My prayer is that everyone in the CRC will be able to articulate the gospel and would unashamedly spread this good news. While the evangelical world has the gospel, they are adrift without a confessional tradition to ground them. Many have floated in the directions of the prosperity gospel or Christian nationalism or pastoral personality cults. An emphasis on the Reformed confessions, their biblical validity and historical viability keeps an understanding of Scripture anchored against the changing winds of time and culture.

Note: As I Was Saying is a forum for a variety of perspectives to foster faith-related conversations among our readers with the goal of mutual learning, even in disagreement. Apart from articles written by editorial staff, these perspectives do not necessarily reflect the views of The Banner. 

Multiple laments have been published about Synod 2024. For sure, its decisions were tough and the fallout tremendous. The reactions have gone beyond disappointment.

Some have said Synod 2024 represents a “new direction.” Its decisions have been described as “reckless, arbitrary, and unimaginable in any other age.” One writer characterized it as, “The Babylonians have struck.”

However, upon looking back at synods of the past 20 years or so, the decisions of the past three synods come as no surprise. Synods 2022-2024 are consistent with synods of the past.

Holding congregations and officebearers to the CRC stance on human sexuality is consistent with the response of synods 2004 and 2005 to First CRC Toronto. Not compromising the traditional biblically orthodox stance on human sexuality can be seen in 2011 when synod refused an overture to restudy the matter from scratch. The same was evident in 2013 when synod specified that the committee to give pastoral advice on same-sex marriage be grounded in the existing stance on sexuality from 1973. When the pastoral advice committee stretched the 1973 tether to the breaking point, Synod 2016 adopted only the minority report that kept ministers from solemnizing same-sex marriages. Moreover, Synod 2016 formed a new study committee to look at human sexuality altogether but required its members to agree with the 1973 stance, minus the Promotor Fidei to keep the committee from being an echo chamber.

The past three synods are not an unimaginable new direction akin to a foreign invasion but a continuation of the historical direction. Some will be disappointed that we did not bend to changing times, but CRC history has been consistent on human sexuality.

To balance the many laments, the following is a case in favor of Synod 2024’s decisions.

The CRC has had two ideologies on a collision course. These two views are fundamentally incompatible. Each has differing doctrines of anthropology, sin, general and special revelation, ecclesiology, soteriology, and sanctification. The result has been a war for the soul of the denomination, prolonged by the pipe dream that these differences could simply be smoothed over. Splits in multiple denominations (including the CRC’s close ecclesiastical relative, the Reformed Church in America) have demonstrated that trying to remain under one denominational umbrella with these differing views on human sexuality is untenable. Synod needed to make a decision on where to stand on this topic that—like it or not—has de facto confessional status. Synod recognized the incompatibility and confirmed as much. The past three synods have decided that the CRC is going to stay on course with the historic and worldwide church on the topic of marriage and sexuality. Recognizing the incompatible nature of the two colliding theologies, synod has said that church teaching on unchastity is not negotiable. Those who publicly contradict the teaching on unchastity with a high hand will be under discipline.

Read More