Dear Readers & Editors,
I am thankful to God for His mercy in rebuking me through the mouths of his prophets over the last months. Whether in the preaching or in the Sword & Shield, I have been confronted with this rebuke from the LORD: “What have you done and what are you doing with my truth? Why do you yet strengthen the hands of evildoers, minimizing the false doctrine they have taught? Why is there ever a mind of compromise within you that seeks to find common ground with the lie, seeks to excuse and explain it away as a mere difference in emphasis or vantage point, and seeks to ignore your differences in order to avoid the battle that ever belongs to true faith? How is it that your love for me and my truth has grown so cold?”
And, I have found this rebuke to be convicting. Initially, I was frustrated and disgusted with the weakness of the decision of Synod 2018 regarding Connie Meyer’s appeal. After hearing many praise it and give thanks for it, I began to think it maybe wasn’t so bad. Yet, my conscience could not but protest this decision to the Synod of 2019. As many whom I highly respected, including the editors of the Sword & Shield, continued to consistently hold forth the decision of Synod 2018 as a strong defense of the truth, I began to conclude that perhaps the decision itself was good and strong, and the problem was only with those who were continually twisting it.
But, in the face of these rebukes, I have been compelled to again face this question: You uphold the decision of Synod 2018. You take it for your confession of the truth and your rejection of the lie. But what kind of confession of the truth is this that you have made? Is it truly a confession of the truth that leaves no room for the lie? Is it a confession of the truth that does nothing but reject the lie in strongest terms? Is it a confession that holds up the truth in all of its purity and clarity, dispelling the darkness and confusion which belongs to the lie?
Truly, the truth is holy. It is pure light. It is a burning and consuming fire before which not even one word of the lie can stand. Christ is the Truth, and the devil is the lie, and there can be no concord between Christ and Belial. And so it is, throughout scripture and throughout the Reformed Confessions, that the truth is declared to the utter destruction and rejection of every lie, even every slight wind of false doctrine.
So, the question I have again been called to ponder and to meditate on in light of the rebukes that have been brought is, “Is the decision of Synod 2018 to which you hold such a confession of the truth that fiercely, fully, and jealously rejects the lie as an all-consuming fire burns away every spec of dross?” Is it truly a rejection of the lie that one’s experience of this blessing or that blessing in the covenant is contingent on how one lives in the covenant? Or, is it also to be judged as a minimization of that lie? A minimization that leaves just a little room for the lie, entertaining the possibility that the lie could be understood as truth and could be interpreted rightly? Since the decision of Synod 2018 was made, the error has been minimized in many ways. But did our minimization of this gross error begin already with our adoption of Synod 2018’s decision? May each of us who have taken this decision as our own confession of the truth lay this question to heart, shine the light of scripture upon it, and answer it with the conviction of the Spirit of Christ.
In answering this question, I began by looking at what a scriptural rejection of the lie looks like.
Acts 15:5, 10–11, 24: “But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment.”
I Timothy 1:3–7, 18–20: “As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: from which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare; holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.”
II Peter 2:1–3, 12–22: “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; and shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; but was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbad the madness of the prophet. These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever. For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.”
Matthew 15:6–9; 16:6 “Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.”
Colossians 2:8, 16–23: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, and not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.”
Galatians 1:6–9; 2:3–5; 5:6–9: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: and that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: to whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.”
Titus 1:10–14: “For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake. One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.”
Similarly, the Reformed confessions are characterized by the same uncompromising rejection of the lie.
LD 11: “They do not; for though they boast of Him in words, yet in deeds they deny Jesus the only deliverer and Savior…”
LD 30: “So that the mass, at bottom, is nothing else than a denial of the one sacrifice and sufferings of Jesus Christ, and an accursed idolatry.”
Art. 7: “Therefore we reject with all our hearts whatsoever doth not agree with this infallible rule, which the apostles have taught us, saying, Try the spirits whether they are of God. Likewise, if there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house.”
