The Protestant Reformed Churches (PRC) are in the midst of internal doctrinal controversy. The controversy is whether a grace principle or a works principle governs the believer’s conscious experience of salvation. In the lead-up to Synod 2018, the false doctrine was taught, tolerated, and defended that the believer’s assurance and conscious enjoyment of salvation were due to his good works. Synod 2018, by the grace of God, exposed the doctrinal error in our midst and demonstrated that the error militated against our Reformed confessions. In the aftermath of Synod 2018, the churches remain divided over our evaluation of the error that was exposed by Synod 2018. Was that error conditional theology, a lie out of hell, false doctrine, and heresy? Was it contrary to the Reformed confessions? Or was that error something much less, perhaps merely poor phrasing, confusing language, and generally excusable mistakes? Did the error perhaps not actually contradict and deviate from the Reformed confessions? Such is the state of our doctrinal controversy today.

This division in the PRC over our evaluation of Synod 2018 is major. If the PRC cannot condemn the error as deadly false doctrine, then the PRC are not united as a denomination. Our unity is not only that we confess the truth positively together, but also that we condemn together every lie that militates against that truth. If some are condemning our error as a lie, and some are failing to condemn it as a lie, and yet others are maintaining that it was no lie, that is division. Worse, if the PRC cannot condemn the error as deadly false doctrine, then the PRC will remain susceptible to the error and will eventually embrace that particular lie as the truth.

Therefore, the urgent question for the PRC is, how can we be delivered from our error and thus come to the conclusion of our controversy? The good news is that there is a way forward for a denomination that has erred and that is convulsed by doctrinal controversy. The situation is not hopeless, and the controversy need not be endless. By God’s grace the Protestant Reformed Churches can come to blessed unity and peace in the truth. To this question we now turn: What is the way forward for the PRC in our present controversy?

Official Instruction

First, the way forward is official instruction in the decisions of Synod 2018. Such instruction is necessary for a denomination in the aftermath of major doctrinal decisions. In controversy the churches’ work is not finished with the meeting of synod. The meeting of synod is really only the beginning of the churches’ official work. At synod the controversy is deliberated, judged, and decided. These synodical decisions are necessary as synod’s judgment of the controversy in the light of God’s word as expressed in the Reformed confessions. Synod’s decisions declare what is true doctrine in the controversy and what is false doctrine in the controversy. When those decisions are made according to the truth of God’s word, they are settled for the members of the denomination and binding on their consciences. Therefore, synod’s decisions are necessary for the settling of doctrinal controversy in the denomination.

However, the churches’ work is not finished with the settled and binding decisions of synod. Those decisions must be brought to the members of the denomination. The churches must instruct the members in the meaning of the decisions. The members of the churches must know the doctrinal issues that came to synod. The members must be informed exactly what the controversy was about. The members must be taught precisely what the doctrinal error was in the controversy. The members must know exactly where the word of God and the confessions condemn that error as the lie. They must know precisely how that error militates against the truth. They must know the magnitude and the danger of that error, so that they abhor and repudiate that error. The members must be taught exactly what is the true doctrine that stands over against the lie. They must be shown the beauty of that truth, which truth glorifies God and saves their souls. The members must be reminded that we as churches are susceptible to error, as the controversy proved. The members must be encouraged to be on their guard against the error and to know and embrace the truth. Synod’s settled and binding decisions are only the beginning of the churches’ work in settling doctrinal controversy. Those decisions must also be delivered to the churches through official instruction.

This official instruction of the members of the churches has biblical precedent. Acts 15 records a major doctrinal controversy in the early church. The controversy was the age-old conflict between the true doctrine of salvation by grace and the false doctrine of salvation by works. It was a controversy between the grace principle and the works principle of salvation. On one side were certain men who came to Antioch from Judea, teaching the brethren, “Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved” (v. 1). On the other side were Paul and Barnabas, who had no small dissension and disputation with those men. The question in that controversy was whether the Gentiles had to keep the law of Moses in order to be saved. The basic issue in the controversy, then, was whether salvation was by the keeping of the law—the works principle of salvation—or whether salvation was by grace through faith in Jesus Christ—the grace principle of salvation. The controversy was brought to an assembly of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for their consideration, judgment, and decision. In the course of the deliberations, Peter expressed the doctrinal truth of the grace principle that carried the day: “We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” (v. 11). The assembly of apostles and elders grounded their doctrine in the word of God. The elder James quoted the prophecy of Amos to demonstrate that the salvation of the Gentiles was biblical: “To this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written…” (v. 15).

