Repair or Repeal: A Slippery Slope

Improvement is a term that has established itself in advertizing, health, and practically every human endeavor as an indispensible “have to”. Few among us can resist the appeal of “new and improved”. Who in his right mind would take the position that it is best to remain so conventional that you never need to improve any product or person?  Making a thing better, even it is already good but not good enough, by adding to it is one option. The other alternative open to us, besides doing zero, is to repair what is worn out or broken. There is undoubtedly something so irresistible about improvement that in order to keep our connection with the thoughts and actions of our current society and not be left behind and irrelevant in the archives file, we have to adjust. Of course the adjustment is not backward but forward and to the advantage of our cause or merchandise. This is the case concerning Christian doctrine, the issue on which we focus in this article.

The effectiveness with which Christians communicate our message to the multicultural, post-modern population near and far to us is a priority concern. We need to connect and stay connected so that we do not find ourselves explaining the directions on how to get to the post office to the guy who has already mailed his letter. Recently I have noticed a definite move on the part of several Christian denominations, especially evangelical groups, to improve their statements of faith. Such an endeavor is for the purpose of clarifying and applying their beliefs to the general public or at least that part of the public that may care to be enlightened. Who could reasonably object to that? Certainly not me…unless…the ways and means of intended improvement picks up a virus on its way to its destination.

Is a doctrinal statement, or any part of it, broken? If so, it needs to be taken to the repair shop. Is it deficient because it is outmoded? Then it needs a trip to the research and development department. A problem may arise, however, if the method of repair in order to improve the item consists of simply removing parts. When it is put back into service it is, granted, not the same as it was, but that version of repair begs the question, “Is the takeaway an actual improvement or is what is missing a real miss?” If an enhancement brings about the kind of change that distorts an article of belief then another question is in order, namely, “Are we violating the principle by adding too many amendments.”

My case in point turns out to be more than one case and involves several points. Recently, through no intention of my own, I have been exposed to the results of the efforts of three evangelical denominations and one para-church organization to revise their official articles of faith or their statements of faith. What stood out in all of them was an attempt to fix a perceived problem in the way this or that theological viewpoint had formerly been presented or to insert additional words to convert their position to a more palatable flavor. In order to do this, some consensus had to be reached among governing leaders and definite determination had to be made in regard to the wordsmithing. Just as consequential, it appears that the statements of their “fathers of the faith”, ancient or recent, would no longer do.

In some instances the agents of improvement finesse issues such as homosexuality or abortion. Verbal passes are freely awarded to lifestyles the Bible plainly prohibits. Other modifications appear to be merely an attempt to tweak the vernacular on subjects that seem to be less conspicuous in their significance, such as the necessity of sanctification or the inspiration of the Scriptures. All of this maneuvering is justified as an attempt to upgrade; to make the doctrine more appealing to the average consumer than the words of those who last adjusted the terminology.

The peril of such improvement may be illustrated by the analogy of the family Thanksgiving gathering where Granny’s gravy was simmering on the stove. Every time a different daughter or granddaughter would pass by the pot she would lift the lid and remove a spoonful of turkey giblets or add a dash of pepper or cup of water. To the amazed and disappointed diners, when the renowned gravy was finally served it was too spicy and too weak, to which Granny replied, “Land sakes, my gravy has been improved so much it ain’t gravy no more.”

The aim of more clearly communicating the truth of sound doctrine to our present generation is a necessity and may God bless all who take on that challenge. May our Lord not only bless them but may He keep them; keep them from the tempting tendency to repair or even repeal any word of truth that dilutes the real “gravy”.

~ Dr. Dan Light