Wrapping up; zooming out

How is it possible that, in a denomination, which stresses true doctrine as the premier criterion for the genuine church, so few people can discern true biblical doctrine?  From the day we came under discipline (until we left, about a year later) we had regular home visits.  Since my wife agreed with me, she too, was withheld from communion.  Two elders would come for an evening, but they would not talk about doctrine.  They were probably instructed to avoid the topic, even though we were under discipline for heresy.  According to the church confessions, people must be placed under discipline when they show in doctrine and in life that they are unbelievers.  In a grim letter we were informed that we no longer shared in “the reformed faith”.  It was a very twisted experience.  At one home visit, an elder confided that he was happy that, in all the turmoil, our marriage was still strong; that my wife stood beside me.  To this I replied in true amazement, “What?  You are happy that I am not the only one who is on my way to hell, but that my wife has decided to join me in this journey?”  Also, the senior elder who kept using the term ‘heresy’ against me, wrote a very positive recommendation so that I could be accepted as student in an interdenominational seminary.  Then, about a year later, the church counsel wrote that my study at a baptistic seminary gave ample proof that I was unrepentant and hardening myself in sin. 

It was at this time that two small books were published on (infant) baptism and the covenant.  In our church, the publication was titled “The Covenant of Love”.  The other book was published in our Dutch mother churches.  Its title was “The Deep Water of Baptism”.  The latter book (not a call for baptism by immersion!) warned the readers that baptism is not just a wonderful promise of salvation (for those who follow Christ!); it also implies a serious threat for all who reject the love of God!  This side of the biblical truth had been conspicuously absent in our churches!

What I observed over and over was a form of hyper-Calvinism, which I called Arminiuphobia.  It is not restricted to one church (denomination).  In fact, I have been challenged by men from various reformed denominations about my apparent Arminian tendencies.  At one occasion I was examined in the URC, where they had earlier decided that my book did not contain heresy.  One elder insisted that, since faith is the gift of God, we may not say that it (the believing) is our work, even when we are regenerated by God’s Spirit.  At another occasion I was challenged on my writing that the Holy Spirit works in some, who will not go to Heaven.  In the Protestant Reformed Church’s view, the Holy Spirit only works effectively and irresistibly in those who are elect.  The Gospel is only “good news” for those people, and only God knows who they are.

It think it is a well established fact that communities, which make it their focus to fight one evil, often end up embracing another -opposite but just as serious- evil.  It is the pendulum principle. If it is our mission to stamp out every hint of Arminianism, we will end up with hyper-Calvinism and Sandemanianism.  Pointing fingers at those who fall from the biblical truth one way, we easily fail to see that we are doing the same, yet on the opposite side!

I have concluded that every believer, every preacher, and every church group must continue to be on their guard against losing the biblical balance.  Nobody can claim to have the perfect doctrine: it is an ongoing process of adjustment to the whole biblical truth, which cannot simply be contained in a few confessions.  In my experience, we can only maintain the proper balance if we learn to look from multiple perspectives: openly and honestly comparing views from different tages, different cultures, and different denominational backgrounds.  If we have a strong bias in favor of ‘our own’ leaders and an equally strong bias against those ‘outside the true faith’, then our pride will lead to (denominational) destruction.  Maintaining the form of religion, we will quickly lose the power of God’s presence. 

I have much respect for the work of John Calvin, and I am convinced that in most issues he promoted teaching according to the biblical balance.  Yet, he is not the J. C. in the centre of my teaching or my life!  In some churches and mission projects, I wonder about their focus or purpose.  Are they trying to win disciples for Jesus Christ or for John Calvin, or do they really think that this cannot make a difference?