On Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Reformed Catholicity
One holy, catholic and apostolic Church
Trinity Reformed Church recognizes itself as part of the ancient Christian Church established by the apostles, rejoicing in the “faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jud. 1:3). We are thankful for the fellowship we share with all the faithful in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church throughout the ages. We affirm with the apostle that there is one body and one Spirit, just as there is one hope, “one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:5). Therefore with the holy fathers, we confess that one faith as it has been handed down in the Apostles’ Creed, Nicene Creed, the Definition of Chalcedon, and Athanasian Creed. On this basis we cheerfully recognize the Trinitarian baptisms of Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians, receive them (and all others who confess this ancient faith) to our celebration of the Eucharist, and warmly welcome them into membership in our congregation. Because there is one body and one Spirit, we insist that the unity of the body of Christ is fundamentally something to be preserved through humility, gentleness, and love in the Holy Spirit and is not dependent upon institutional forms, church polity, or bureaucratic decisions (Eph. 4:2-3).
Likewise, in submission to the apostle’s instructions, we seek ecclesiastical maturity which rejoices in all of the ways the saints are being built up and equipped for ministry, striving for the unity of faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, until we reach mature manhood, the fullness of Christ (Eph. 4:14). Standing firmly in the Reformed and Protestant branch of the Church, we are committed to enriching and deepening our understanding, practices, and doctrines, fully expecting continued reformation and renewal in the entire body of Christ.
Gratitude for the rich and fruitful heritage of the Reformed faith.
At the same time, this tradition of semper reformanda (“always reforming”) has periodically been a subject of confusion and misrepresentation. The Reformed tradition at its best, far from willfully dividing and abandoning the one true Church, seeks to preserve that Church which the apostolic, patristic, and medieval fathers established and has continued in the lives of all the faithful throughout Christendom. Yet, some within the Reformed tradition itself today misinterpret ongoing reformation and preservation of this rich catholic heritage as an abandonment of historic Reformed principles. Some think they see a trajectory in our reformational progress which leads back to Roman Catholicism or leans toward Eastern Orthodoxy. Individuals who claim that we are moving this direction after having studied and worshipped and lived in our community have dramatically misread our aims and purposes.
Furthermore, such interpretations fail to appreciate the deep catholicity found in the Reformed tradition and display ingratitude for the great sanctifying work our sovereign God has done in His Church by the faithful labors of protesting catholics over the centuries. While we affirm our fundamental unity with all the saints within the body of Christ, including those in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, as well as our great appreciation for the many gifts, insights, and contributions they bring to the broader Church, we equally affirm our great thankfulness for our own history and tradition. Our commitment to the Reformation and those central claims of the Protestant Reformers is unwavering and as robust as ever, and our thankfulness for this rich and fruitful heritage has only deepened as we have grown. In particular, we are grateful for and committed to those summaries of the faith found in the Westminster Confession of Faith, The Three Forms of Unity, and the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. At the same time, we do not understand this gratitude to be at odds with a genuine catholicity and love for the saints throughout the body of Christ. Rather, we are most thankful for the insights and concerns of the Reformed tradition because of how hopeful we are that God will be pleased to use us to bless and build up the broader Christian Church.
Catholicity and the ultimate, infallible authority of Holy Scripture
In keeping with this hope, we reject views which place the ultimate, infallible authority of the Scriptures in competition with other sources of authority since Christ is Lord over all, and His Word cannot be broken (Jn. 10:35). The sixty-six books of the Bible in their entirety are this perfect, God-breathed Word and comprise the only ultimate, infallible source of tradition for the Christian Church (2 Tim. 3:16, 2 Thess. 2:15, 3:6, 14). With the Reformers, we insist that liturgical idolatry is a most dangerous temptation and sin for many within Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.
This includes the veneration of man-made images, statues, relics, Eucharistic elements, the invocation of the saints, as well as other practices and traditions which are not according to Scripture. Likewise, we warn all the faithful to flee those doctrines or practices which, whether in doctrine or in practice, undermine the fundamental and sovereign graciousness of God in salvation. Finally, while we consider divisions in the body of Christ most grievous to the calling of the Church, and we confess that the Reformed tradition has contributed its own failures to this state of affairs, we do not believe that abstract considerations of church polity, apostolic succession, or institutional unity rise to the level of weightier matters of the law. Therefore, however helpful the study of those issues may be, they must not jeopardize genuine Christian fellowship, justify the denunciation of the least in the kingdom of God, or result in disparaging the validity of the ordinations or sacraments of other churches that worship our Triune God in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Individuals who join communions that effectively excommunicate their Protestant brothers and sisters contradict their search for catholicity, and ironically, the goal of unity comes at the expense of further divisions in the body of Christ. We desire to be of one mind with all the saints, not by coercion, but by the same patient love of our brothers and sisters shown by Christ in His patient love for His Bride, the Church.
