In preparation for the 1989 general council of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, the Warc theology department sponsored a consultation on "Confessing the Faith Today" at the John Knox International Reformed Centre, August 17-24 1986.

Participants in the consultation were drawn from Reformed churches throughout the world which had recently written, or where in the process of writing, new confessional statements.

The purpose of the consultation was:

to examine the history of confessions and confessing within the Reformed tradition;
to compare more recent Reformed confessions with the "classical confessions" of the 16th and 17th centuries;
to identify common themes among the various confessions and, in particular, the issues which call forth new confessional statements today;
to discuss the implications of the new confessions for the Reformed family as a whole.

The following report of the consultation is intended to further this discussion among our member churches, and to provide guidance as we plan the 1989 general council. It is hoped that, as we move towards the next general council , we will all come to a deeper understanding of the faith we are called to confess, and of the common witness the Alliance itself can and should bear as a community of confessing churches and movements within the Reformed tradition.

Introduction

All Christians are called to bear witness to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. As Christians, we are set free to bear this witness by the judging and renewing force of the gospel. As members of the Reformed family, we share a particular history of confessing faith in Jesus Christ. Throughout the centuries, Reformed Christians have articulated their faith, trusting the sovereign subject of those confessions to use them where, when and how he wills.

Guided by the Holy Spirit and the Word of God, we participate in the joy of those who have confessed the faith in earlier times. We also share in their guilt for not having believed, hoped, prayed and loved enough. We recognize that the church is tempted to forget the foundation of its hope in the crucified and resurrected Lord, and to abuse scripture and confessions to justify its own ways.

Therefore, in company with all who have confessed the good news of Jesus Christ from within the Reformed family, and with all our fellow Christians who witness to the same gospel, we testify:

that, in creation, God has made heaven and earth for God's own glory, and fashioned humanity in God's own image, giving equal dignity and worth to every human being;
that, in the incarnation, God has come among us flesh of our flesh, bringing humanity to the wholeness and freedom for which we were created;
that, on the cross, God has endured human suffering, judged human justice and broken down the walls of hostility which divide human beings from each other and from God, and has made us one in the peace of Christ;
that, in the resurrection, God has set the world free from every power of darkness, death and unrighteousness by which it is enslaved.

Thus the promise and reality of God's coming kingdom, already inaugurated by Christ, incarnate, crucified and risen, is the new creation in which all humanity is reconciled and the world made new.

Yet many aspects of the world's life today conceal or deny this truth of humanity's oneness and the world's liberation. The urgent cries of those who suffer in situations which deny the gospel's truth demand from us in the Reformed family fresh professions of our faith, in solidarity with brothers and sisters who are witnessing by their words and in their bodies to God's good news in the midst of their own oppression and despair.

We must make this witness in relation to the societies by which we order God's earth. Some nations and governments rob their citizens of dignity and self-determination because of their colour, race, sex or creed. Some deny their people the freedom of worship and public expression of belief.

We must make this witness in relation to global political and economic polarization. Ideology, propaganda, terrorism and the threat of war create misunderstanding, tension and deadly peril between the spheres of influence of the super-powers. Political systems both collectivist and individualistic can foster outlooks which quench the human spirit and prevent the discovery of life in all its fullness. Unjust economic systems and international structures can perpetuate the gulfs between the rich and the poor, the hungry and the overfed, the exploiter and the exploited.

We must make this witness in relation to the human race by which God's earth is peopled. Often women are denied the opportunity for self-fulfilment and for equal participation in families, churches, communities and society at large, thus frustrating God's purpose for women and men alike. Often children and young people are exploited and abused for the gratification of their elders, and made the victims of adult greed, folly and violence. Often the disabled and disfigured are further handicapped by the insensitivity and prejudice of those who deem themselves normal. Often minorities of every kind are rendered voiceless and defenceless by the domination of the powerful.

