Yesterday I received the honor of being chosen to serve the CREC for the next three years as her presiding minister. When we say we are honored by an honor and when we say we are humbled by an honor, it is too easy to assume that these are sentiments that pull in opposite directions. But actually, biblically understood, they are the same sentiment. This responsibility is a weighty one, and I would genuinely appreciate your prayers for the CREC, for me, those who will be assisting me, and for the presiding ministers of our seven presbyteries. We have some glorious opportunities before us.
What will it mean for this blog? Very little will change, but it is true that we will have to address some things at the very front end, and by this I mean the business of disclaimers.
We are all familiar with the statement that “the views expressed by old so-and-so are not necessarily the views of the fill-in-the-blank entity.” This is a commonly expressed sentiment because it is a necessary one. How we represent ourselves, particularly when we are also representatives in other senses, is an operation that calls for care and finesse. “But if it calls for care and finesse, why’d they pick you then?” I see that this is a reasonable question.
I have finesse. It is just a different kind of finesse, the kind you wield with a cricket bat.
Nonetheless, explanation is required. I do need to lay out what the relationship is between the CREC as a whole and the views expressed so cogently in this space from time to time. Our difficulty is particularly acute because the ethos of the CREC is by-and-large transformationalist.
Postmillennialism is not a doctrinal requirement in any way, but it is very common in our ranks. This means — apart from the general cheerfulness — that we believe that no area of life is outside the authority of the Lord Jesus, and we want to bring biblical principles to bear however and wherever we can. The difficulty is that not every proposed integration of life and Scripture meets with immediate or unanimous acclaim. And where there is ongoing debate and interaction, it would be inappropriate for me as presiding minister to act as though this were not the case — as though my proposed intersection were the only option, and that the CREC had adopted it simply because I wrote it.
Start with the obvious. If I were to write a post arguing that PopTarts are actually pretty good for you, the views expressed in that post would not necessarily be those of the CREC. Let us hope not. We are still trying to figure out why I did that.