Toward greater unity and purity of the body of Christ
As we hope and pray and continue to work toward the greater unity and purity of the entire body of Christ, we do so committed to the most central callings of the Church: humble submission to Scripture and the proclamation of the gospel, the centrality of faithful worship and celebration of the sacraments, and loving God and neighbor with all that we are, which includes caring for the poor as well as widows and orphans in their distress. And this, we confess, is the way to grow up together with all of Christendom “into Him, who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love” (Eph. 4:15-16).
Adopted by the Elders of Trinity Reformed Church on Thursday, August 14th, 2008
Joshua Appel, Roy Atwood, Patch Blakey, Peter Leithart, Chris Schlect, Toby Sumpter
On Liturgical Freedom and Glory
Preamble
In our churches, as we have been rediscovering the richness of liturgical worship, we have been also rediscovering some of the pitfalls that come with rediscovering anything. There are at least four temptations that can hinder faithful liturgical reformation: (1) traditionalists may hold to their immediate tradition too tightly because they are afraid any change represents slippery-slope liberalism; (2) reformers may “overshoot” by thinking that anything new is automatically an improvement and thus confuse reform with radicalism; (3) moderates who try to make everyone happy by including even contradictory ideas or practices just to keep a form of peace between opposing camps; and (4) those who have good, conservative, reforming or moderating instincts, but are uncharitable to those who disagree with their position (to a devoted traditionalist, everyone else can look like a radical leftist; to a committed reformer, every else can look like a traditionalist; to a moderate everyone else can look like an extremist). Because we want to be scriptural Christians, we want to make sure that the center of our endeavors is a sincere effort to discover what the Bible actually teaches, and to obey that, while also observing what the Bible teaches about honoring our fathers in the work of liturgical reformation. In our desire to help churches that are working with the same issues, we have drafted the following statement.
Freedom and Glory
The life of Christian worship is nothing less than a participation in the life of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the model of perfect freedom and overflowing glory, a freedom and glory that mutually establish one another. Freedom with no glory is ungrounded; it is really no freedom at all. It is “carried about with various and strange doctrines.” It is not sufficiently aware of what worship is or the grace being given. Freedom needs the weight of glory. On the other hand, glory with no freedom is turgid and lifeless. Glory is heavy, and the glory of God is our shield. But glory with no freedom is like David in Saul’s armor. It is awkward and cumbersome, and doesn’t fit. Glory with no freedom will eventually reduce to stifling traditionalism, and will cease to be glorious. Freedom with no glory will reduce to whimsical worship, and will soon cease to be free. And when freedom and glory are divorced from one another, one sign this has happened is an erratic swinging back and forth from one to the other. This has the result that worship is treated like a smorgasbord, a liturgical talent show with a little bit of everything for everyone. And the end result in both cases is neither freedom nor glory.
Liturgical freedom is not anarchy; liturgical glory is not hidebound. In order to keep a balance between the two, we must make and maintain the following distinctions.
Three Categories
There are three categories under which to consider possible liturgical practices: first are practices that we must do (things commanded), second, practices that we may not do (things prohibited), and third, practices that may or may not be fitting, helpful, or edifying depending on circumstances, needs, or gifts. While this third category is generally referred to as adiaphora (things indifferent, i.e. things neither commanded nor forbidden), we would insist that this does not mean that the decisions made in this category do not matter. Rather, depending on many particulars, different decisions may be lawfully and wisely made. And just because something is adiaphora does not mean there is an automatic protection against a lack of wisdom. Such decisions can matter greatly, but their nature is such that completely opposite decisions may both be correct, given the different circumstances. And the nature of time and history must be given sufficient weight in such considerations. The bronze serpent was a symbol of Israel’s salvation and a powerful reminder of grace, but later became a great stumbling block. Hezekiah was right to tear it down (Num. 21, 2 Kgs. 18:4). In the realms of liturgical practice, specific examples of this same kind of thing would include certain bodily postures, sermon length, specific instruments/music, vestments, sanctuary adornment, the selection of particular prayers and creeds, as well as less important decisions like meeting times and seating arrangements, etc.