We must make this witness in relation to God's earth itself. Our natural habitat is polluted and exploited by human gluttony. Our fellow-creatures are tormented and destroyed by human ruthlessness. Our planet's survival is imperilled by the piling up of weapons of global holocaust.

Within the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, we are aware of the numerous crises faced by Christians in our member churches today. In many cases, these struggles have become new occasions for confessing the gospel in particular contexts - for example, recent confessions in Taiwan and South Africa, concern in Germany for weapons of mass destruction, the confessions of new churches formed by unions of Reformed churches and churches of other traditions. As member churches of Warc, we are all challenged by these particular struggles and confessions to:

solidarity with other members of our Reformed family;
mutual intercession as we witness in diverse situations;
mutual correction when our practice and confessions appear contrary to the gospel;
reflection on the crises and occasions for witness in our own contexts.

As an Alliance, we have long recognized and responded to such challenges. Most recently, this response has taken such forms as:

the declaration of status confessionis on apartheid at the Ottawa general council in 1982;
the study Called to Witness to the Gospel Today, initiated by the general council and sent to all member churches for reflection and response;
our involvement in bilateral dialogues with other confessional groups and our commitment to the larger ecumenical movement.

In addition to these efforts, the increasing number of new confessions appropriate to a diversity of contexts provide a new challenge for Warc: to identify that which binds us together as a family of confessing communities in the Reformed tradition, and to give testimony together to the common perspectives of our faith. In order to do so, we must examine anew our confessional heritage as a Reformed family, as well as articulate the particular challenges to faith and obedience which arrive in our world today.

Scripture, confessions and confessing

The Reformed churches share with the other churches of the Reformation the conviction that Holy Scripture is the supreme rule of faith and life because it contains the normative witness to the Word of God incarnate for our salvation in Jesus Christ. Creeds and confessions are valid and may claim authority only insofar as they authentically interpret and apply that witness.

Through the centuries, Reformed Christians have composed a rich variety of confessions. The oldest, and in many ways the most influential, are the "classical confessions" from the 16>th and 17th centuries. Especially prominent among these are the Genevan Catechism (1542); the French Confession (1559); the Scots Confession (1560); the Belgic Confession (1561); the Heidelberg Catechism (1563); the Second Helvetic Confession (1566); the Canons of Dort (1619); the Westminster Confession and Larger and Shorter Catechisms, dating from the 1640s; and, from the Congregational branch of the Reformed family, the Savoy Declaration of Faith and Order (1658) and the Cambridge Platform (1648).

These confessions were not intended to supplant the ancient creeds, but to draw our their implications more fully in the new setting of their own time. For example, the Heidelberg Catechism includes a detailed exposition of the Apostles' Creed; and the Belgic Confession in Article 9 explicitly acknowledges the truth of the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed. Nor did any of these confessions claim universal or timeless validity, as their very variety shows. With the exception of the Canons of Dort, they all had in the first instance local or national character. This is a main reason why the tradition of composing Reformed confessions did not end with them, but continues to the present day.

The status of these and other confessions in the Reformed churches today is diverse. Some Reformed churches no longer subscribe to any confession in a binding fashion. Other churches hold to one or more confessions as their standard of doctrine, although often with qualifications which allow some liberty of opinion with regard to the confession's teaching. Four main reasons can be given for this:

