Introduction

Herman Hoeksema fought his first great doctrinal controversy between the years 1914 and 1920 in Holland, Michigan. The doctrinal issue in that controversy was the Christian school.

That first controversy in Herman Hoeksema’s ministry is largely forgotten, even by the two denominations that can trace their history directly to him. Ask anyone in the Protestant Reformed Churches or in the Reformed Protestant Churches what Hoeksema’s first doctrinal controversy was, and they will likely tell you it was about common grace in 1924. Hoeksema battled against the three points of common grace adopted by his own Christian Reformed Church’s synod in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Hoeksema’s battle in 1924 is memorable. It gave rise to the Standard Bearer, which for many years was a powerful, compelling, and beloved witness to God’s sovereign, particular grace. Hoeksema’s battle in 1924 led to his unjust deposition from the Christian Reformed Church (CRC). Hoeksema’s battle in 1924 led to the formation of the Protestant Reformed Churches, which for many years maintained the pure Reformed doctrines of grace over against the Arminianism and worldliness of the theory of common grace. Yes, 1924 is memorable indeed. The controversy in 1924 is one of the ancient landmarks of the church that marks a great battlefield in which God preserved his truth. And right in the middle of the battle in 1924 was Herman Hoeksema. Hoeksema was and is known for 1924.

But the common grace issue in 1924 was not Herman Hoeksema’s first doctrinal controversy. Hoeksema’s first great doctrinal controversy was the Christian school issue in the years 1914–20.

“Not Delivering Our Children to the Gates of Hell”

Herman Hoeksema’s controversy regarding the Christian school began already when he was a student in the Christian Reformed Church’s theological school, Calvin seminary. In those days there was a Christian Reformed day school in Holland, Michigan: Holland Christian School. But there were at least two Christian Reformed congregations in Holland that opposed Holland Christian School: Fourteenth Street CRC and Fourteenth Street’s daughter congregation, Maple Avenue CRC. The opposition of these two churches to Holland Christian School consisted of their failure to support the school and their failure to use the school. The children of the congregations went to the local public school. Hoeksema estimated that a full 90 ninety percent of Fourteenth Street’s members were lukewarm at best to the school.

Even as a seminary student, Hoeksema “insisted that it was consistent with lives dedicated to the service of God that covenant children receive distinctive covenant training.”¹ The children were covenant children. Their rearing must be covenant rearing. A failure to use and support the Christian school was covenant failure. Christian Reformed parents who did not use the Christian Reformed school were delivering their covenant children to the gates of hell.

Herman Hoeksema fired the first shot in the school controversy in Holland as a seminary student. Maple Avenue CRC was vacant in 1914–15, so seminary students often took turns supplying its pulpit. Hoeksema took his turns, and he quickly became uncomfortable with the praise that the congregation lavished upon him for his sermons. He knew that he and Maple Avenue disagreed on the issue of the Christian school. Therefore, he resolved that he would be clear-cut regarding the congregation’s sin of not using Holland Christian School. During the congregational prayer one evening service, “he made a statement about ‘not delivering our children to the gates of hell.’”²

The reaction of the congregation against Hoeksema was swift. His hosts for the weekend from Maple Avenue CRC suddenly disappeared from their own house and would not cross paths with Hoeksema while he ate and stayed in their home. The consistory of Maple Avenue complained to the seminary. And the consistory requested that from then on any student but Hoeksema supply its vacant pulpit. After more wrangling the consistory of Maple Avenue called student Hoeksema in for a meeting. When Hoeksema saw through some initial funny business on the part of the clerk and called him out on it, “the members of the consistory began to damn the Christian school and to rant in confusion. Herman stared at them astounded, then said good-bye, turned, and left.”³

“Do You Mean You Want a Fight?”

Herman Hoeksema continued to pursue the Christian school controversy in Holland, Michigan, after he had graduated from seminary and had received the call to Fourteenth Street CRC, Maple Avenue’s mother congregation. Hoeksema was popular with the Fourteenth Street congregation, even though many disagreed with his stance on the Christian school. Knowing that Fourteenth Street’s disagreement with him was essentially the same as her daughter’s, Maple Avenue, and weighed down by the call that they had extended to him, Hoeksema asked for a congregational meeting at which he could address the congregation regarding its call. Gertrude Hoeksema, Herman Hoeksema’s daughter-in-law, relates the spell-binding events of that congregational meeting.

