To the editors of Sword and Shield,

I apologize for the length of this letter. However, I believe the topics which it addresses are important enough for your periodical and her readers to warrant such length. Also, out of love for the neighbor large complete quotes are provided in order to give an honest rendering of what has been said. I am writing to you because of the unusual circumstances and response of some Protestant Reformed churches to the Sword and Shield. These responses have been in the form of letters to their membership whereby they have warned their members regarding Sword and Shield. It is the purpose of this letter to show why I believe these warnings are unnecessary and unjust.

One such letter from a consistory states, 

Although the magazine purports the development of the Reformed truth, statements made within the publication, rather than promoting the unity of believers in that truth, promote disunity and schism. This is evident when it describes the current controversy within the PRC as being “between the truth and the lie. (Editorial pg. 7)”. The publication goes on to give itself the authority to “condemn doctrines, attitudes, and practices within them (the PRCA), (Editorial pg. 8)” that they perceive to be false, even if that criticism and condemnation is of the highest ecclesiastical assemblies of the church.

Another letter says, 

We object to statements in the editorial which allude to “the lie” present in our churches, and declaration of the magazines intent to set aside good order in the churches in addressing this supposed “lie”, even maintaining the right to “condemn” in their magazine the decisions of “ecclesiastical assemblies of the Protestant Reformed Churches”. These statements threaten to promote disorder and a divisive spirit in our churches.

A third example reads, 

Unrest stems in part from the creation of the periodical itself, but especially because of statements made in the editorial of the June 2020 issue. It states, “Sword and Shield is…free to comment on the Protestant Reformed Churches…It is also able to condemn doctrines, attitudes, and practices within them that are false. This is true even regarding the ecclesiastical assemblies of the Protestant Reformed Churches.” The consistory informs you that such a practice is not according to Reformed church government and has potential to create schism in the Protestant Reformed churches.

As can be seen from these letters there are two main complaints. The first is the issue of describing the current controversy in our churches as being between the truth and the lie. The second is the contention that the editorial claims to itself the right to condemn the decisions of ecclesiastical assemblies instead of following proper church polity of protest and appeal when one is aggrieved by these bodies’ decisions.

With regards to the second complaint, let us examine whether or not Sword and Shield, as a magazine, may legitimately condemn decisions of Protestant Reformed assemblies. To help answer this we should ask whether or not Sword and Shield may condemn decisions of other denominational assemblies? Yes, it may. Is doing so promoting schism in the body of Christ? No, it is not. Why not? Because as the editorial told us, Sword and Shield “is non-ecclesiastical, in the sense that it is not the possession of or under the governance of any church institute.” Because Sword and Shield is not the possession of nor governed by these other denominations it is free to condemn decisions of those churches. 

Likewise, Sword and Shield is not the possession of nor under the governance of the Protestant Reformed Churches. Therefore, it is free to condemn decisions of the Protestant Reformed Churches. Is saying this a promotion of schism in the body of Christ? No. Why not? Because since the magazine is free from any church governance the magazine is free to condemn any and all denominational decisions.

The letters of the consistories do note the correct church orderly way one who is under the governance of the Protestant Reformed Churches would address disagreement with their decisions. Sword and Shield, as a magazine, is not under such governance, however, the editors and current authors are under such Protestant Reformed governance. The current authors and editors are under this governance and therefore the editors and authors are required to follow the church orderly way of protest and appeal regarding decisions in the Protestant Reformed Churches. We must be careful not to confuse and combine the magazine for her editors and authors. The two are not synonymous nor equivalent to each other. The men are under the governance of the Protestant Reformed Churches, the magazine is not. Just because the men are not at liberty to condemn decisions of the Protestant Reformed Churches in the magazine this does not mean that the magazine as an entity does not have this freedom. In theory someone who was a member of another Reformed denomination could write for Sword and Shield and be perfectly in his rights to condemn decisions of the Protestant Reformed Churches in the magazine. Such is the freedom of the magazine.

But did the editor in his editorial claim to himself the right to condemn decisions of the Protestant Reformed Churches in the magazine? Due in part to the paragraph’s layout, a superficial reading of this section could lead one to this conclusion. However, a careful and honest reading of what was actually written should clear up this misunderstanding. After explaining that Sword and Shield arises out of the office of believer we read: “Sword and Shield is thus free to comment on the Protestant Reformed Churches. Sword and Shield may evaluate these churches and offer instruction to them. Sword and Shield is able to commend doctrines, attitudes, and practices within these churches that are true. It is also able to condemn doctrines, attitudes, and practices within them that are false. This is true even regarding the ecclesiastical assemblies of the Protestant Reformed Churches. Sword and Shield may write about matters coming to the assemblies; it may state its position on those matters; and it may comment on the decisions that the assemblies make.”

