What builds trust?

Restoring trust in a “low-trust” context was one rationale for strict enforcement of decisions made by the Christian Reformed Church’s (CRC) Synod 2024. But as CRC churches in Canada implement the detailed rules to ensure that all office-bearers agree with Synod’s definition of chastity, I hear more stories of lost trust and higher anxiety than restored trust. The contrast between the higher trust I find in ecumenical circles – where there is a wide diversity of views on many ethical issues – and the erosion of trust in CRC circles leads to this question: Does forced conformity actually lead to greater trust?

There is a comfort level when everyone in a group agrees, and I understand that knowing precisely where a church stands on a current issue may attract some people. However, when church members report that they are afraid to say what they think or raise any concerns for fear of being shunned, the trust seems shallow. When young people say that church is the least safe place for them to discuss questions about emerging sexual feelings and relationships, that is not an indicator of high trust, either. “We’re really back to a culture of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t talk about it,’” a member of another church observed, “[and] we know how well that works out.” Still others report intentional decisions not to talk about Synod at all in order to avoid conflict. Many of us agree that there are other pressing issues to discuss, such as care for a groaning creation, but those conversations are not happening either, because trust is too low to talk about what Synod decided and what its real-life implications are for all church members in Canada. 

Spiritual intimidation

One of those real-life implications is that a number of professional people in Canada are turning down requests to be office-bearers. As a result of Canada’s laws about non-discrimination, they have learned to witness in public life with a high degree of respect for the moral agency of other persons. They tell me that it would hurt their public witness to be publicly associated with the current CRC approach to compliance with Synod’s decisions because it lacks that respect.     

Then there are stories that slip over from mistrust into intimidation. Intimidation is defined as inducing fear to persuade someone to do what they do not want to do, or making someone feel afraid in order to maintain dominance. I would describe some of what I hear happening in churches as spiritual intimidation or spiritual bullying. Intimidation works; fear is a powerful force in close circles. I also understand that the line between “disciplining” and spiritual intimidation might be fine in some situations. Context matters. I am hearing stories from people who are afraid because they are being watched or “policed” to ensure they conform and don’t cross red-lines or say anything that suggests a different view, if they want to keep ministry positions or employment. The problem is that inducing fear, shaming, shunning and policing erode more than build the kind of trust that is essential for healthy communities. 

Covenant or constriction

I signed the CRC Covenant of Office-bearers years ago with a general reservation. While I appreciate the strong foundation of our creeds and confessions, I am reluctant to say “they define our understanding of the Bible” mostly because of what they do not include. That statement in itself seems to downplay God’s continuing revelation, in line with the “constantly reforming” thread that I value in the best of Reformed thinking. Being forced to sign it every year or use the highly constricted process to resolve any questions conveys mistrust. It discourages questioning and a healthy curiosity about what new work God is doing. Forced conformity shrinks the space for a God who repeatedly breaks through previous boundaries, such as the once-required circumcision, for the flourishing of his covenant relationships with humans. That’s trust.