosing a relatively small number of relatively clear issues would enable the Church to speak for what we understand as Kingdom values and be heard more clearly. What do others think?

To me this would be a good example of something where congregations can and should get directly involved, as opposed to encouraging their members to be involved.  Increasing high school graduation rates is an obvious good.  Who is against it?  There are other situations where the demands of Biblical justice are so clear and compelling that the church must speak.  My two cents,

Hi Steve,

  This story is fictional but based on some trends that have been developing for a number of years.  It projects those trends forward another decade to raise an alarm.  World Missions and CRWRC personnel continue to visit partner congregations every two to three years and communicate with them regularly in print and by email.  Some are beginning to use Skype to communicate into worship services while on the field.  Local outreach is vital and was badly neglected a generation or two ago.  This fictional story raises the question of whether the pendulum is swinging too far in the opposite direction.  Steve

Hi Wendy,

  "The End of Missions" is designed to be a provocative title with a double meaning, or even triple.  End can mean purpose and also where something is going rather than just conclusion.  The piece does not mean to say that the things which First CRC is doing (in 2020) are unimportant.  Indeed, they should be part of an overall church missions strategy.  But because this committee is unconnected to them it made itself irrelevant and important values are being lost.  Least reached peoples, leadership training and other parts of missions disappeared from the church's radar.

Wendy,
I had some trouble using the link you provided, but I did find the article. She mentioned a number of objections to the Roman Catholic Church that indicated she might fit theologically in a liberal Protestant environment, but she is so disillusioned that she doesn't want to go there either. Many people have observed that you don't need a "church" to maintain Christian belief, but following Christ isn't just about belief.

I had this situation some years ago.  In the end I asked some questions of the mother and some of the seven year old boy.  And he was baptized.  But, this didn't count as profession of faith. 

You definitely need to re-sign if you change classes, so it seems like you would in a new congregation as well.  Steve

In practice of course, it is up to the body to decide.  And the potential for changes of mind is not a main factor since we promise to bring such changes of mind to the council we are responsible to.  However, the commitment you make by signing is to function in THIS context within the bounds of the confessions.  So when you join a new council or classis it seems very appropriate to reaffirm the commitment made in the other council or classis.  At the beginning of each synod every delegate reaffirms their commitment that in the context of the synodical meetings they will work within those boundaries.  If this is done as a formality, it is of no value, of course.  But, it seems to me to be a very good practice.

The question is, to whom are you making the commitment when you sign.  The answer is not "The whole world" or "The whole denomination" but rather, "The body to which you belong."  Whether that is the council, classis or synod.  When you become a part of a new body, you reaffirm your commitment to operate in the new context according to the confessions.