When I was young, there was only black and white. Our church (denomination) was the genuine
church of Christ, while the denomination which we left suddenly had ceased to
be a real church. My parents came from large families. One of my mother’s
younger sisters decided to move to Eastern Canada to marry a young man, who was
a member of the CRC. This denomination
refused to break contacts with “the now apostate church” in Holland. My grandfather was deeply saddened and bitterly
disappointed with his daughter’s plans.
He could not give his blessing, and he vowed never to visit his daughter
in Canada. For him the denomination seemed
more central in his life than his daughter.
At the time I was still young, and I was not aware of the deep drama and
the great bitterness involved. I think
he made a terrible mistake. Yet, I
cannot just blame my grandfather; obviously he was strongly influenced by his
immediate community- as we all tend to be.
Fourteen years later I moved with my wife and two children
to the Canadian Prairies. We joined the
proper church. One of its senior members
was actually a relative of one of my high school peers. He probably had little formal training, yet
he was a man of wisdom. At one of our
visits, he told me that Christian parents always want to believe that their
children are saved: they will look for any hope. Even if they have obviously rejected Christ,
parents find assurance in their children’s baptism that their eternal destiny
with God is sure. I was deeply impressed
by his keen observation and his honest evaluation. Later, our pastor also acknowledged the man’s
wisdom: he was allowed to write short articles in the church bulletin.
I understand the reasoning behind infant baptism. Although I
have never baptized any young child, yet even in (Baptist) seminary I have always
defended infant baptism. On the other hand, I reject
the idea that the doctrine and practice of infant baptism can be used as
criteria for a genuine church of Christ.
Also, I would rather be in a good Baptist church than in a church where
baptism is abused. When I taught at a
Christian high school in Canada, some students, colleagues, and preachers were
upset when I challenged my students whether or not they were true
Christians. Of course they were
Christians: they were baptized! They
just have to grow (or be trained) in showing the fruits. The process of regeneration was typically seen
as (an automatic) lifelong process of any baptized person in the church.* One of my colleagues reminded me that “When
we are faithless, God remains faithful” (2 Tim. 2:13). I asked, “Faithful regarding what?” She replied, “To the promises He gave in
baptism!” “What is this promise?” “That
His Spirit will dwell in us”. Some
pastors even insisted that the baptism of our child gives us assurance that he
will go to heaven**, even if he obviously lives as an unbeliever.
I was declared a heretic, and my wife and I were kept from
the communion table. Yet, privately I
noticed that the leaders took the warnings to heart. Trying to keep face to the outside, they
quickly set to work to renovate the inside.
When it became clear that other reformed churches in the region shared
my concerns, my label shifted from “heretic” to “disturber of the peace”. Several other churches refused to accept us
as members.
*Meanwhile my
“Reformed doctrine” teacher-colleague insisted that we (in the church) are all
totally depraved. The church confession
states that “we are totally depraved unless we are regenerated by the Holy Spirit
(HC, QA8).” This then seems to imply that
none of us are regenerated!
**The form for infant baptism stated, “When we are
baptized into the Name of the Holy Spirit, God the Holy Spirit assures us by
this sacrament that He will dwell in us and make us living members of
Christ…” In the Dutch version the
wording was “He desires to dwell in us”. Apparently, something got lost in translation!
No comments:
Post a Comment