Having decided the controversy, the assembly at Jerusalem took steps to instruct the members of the churches in its decisions (Acts 15:22–35). The assembly wrote a letter to the church in Antioch stating the decision of the assembly. The assembly also sent an official delegation to Antioch with the letter, which delegation consisted of Paul, Barnabas, Judas Barsabas, and Silas. When the delegation arrived in Antioch, the men gathered the multitude of the church together and delivered the letter from the assembly. The church in Antioch read the letter in the presence of the delegation. Judas and Silas exhorted the brethren and confirmed them, apparently regarding the doctrine that had just been upheld by the assembly in Jerusalem. Later, when Paul and Silas went through the churches that had been established on Paul’s previous missionary journey, they instructed the churches in the decisions of the Jerusalem assembly. “As they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem. And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily” (16:4–5). All of this demonstrates the care and pains that the apostles and the Jerusalem assembly took to instruct the members of the churches in the decisions of the assembly.

So also the Protestant Reformed Churches must move forward in our controversy by the official instruction of the members of the churches in the decisions of Synod 2018. The churches have begun this official instruction through the printing and distribution of the Acts of Synod 2018. Every household in the PRC has or could have a copy of these decisions. This is a good start, but much more could and should be done by the churches. Because the oversight and instruction of the congregation is the responsibility of the consistory, consistories should take the lead in instructing their members in the decisions of Synod 2018. For example, the consistory could host a public reading of the decisions of Synod 2018 to the congregation over the course of several designated evenings, just as the letter from the Jerusalem assembly was read in the presence of the delegation from Jerusalem. The Acts of Synod 2018 may be in every household, but perhaps there are members who have not yet gotten around to reading the Acts. Perhaps there are members who are daunted by the Acts and who do not know where to begin in trying to digest the controversy. A public reading of the decisions would at least ensure that the members of the congregation have heard firsthand from the Acts what was actually decided. They will hear from that reading what the doctrinal issues are, what the doctrinal error was, and what the truth is over against the error. Very likely, the congregation’s gathering together to hear the decisions read will spark conversation and further study together. If nothing else, the consistory will signal by this public reading that it is good and holy for members of the churches to hear about the controversy, to read about it, and to discuss it together. Members who perhaps have been under the mistaken impression that silence is the holiest approach to the controversy will be liberated to read, hear, learn, understand, and confess the truth as it is being sharpened through the controversy.

Consistories can be as creative as they would like and go into as much depth as they deem beneficial for their members. During the reading of the decisions, consistories might highlight certain pages, passages, phrases, and words that are especially important for understanding the controversy. Because synod rightly grounded its decisions in the Reformed confessions without explicitly citing the scripture passages upon which those confessions are based, a consistory might prepare a list of biblical passages for its members as a kind of compendium to synod’s decisions. A consistory might ask its pastor to give a speech or a brief summary of the decisions. Neighboring consistories might work together to host a speech by a professor or even to host a conference for a day or a weekend with a panel of speakers. A consistory might even overture synod to ask synod to host a speech or a conference that could be livestreamed to the denomination. The possibilities are endless, but the point is that consistories should take the lead in the official instruction of their members in the decisions of Synod 2018. Through this official instruction, under the blessing of God, the members of the PRC can come a long way in our understanding of the doctrines and decisions of Synod 2018, and thus can come a long way toward unity in our evaluation of those decisions. As did the Jerusalem assembly, let us gather the multitude together and deliver the epistle, which when we have read, we shall rejoice for the consolation (Acts 15:30–31). And so shall the churches be established in the faith (16:5).

Polemics

Second, the way forward for the Protestant Reformed Churches is polemics against our own error. Polemics is fighting. Polemics is fighting against the lie that militates against the truth. Polemics is the order of the day for the PRC. Our polemical activity, our fighting, must not be general or external. Our fight must be specific and internal. Our polemics must be against ourselves. That is, the PRC must fight against the lie that has been among us and that has troubled us. Our fight against ourselves must be vigorous. It must be a fight to the death, so to speak. One principle must prevail, and the other principle must be vanquished, driven from the field, and destroyed in the PRC.

The calling to fight is unpopular. The calling to fight against ourselves is especially unpopular. Fighting, especially fighting ourselves, is painful. Besides, it seems backward that the solution to a doctrinal controversy is to press the controversy. It seems that if we want to come to the end of this controversy, we must not keep fighting, but we must stop fighting. Polemics would only seem to inflame the controversy, not settle it.

In spite of its unpopularity, polemics against the lie is necessary. Now is not the time to cease hostilities, but to dig in and to bear down in this fight. Certainly, let our fight not be personal and bitter. Certainly, let us work together in this fight against the lie. But let us fight. And let us fight harder!

The church and her members are called to fight against the lie in our midst. Fighting the lie is not merely an option for the church that she may take or leave at her convenience. Fighting the lie is her solemn obligation before God. The church and her members are exhorted, “Ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). Contending is fighting and that earnestly. The faith which was once delivered unto the saints is the truth of the word of God. Therefore, contending for the faith means fighting against the lie that compromises the truth, opposes the truth, and thus denies the truth. This is the polemical calling of the church. She must be a contending, fighting church.