First, the style of presentation of the faith in a 16th or 17th century document does not always best express and convey that faith in the world of today.
Second, not all of the claims and teachings contained in the classical confessions appear to be as valid or appropriate today as they seemed to their authors. For example, the prominent place given to the doctrine of predestination in several of the classical Reformed confessions, and the form of its exposition, today appear exegetically, theologically and pastorally questionable. Again, the anti-Roman Catholic tone characteristic of some of them was a product of the time of their composition which today can no longer be sustained. Yet again, they on occasion adopted attitudes to specific issues of faith and order which today are increasingly controversial. For instance, the forbidding of women to baptize or to preach (second Helvetic Confession, chap. 20; Scots Confession, Chap. 22), is a tenet which many Reformed churches are now convinced can no longer be upheld. For reasons such as these it is impossible simply to appropriate and perpetuate the classical Reformed confessions as binding doctrinal standards for Reformed churches in the 20th century.
Third, confessional standards have sometimes been misused to control and govern the life of the local Christian community instead of encouraging it to engage in solemn, spontaneous confession and articulation of the faith. For this reason, at least one major branch of the Reformed family, the English Congregationalist, found itself compelled as early as the 17th century to oppose the imposition of such standards.
Fourth, in the course of time new issues arise which were not experienced or addressed by the authors of the classical confessions.

Thus, it is appropriate for Reformed churches today to hold the classical Reformed confessions in honour as testimonies handed down from our foreparents in the faith, to see, to hear and learn from them, to study them, to go to school with them. But we should do so with the critical eye and ear of those who know that their loyalty does not belong in the first place to the testimonies of their confessional tradition, but to the Lord of the Church, Jesus Christ. The classical Reformed confessions contain immense riches of faith, theology and witness. We neglect them at our peril. But they are no last word. The riches they contain must be mined and minted anew.

In the present time, this mining and reminting is often attempted in a different and more modest fashion that in the classical confessions which sought for the most part, to offer a comprehensive outline of the entire gospel, the entire faith, spelled out in every aspect. That is and remains the task of the church in its teaching, preaching, liturgy, sacramental celebration and pastoral care. It is what Karl Barth called the task of "regular dogmatics" as a theological discipline. But he also pointed out the importance of "irregular dogmatics", of partial, issue-oriented theological reflection which focuses on the decisive challenges to faith and obedience at a particular time. In our time, the critical challenges focus our theological reflection on the Christian understanding of human identity, human existence, human calling and destiny. What is it to be a human being? What is God's purpose for the human race? What can we allow ourselves, and what must we forbid ourselves, in the technological exploitation of our world - which we have received as a gift from our Creator? How can we advance towards a truer anticipatory reflection of the promised reign of God, in which there will be neither sorrow nor pain, in which God will wipe away the tears from every eye? How is the proclamation of grace abounding to be heard and transmitted in the midst of the world's conflicts? How is the high calling of each and every human being to reflect the image of God to be put into practice in a world divided by the antagonisms of the super-powers, by the exploitation of the poor and humble of the earth by the rich and powerful? And where, in all this, is the witness to the crucified and risen Jesus Christ to be heard?

In seeking to address these issues - issues of major consequence for the church and the world - the kind of comprehensive account of Christian faith and practice represented by the classical Reformed confessions is not necessarily required. Within Warc, these issues can and should be addressed in a variety of ways. In particular, we would suggest that the member churches of the Alliance reflect together on the creation of humanity in the image of God and the central biblical theme of God's covenant, and the implications of these theological concepts for our life and witness in today's world. These reflections can lead us on to a common affirmation of faith in God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier, by whom we are created and sustained, to whom we have been reconciled in Jesus Christ, in whom our future is one of hope and not of despair.

A focus for contemporary confessions:human being in the image of God

A central challenge to faith and obedience today arises from the many-sided threats to human life, human dignity and the ecological support-systems by which our life is sustained. A recovery of the awareness of our common humanity as made in the image of God can give a fresh focus to our confession and help us both to name and to respond to this challenge.

Being human before God

The biblical concept of the image of God has often been misinterpreted in an individualistic way, or misused to justify exploitation of the created world and other living beings. Especially in the western world, the emphasis of the Reformation on the justification of the individual person has combined with an individualistic view of human life to make the image of God seem a quality belonging to the individual in herself or himself. It must rather be seen as the gift of a relationship to God which brings with it a calling to community and mutual responsibility. It should be understood in a trinitarian horizon, and in the light of Jesus Christ as the true image of the invisible God. He is the God who is for humanity and the human being who is for God and for others. The image of God refers to personal and social community. It speaks of the responsibility involved in cohumanity as living with and for God and each other. It reminds us that human beings are called by God to be mirrors of the love of God to each other - to be gracious neighbours, recognizing in other persons the image of God, the image of Christ. It also reminds us of the proper calling of humanity to be stewards, not abusers of God's creation.

