"Peripheral"
Just a quick note for those who aren't quite up on the Dutch Reformed subculture. This post, and likely the next one, is a response to an article in The Banner (thebanner.org) -- this one is in response to an article by Jacob D. Eppinga, "Peripheral." The Banner is the monthly publication of the Christian Reformed Church, which is the denomination I grew up in. It's somewhat similar to the Presbyterian denominations, since they both find their spiritual roots in the writings of John Calvin. It's just that the Presbyterians are Scottish, and we're Dutch.
In this article, Eppinga describes paper he wrote once about the debate between supralapsarianism (the view that God planned our salvation before the fall) and infralapsarianism (the view that God planned our salvation after the fall). This was quite a heated topic back in the day, and it's Eppinga's jumping off point for a discussion of what he calls the 'peripherals' -- those bits of the faith that are "not central." His conclusion is that "we must, where possible, avoid passing harsh judgments against other people." Debates about the periphery are impossible to avoid, he writes, if only because there's not always agreement about what is, in fact, peripheral. But we need to remember that, regardless of what our disagreements might be, there is certainly a center we can all agree on.
Perhaps this is just a difference of generation, but I'm not sure that intolerance regarding peripheral issues is really that large of a problem. I've had arguments about infra- vs. supralapsarianism, about Calvinism vs. Arminianism, even about Protestantism vs. Catholicism. (Still haven't had the sprinkled vs. dipped debate yet, though). But I've never gotten the impression that my opposition thought of me as less of a Christian because of it. But I've known a lot of people my age inside the church who simply don't care about these sorts of issues, and I think that can be dangerous. These issues may be peripheral, but that doesn't mean that they're not important. A lack of concern about these issues can indicate a lack of concern with the truth, and that is obviously a bad thing. For the past few centuries, people have been accusing Christians of believing in the gospel merely because it makes us feel good, not because it's true. So a lack of concern about the truth within the church serves to bolster these claims. I don't think we should burn people at the stake because they sing hymns in addition to psalms, but we should probably think about the issue to the extent the gifts God has given us. As C. S. Lewis wrote, "God is no fonder of intellectual laziness than he is of any other sort of laziness."
In this article, Eppinga describes paper he wrote once about the debate between supralapsarianism (the view that God planned our salvation before the fall) and infralapsarianism (the view that God planned our salvation after the fall). This was quite a heated topic back in the day, and it's Eppinga's jumping off point for a discussion of what he calls the 'peripherals' -- those bits of the faith that are "not central." His conclusion is that "we must, where possible, avoid passing harsh judgments against other people." Debates about the periphery are impossible to avoid, he writes, if only because there's not always agreement about what is, in fact, peripheral. But we need to remember that, regardless of what our disagreements might be, there is certainly a center we can all agree on.
Perhaps this is just a difference of generation, but I'm not sure that intolerance regarding peripheral issues is really that large of a problem. I've had arguments about infra- vs. supralapsarianism, about Calvinism vs. Arminianism, even about Protestantism vs. Catholicism. (Still haven't had the sprinkled vs. dipped debate yet, though). But I've never gotten the impression that my opposition thought of me as less of a Christian because of it. But I've known a lot of people my age inside the church who simply don't care about these sorts of issues, and I think that can be dangerous. These issues may be peripheral, but that doesn't mean that they're not important. A lack of concern about these issues can indicate a lack of concern with the truth, and that is obviously a bad thing. For the past few centuries, people have been accusing Christians of believing in the gospel merely because it makes us feel good, not because it's true. So a lack of concern about the truth within the church serves to bolster these claims. I don't think we should burn people at the stake because they sing hymns in addition to psalms, but we should probably think about the issue to the extent the gifts God has given us. As C. S. Lewis wrote, "God is no fonder of intellectual laziness than he is of any other sort of laziness."