The Glory of Tradition
While the Scriptures are critical of certain kinds of tradition (e.g. Col. 2:8), the Scriptures also require us to keep and honor other kinds of tradition (e.g. 1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thess. 2:15, 3:6). The fifth commandment requires that we honor our fathers and mothers (Ex. 20:12), following them unless they have been rebellious (Ps. 78:7-8), and this command to honor them does not cease to apply after they have died. Removing the ancient landmark was a temptation for Israel as much as it is a temptation for us (e.g. Prov. 22:28). This means that, in addition to our earthly parents, within the one family of God, we are required to honor the fathers and mothers of our own particular “tribe.” In God’s providence, Christians are sometimes orphaned, neglected, or abused and they must seek out and find new families. But we are more fortunate and our call is to cultivate thankfulness for what God has given to us. In our particular context, we recognize the Reformed tradition broadly as our branch of the family, while gladly embracing the western, catholic tradition more broadly as our family tree. All of God’s people throughout Christendom are our people, but the Reformation branch is our place in Christendom, and the great Reformed confessions, catechisms, and liturgies tell the story of our faith well. In saying this, we do not mean to imply that doctrinal issues can be reduced to mere geographical placement. There are truth claims involved, and this means that over time, the entire tree will ecessarily grow up into a greater unity and like-mindedness.
The Freedom of Sola Scriptura
At the same time, constrained by Scripture, we also confess the sins of our fathers and cling to the promises of Scripture that call us to work for and expect more glory, new glory. Reformation is not to be understood as merely a onetime event, but rather as our marching orders. Sanctification is not just for individuals, but also for the Church as a whole. With the 16th century reformers we affirm the supremacy of Scripture and rejoice in the freedom of the Spirit to lead the Church into all truth. Grounded in the Scripture, we trust the Lord to grow us up into all maturity (Eph. 4:13; 5:27). While we stand with the fathers of our tradition, we confess with faithful fathers like Athanasius and Luther and many others that our fundamental allegiance is to stand faithful to the Word of God. This is necessary despite the fact that many may oppose us even from within the Church of
Jesus. We trust the Holy Spirit to work out all truth in His timing through history, and we are happy to trust Him to lead us in this. We are therefore not dismayed by popes, councils, individual pastors or factional movements, or political pressures when they differ with the Scriptures.
CREC Memorial on Worship
We affirm the CREC Memorial on Worship which helpfully describes positively what faithful Christian worship seeks to embody and grow in, and in addition to that statement, we find it necessary, in our particular circumstances, to address several specific areas where liturgical questions usually arise.
Freedom and Glory in the Details
We warn our people and our children against religious pageantry. While worship is a dramatic event, the sinful heart of man naturally inclines to hide behind theatrical forms. And any sort of service can be turned into a theatrical facade. Both High Church rituals and Low Church “anti-ritual” rituals can be opportunities for confusion, undue offense, and provide a stumbling block for those who prefer empty form and ritual to honest communion with the triune God (Is. 1:12; Jer. 7:4; Hos. 6:6; Ps. 40:6; 1 Sam. 15:22; Rom. 2:29).
Against traditions that say otherwise, the Scriptures teach that the action of bowing is reserved for God and His living image bearers. God’s people are not to bow before man-made objects, the elements of communion, or any other relic or icon (Ex. 20:4-6). While human beings may not be worshiped as God (e.g. Acts 10:25-26, Rev. 22:8-9), because they are living icons of the true God (Gen. 1:27), the kind that only He can make, they are to be venerated or honored as appropriate (e.g. Ex. 20:12, 1 Kgs. 1:2, 1 Pet. 2:17) and may be honored with the holy kiss (Rom. 16:16, 1 Cor. 16:20, 2 Cor. 13:12, 1 Th. 5:26).
Likewise, kneeling is a posture which is not suitable for the celebration of the Lord’s Supper and may suggest a sort of veneration that is not fitting for this festive memorial meal. Sitting or reclining was the posture used by those who celebrated it first at the Last Supper (Mk. 14:18, Jn. 13:23), and we believe it continues to be the most beneficial. Other postures like hand-raising, clapping, prostration, and even standing or sitting are not neutral, and anything we do like this should be carefully compared with Scripture. Even prudent applications of biblical postures can become occasions for pride and idolatry and as such should be reformed as need arises.
