Report of the eGoli Presbytery Commission to the Stated Meeting of the
Presbytery, 10th June 2015, regarding an accusation against Prof Wolmarans
alleging teaching contrary to the Holy Scriptures.
Below is an extract of the minute of the stated Meeting of the Presbytery of eGoli, which took place on the 14th of April 2015: The Acting Clerk informed the Council that correspondence had been received from the Convener of the Court of Assembly referring an accusation from the Rev. Jeremy Smith and the Session of Pinetown Presbyterian Church in the Presbytery of eThekwini to the Presbytery of eGoli. The accusation is against the Rev. Prof J L P Wolmarans and alleges teachings contrary to the Holy Scriptures.
Proposal:
“Presbytery receives the referral from the Court of Assembly and refers the
matter to a commission in terms of para 18.65 of the Manual, consisting of Rev.
CJ Judelsohn (as Moderator), Elder Giyani Matampi, the Rev. MI Cook, Dr. Gonnie
Leurs and Prof MJ Masango, to interview Prof Wolmarans in terms of paras. 18.64
and 18.68, and instructs the Commission to report back to Presbytery’s
Executive in May 2015”.
This was seconded and AGREED
The
Allegations:
The Rev Smith alleges that Prof Wolmarans has contravened para 18.4 of the
Manual of Faith and Order in that he teaches doctrine that is contrary to the
Holy Scriptures and the doctrine of the UPCSA; and thereby has injured the
peace and unity of the Church.
Preliminary
steps:
The Clerk of the Presbytery provided the Moderator of the Commission the Rev Judelsohn, with a copy
of the charges and allegations submitted by the Rev Smith to the Court of Assembly.
It is a substantial document comprising a 9 page charge a 3 page narrative of events leading to the laying
of the charges and then numerous appendices, A – H, comprising various papers, lectures,
emails and correspondence in support of the charges.
Mr Judelsohn scanned the whole document and disseminated it to the members
of the Commission for their study. Due
to the length of the document and in a desire to exercise diligence in studying
the document, Mr Judelsohn informed the Clerk of Presbytery that it would not
be possible to meet the deadline of reporting to the Presbytery Executive meeting
in May 2015, but would endeavour to do so by the June Presbytery meeting.
Considering the gravity of the accusations against Prof Wolmarans the members
of the Commission agreed that the best way forward would be to compile a set of
questions based on the accusations from Mr Smith, to be given to Prof Wolmarans
in advance of our meeting with him. This
would allow both the members of the Commission and Prof Wolmarans to come to
the meeting well prepared.
The questions were forthright and dealt with the following issues:
- 1. Prof Wolmarans’ approach to the Holy Scriptures and the interpretive tools he employs when studying the bible.
- 2. Prof Wolmarans’ attitude towards and understanding of the orthodox Christian teachings regarding the resurrection, Parousia and deity of Christ.
- 3. An explanation for some of the statements made by Prof Wolmarans in his paper En route to an alternative, secular Christianity.
- 4. The relationship between academia and the Church.
- 5. The relationship between Prof Wolmarans’ academic research and his personal faith.
- 6. The content of the teaching that Prof Wolmarans is engaged in at St Columba’s Presbyterian Church as Associate Minister.
On the 26th of May 2015 the Commission met at Midrand
Presbyterian Church at 09h30 to pray and prepare for the meeting with Prof Wolmarans
which commenced at 10h00.
All members of the Commission were in attendance as well as the Rev Dr
Chunky Young, invited by Prof Wolmarans.
The Commission met with Prof Wolmarans for 2 hours following which the Commission
deliberated from 12h00 to 12h30 at which point it was agreed that a further
meeting of the Commission would be necessary to conclude our decisions and
report.
The Commission met again at Midrand Presbyterian Church on the 4th
of June 2015 at 09h00 for this purpose.