The topic sentence of this paragraph is, “Sword and Shield is thus free to comment on the Protestant Reformed Churches.” Therefore, the rest of the paragraph must be understood under this theme of commenting. Commenting by commending the good. Commenting by condemning the bad. Commenting even on ecclesiastical assemblies of the Protestant Reformed Churches. The sentence that says “this is true even regarding the ecclesiastical assemblies” is not modifying the previous sentence which speaks of being “able to condemn.” The “this” in “this is true even regarding ecclesiastical assemblies” is modifying the topic sentence, “Sword and Shield is thus free to comment on the Protestant Reformed Churches.” We know this because the very next sentence explains what it means that “this is true even regarding the ecclesiastical assemblies.” The next sentence reads, “Sword and Shield may write about matters coming to the assemblies; it may state its position on those matters; and it may comment on the decisions that the assemblies make.” The point of the editorial was not that the editors or authors of Sword and Shield are free to condemn decisions of the broader assemblies, but that the editors and authors are free to comment on decisions of the broader assemblies.

The editor is not advocating for nor taking upon himself the right to go against the Church Order by publicly condemning decisions of the broader assemblies. What the editor is telling us is that he has the right and responsibility to comment on decisions in our churches by evaluating these decisions and offering instruction regarding them. When a church assembly makes a decision regarding a matter before it, just as we all have the right and responsibility to discuss the implications and impact of those decisions upon ourselves, so also the editors and authors of Sword and Shield have the right and responsibility to comment on the import of those decisions for our churches as a whole. This is nothing more and nothing less than what we all as individual members of our churches have the right and responsibility to do. Such is not promoting schism; such is exercising the office of believer by being interested, informed, active members in the body of Christ.

As for the additional complaint, that being the editorial’s description of our current controversy as a matter between the truth and the lie, this is merely an application of the editorial’s position that it has the freedom to comment on decisions of the broader assemblies by evaluating and instructing the churches regarding these decisions.

The decision specifically being commented on and applied to our churches was that which was made at Synod 2018. This is clearly seen from the July 2020 editorial. In this editorial, which was titled “Our Present Controversy,” a decision of Synod 2018 was specifically referenced. Per this editorial this decision was, “‘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’ (Acts of Synod 2018, 61, art. 62 B.1).”

Synod declared that doctrinal error was taught in the sermons protested. Is doctrinal error the truth? No. To teach error is to teach something that is false. Doctrinal error is a false teaching. It is untrue, it is a lie. Calling doctrinal error the lie does not imply that the one who taught that doctrinal error intended to lie. But calling doctrinal error the lie is to speak the truth. Calling doctrinal error the lie is to truly apply and place oneself in subjection to the decisions of Synod.

Synod 2018 sustained the protestant with regards to the fact that doctrinal error was being taught. By this decision the church of Jesus Christ has officially rejected this teaching and by doing so has labeled this teaching a lie and made this teaching heresy in the body of Christ. A heresy is a teaching which has been officially rejected by the church as a false teaching. It was the ecclesiastical ruling of the body of Christ at Synod 2018 that by this very decision made this doctrinal error heresy. Therefore, it is the bounden duty of the members of our churches to henceforth describe and call this error the lie and heresy. Doing so is the only way to truly hold oneself in subjection to the authority of the Spirit of Christ and to not be schismatic against His guiding of our churches in all truth.

It is my hope that this letter helps others understand, as I have come to understand, the correctness and necessity of the position and statements made in the first and second editorials of Sword and Shield.

In Christian love and submission to the Spirit of Christ,

—Matthew Overway

REPLY

I think your letter speaks for itself, so I do not intend to comment at length on it here. However, it does give me the opportunity to put in a plug for the first annual meeting of Reformed Believers Publishing on October 15. Lord willing, the speech that evening will be “A Believer’s Paper: The Freedom of Sword and Shield.” The speech will address some of the matters that you raise in your letter, including the relationship of Sword and Shield to article 31 of the Church Order and the false charge by some that Sword and Shield is schismatic. By God’s grace, Sword and Shield is a holy endeavor. Members of the Protestant Reformed Churches may read the magazine and subscribe to it with the confidence that they are participating in a godly project, and without any fear that they are somehow participating in schism. Your letter provides ample demonstration of that fact. Thank you. 

Your letter also gives me an opportunity to invite all Reformed believers to join Reformed Believers Publishing as members. Membership is free, and applications can be found on the RBP website at reformedbelieverspub.org. Applications will be received and members will be accepted at the RBP annual meeting. Again, God willing, the RBP annual meeting will be livestreamed in some form or another, which means that believers from anywhere in the world can become members of RBP. The constitution of RBP, which spells out the different types of membership, can be perused at the RBP website. Basically, one can be a regular member (eligible to vote on matters and eligible to be nominated for the RBP board), or one can be an associate member (eligible to speak to matters at RBP meetings). Membership in RBP is not tied to subscription to Sword and Shield, so if you have already subscribed to the magazine and would like to be a member of RBP, be sure to fill out the application.