We stand with the Reformed tradition wanting to see the Word of God honored, and therefore those ministers who declare it ought to be dressed as befits the dignity and responsibility of that office. While it is not required, it is legitimate for ministers to be vested for the worship service. But because this, when done, is “for glory and beauty” (Ex. 28:2), it is important that it not be overdone. We therefore warn against undue pageantry, and commit ourselves to pursuing a glorious simplicity even and especially here. We also warn against those who believe that the status quo (whether high or low) is somehow safer or more orthodox just because we’re used to it. High and Low Church traditions can each be turned into their own kinds of will-worship or pageantry.
We recognize that there will be others who may find places to hide in traditional Reformed elements, seeking refuge behind the words of catechisms, confessions of faith, and a certain regulated simplicity. And still others will soothe their guilt in ancient prayers, liturgy, and ritual. And therefore, wherever the sinful heart seeks to hide from God in our worship, we pray for God’s wisdom to be upon us and our children and that the Holy Spirit might lead us to expose all darkness to the light of the gospel that God’s mercy may be upon us and our congregations to a thousand generations.
A Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving
Finally, we confess that ingratitude and bitterness is at the heart of all sin. But at the heart of faithfulness and love is thankfulness and praise. We want to receive all the elements of our worship with thankfulness, as the grace of God to us, and we want to embrace them and rejoice in them as gifts of grace. The format of our liturgies therefore needs to be received as grace, the words of our prayers and confessions need to be received as grace, the instruments and music and words of our psalms and hymns need to be received as grace, the weekly observance of the Supper needs to be received as grace, the Scripture readings, congregational responses, and the benediction need to all be received as grace. And we commit ourselves and charge our descendants to continue the reformational work necessary to be steadfast in this spirit of thanksgiving, in the glory and freedom of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
On Holy Days
We believe that the people of God have been freed from all bondage to observing days, weeks, months, seasons or years (Gal. 4:9-11, Col. 2:16). Those Old Testament laws were shadows of Christ who has come (Col. 2:17). And when Christ died we died with Him, and when He was raised and ascended into heaven, we were raised and seated with Him in the heavenly places (Col. 3:1, Eph. 2). This means that together with Christ, the saints are the rulers of time and space. We have all been established in Him as lords of the Sabbath, to rule time according to the wisdom of the Spirit (Rom. 8:14, Gal. 4:6-7). We are not under days, but now the days are under us. And therefore we confess that all celebration of days is voluntary, freely offered, and no one may judge or be judged on this basis (Rom. 14:5-6, Col. 2:16).
It is in this spirit of freedom and victory that we gladly encourage the celebration of the historic church calendar as a glorious testimony of the victory and rule of Christ over time. Rightly understood, His life celebrated and remembered in our days and weeks and months is a continuation of the triumph of Christ over the principalities and powers. He made a public spectacle of them and triumphed over them, and our memorials in time are meant to continue to walk in Him in the power of the Spirit. We recognize the Lord’s Day as the chief glory of these privileges and gifts; it is the Old Testament Sabbath raised from the dead, transfigured, glorified, and grown up into maturity. It is the celebration of the resurrection of Jesus, our weekly Easter, and the only feast day which must be honored and kept (1 Cor. 5:8).
“It is in this spirit of freedom and victory that we gladly encourage the celebration of the historic
church calendar as a glorious testimony of the victory and rule of Christ over time.”
It is in the spirit of Easter joy that we recognize the wisdom of our Fathers who wanted to put memorials of Christ everywhere (Dt. 6:5-9) so that we might rejoice and give thanks always (Phil. 4:4, Eph. 5:20). Because we want to walk in thankfulness and gratitude, we want to mark our time with regular reminders of God’s goodness and grace in particular events. For this reason, our congregations recognize and commemorate the five evangelical feast days (Christmas, Good Friday, Easter, Ascension Day, and Pentecost) as the principal feasts of the church calendar which highlight specific events in the story of Christ which we want to give thanks for and meditate on. We also recognize that the various seasons of the historic calendar are useful for instruction, correction, and training in righteousness as they reflect on many other themes found throughout Scripture.
While commending the general principles of having our lives shaped by the story of Jesus, we nevertheless recognize that this gift has in the past been turned into a bludgeon with which to abuse the flock of God. We stand gratefully in the Reformation tradition which courageously freed the saints of God from those enslaving regulations related to saint days, penitential seasons, and superstitious fasting. In so far as various practices and laws had become obligatory apart from scriptural warrant, or were used to enforce unbiblical understandings of grace, salvation, and forgiveness, or became stumbling blocks for the faithful, we condemn such abuses and warn our people to likewise remember these lessons from the history of the church.