Understood in this way, the affirmation of the image of God radically confronts every kind of exploitation, oppression and degradation of human beings, identifying these as a denial and defacing of the divine image. For the image is denied and defaced by the self-destructiveness and other-destructiveness of sin. Of this we are all guilty. But in Jesus Christ the image has been restored and promised to us anew: that renewal is even now provisionally and promisingly real in the Christian community, the Body of Christ. All the more reason, therefore, to be guided by the vision of the image of God as we seek in faith, hope and love to look on the often harsh and painful reality of our contemporary world and to discern the challenge of our time. We do not have to look beyond our Reformed family to find those who suffer from tyranny, exploitation and the denial of their dignity as created in the image. Our solidarity with them is a special reason for concentrating on this theme. At the same time, we have in view and wish to speak for all who suffer similarly.

The image of God is disfigured on our earth by military force, political oppression, racial and sexual discrimination. Christians in all parts of the world cry with Job: Where is God? Where can we experience God's power and presence? The suffering of the world is the strongest challenge to our faith in God the Father Almighty.

We confess in Jesus Christ God's self-identification with the suffering of humanity. God has taken the path of human pain with us and for us. God's Almightiness is the Almightiness of a love so powerful that it is capable of accepting powerlessness for the sake of the other, capable of suffering for the other. We tend to measure God against our conception of power. Just this conception has been refuted by God in the crucified person of Jesus Christ. God is apparently powerless and weak in the world; that is how God bears and accompanies the world and its history. Through the suffering of Jesus Christ the suffering human is presented to our eyes as the image of God. Through his resurrection, God's apparent powerlessness and weakness are recognized as an expression of God's limitless power.

Yet God's identification in Jesus Christ with human suffering does not imply any justification of the suffering that human beings inflict on each other, but rather its sharpest criticism. We confess the suffering Christ in entering our protest against the powers of money, armaments and racist structures which cause so much of the suffering of our world. We recognize in them sources of destructive violence. Therefore we side in the name of Jesus Christ with the victims of this violence. Our solidarity with them takes a double form with respect to their oppressors: we have not only to pray for their repentance and forgiveness but also to support active resistance against injustice and unjust structures in economics, jurisprudence and politics. We acknowledge that only out of the situation itself can it be settled what forms this resistance can and should take, and that we are not entitled to prescribe the form for the victims suffering violence. Nevertheless, we are convinced that it is only on the basis of a commitment to nonviolence that, where circumstances demand it, the hard decision for violent resistance can properly be made.

Church and state

Human beings created in the image of God belong to and live within the structures of human society and have to fulfil their calling there. This brings before us the issues of the relationship between church and state and the catholicity of the church. The church finds its identity and continuity in space and time in the witness to the universal Lordship of the crucified and risen Jesus Christ whose authority extends to every area of life, and therefore relativizes the claims of the state. The matter is expressed in these words from "The Statement on the Relationship between Church and State in the Present-day Japan", adopted in 1983 by the 33rd general assembly of the Church of Christ in Japan:

...the church believes that no authority or power can ultimately violate the lordship of Christ... The church is to be administrated by the officers elected according to the church law and order, which the church by itself enacted based upon the Word, in order to fulfil God's missions. The law of this world is not to interfere in the church law which is under the lordship of Christ, and to violate its autonomy. Further, the law of this world is not to limit, restrict or direct the matter of our conscience and the content of our faith. Therefore, the order of this world must obey the words of God: "Render to God the things that are God's." When the lordship of Christ is violated, the church is allowed and commanded to act in obedience to Christ who is the true Lord; we should "obey God rather than man" (Chapter 1).

