Whisper part of the Gospel?

The Christian Reformed Church in North America recently had their annual Synod and their communications department sent out a list of "quotable quotes" heard during Synod 1008. The link to this list is here.

One of the quotes that jumped out at me was given by none other than the President of Calvin Theologial Seminary, Neil Plantinga. Here is his quote:

"The church today is so much more diverse in old and new ways that no single recipe can possibly feed everybody. The minister who attempts to force a ministry style into an alien context will only frustrate, baffle or amuse God’s people. Healthy pastors figure out the local culture—urban or rural, elder- or youth-based, immigrant or settled. Wise pastors will exclaim one part of the gospel, and whisper another. (emphasis added)"

Overall I kind of disagree with him on many parts of this quote, however, I understand to some level what he is getting at. My major overall concern or caution with this statement is how much the local culture is to drive the Sunday morning divine service (or ministry style as Dr. Plantinga puts it). There is a point at which a pastor needs to be sensitive to that, but at the core there are theological reasons why certain things are done the way they are in legitimate Reformed worship. This is something that has fallen off the radar in many CRC circles (and other Reformed bodies) where cultural trends drive things and not theology.

However, the part of the quote that got me moved to blog was the part that I emphasized. I really want to know two things: 1) How can the Gospel be broken up? and 2) which part is able to be whispered? The Gospel is a single message concerning God's redeeming for himself a people through the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. Which part of that is not applicable to every man, women, and child regardless of race, culture, age, etc.? The biggest problem I have with Evangelicalism from my limited exploration and understanding is that they think the Gospel message needs to be changed and adapted depending on the particular needs of the congregation - felt needs not Christ is then preached. This, then, removes the Gospel from its Scriptural roots and makes it something totally foreign to Scripture. This I feel, sadly, is where the CRC is taking its cues and it has gone all the way to the top - the President of its Seminary.

Sure you can present things differently depending on who you are talking to (if nothing is compromised theologially) as Paul did on Mars Hill, but the core message is always the same. Actually Acts 17 and Paul on Mars Hill is a perfect example of doing exactly the opposite to what Dr. Plantinga is advocating. Paul is talking to pagan Athenians and in verse 31 Paul tells them about the resurrection of Christ, knowing full well what the result will be to these pagans. Verse 32 then gives the result - some of them mocked Paul. Now was Paul not wise because he did not whisper "part" of of the Gospel and that he was mocked for it? That was definitely an "alien context" and Paul "frustrated, baffled, and amused" those people, but Paul did not sink down to the level of his hearers and tell them only that which would please their ears. Paul does not say in 1 Corinthians, "the Gospel is a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks, therefore, if needed I emphasize only those parts that my audience would agree with and feel comfortable with." NO!! The Gospel is a particular message that all people need to hear in all its beauty! If we change that message (or whisper parts of it) then we are not trusting in the Holy Spirit that he is the one who will make hard hearts soft and make people receptive to the Gospel and create in them true faith that trusts that Christ died for them too and was raised for their justification. It is a preacher's job and duty to just proclaim that message faithfully and trust in God to do the rest.

I know this blog is read by only a handful of people, but if one of you actually knows Dr. Plantinga I would love to get his take on what I wrote, because I am sure there is more to his quote than what was given and I would hope he can clarify what he means by "whispering another [part of the Gospel]."

The Vander Pol Confession

This past semester I took a class with Dr. Clark called Reformed Confessions in which he was going through the Three Forms of Unity (The Heidelberg Catechism, The Belgic Confession of Faith, and The Canons of Dort). Part of the assignment for this class was to draft up our own confession covering all the major loci of theology (Doctrines of God, Scripture, Man, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Church, and Eschatology). This exercise had a twist in that there was a word count limit of 1000 words. This forces you to really think about what is important and how it can be said in as concise a way as possible and yet still carry with it the emphasis that you desire. What was also necessary to include were the Scripture proofs for what you were writing.

Although this was a tough exercise at times (especially when trying to shave off those final 100 words or less!) it was also extremely edifying and overall a pleasure to do. Let me encourage you to do something of a similar exercise. This really forces you to write down what you believe, and why you believe it from Scripture. This also, at least for me, caused me to think about what I feel needed to be addressed concerning what I believe about a particular doctrine in light of the church's past, present, and future struggles. I really feel that this will be very edifying for you and if you do it with your spouse or family it can get you talking about things you might not have thought much about.