Art. 9: “This doctrine of the Holy Trinity hath always been defended and maintained by the true Church, since the times of the apostles to this very day, against the Jews, Mohammedans, and some false Christians and heretics, as Marcion, Manes, Praxeas, Sabellius, Samosatenus, Arius, and such like, who have been justly condemned by the orthodox fathers.”
Art. 12: “Therefore we reject and abhor the error of the Sadducees…and also that of the Manichees…”
Art. 13: “And therefore we reject that damnable error of the Epicureans, who say that God regards nothing, but leaves all things to chance.”
Art. 14: “Therefore we reject all that is taught repugnant to this concerning the free will of man…In short, who dare suggest any thought…”
Art. 15: “Wherefore we reject the error of the Pelagians, who assert that sin proceeds only from imitation.”
Art. 18: “Therefore we confess (in opposition to the heresy of the Anabaptists, who deny that Christ assumed human flesh of His mother)…”
Art. 22: “Therefore, for any to assert that Christ is not sufficient, but that something is required besides Him, would be too gross a blasphemy; for hence it would follow that Christ was but half a Savior.”
Art. 34: “Therefore we detest the error of the Anabaptists, who are not content with the one only baptism they have once received…”
Art. 35: “Therefore we reject all mixtures and damnable inventions which men have added unto and blended with the sacraments, as profanations of them…”
Art. 36: “Wherefore we detest the Anabaptists and other seditious people, and in general all those who reject the higher powers and magistrates and would subvert justice, introduce community of goods, and confound that decency and good order which God hath established among men.”
1.RE1: “For these deceive the simple and plainly contradict the Scriptures…”
1.RE2: “For this is a fancy of men’s minds, invented regardless of the Scriptures, whereby the doctrine of election is corrupted…”
1.RE3: “For by this injurious error the pleasure of God and the merits of Christ are made of none effect…and this declaration of the apostle is charged as untrue…”
1.RE4: “For this savors of the teaching of Pelagius, and is opposed to the doctrine of the apostle, when he writes…”
1.RE5: “This is repugnant to the entire Scripture…”
1.RE6: “By which gross error they make God to be changeable, and destroy the comfort which the godly obtain out of the firmness of their election, and contradict the Holy Scripture…”
2.RE1: “For this doctrine tends to the despising of the wisdom of the Father and of the merits of Jesus Christ, and is contrary to Scripture.”
2.RE3: “For these adjudge to contemptuously of the death of Christ…and bring again out of hell the Pelagian error.”
2.RE6: “For these, while they feign that they present this distinction in a sound sense, seek to instill into the people the destructive poison of the Pelagian errors.”
3–4.RE3: “This is an innovation and an error, and tends to elevate the powers of the free will, contrary to the declaration of the prophet…”
3–4.RE4: “For these are contrary to the express testimony of Scripture.”
3–4.RE7: “But this is altogether Pelagian and contrary to the whole Scripture…”
3–4.RE8: “For this is nothing less than the denial of all the efficiency of God’s grace in our conversion…”
3–4.RE9: “For the ancient church has long ago condemned this doctrine of the Pelagians…”
5.RE2: “For this idea contains an outspoken Pelagianism, and, while it would make men free, it makes them robbers of God’s honor…”
5.RE3: “For this conception makes powerless the grace, justification, regeneration, and continued keeping by Christ, contrary to the express words of the apostle Paul…”
5.RE5: “For by this doctrine the sure comfort of the true believers is taken away in this life, and the doubts of the papist are again introduced into the church…”
5.RE6: “For these show that they do not know the power of divine grace and the working of the indwelling Holy Spirit. And they contradict the apostle John…”
5.RE8: “For these deny by this doctrine the incorruptibleness of the seed of God, whereby we are born again…”
5.RE9: “For they contradict Christ Himself, who says…”
And, now, let us compare the decision of Synod 2018 to the rejections made in the scriptures and the confessions (underlining added—SD).
p. 61 B.1.: “Classis failed to deal with doctrinal error contained in sermons Mrs. Meyer protested to Hope’s Consistory. The doctrinal error is that the believer’s good works are given a place and function that is out of harmony with the Reformed confessions.”