“The true fast that God has commanded is to loose the bonds of wickedness and to let
the oppressed go free, to feed the hungry, and clothe the naked.”
Finally, while we recognize the importance of prayer, almsgiving, and fasting in the lives of all followers of Jesus, we believe that sinners have particular tendencies to turn these gifts into pits to fall into (Mt. 6:1-18). Various forms of fasting and observance of days can have an appearance of wisdom, but it is of no value against the indulgence of the flesh (Col. 2:23). The true fast that God has commanded is to loose the bonds of wickedness and to let the oppressed go free, to feed the hungry, and clothe the naked (Is. 58:5-8). In order to keep the fast faithfully, the warnings of Christ specifically related to hypocrisy in prayer, almsgiving, and fasting must be thoughtfully and consistently applied to practice (Mt. 6:1-18). Nor may believers grieve one another by eating or not eating, celebrating or not celebrating, for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit (Rom. 14:15-17). Therefore we exhort our people to flee all idolatry, and hold fast to Christ who is the substance, the point of all of it. We further exhort our people that if they are going to celebrate certain days and seasons to do so as kings, free nobility, cultivating joyful and thankful celebrations with generosity and open-handedness towards neighbors, friends, and all those in need. And particularly with regard to seasons like Advent and Lent, we commit ourselves to cultivating godly and joyful repentance that is built on the bedrock of Christ’s finished work on our behalf (2 Cor. 7:9-10), and which consistently overflows in joy. We encourage families to use these and all other days and seasons as opportunities for serving those in need, memorizing Scripture, singing Psalms, and giving themselves to and for one another in love.
On Parish Life
Parish Life at Trinity Reformed Church
At Trinity, we seek to live out what happens in our worship on Sunday morning. This means that we are committed to building a strong and vibrant culture that flows out of our gratitude for God’s work in our lives. Because worship is central, it forms the blueprint for all that we do. Centrally, we understand worship as God’s remaking us through His Word and Sacraments, equipping us to love each other and to serve our neighbors. In order to support and advance this work, Trinity organizes yearly parish groups comprised of families and individuals who gather for prayer, Bible and book study, fellowship, and outreach to their neighbors. Parish groups gather for two sessions: a fall session (from Sept. to Dec.) and a spring session (from Feb. to May). Each group is lead by a parish group leader with the support of a family who opens their home to host the meetings. Joshua Appel, Pastor of Parish Life and Christian Education, oversees the training and mentoring of Parish group leaders. Parish groups usually meet twice a month, and most gather around a communal meal. The three overarching objectives for parish groups at Trinity are best summarized in three directions: Up, in, and out.
Up – Loving God: Prayer, Bible and book study: The upward direction orients us to the first great commandment: to Love the Lord our God with all of our heart, mind, soul and strength (Mark 1:30). Parish groups are designed to encourage and deepen our understanding of God’s love toward us revealed in the incarnate Word. Toward that end, a central feature of parish group meetings is the study of God’s Word and prayer for the needs of the Saints. Such study can assume different forms: Some seasons are devoted to discussing and fleshing out insights from the weekly sermon texts. At other times, parish groups provide an ideal setting to discuss books chosen to deepen our understanding of the Bible and to challenge us to practically embody His love to our community. Historically, this kind of study has been an anchor for our community. Our church has grown out of many years of practical study and application of the Scriptures and the wisdom of the Christian tradition.
In – Loving Each other: Fellowship, friendship, and community: Parish groups are also designed to build our love for one another within the body of Christ. One of the great blessings of the broader church community has been the many strong friendships that have grown together over the years. At Trinity we believe that such friendships are not a luxury, but are essential to every Christian’s growth and maturity (Prov. 27:17). Christian maturity and character cannot flourish in a vacuum but depend upon the support, strength, and accountability provided by the different gifts Christ has given His body (I Cor. 12:12-30; Eph. 4:11-16). We believe that one of the central ways friendships are formed and fed is through the simple act of breaking bread together. This means that parish groups gather for regular fellowship dinners, parties, and various social events. These are opportunities to love one another, to encourage one another, and to celebrate God’s kindness to us as a community (Rom. 12:10, Heb. 10:24), and to encourage fellowship with Christians from other churches as well. When done faithfully, Bible studies and prayer will translate into fruitful marriages, children with fat souls, and laughter around dinner tables. Our church’s community life is a sacramental outworking of our experience of being joyfully welcomed to our Father’s table each Sunday.
