Without Reservation

Written by Herb Kraker

Overview

a number of people have expressed concern about the need for CRC officebearers to sign up to the creeds and confessions “without reservation.” This has especially become apparent with the synodical decisions of the last three years with respect to same-sex marriage. It has been heard around the denomination that people might now have significant difficulties signing the Covenant for Officebearers. Why is that? The purpose of this article is to make the claim that by signing the Covenant for Officebearers one is not indicating they understand every jot and tittle contained in the confessions and have no questions. Rather, one is pledging to support the fact that the doctrines in the confessions are taught in Scripture.

Our Church Order contains the phrase “without reservation” when it says, “The person signing the Covenant for Officebearers affirms without reservation all the doctrines contained in the standards of the church as being doctrines that are taught in the Word of God.” (Supplement Article 5, A, 1. Emphasis added.)

It is important for us to consider the definition of the word “affirm.” The relevant definition that Merriam-Webster online gives is, “3: to show or express a strong belief in or dedication to (something, such as an important idea).” The meaning of the statement with the phrase “without reservation” expresses a commitment to the doctrines in the confessions as being biblical teachings. It does not pertain to understanding all those doctrines without any questions about them.

Note the wording here. The person affirms without reservation all the doctrines in the standards as being doctrines that are taught in the Word of God. The church order does not say the person affirms without reservation every detail people have claimed the confessions teach.

It goes on to say, “A signatory is bound only to those doctrines that are confessed, and is not bound to the references, allusions, and remarks that are incidental to the formulation of these doctrines, nor to the theological deductions that some may draw from the doctrines set forth in the confessions.” (Supplement Article 5, A, 3.)

These two paragraphs indicate that the church order is distinguishing between the big picture and the many details that have come up for discussion. This means that when we sign the Covenant for Officebearers, we agree that Scripture teaches infant baptism, predestination, the Trinity etc. In signing the covenant, do I understand everything about the Trinity? No. Do I have questions about the Trinity? Certainly. In order for us not to have questions we would have to be all-knowing. Only God is omniscient. Several decades ago adopted children were not allowed to be baptized. When we sign the Covenant for Officebearers today, do we agree with that? No. Likewise, when we agree that same-sex erotic acts are sinful, does it mean that we agree with everything the Human Sexuality Report states concerning gender dysphoria? No.

There is a lot of gray area concerning specific doctrines. That is why the process of a “confessional difficulty gravamen” exists. Merriam Webster defines a gravamen as “the material or significant part of a grievance or complaint.” A gravamen allows an officebearer to ask questions and express doubts about a specific point of doctrine. Its purpose is to allow the person to serve while being helped by that person’s council, classis and/or synod. The hope is that by raising these questions we will learn more about Scripture together.

It would be unfortunate if members of a congregation took the approach of saying that they cannot serve because they don’t necessarily agree with everything that the confessions teach, and therefore cannot sign the Covenant for Officebearers. A general statement like this is too vague. The questions one has need to be specifically stated and examined. In order for our churches to be as healthy as possible we will need to work to build unity, toward being of one mind. It will not be healthy if people look for a reason to not believe a particular teaching. In the past, some churches took the approach of using gravamina to take exception to some teachings. The CRC Church Order never allowed such exceptions, nor did any synod. That has now been clearly disallowed in the CRC.

The fact that “without reservation” must be seen from the big picture aspect and not from the vantage point of having absolutely no questions can be seen from history. Probably two of the earliest gravamina in the CRC were ones filed by Dr. Dietrich Kromminga and Dr. Harry Boer. Dr. Kromminga filed a gravamen having to do with eschatology, the study of the end times. Dr. Boer filed one pertaining to questions surrounding exactly what the Canons of Dort teach concerning predestination. These two theology professors had questions. If “without reservation” meant that a person considering becoming an elder or a deacon had no questions at all about what our confessions teach, then these church members would have to understand theology better than these two professors of theology.

If one cannot sign the Covenant for Officebearers it must be because they believe, taking our most recent context, that under some circumstances it is acceptable to God for two men or two women to marry. Many today claim Scripture only prohibits violent same-sex acts such as pederasty. That Romans 1 prohibits all same-sex erotic acts is confirmed by Paul’s reference in Romans 1:27 to men who have sex with other men who “were consumed with passion for one another.” The phrase “for one another” indicates that the apostle is referring to consensual sex and that he finds fault with both persons involved in the same-sex act (The Human Sexuality Report page 104). I Corinthians 6:9-10 tells us that men who practice homosexuality will not inherit the kingdom of God. In light of these two passages and others, how is it possible to believe that in some cases Scripture does permit the marriage of two people of the same sex?

There have been several high-level resignations by pastors and a professor in the CRC recently. At least one of them cited they could no longer serve with integrity. Without any further explanation, it seems almost unavoidable to conclude they could no longer serve under the Covenant for Officebearers. Yet, do they think Scripture allows for it under any circumstances, and if so, how? They did not give an explanation of their reasoning.

An example of a situation that could be a problem would be a young man who made profession of faith many years ago and sincerely desired to serve the Lord. He went on to become a youth pastor for a dozen years and was very effective. Eventually he left the ministry. Now he lives with a man. What is his eternal status? Is he saved? There are many things we do not know or understand. We do know that salvation requires repentance from sin, and we know one cannot lose one’s salvation. We also know we serve a loving God, and we need to trust in Him. Knowing someone like this, having compassion for him should not prevent us from serving God’s church. We need to continue to work through the thorny aspects of doctrine while loving and serving.

In conclusion, signing the Covenant for Officebearers is not to be prohibitive because one does not understand every last detail about the doctrines contained in the confessions. As long as one believes that the doctrines covered in the confessions are taught in Scripture one can uphold the Covenant for Officebearers. As interpreted by recent synods, with respect to the matter of same-sex marriages, as long as one believes that same-sex marriages are not acceptable to God under any circumstances, then one is in compliance with the Covenant for Officebearers.

---

Herb Kraker is an elder at Searchlight Ministries in Jamestown, MI and he completed an MTS from Calvin Theological Seminary in 1987.