p. 63–64: a),b),c), d): “L.D. 32 does not teach that the necessity of good works is…”
p. 66 a): “Good works of ‘obedience’ and ‘godliness’ are forced into L.D. 45. It is not true that ‘when the Catechism mentions requisites or requirements, it’s talking about obedience,’ or ‘godliness.’ L.D. 45 is not teaching the requisites of God’s law (L.D.s 34–44), but the requisites of prayer.”
p. 66 b): “It is erroneous to teach…Nowhere do the creeds, including L.D. 45, which is the text for the sermon, teach that…Giving to our obedience the place that these statements do strongly suggests that our obedience is a condition for covenant fellowship.”
p. 66 c): “Nowhere does L.D. 45 teach or even suggest…”
p. 68–69 a): “But, L.D. 23 says nothing about our good works…It is detrimental to the congregation that anywhere in a sermon on forensic justification, a preacher would teach that Scripture speaks highly of works.”
p. 69 b): “James 2 teaches that Abraham demonstrated his faith by his works, but it does not teach that Abraham looked at his works to become aware of and more conscious of God’s justification of him in the courtroom of his heart.”
p. 69 4) a): “The orthodox statements in the broad context of these sermons cannot be used to justify these erroneous statements, but rather the orthodox statements are compromised by the erroneous statements.”
p. 70 b): “The doctrinal error of the sermons then compromises the gospel of Jesus Christ, for when our good works are given a place and function they do not have, the perfect work of Christ is displaced. Necessarily then, the doctrines of the unconditional covenant (fellowship with God) and justification by faith alone are compromised by this error.”
p. 70 c): “Additionally, even the truth of the strict demands of God’s law is compromised.”
p. 70–71 b.: “Hope’s Consistory erred in its defense of Rev. Overway’s sermons…With this defense, Hope’s Consistory reveals that it has a misunderstanding of the ‘necessary way of the covenant’ and the proper use of the phrase ‘in the way of.’”
p. 73 (b): “To say, either ‘Obedience is necessary for the experience of covenant fellowship’ or ‘obedience is a requirement in order to experience covenant fellowship’ is ambiguous and could suggest that obedience is part of the way unto the experience of covenant fellowship, that is, a requirement to be met in order to have covenant fellowship. It is better to say: obedience is necessary in the experience of covenant fellowship.”
p. 74–75 2): “Hope’s Consistory was mistaken when it maintained regarding the challenged sermons, ‘In Rev. Overway’s sermons he teaches the necessary way of the covenant’ (Mar. 22, 2017 Letter)…a) Contrary to the contention of Hope, the following statements are not expressions of the ‘necessary way of the covenant.’”
p. 75 a) (2): “In these statements good works are no longer fruits and are no longer the way of grateful conduct in the experience of fellowship with God, but good works are performed to obtain something, or good works function as an instrument/means for the reception of something, or good works become part of the way unto the experience of covenant fellowship.”
p. 75 3): “Furthermore, Hope’s Consistory erred by reformulating the ‘necessary way of the covenant’ in an ambiguous manner so that the believer’s obedience seems to be given an instrumental role, in which case obedience is no longer a fruit.”
p. 76 c): “Whether we are convinced as Mrs. Meyer is that Hope made obedience an instrument unto rather than a fruit in the covenant relationship, the phrase ‘in the way of’ should not be used as Hope’s Consistory used it.”
p. 76 c.: “Classis East…errs in the pronouncements it makes regarding Mrs. Meyer. 1) Ground 1—Classis East states (Art. 41, I, A), ‘Mrs. Meyer does not prove her accusation “that the teaching of Hope Consistory is the teaching of a conditional covenant and justification by faith and works.” Rather, Mrs. Meyer assumes what she must prove.’ This statement is accurate but not to the point.”