Out – Loving Neighbors: Outreach, community service, and evangelism: Faith that does not translate into blessing for our neighbors and city is necessarily dead (Jas. 2:14-26). Therefore we encourage our parish groups to think like missionaries, and this may take many different forms: Direct or personal evangelism, neighborhood parties, fundraisers for community needs, or diaconal and mercy-ministry endeavors are all part of this effort (Col. 4:5-6, 1 Pet. 3:15, Jas. 1:27). Of course this also includes inviting and welcoming nonbelievers to Bible studies, meals, and other fellowship events in order to serve them and introduce them to the gospel (Mt. 5:14-16,1 Pet. 3:15). Parish groups are regular opportunities to invite new friends, neighbors, and church members to join in the joy of knowing Jesus.
All for Worship: All of these directions ultimately flow into and out of our Lord’s Day worship. When we gather as the Church in the liturgy, we do so in order to do all of these things. Our study of Scripture and worship and prayer are done in the unity of the Holy Spirit and for the blessing of our community and the world. All worship embodies this, but our celebration of the Lord’s Supper particularly reveals this. At the Eucharist, all three of these dimensions are at work: we commune with the Father through the body and blood of the Son in the power of the Spirit; we commune with one another in the breaking of bread and sharing the cup; and finally, we remember the death of Christ for the forgiveness of sins, not only for ourselves but for the whole world.
On Sex, Gender, and Marriage
1. We confess that the church is subject to Christ, who is Lord over all. While church members ought to obey civil rulers in temporal things, provided they are not required by those authorities to sin (Mk. 12:13-17; Rom. 13:1-7; 1 Pt. 2:13-17), the church has a divine right to embody her beliefs in her practices and to carry out the mission Christ has entrusted to her without interference or hindrance. The church as an institution shall remain free from state control in faith, doctrine, and practice, and her members should not be forced to act contrary to their consciences, as informed by the Word of God. With these truths in view, we declare the church’s right to reject any attempts on the part of the state to impose on her institutionally or her members individually unbiblical, unnatural definitions of marriage or sexuality.
2. God created man male and female in the beginning for this very reason, that they might be joined together in the covenant of marriage as one flesh (Mark 10:5ff). Marriage as a covenant bond between a man and a woman is an institution founded not in cultural convention or convenience, but in God’s act of creation (Gen. 2:23-24).
3. We resist and reject all attempts to redefine marriage to include same-sex partnerships. Certainly, we desire to serve and love persons with homosexual desires or who engage in homosexual practices. We know we are fellow image bearers and fellow sinners along with them, and we long to show them the compassion of Christ. But we cannot endorse the fulfillment of their desires under any circumstances. Rather, we call on persons with such desires to join us in trusting the Lord Jesus to forgive our sin through his shed blood and transform us by his healing grace.
4. We claim the right for our churches and church members (whatever their particular vocation) to refuse to host, officiate, or in any way support same-sex “marriage” ceremonies, not out of animus, but out of love for God, neighbor, and truth. Likewise, we refuse to host, officiate, or support other ceremonies that violate biblical teaching on marriage.
5. We reject transgenderism as a perversion of God’s good creational order. There are only two sexes, male and female (Gen. 1:26-28). Sex is not fluid, it is binary. We reject the notion that gender is determined by one’s feelings, or is detachable from biological and bodily givens. God forms each person genetically as a distinct male or female from the moment of conception. As God is the Creator, and makes each of us either male or female, we cannot unmake and remake ourselves into the opposite sex. Sex is an immutable feature of our identity as creatures; thus, it is impossible for anyone to change his or her sex.
6. Gender dysphoria should not be used to create a protected class of persons, in which one’s feelings override the facts of biology, or in which the rights, dignity, and privacy of transgender persons override the rights, dignity, and privacy of others. Thus, we claim for our churches and church members (in whatever vocation they serve) the right to reject compliance with any public policies or laws that would require us to deny binary sexes, or to accept claims of gender identity that are contrary to one’s God-assigned biology. We reject the legal redefinitions of sex and gender that divorce either of these realities from God given biology. We claim the right to speak to people according to their God-given sex, rather than reinforcing gender dysphoric confusions by using alternative pronouns. We claim the right to restrict access to intimate facilities (e.g., bathrooms, nursing areas, shelters, etc.), to sex-specific events, etc., strictly according to God- given biological realities. In the case of someone who has already transitioned to the appearance of the opposite sex, the session of the local congregation will determine the wisest and most compassionate course of action.