Findings in
relation to the 6 questions listed above:
A study of the UPCSA’s Confession of Faith shows that when reading the
Holy Scriptures the believer is to recognise that the scriptures are human
documents clothed in a culture and context of the times it was written in and
so the scriptures need to be rationally analysed. (See below)
Article
6.10
Indeed as human documents the books of the Bible are conditioned by the thought
forms of their times and open to rational analysis. Such analysis helps us
understand their literary and historical nature and their social, political,
ideological and religious contexts.
Article
12.1
In Scripture revelation comes
to us clothed
in the culture of
the ancient Middle East. To
communicate the good news to others we need to express it in their language and
cultural concepts. As the good news takes root, it becomes embodied in a
particular culture.
Article
12.2
Human culture, however,
tends to enmesh
the Church in
its values and to
reduce the Church’s preaching and teaching to an echo of those values. Even in
Scripture a cultural patriarchalism and male - centredness in many places
obscures the full biblical insight that in God’s eyes all people are equal, no
matter their gender, race, nation or class. God’s revelation itself is not to
be identified with any human culture or its religious aspect. It remains sovereign
over every culture and addresses every culture an .d all people equally
It judges every culture together with its religious beliefs, practices
and pretensions. When it comes to the relationship between the Word of God and
the Scriptures, Prof Wolmarans identifies with the third view outlined in the footnote
to Article 6.5. (see below).
Footnote
to Article 6.5
In adopting the Confession the UPCSA recognizes
that its members have
different (for some,
overlapping) views on
the relation between
the Word of
God and scripture:
1.
Some fully identify the Word of God with Scripture,
regarding it as verbally inspired and infallible.
2.
Some distinguish between the Word of God and
Scripture as its inspired and normative but fallible human record and witness.
3.
Some
emphasize that the
Word of God
is strictly Jesus
Christ, the living
Word, and see Scripture
as the normative
and authoritative witness
to Christ that
by the power
of the Spirit becomes and is the
Word of God in bearing such witness (Jn.5:39f., II Cor.3 - 4:6).
All, however, confess that Jesus Christ is the living Word of God and
that the Scriptures are inspired by God and have unique authority. It is in the
light of the above that his reference to mythos, as a biblical hermeneutic,
needs to be understood. Mythos does not mean
untruth or lie, but is rather an attempt to separate the truth of God’s
revelation in the Holy Scriptures with the vehicle (context and culture) in
which that truth is conveyed. Although
some will contend that the two are inseparable, i.e. the truth and vehicle in which
it is carried are one and the same, others will not, and the Commission
believes that this difference in approach to the Holy Scriptures falls within
the scope and intention of the principle of the liberty of opinion that the
UPCSA holds so dear.
2) Prof Wolmarans defends the historical creeds of the Church and holds
to the doctrines of the Resurrection, Parousia, deity of Christ and all other
orthodox teaching, however his understanding is informed by his approach and
interpretation of scripture outlined above. Although many may struggle with his
interpretations, the Commission does not believe that he is in conflict with
the faith of the UPCSA.
3) The Commission is of the view that at the heart of the allegations against
Prof Wolmarans and the source of all the dis - ease surrounding Prof Wolmarans
over the past year lies the publication of his paper En route to an
alternative, secular Christianity. It is
this paper that sparked the numerous inquiries into Prof Wolmarans’ teaching
and conduct and doctrine.
The Commission wishes to affirm, as the Presbytery has done once before,
that this paper must be understood within the context in which it was written and
for the audience for which it was written
.
The paper was commissioned for the purpose of an inter - faith
conference held at UNISA in 2010 with the express intention to ignite debate on
the issues raised in the paper. It is an
academic work not intended for the Church per se and was never introduced by
Prof Wolmarans to the UPCSA. It had been
published and been available for well over 4 years without causing any dis - ease in the UPCSA. The controversy was sparked, not by Prof Wolmarans,
but by Mr Smith who literally took it out of its context and placed it into a
new context, the faith of the Church, for which it was never intended.