At the meeting, he found the whole congregation present to listen to him. He told them about his firm stand in the Reformed truth and his intention to preach forthright, exegetical, Scriptural sermons. And he told them about themselves. He scolded them about their wrong views of Christian education. He told them that they were not Reformed in doctrine and in practice. He told them that they almost killed their former minister. He promised them that they would hear the Christian school issue from the pulpit; furthermore, the congregation might never dictate to him what he should preach.

“Now,” he concluded, “if you still want me to come, shake hands with me after the meeting.”

Almost everyone came up to him and said, “We aren’t as bad as you think we are, Dominee.”⁴

Herman Hoeksema took the call to Fourteenth Street, and it quickly became evident that there were men in the congregation who were every bit as opposed to the Christian school as Hoeksema suspected them to be. On family visiting in one home, Hoeksema mentioned the Christian school. Again, Gertrude Hoeksema relates the jaw-dropping events.

He faced more open opposition at some of the households he visited, when the Christian schools were discussed. At one home, very shortly after the visit had begun, and Christian instruction was mentioned, the head of the home raised his voice and said, “Look out, Dominee, I’m short!”

“What do you mean?”

“I mean you’d better look out, Dominee. I’m short.”

Rev. Hoeksema stood up, took off his suitcoat, exposed his powerful physique, and asked, “Do you mean you want a fight?”

The thoroughly frightened man ran right out of his own house, shouting, “You can talk to my wife! You can talk to my wife!”⁵

Hoeksema and his parishioner did not come to physical blows that night, which is just as well, but Hoeksema and many of his parishioners came to spiritual blows month after month over the issue of the Christian school. Whatever power Hoeksema may have had in his physique, his true power was the gospel of Jesus Christ. Hoeksema took to the pulpit and preached the gospel.

After one particularly tense episode in the election of an elder in Fourteenth Street CRC, which resulted in widespread division and bitterness in the congregation, Hoeksema preached a preparatory sermon for the Lord’s supper on Galatians 5:7–10. He rebuked the members of the congregation for their division against the truth and against each other. And he concluded the sermon with this clarion call, once again as related by Gertrude Hoeksema:

Three things I have to say, and I hope to be so plain that misunderstanding is impossible. In the first place, to the troublers, and by them I mean those that oppose the official truth of their own church, and those that have gone to the length of working for another congregation, while still belonging to the church, I have this word. This week you stand before two alternatives: Repent and submit and come to the Supper of the Lord. That is your duty. Even now I maintain that the Supper must remain the standard in the congregation. Or, if this is impossible, there is but one thing left: Leave the church, for your own sake, and for the sake of the congregation, as soon as possible, for the church stands or falls not with number, but with the truth of the Word of God. In the second place, to the congregation as a whole, this warning: Be not led astray by troublers, whoever they be. The Lord shall judge them. And finally, let the coming Supper be the means to remove all the envy and the hatred from your hearts, so that again we may manifest our unity in Christ Jesus to His glory on the basis of the truth. That truth shall stand; that truth shall conquer. And all else, all personal pride and vain glory the Lord shall judge. Standing on that truth you may be of good cheer, for the everlasting Lord of His church has promised us the victory. Amen.⁶

In the sermon Hoeksema contended for sound Reformed doctrine, including the doctrine of the Christian school, which sound Reformed doctrine he referred to as “the official truth” of the church. He told those who contended against the official truth of their church to leave if they would not repent. The result of that sermon was a split in the congregation.

After the service, Mr. M____, the liberal member who was not elected elder, came up to the pastor and said, “That’s enough, Dominee.”

“That’s what I intended it to be,” was his pastor’s brief reply.⁷

That very week many members left for other denominations. Although the group that left was not as large as some had anticipated, it was still a considerable church split.