7. All sexual sins can be forgiven through the shed blood of Christ, including the practice of sodomy and transgenderism. But forgiveness can never be separated from confession and repentance; forgiveness can never be separated from denying oneself and taking up the cross daily; forgiveness can never be separated from fighting against sin and pursuing holiness in the power of the Holy Spirit.
On Church Officer Qualifications
(adopted by TRC Session, November 2013)
“A bishop then must be…One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)…” (1 Tim. 3:4-5)
“Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.” (1 Tim. 3:12)
“… Ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: if any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly…” (Tit. 1:5-6)
We live in a time in the Christian Church when we must address these qualifications carefully. On the one hand, it is necessary to point these qualifications out and take them seriously because many in the church do not. The fact that some denominations are now debating whether practicing homosexuals may be ordained to leadership in the church indicates how far we have drifted from biblical orthodoxy. Indeed, even within Bible believing denominations, it is not uncommon to find elders and pastors with unbelieving or rebellious children, marital strife or infidelity, and often these familial crises are never raised as potentially disqualifying men from office.
On the other hand, as many congregations return to the Word and seek to take the biblical qualifications for leadership seriously, it can be easy to overcorrect in a simplistic, legalistic way that is not actually faithful to the text, creates unnecessary barriers to qualified men, and may actually end up endorsing some men who are otherwise disqualified.
In our own circles, within the CREC, we see the development of two extremes. One is to hold to such a tight understanding of these elder qualifications that churches are left leaderless. No one is “qualified,” which usually means that perfectionism is at work. On the other hand, we see situations where the children of leaders are apostate or entirely out of control, and yet this is accepted as a sad but normal circumstance.
Several things we ought to keep in mind as we consider this issue: First, Scripture is not a block of wood; it is the source of all spiritual wisdom. It must be taken seriously, studied carefully, and applied faithfully. Second, the application of God’s word to this topic should be one of the places where we illustrate biblical wisdom and prove our commitment to Scripture, not a place where we’re trying to find a hermeneutical loop-hole or work around. Third, we should note here at the outset that there is no difference in qualification for elder or deacon on this particular point. This is an identical qualification for both offices.
A few test case scenarios might help us realize that this is not a problem that can be fixed with simplistic analysis. Suppose a man with four children became a Christian mid-life. His two older children were already older when he converted. They have grown and left the home and are not professing Christians. The two younger children grew up in a much more consistently Christian home, and they are walking with the Lord. Suppose another man has three biological children and one adopted daughter (born with fetal alcohol syndrome). The three biological children grow up and embrace the faith, while the adopted daughter has a rocky story, expressing doubts and unbelief at various points along the way and ends up pregnant out of wedlock in college. Yet another man has one child who is not obviously rebellious, but sits like a bump on a log every Sunday. A fourth man has five children all apparently walking with Lord, but his home business has run afoul with the IRS a number of times, and he receives mixed reviews in the community for his financial dealings. And then we meet a man who has never been married and has no children, but he has successfully started a business that has grown to employ 25 individuals over the last 15 years.
The point of these examples is to present scenarios that clearly call for wisdom. At the outset, we should note that none of these situations are slam-dunks. Perhaps some are easier than others, but all would require diligent inquiry on the part of elders. Because elders will have to make decisions like this, we have even more reason to want our elders to be tested and wise men.
In the ordinary course of things, the Bible teaches that a man will be proven to be qualified for the offices of elder or deacon in the Church through his children growing up to embrace the faith of their father and mother. Jesus says that ‘wisdom is justified by her children.’ It is right and proper for congregations to expect that their elders be men of integrity, wisdom, and faithfulness, proven in the first instance in their own families. This must be the norm. At the same time, Timothy was an ordained officer in the church and was exhorted not to let anyone despise him for his youth. While we cannot say with precision exactly how old Timothy was, we may assume that he was old enough to be accused of being too young, and that certainly may have included younger children. This indicates that while elders ought to be characterized by having faithful children, it is one qualification among a number of others and must be understood within a broader context, and not in order to explain the force of the requirement away.
