‘Good, not perfect’
Several months ago, Christian Courier Editor Angela Reitsma Bick interviewed Rev. Al Postma, Executive Director-Canada of the CRCNA, about denominational tensions and his response to CC’s Canada-wide survey on the future of the CRC here. The following excerpts come from that conversation.
CC: Are you tracking disaffiliation discussions?
Postma: Yes, to the best of our ability. It’s hard to say where churches are at, and I’m very, very cautious on sharing stories of possibility compared to stories of actuality.
I have enough exposure and experience with other denominations to know that we’re not perfect, but we’re not bad. For anyone who wonders whether it’s worth staying part of the CRC, I want to do my best to make sure that the CRC is worth staying part of. In this time where denominational affiliation is more porous and people are looking at that denominational relationship in ways they haven’t in the past, it really pushes us to say, not just ‘don’t go,’ but to give a compelling reason to stay. With the ministries that we do together and the history that we have of having good engagement around a whole variety of areas of life and theology, I think we do have a lot to offer. I think it’s a good denomination to be part of. Not a perfect denomination, but a good one.
CC: What are you hearing on the ground in Classis meetings?
Postma: I found your ‘Five Conversations’ article utterly fascinating because I had written an unpublished draft of the ‘Postma Post’ that names three conversations, and I pegged them similar to yours five. First, there are people who have a long commitment to Canadian Ministry, and what I share with some of them is that on a ministry basis, on an operational basis, we do have full direction and control at this point. I cannot stress that enough. Many people who have been part of this conversation for a long time just don’t believe me. But operationally, ministry-wise, it’s very different. Second, there are people who have said to me, ‘We need a separate Canadian CRC because we need a denomination that can revisit synodical decisions, particularly around human sexuality.’ I want to ask them: ‘Do you want a separate Canadian CRC circa 2024, or do you want a separate Canadian CRC circa 2016?’ My experience and engagement across Canada is one in which I don’t anticipate that the CRC would necessarily have a different theological position than we currently have. But there are some for whom I’ve heard the phrase, ‘I’m willing to give it a shot.’ Third, there seem to be some people who feel like they have lost a sense of empowerment or a sense of a voice. And a separate Canadian CRC to them is a way of saying, ‘I can reestablish a sense I have a voice here.’
So I’m a little bit less articulate and nuanced as your five, but I just found that your five really tracked, which was very affirming to me and maybe is affirming to you too, that in my anecdotal conversations we were landing in the same place. The concern that I saw in your article was that even with a separate Canadian CRC, then you still have your five voices that are going to battle it out. So a separate Canadian CRC is either a silver bullet or it’s probably not actually the solution everyone thinks it is.
CC: What would you say to members of the CRC who are feeling discouraged?
Postma: I know that there are some who feel like we’ve lost our Reformed identity, and the CRC has gone in a direction that’s unhealthy or loses the robustness of its history. I just see so many places where we still have it, and we still live into it, and I think we can continue to grow into it. I remain convicted that the Reformed tradition has a lot to offer the world – not just the Christian world, but the world. And when we look at the renewal of all things in Christ and a real engagement around all the different areas that we live into, I think we can still do that.