One historian briefly relates the whole history of the Christian school split in Fourteenth Street this way:

Moreover, a vocal minority opposed strong doctrinal preaching of such cardinal truths as predestination. The irenic [Rev. Peter] Hoekstra had held the divided flock together, but when he left, its reputation was so bad that three ministers in a row declined calls. The fourth call was to the militant Hoeksema, who brought the disagreements to a head by pushing Christian education and doctrinal orthodoxy until a number of families transferred to local Presbyterian and Reformed churches.⁸

Another historian related the split this way:

The militant Hoeksema came to Fourteenth Street Church right out of seminary, after three ordained ministers had declined the call. Rev. Hoeksema claimed that “under his predecessor some 90 percent of the families in the congregation opposed Christian education and were very lukewarm in their support of Holland Christian School,” which had been established the same year as Fourteenth Street Church. Rev. Hoeksema “brought the disagreements to a head by pushing Christian education and doctrinal orthodoxy.” The membership of the congregation declined considerably between 1917 and 1918, because his approach alienated a number of the families, with the result that “there was a grand exodus…mostly to Trinity RCA, and primarily over the issue of the Christian school.” By the time that he left in 1920, however, the membership had rebounded to slightly more than it was when he arrived.⁹

A Few Observations

Permit me a few observations on Herman Hoeksema’s first doctrinal controversy. First, Herman Hoeksema was a thoroughly covenantal theologian. In fact, Herman Hoeksema is the theologian of the covenant. Hoeksema did not become a covenantal theologian in 1953 in response to Klaas Schilder’s conditional covenant. Rather, Hoeksema left seminary as a covenantal theologian.

The evidence that Hoeksema was a covenantal theologian from the beginning is that his first doctrinal controversy was over the Christian school. The doctrine of God’s covenant and the Christian school are intimately related. The Christian school is the doctrine of the covenant. It is the doctrine of God’s covenant with believers and their seed. It is the doctrine of God’s covenant as God’s covenant unites members with one another. The Reformed confessions and the Reformed Church Order express this relationship between God’s covenant and the Christian school by teaching that the Christian school is the demand and requirement of the covenant. For more on this doctrine, see the speech printed elsewhere in this issue.

This also indicates that Hoeksema’s controversy in Fourteenth Street CRC was not merely about public education versus Christian education. The issue was not merely whether the children should go to a public school or to a Christian school. Rather, the issue was God’s covenant. Wherever the issue is the Christian school, there you have the issue of God’s covenant.

In today’s terms this means that wherever you find opposition to the good Christian school by a homeschool movement, there you find opposition to God’s covenant. God’s covenant does not only concern the content of the covenant child’s education, but it also determines the togetherness of the covenant child’s education with other covenant children.

Second, Herman Hoeksema considered the Christian school to be an issue worth splitting the church over. From day one in Fourteenth Street CRC, Hoeksema intended that the medicine of God’s word regarding the Christian school do its work of purging out of the church any opposition to the Christian school. When unrest was at its height in the congregation due to those who opposed his Reformed preaching, he even counseled a troubled member that such preaching must increase rather than decrease. When the member reported to Hoeksema that “the liberal element were actively conniving with the Presbyterian Church and were working to leave the denomination and to take the property with them,” this was Hoeksema’s response:

“Mr. H____,” he said to his worried parishioner, “you are like the doctor who gives his patient a dose of castor oil and then gets scared when it begins to work. Now a good doctor will give him one more dose. That’s what the congregation will get next Sunday morning.”¹⁰

Today then too, let the Reformed Protestant Churches consider the matter of the Christian school to be worth splitting over. To those who believe the Reformed doctrine that the Christian school is founded upon the covenant and is a demand of gratitude in God’s covenant, stand fast. You stand upon the doctrine of the Reformed confessions and therefore upon the doctrine of scripture.

To those who erroneously think that making the school to be a demand of the covenant is to entangle yourselves in a yoke of bondage, either repent or leave the denomination. The Reformed Protestant Churches stand upon the Reformed confessions. From the very first day in First Reformed Protestant Church’s Act of Separation, the foundation of the churches has been the Reformed confessions. From the very first moment of the Reformed Protestant Churches’ federation in the Act of Federation, the foundation of the denomination has been the Reformed confessions. The Reformed confessions are clear regarding the Christian schools as a demand of the covenant. Lord’s 38 of the Heidelberg Catechism teaches that God requires that “the schools be maintained” (Confessions and Church Order, 128). This is not something hidden or new for the Reformed Protestant Churches. Not only is this the official doctrinal position of the Reformed Protestant Churches in their confessions, but this has also been the position taught to the denomination in Sword and Shield.