At the link below is the confession that I submitted to Dr. Clark. Nothing has changed in the body of the confession, all I did was add a title and page numbers (the title would have counted against my word count and I was already at 998!).

The Vander Pol Confession

What I was attempting to do with my confession was make it relevant to Reformed churches today particularly in light of the Federal Vision controversy as well as those who deny the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Redemption. I wanted to make it clear those things which I believe concerning those doctrines, but I could not take out those things which have historically defined Reformed Theology because those are still important today. Whether or not I was successful or not in my goals, I don't know, but I liked what I came up with.

In the future I might add a couple of articles and reword things to make it clearer, but I hope I can make this document something that I will keep as a current record of those things which I believe Scripture to say.

---

UPDATE: I had the link to the PDF document wrong so it wasn't working. Sorry about that. It is now fixed.

Practically Reformed (literally)

Below is a link to a fellow's WSC student's blog concerning his life as a seminarian as well as a foster parent to eight boys. If you think that Reformed Theology (as taught at WSC) isn't relevent to everyday life, if you think that the broader Evangelical church's "methods" are the way to go, or if Calvinism is only for the "frozen chosen" and leads to such a state, then you MUST read this blog.

Let me know what you think...

"Creed in Chaos" by creedorchaos

(HT: The Heidelblog)

New Blog Name

I was never satisfied with my blog title of VPol's Blabbing. Well yesterday Dr. Horton actually suggested the name Vanderblog, which sounded great to me! Therefore, my blog now has a new name! Now I just need a new sub-title, any suggestions?

A Recession and the Prosperity Gospel

A thought occured to me this morning as I was walking into work. Since it looks as if we are at the beginning (I guess it has been going on for a while) of an economic recession with the largest monthly increase of unemployment rates in 20 years, I wondered how the prosperity gospel preachers are going to handle this? I would assume it is easier for them to gain a captive audience as to the blessings they can claim from God when the economy is doing great as it was for the past 20 years or so. But what happens when people loose jobs and can't make ends meet and all their pastor is telling them is "have more faith" and "claim your blessings from God?" I also wondered, distraughtly, how many people would walk away from this faith based not on Christ's propitiatory sacrifice but on their bank accounts, homes, and overall prosperity.

These people being hit in this "economic slow-down" need to hear that their reward, the only reward that God actually promises his children, will be found in heaven, not in this present evil age. In short these people need to hear the GOSPEL!!

Put another way I guess we can ask a question, "Will our faith withstand a serious economic depression?" Ultimately what is the object of our faith? If it is Christ and his accomplishments, we can be assured that there is nothing that will separate us from God's love.

I could try and work this out a bit, but I just wanted to throw that out there and see if you had any comments.

I'm Published!

Something I have written is in print! Actual printed text on an actual paper page! The June 2008 edition of The Outlook printed an article that I wrote entitled "It's Decision Time." This was a paper I did for a class in the Fall of 2007 looking at the history of the issue of women's ordination in the Christian Reformed Church of North America (CRCNA) and the need for the denomination to become united over this issue since the denomination currently holds as its official position that either position (for or against women's ordination) is Biblical. Two mutually exclusive positions cannot be held in the church and that will become evident, in my opinion, this year at the CRC's Synod where women can be delegates for the first time when there are those present who do not think they should be on Scriptural grounds.

I need to make perfectly clear that this is not an article for or against women's ordination, and I don't think my particular bias influences the article too much and I would hope that either side of the aisle can benefit from the discussion and presentation that I make.

I argue that those in favor of ordaining women to ecclesiastical office have not been acting properly in the past and to make my point I use Calvin's "weaker brother" argument. I won't say anymore and force you to read the article! I should have an electronic copy of the actual printed aricle soon, so if you do not subscribe to The Outlook I can send you a copy. Just e-mail me or leave me a comment and I will send that to you when I get it. Finally, I would love to discuss this with you, so again, e-mail me or leave a comment below.

Website Update - finally

I finally updated my website with some new photos from the past six months or so. Please take a look!

Homepage
New Photos Gallery