The church is called to fight because her God is a fighting God who hates the lie. Jehovah “is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he” (Deut. 32:4). Jehovah contends against the lie through Jesus Christ, who is the truth, the Word made flesh, who came to the earth to fight. The Prince of peace, who brings the peace of heaven to God’s elect people through his death and resurrection, did not come to send peace on the earth, but a sword (Matt. 10:34). The Prince of peace came to fight. He came to tell the truth and, telling that truth, to fight the lie and the Liar (John 8:44–45). Wherever the Prince of peace goes by his gospel throughout the earth, there follows peace with God for his people but warfare and contention against the lie and the Liar. So also the church that the Captain of our salvation gathers to himself is a fighting church. She is the church militant. In Jesus Christ she is the seed of the woman, who is at enmity with the seed of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). She wears the whole armor of God (Eph. 6:11–20), and she is saved by Jehovah, the shield of her help and the sword of her excellency (Deut. 33:29). In the great battle of the ages, she prevails through Jesus Christ her savior, so that her enemies are found liars unto her, and she treads upon their high places (v. 29).

For the PRC this means that our solemn obligation before God is to fight against the lie that has been exposed in our midst. When synod said there was “doctrinal error” among us that “compromises the gospel of Jesus Christ” (Acts of Synod 2018, 61, 70), that was a call to arms for us. The faith which was once delivered unto the saints was compromised by us, and we must now “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). When the lie is exposed, God calls to the church, “Contend! Fight!”

The question is not, do we feel like fighting? The question is not, will fighting be pleasant for us? The question is only this, was the truth compromised? Then we are called to fight the lie that compromised the truth.

The church’s condemnation of the lie is an integral part of her confession of the truth. By its very nature the truth stands opposed to the lie. By its very nature the truth is antithetical. The truth that a man is justified by the faith of Jesus Christ stands opposed to the lie that a man is justified by the works of the law (Gal. 2:16). The truth that God’s blessing rests upon those who are of faith stands opposed to the lie that God’s blessing rests upon those who are of the works of the law (3:9–10). Therefore, the church that confesses the truth must also condemn the lie. If the church does not condemn the lie, her confession of the truth will be swallowed up by the lie, just as Israel’s toleration of the Canaanite altars led to her being swallowed up by Canaanite idolatry (Judges 2:1–5).

How does the church fight against the lie? First, the church fights the lie by identifying and exposing the lie as a lie. The nature of a lie is that it masquerades as the truth. The lie cloaks itself in the language of the truth so that it can pass itself off as the truth. The lie deceives so that those who tolerate and embrace the lie do not know that it is the lie but think that it is the truth. False apostles and deceitful workers transform themselves into the apostles of Christ; and no wonder, for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:13–15). The church contends against this deception by exposing the lie for what it is. She knows all truth from the word of God and judges all things in the light of that word (1 Cor. 2:12, 15). By this word she is able to discern the truth from the lie. By this word she is even able to try those who say they are apostles and are not and find them liars (Rev. 2:2).

Second, the church fights against the lie by condemning the lie. It is not enough only to identify and expose the lie; the church must also condemn the lie and repudiate it. When the apostle rebuked the Galatians for their toleration and acceptance of the Judaizers’ error, he condemned the error as “another gospel: which is not another” (Gal. 1:6–7). He condemned the error as “pervert[ing] the gospel of Christ” (v. 7). He pronounced a curse and an anathema upon those who would teach the error (vv. 8–9). Indeed, the entire epistle stands as one sustained condemnation of the Judaizers’ error.

So also today the church fights the lie by condemning the lie. She calls it the lie, hates it as the lie, repudiates it as the lie, and puts it out as the lie. She sets her sights on the lie and raises her spiritual weapons against it. In her sermons she fights the lie by bringing God’s word to bear against the lie, exposing it as the lie against the truth, and condemning it as antithetical to God and Christ. In the hearts of her members, there is revulsion of the lie, hatred of the lie, and zeal against the lie. In her ecclesiastical assemblies she discerns the lie and judges righteous judgment against it. In her writings she is specific and explicit so that there is no ignorance about the wickedness of the lie. In her heart and by her words, and according to the word of God, the church fights the lie by condemning the lie.

It is especially in the matter of polemics against the lie that the PRC must yet make progress in our controversy. There has been a tendency among us to minimize the seriousness of our doctrinal error. That minimizing of our error is deadly and will lead to the demise of our denomination, just as the minimizing of false doctrine has led to the demise of many other denominations in the history of the church. It is time that we stop minimizing our error and instead reject the error. To this we will turn next time, the Lord willing.