If there is a congregation that does not want the schools to be a demand of the covenant, that congregation does not have to be Reformed Protestant. That congregation is autonomous and is free to leave the federation. If there is an individual who does not want the schools to be a demand of the covenant, that individual does not have to be Reformed Protestant. That individual’s membership is his own, and he must either find or form a true church where he can be a member. I maintain to that congregation and that individual that your duty is to repent and to live up to the Reformed confessions. You belong in the Reformed Protestant Churches by your confession. But if you cannot agree with the Reformed confessions that the Christian school is required as a demand of God’s covenant, then leave the Reformed Protestant Churches as soon as possible. The Reformed Protestant Churches are Reformed. The Reformed Protestant Churches believe the doctrine of the scriptures according to the conception of that doctrine in the Reformed confessions. If you are not of us, then go out from us. This ought not be a dismaying thought for the churches, for the blessing of the church is not measured by the pound but by the truth.

To all of those in the Reformed Protestant Churches who are being led to believe that this whole issue is a matter of procedure or what may be treated by classis or hierarchy or the will of man or any other side matter, do not be deceived. The issue is God’s covenant. The Christian school is God’s covenant as that covenant comes to expression in the lives of God’s people with one another and with the covenant seed. Stand fast on the doctrine of the covenant, which includes the Christian school as the demand of the covenant. Do not get excited by every other issue that men try to set before you. Stick to the doctrinal point of God’s covenant, for there alone is peace.

Finally, permit me this third observation. Herman Hoeksema’s ministry was characterized by doctrinal controversy. He is known to history in this incident as “the militant Hoeksema.” Perhaps historians intend that description to be a criticism of Hoeksema. Doctrinal controversy has never been fashionable in the church. It is not fashionable today, and it was not fashionable in Hoeksema’s day. In fact, from the moment that God pursued doctrinal controversy with Cain regarding justification by faith alone in Christ alone, Cain’s countenance fell. From that moment until this in the history of God’s church, the countenance of every Cain falls when the word of God pursues doctrinal controversy with him. Men want peace, or at least man’s version of peace. Men want their ministers to cry, “Peace, peace!” to them, even when there is no peace. When God does raise up a militant man who makes war on behalf of the gospel, all men are critical of him, and all men fight him. Many people will come to a militant man and read 2 Timothy 2:24 to him as if it were the only verse in the Bible and as if it condemned militancy on behalf of the truth. In Hoeksema’s day men praised ministers who were irenic, peaceful, and forward-looking. But Hoeksema was something else. He was controversial. He made war against the lie. He was “the militant Hoeksema.”

Herman Hoeksema was right to be militant. God had set him as a watchman on the walls of Zion, a militant position if ever there was one. God had made him mighty in the scriptures, arming him with the sword of the Spirit, and Hoeksema was not to return to the Lord with his sword clean but bloody. Hoeksema was to stand fast on the Lord’s battlefield and acquit himself as a man of God. While all the troops of light, silly, nice men in the church were busy making the enemy comfortable and chiding all the soldiers of the Lord to speak with a civil tone and friendly language, Hoeksema stood up and killed the enemy.

What is especially striking about Hoeksema’s doctrinal controversies is that he fought them against his own church and his own denomination. When he was a Christian Reformed minister, he fought the Christian Reformed Church and split her for the sake of the truth. When he was a Protestant Reformed minister, he fought the Protestant Reformed Churches and split them for the sake of the truth. He was a watchman on the walls of Zion, indeed. There are men in the ministry in Reformed churches who have banged their swords on their shields for their entire ministries in order to alert everyone that they are mighty champions of God’s truth. But those men spend their entire ministries condemning the doctrinal errors of every denomination except their own. They somehow never get around to condemning the false doctrine and to slaying the carnal seed within their own walls. When that carnal seed becomes the majority in the denomination and the denomination apostatizes from the truth, those men who banged their shields all their lives still will not rise to defend God’s truth but participate in the perishing of their churches. Herman Hoeksema was not such a man. He rose to the theological battles in his own churches and was willing for the sake of the truth to see the churches split, knowing that such splits were the preservation of the churches in the truth, though he knew very keenly and personally all of the pain and suffering that inevitably accompanies such splits.

Yes, “the militant Hoeksema” has a nice ring to it. And remember that the militant Hoeksema’s first great doctrinal controversy and first church split was over the Christian school. Let us not go backward in the matter of the Christian school but forward. And how can we do otherwise, for our gracious God has made his covenant with us and our seed.