Those who support the 2012 CRC Synod adopting the Belhar Confession as a fourth confession say it candidly addresses the racism that still afflicts North America….Others say the Belhar Confession falls below the doctrinal standard of the CRC’s three historic confessions that have been in place for centuries….They charge it doesn’t mesh with the gospel’s intent and is widely used in ecumenical circles to promote progressive theologies that ultimately diminish doctrinal soundness, denominational unity and ecumenical integrity.

GRAND RAPIDS — When the Christian Reformed Church Synod convenes next year, a guaranteed hot-button issue will be the possible adoption of a fourth confession that focuses on racial reconciliation.

Those who support the 2012 Synod adopting the Belhar Confession as a fourth confession say it candidly addresses the racism that still afflicts North America. The confession emanated from South Africa as a call to dismantle the apartheid system, and replace it with justice and reconciliation.

Others say the Belhar Confession falls below the doctrinal standard of the CRC’s three historic confessions that have been in place for centuries: the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession and the Canons of Dort. They charge it doesn’t mesh with the gospel’s intent and is widely used in ecumenical circles to promote progressive theologies that ultimately diminish doctrinal soundness, denominational unity and ecumenical integrity.

Such arguments don’t hold sway with the Rev. Peter Borgdorff, the CRC’s deputy executive director and a member of the Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations Committee that in 2009 recommended the adoption of the Belhar Confession be put on the Synod’s agenda in 2012 when it meets in June at Redeemer University College in Anchester, Ontario.

“The Belhar Confession addresses issues important to North American society, that is justice in the most general sense, with an emphasis on unity of the church in terms of biblical unity and a ministry of reconciliation between God and man, to be sure, and between people,” Borgdorff said.

“Though it’s usually thought of as a political, social and societal reality in South Africa, apartheid is just another word for racism in the United States. In Africa it’s tribal warfare, and in Eastern Europe, it’s ethnic cleansing.

“It’s the diminishing of one part of the population, and that’s true of American society.”

Objections

But calling the Belhar a confession is a misnomer, said the Rev. John Cooper, professor of philosophical theology at Calvin Theological Seminary.

Instead, he said it’s more akin to the Barmen Declaration that protested the Nazi Party’s determination to infiltrate German Protestant churches in the mid-20th century, which was correctly regarded as a statement and not a confession.

The Belhar does not meet the same doctrinal standards the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession and the Canons of Dort do, Cooper said.

“The Belhar isn’t anymore like them than a haiku is an epic poem,” Cooper said.

“It’s theological confusion; that’s my main objection. Changing a declaration to a confession is a colossal mistake, a result of political decisions in South African churches.

“I have no objection to it as an affirmation of biblical and social justice, but to identify it with the Heidelberg Catechism and Belgic Confession and Canons of Dort as a doctrinal standard, I absolutely object to that.”

Read More