“Calvinist” or “Christian”

Rev. Ray O. Zorn. Trowel & Sword, March 1975

Preamble: What’s in a name? This could well be considered a subtitle to this week’s post. In the early days of the Reformed Church, its leaders went to great lengths to proclaim to its members and indeed to the world that here was a church which unashamedly followed the teachings of John Calvin. This was reflected in the naming of many of its groups, particularly its youth groups. For example, we had Calvinettes, the Calvinist Cadet Corp and also the Federation of Calvinist Youthclubs of Australia. Some twenty-five years later the mood started to change. Some wanted to become more closely associated with Christians of other denominations, hence the push to drop the “label” Calvinist and replace it with “Christian”, while others argued for the distinction to be retained. The following article by Rev. Zorn was part of that debate.

“Calvinist” or “Christian”

The Editorial Secretary has asked me to respond to certain questions which have arisen in connection with the change of the name of the Calvinist Cadet Corps to the Christian Cadet Corps. Mrs. J.F. Schouten in the August issue of Trowel and Sword wrote a letter expressing her “dissatisfaction and unhappiness with the change as it waters down the principles for which we stand”. (p.25).

Mr. J.W. Bonker in the October issue wrote a letter in defence of the name change, “for we are followers or disciples of Christ (as e.g. Luther and Calvin were) and therefore we and our associations are called after Christ and not after certain men”. (p.25).

Mr. W. de Vries then wrote in the December issue that he thought it would be better to keep the old name, since “The Reformed Church stands for the teachings of John Calvin and so does the Cadet movement. It is not Lutheran or Baptist. Let it then be so and do not change the name because you are confusing others and maybe yourself too.” (p.26).

In the meantime another letter was received by the Editorial Secretary which raised the question whether the majority of Reformed Church members are indeed Calvinistic or merely Christian? For, the letter-writer alleges, aren’t the ordinary members simply bound to the Twelve Articles of our catholic and undoubted Christian faith? However, he admits that the office bearers must subscribe to the Three Forms of Unity (e.g. the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dort) before taking office. The letter-writer concludes by saying, “I confess that Calvinists are also Christians and that all Christians are not Calvinists, but to say that the Reformed Church – as a whole! – stands for the teachings of Calvin … that is not true!”

Without going into the issue of whether the Cadet Corps was right in changing its name from Calvinist to Christian, it seems to me that the above correspondence deals with two basic questions which need clarification.

The first is, what does the word Calvinist express? The answer to this is really quite simple. For the word stands for a movement of reform in the Christian Church of which John Calvin was a leading exponent, as over against another movement of reform of which Martin Luther was the initiator and leading exponent. Calvin’s movement followed Luther’s and was more thoroughly biblical as can be seen, for example, by the principle he advocated in the worship of God; namely, what is not commanded by God is forbidden (reflected also in the answer to Question 96 in the Heidelberg Catechism). Luther’s more mediating principle was, what is not forbidden by God is allowed.

Just as Luther’s movement of reform came to be known as Lutheran, Calvin’s came to be known by the terms Reformed, or Calvinistic. Therefore, though none of the creedal standards of the Reformed Churches of Australia were written by Calvin, they are nevertheless a part of the Reformed, or Calvinistic, movement. So also are the Westminster Confession and Catechisms, even though they were written some 100 years after Calvin’s time.

A Calvinist is therefore a Christian in the Reformed tradition. Hence, it would at any rate seem that the Cadet Corps by changing its name now wishes to identify itself more broadly with the mainstream of Christianity rather than with the narrower Reformed movement that gave it its birth. Whether this is an improvement or not we leave to the judgement of others.

The second question arising out of the above correspondence is, how Reformed (or Calvinistic) are the Reformed Churches and their members?

It is not hard to establish the fact that the official position of the Reformed Churches is a wholehearted commitment to the Reformed (or Calvinistic) faith. For the office bearers at their ordination are required to give their assent to the question, “Do you believe the Old and the New Testament to be the only Word of God and the doctrinal standards of this church to be in harmony therewith?” (Psalter Hymnal, p.106): which in the provisionally adopted new Liturgical Forms booklet is, if anything, put even more strongly, “Do you believe that the Old and New Testaments are the only Word of God and that in them the way of salvation is taught completely, also accepting the Confessional Standards of this Church as being in harmony with Scripture, and do you refute all doctrines conflicting with them?” (p.41).