p. 79–80 B.2.: “Classis erred in advising ‘Hope Consistory to rescind its November 21,2017 decision to adopt “The Doctrinal Statement: Re Experiencing Fellowship with the Father.”’ Classis should have advised Hope to reject the Doctrinal Statement because it contains ambiguous statements and the similar doctrinal error of giving to our good works a place and function out of harmony with the Reformed confessions.”
p. 80–81 a.,b., c.: “The Statement teaches…This statement is ambiguous and not distinctively Reformed.”
p. 80 a. 2): “However, to continue in the very next line and teach that the gift of sanctification is part of what brings the elect into the enjoyment of fellowship with God, strongly suggests that good works bring us into the enjoyment of fellowship and have been assigned a role the confessions give only to faith in Christ.”
p. 80 b. 1) “By teaching…the statement could be interpreted to teach that a holy life of obedience is a prerequisite of, or condition of, or instrument unto the enjoyment of the Father’s fellowship.”
p. 80–81 b. 2) “It would be better to teach…so that our obedience is never mistaken to be the way of approach unto the enjoyment of covenant fellowship.”
p. 81 c. 1): “To say…could be interpreted to mean that obedience is a condition of…It would be better to teach…”
p. 81 c. 2): “The statement, ‘It is only by a living, sanctifying faith which exercises itself in obedience that we can experience and enjoy God’s fellowship’ could be read to teach that the believer’s good works of obedience are the instrument by which he experiences fellowship with God.”
p. 81 c. 3) “This statement fails to use the phrase ‘in the way of’ to state the relationship between obedience and the experience of covenant fellowship. It is better to say, we experience the Father’s fellowship on the basis of Christ’s perfect work, through a justifying faith in Christ, and in the way of a holy life of obedience.”
p. 81 d.: “The Statement errs when it concludes…1)…It is not in harmony with the creeds to teach that we have fellowship with God through a sanctifying faith. Our good works are never an instrument by which we obtain fellowship with God.”
p. 86 2.: “That synod declare that whether or not Mrs. Meyer’s extreme characterizations of Hope’s teaching (listed by Classis East in Art. 44) were necessary is a matter for her conscience.” (The extreme characterizations referred to are: rank heresy, gross false doctrine, Federal Vision and Romish doctrine, and teaching justification by faith and works and a conditional covenant—SD).
p. 63 a.: “One of the perceived inconsistencies Miss Doezema points to is explained by the fact that Synod 2018 distinguished between statements that Rev. Overway made repeatedly and persistently in his sermons, and the same statements stated abstractly in another context.”
p. 64 b. 2) “Synod 2018 was not willing to say that this one statement made by Hope [in their defense of Rev. Overway’s sermons—SD] definitely taught the error, while it was willing to say that Rev. Overway’s repeated and persistent statements definitely did.”
p. 81 c.: “Rev. Overway did not militate against Synod 2018 when he preached that there is an activity of the believer that is prior to the experience of a particular blessing from God.”
p. 82 d. “Rev. Overway’s preaching that we repent and in the way of repentance experience the mercy of God is the teaching of Scripture and the confessions.”
We have seen what a true rejection of the lie looks like. We have held the decision of Synod 2018 up to that pure light and brought it before that all-consuming fire. Does it stand the test? May God’s holy Truth live within us, that we may answer with conviction and repent of all minimizing of the lie that we have been a part of throughout this controversy, to the end that the lie might be all the more fiercely consumed whenever it arises in our midst. Furthermore, may God’s Truth live within us, that we might go forward into battle as the church militant, surrounded on every side and especially from within by the mightiest of foes. God be thanked that we might go forward with the confidence that the battle is won, the victory is ours, and He will keep our feet from falling in the heat of battle!
God’s word shall surely stand;
His Name through every land
Shall be adored;
Lord, who shall lead our host?
Thy aid we covet most,
In Thee is all our boast,
Strong in the Lord. (Psalter 298)
All glory to God, who is our Sword and Shield!
With thanksgiving for God’s gift of Himself and His Truth,
Sara Doezema
Share on
Next Article
Reformed Believers Publishing
325 84th St SW, Suite 102
Byron Center, MI 49315