4) The Commission needs to state it very clearly that an academic has a
responsibility to push the frontiers of faith and thinking and to ask questions
that have not been asked before. It is
this drive to experiment and search and question that lies at the heart of the Reformation
and many other key moments in the Church’s history.
As a career academic and minister of the UPCSA, Prof Wolmarans would not
be fulfilling his vocation if he did not ask the tough questions and explore
new thinking on behalf of the Church.
His opinions may not be liked by all or supported by all, but the UPCSA must
affirm the right of all her members to explore their faith and thinking and to disagree
with one another within the context of robust discussion.
It is unfortunate that instead of
engaging in this kind of discussion, Mr Smith has chosen to accuse a colleague with
misconduct in an attempt to stifle any thinking contrary to his own.
5) Prof Wolmarans’ has stated that his personal journey of faith has inevitably
been influenced by his academic work and research, as it would with
anyone. However, he believes, as does
the Commission, that his personal faith is not in conflict with the faith of the UPCSA.
6) Prof Wolmarans preaches
occasionally from the pulpit at St Columba’s Presbyterian Church, Parkview, and
facilitates that congregations’ Wednesday Night Live program. Mr Smith produced copies of some of the
lectures that Prof Wolmarans has given at Wednesday Night Live as further
evidence of Prof Wolmarans’ deviant teaching.
The Commission needs to make it clear that the Wednesday Night Live
program, which has been a part of the life of St Columba’s for many years, is
intended to be a safe place for exploring the faith. It is not a doctrine selling forum, but
rather an opportunity for anyone, both members of St Columba’s and others, to
explore issues in our faith through discussion and questions. The lectures given by Prof Wolmarans fall in
line with his approach to Holy Scripture and are intended to be conversation
starters, not definitive and final pronouncements on various matters.
Conclusions
and Decision:
Although Prof Wolmarans would be considered what some would term a liberal
theologian, we believe that his approach to the Holy Scriptures or hermeneutic falls
within that which is envisioned by the UPCSA’s Confession of Faith.
Prof Wolmarans is a sincere person who is not ashamed of his convictions
and there is no evidence to support the allegation that he has committed violence
against the Church.
His teaching and doctrine may well leave some believers uncomfortable, but,
in light of his hermeneutic, it is not contrary to the Holy Scriptures and his
ministry is not dangerous to the
Church.
It is not he who has injured the unity and peace of the Church, but in
fact it is the actions of Mr Smith that has done so by taking an article out of
its context, which had been lying dormant’ for over 4 years, and introducing it
to a forum it was never intended for and thereby causing upset and division and
suspicion that could well have been avoided had proper and robust discussion
been entered into, which lies at the heart of any healthy, living and thinking
Church.
Further to this, the Commission wishes to highlight the importance of the
spirit of tolerance e from all theological quarters of the Church when engaging
in discussions on matters of doctrine and Holy Scripture. And, although the
principle of the liberty of opinion must be defended, it has to be done with
integrity and respect for those whose opinions differ from our own.
The Commission is also of the opinion that when members of the UPCSA find
difficulty with the doctrine and interpretation of Holy Scripture of any other
member of the denomination that best practice for dealing with such disagreement
would not only be to exhaust all avenues, procedures and structures of all the
Councils of the church, but must also include the seeking of opportunities for
the parties to engage in robust discussion and debate, before proceeding directly
to the highest Court of the UPCSA.
Taking all of the above into consideration , it is the decision of this Commission
that no further action be taken against Prof Wolmarans.
Moderator
CJ Judelsohn
Proposal:
1.
Presbytery receives the report
2.
Presbytery sends this report to the Convener of the Court of Assembly,
the Clerk of the Presbytery of eThekwini, the Minister and Session of Pinetown Presbyterian Church and
the Session of St Columba’s Presbyterian Church.