In Timothy, Paul emphasizes the principle of analogy: If a man doesn’t know how to rule his own house well, how will he care for the church of God? While Paul singles out children as a primary litmus test of this principle, we ought to reason from the analogy that it might properly include other litmus tests as well. For example, the qualifications for bishop/elder only mention him having one wife, but presumably “ruling well” would include the quality of the marriage—not merely the fact that it is monogamous. Other categories could include vocational leadership, business practices, and personal finances. But this also takes wisdom. For example, the man who has run afoul of the IRS may be the target of liberal hawks, or he might be irresponsible and sloppy with numbers. “Ruling well” may be proven and ought to be examined across a number of categories. Pure literalism would miss other important indicators. Providence is a player as well. A man who has never been married and has no children (like Paul), or a man who is married but has not been able to have children, or a man who had a previous marriage/children from before he met Christ, do not seem to be disqualified necessarily by the mere fact of their providential story. Paul had a very bad reputation among Christians (as a persecutor) before his conversion. But fourteen years after his conversion, Paul had established a pattern of life and a reputation that clearly qualified him for ministry (Gal. 2:1). And it’s worth noting that Paul didn’t play his “God told me to preach” card, but waited and labored for that “call” to be established in the life of the Church in God’s timing. And we should add that “providence” is not a catch-all qualification; it may also be an obvious disqualification (e.g. a man in a polygamous marriage in a polygamous society who converts to Christ).
On the one hand, these texts establish that a man’s home is his first ministry, his foundational ministry. We want to see God blessing his ministry there before we set him loose in the Church. On the other hand, we do not want the challenges of good, hard ministry to necessarily be an automatic disqualification (e.g. adopted children, wayward children from prior to conversion). Sometimes, faithfulness to a challenging ministry in the home may be a qualification for leadership. For example, suppose a man has a real ministry as a foster parent to children of drug addicts. Would we really want to say that this kind of ministry could be a disqualification, or would become one if he adopted one of those children formally, and the child continued to struggle? And on the third hand, while having a challenging ministry in the home may not be a de facto disqualification, it may nevertheless require a prioritization of time and energy and focus that doesn’t allow for broader rule/ministry in the church just yet. Elders must carefully weigh a man’s obligations, gifts, and each situation carefully.
The last thing is to remember that wisdom is found in a multitude of counselors, and not in autonomous men going rogue. In other words, the elders are responsible for the care and protection of the flock, and in consultation with the deacons and congregation must determine whether a man meets the scriptural requirements or not. But this shouldn’t be done by a man himself or any one elder or deacon, independently of counsel and input. This includes both the nomination process before a man is ordained but is also part of the evaluation of a man’s ongoing qualification to continue in an office. A man who comes into rough waters in his home life should not ignore or hide those problems, and he should not just announce his resignation and step down on his own authority. A good officer will certainly be quick to offer resignation if he sees clear signs that he is no longer qualified or needs to at least give concentrated attention to his own family, but this decision should be made by the elders as a whole and a man should be pastored through the process regardless of the conclusion reached.
In conclusion, we do not want this paper to be interpreted as saying that the whole subject is impossibly complicated, and so it is impossible to know what to do—and which conveniently means that every session should do whatever it wants to, taking care to appeal to that nebulous goddess “wisdom.” It can be complicated, but at the same time, the Pauline instructions remain clear. But because of these possible complications, and because general disregard of these qualifications for church office are so widespread in the church at large, we believe that real reformation at this point is necessary. We need to begin the work of incorporating these scriptural standards for the households of church officers into the culture of our confederation. As a way forward, we would therefore recommend the following standard be adopted by the presbyteries of the CREC. We believe, excluding extenuating circumstances, i.e. the child was adopted with fetal alcohol syndrome or a child from a pre-Christian marriage, etc., an officer whose child is excommunicated ought to offer their resignation and it ought to be accepted by his session. Ordinarily, an officer with an excommunicated child does not meet the biblical qualifications for office. This would likewise disqualify potential candidates in the same situation. In the event that an officer or session decides not to offer/accept his resignation, the session will request that the presiding minister review the circumstances of the situation. Apart from extenuating circumstances such as listed above, the presiding minister will recommend to the local session that a resignation be offered/accepted. If the situation is delicate or complicated, the presiding minister may form a committee of presbytery to help him provide that recommendation. We know that such situations can often call for real wisdom, and this is why we should avail ourselves of the wisdom found in our sister churches, which can be close enough to be helpful, but distant enough not to be tangled up in the circumstance.