Moreover, in the Form of Subscription which all office bearers are required to sign before commencing their official duties, they pledge that they “heartily believe and are persuaded that all the articles and points of doctrine contained in the Confession and Catechism of the Reformed Churches, together with the Canons of Dort do fully agree with the Word of God.” They “promise diligently to teach and faithfully to defend the aforesaid doctrine….” They moreover declare that they “not only reject all errors that militate against this doctrine… but that they are disposed to refute and contradict these and to exert themselves in keeping the Church free from such errors” (cf. p.71 of the Psalter Hymnal for the full text from which the above quotations in part are taken.)

It is therefore not easy to see how one of the letter-writers quoted above can, while admitting that the office bearers must subscribe to the confessional standards of the Reformed faith, nevertheless declare that “to say that the Reformed Church as a whole! stands for the teachings of Calvin … that is not true!”

In all fairness to him we should recognise that he bases this claim upon the fact that “ordinary members, when they confess their faith, are bound to the Twelve Articles of our catholic and undoubted Christian faith.” This reference to the Apostles’ Creed, however, which he makes is based upon a quotation found in the form for the celebration of the Lord’s Supper (Psalter Hymnal, p.95) and refers to the liturgical use members of the Reformed Churches make of the Apostles’ Creed when, as they confess their faith in its terms, they make clear the fact that they are a part of the body of Christ as a whole.

However, when they make public confession of their faith at the time they become confessing members in full standing in the Reformed Churches, they are required to give assent to several questions, the first of which is, “Do you heartily believe the doctrine contained in the Old and the New Testament, and in the articles of the Christian faith, and taught in this Christian church, to be the true and complete doctrine of salvation, and do you promise by the grace of God steadfastly to continue in this profession?” (Psalter Hymnal, p.88). In the new Liturgical Forms booklet the question equivalent to this one is even more pointed in its reference to the Reformed faith, for it asks, “Do you believe the Bible to be the Word of God, and the doctrinal standards of this church to be in harmony with that Word?” (p.36).

It should therefore by clear that the members of the Reformed Churches, no less than their office bearers, are required to give their assent to the Reformed faith as being that which they believe “to be the true and complete doctrine of salvation” since it is “in harmony with the Word of God.”

However, we are prepared to admit that there are possible (indeed probable) differences between the official position of the Reformed Churches and their actual practice, at least in some specific instances. For Christians (even Reformed ones!) are in this life in a stage of spiritual development. Therefore their grasp of truth, while it may be correct insofar as they possess it, is yet incomplete. With others it may even be somewhat deficient, due to the remaining effects of sin or to intellectual limitations. A session must therefore decide on each particular case as it examines the applicant for church membership. And because such evaluation, being subject to human frailty, is faulty at times, there will be some who are unreformed and some even who are hypocrites who go undetected by sessions and become members in the Reformed Churches.

Moreover, the writer knows of at least one case where session was faced with the problem of what to do with an application for membership by a family who was Reformed in every respect except in the matter of infant baptism which they rejected. Finally the session, not willing to make membership in the Reformed Churches more difficult than getting into heaven (as was being alleged against it), accepted the family as members, with the stipulation that they not openly oppose the Reformed teaching on infant baptism nor seek to impose their less scriptural views upon other members of the flock.

No doubt many would hail such a resolution of a difficult problem as a wise course of action. And sessions generally may be tempted to follow such a procedure with similar cases which they encounter. Consequently, cases like this may indeed exist in the Reformed Churches. None of these instances, however, is proof of the claim that the Reformed Churches stand for less than the teaching of the Reformed faith. On the contrary, if and when sessions are induced to take such a course of action for these admittedly difficult cases, it is not because the Reformed Churches are thereby less than Reformed; but rather because it is hoped that such people thus admitted to membership and subjected to the teaching and preaching of the Reformed Churches’ ministry will ultimately see the light and wholeheartedly embrace Reformed truth as the truth fully taught by God’s Word.

Sometimes, however, such members ultimately wind up in the unhappy position of being discipline cases for one reason or another. Perhaps it is because they refuse to have their children baptised, or seek to propagate their unreformed views, or lose interest in supporting the church, etc. It may therefore be questioned whether sessions are acting in wisdom when they lower the Reformed bar of admission to church membership in any way for the sake of expediency. For oftentimes they are merely postponing the day of ultimate reckoning with such cases to a later and perhaps more difficult time.

At any rate we may conclude by saying that the Reformed Churches are doctrinally committed to the Reformed position and practically maintain it, howbeit in an imperfect manner at times.

Ray O. Zorn

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from ages past.