Credo ↔ Oratio

The Reformed Church in America traces its history in North America back 1628. We are the oldest continuous denomination on the continent, and yet in that time we have never adopted a new confession.

It is no small thing, then, that for the first time ever, we are going through the process of potentially adopting a new confession – the Belhar Confession. You see, the RCA is a confessional denomination. We currently have three standards of unity (the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the Canons of the Synod of Dort). We also confess three creeds (the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed).

That sad reality is that, despite our confessional identity, there seems to be very little understanding of what it means to be such a body. Many believe the RCA is, like most pentecostal or baptist churches, a “no creed but Christ” denomination or a merely sola scriptura entity. We are not. Every minister in the RCA, alongside affirming the “Word of God as the only rule for faith and life,” also confirms that they hold our confessional documents to be “historic and faithful witnesses to the Word of God” (Declaration for Ministers of Word and Sacrament).

As far as I know, there is no “industry standard” as to how these statements are to be interpreted. In other words, there is no universal understanding of what it means to be confessional Christians. Some of my colleagues read the Declaration with a heavy emphasis on “historic and faithful witnesses….” Others clearly confess that the standards are “historic and faithful witnesses….” I tend toward the latter… many of my friends toward the former.

So, what does it mean to be confessional Christians? What are “confessions?” What is their authority? How are they related to the scriptures?

Here’s what I think:

I believe the confessions are documents from specific historic times and places. They were originally written to specific people in specific contexts. Unlike many theological documents, however, the creeds and confessions speak outside of their original context. While their authority is not equal to that of the scriptures, as with scriptures, a solid understanding of their original context(s) enables us to appropriately embrace them into our own time and place.

The confessions, while always subservient to the Bible, provide accurate and faithful distillations of the gospel. They offer us with the essential touch points of the Christian faith. These documents help us understand what is most important and give us a solid paradigm within which to interpret the parts of the Bible that are unclear or difficult to understand.

All of this helps explain why I believe the RCA should adopt the Belhar Confession.

Unlike some of my colleagues, I do believe the Belhar’s affirmation of God’s preferential option for the poor. I do believe that a faith which proclaims unity, justice and reconciliation but fails to live them, is no faith at all. If God stands with the “least of these” and all who suffer (and I believe God does!) then God’s people must as well. Failure to do so reveals us as Christian-like, rather than truly Christian.

In many ways, our current confessions handle Paul’s writings well, but they fail to adequately express the life and ministry that Jesus lived and taught. The Belhar helps rectify that.

The next two and a half months will show whether or not the RCA is ready to embrace the aspects of the scriptures that the Belhar lifts up as essential. I couldn’t be more pleased that Zeeland Classis and the other 5 who have currently voted on the issue have followed General Synod’s example and voted to embrace the Belhar.

I hope and dream for a world where Christians confess and live into the realities of unity, reconciliation and justice. This is, I believe, a small – but very important – step in that direction!

Grace and Peace,

`tim