Or again, from the recent Kairos document drawn up by Christians in South Africa (1985):

A government which is hostile to the common good in principle is acting against the interest of the people as a whole and permanently. This is the clearest case where the very policy of a government is hostile towards the common good and where the government has a mandate to rule in the interest of some people rather than in the interests of all people. Such a government would in principle be irreformable. ... There has not been any doubt about our Christian duty to refuse to cooperate with tyranny and to do whatever we can to remove it (Kairos Document 4.3).

The question of the relationship between church and state presents itself in many different forms for the member churches of the Alliance. Our churches live in many different political settings, have to deal with various types of political order, and cover the whole spectrum from small minority Free churches to large Established churches. But the general principle is valid: whatever the situation, the church's responsibility is not to be subservient to the state, but to remind the state of its calling by God to uphold justice and to protect and preserve human community. The church respects and supports the state in these undertakings, but must also be prepared to call it to order when the state neglects or violates its responsibility for all its citizens.

The catholicity of the church means that each church in its own situation is bound in fellowship, confession and commitment to all members of the body of Christ. This prohibits churches from recognizing the principles of "national security" or "national interest" as having absolute value, above all when they are invoked to justify cruel and oppressive internal policies or external aggression. The elevation of "national security" or "national interest" to absolute status has its bitter price in the denial of human rights and the burden imposed on the poor of the earth by the diversion of resources to armaments. Against such ideologies, churches are called to work and struggle for justice, for cohumanity among all whom God has created of one human blood.

Cohumanity of women and men

The doctrine of the image of God has further particular relevance to the cohumanity of women and men. The wholeness of personhood and human community depends on a relationship of mutual and equal dignity between the sexes. This is a question of a subtly different order from the others addressed here. It may appear less dramatic than the themes of racism, church and state, and (as follows below) our human responsibility for the created world. Yet it is also more radically pervasive - because it raises the issue of the ordering of human life at every level of family, work and social organization. Although the issue is by no means new, only in recent decades have significant numbers of our member churches come to consider it. For many, the issue is still controversial. Therefore, we pose it as a question - but as one meant most seriously:

We confess that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female (Gal 3.28). Yet in our life together do we not contradict this confession by the multiple ways we perpetuate the dependence of women on men? Do we not deny our common baptism if we continue to exclude women from full participation in the life and work of the church, especially if we exclude them from ordination to eldership and/or ministry? Must not the church rather appeal to society at large to respect the dignity and employ the talents of men and women, and itself set the example? Many of the churches in Warc have taken this step; others still hesitate. Should there not now be an end to hesitation? Are not our sisters, like our brothers, made and redeemed in the image of God, witnesses alike to God's grace and calling? Can they not also be called and empowered by the Spirit of Christ to proclaim the gospel, administer the sacraments, and care for the souls of the people of God? The image of God also has to do with the task and calling of Christian ministry. Our Reformed churches have since the Reformation rejected the idea that this calling could only be exercised by celibate males. Can we any longer justify its restriction to men?

Creation

Finally, the concept of the image of God recalls us to the place of human beings in the whole creation of God. The image is not reflected in the individual human being in herself or himself alone, but in human beings in relation to the creation. God has called the universe into being as an arena for the display of the divine glory. But we are well on the way to stuffing this arena full of weapons of mass destruction, to threatening it mortally with the risks accompanying nuclear technology, to altering radically its pattern and order with the help of modern genetic technology. What was meant to be the theatre of God's glory risks becoming the scene of apocalyptic horror. The image of God on earth is already obscured, not only by the use but also by the preparation and deployment of these weapons and technologies. As God's image, human beings are responsible for the life of the creation, for the richness and integrity of its manifold species and forms of life. This responsibility calls us today to recognize that our traditional, anthropocentric view of the world has led us to claim an authority which does not belong to us. For the world can remain God's creation only so long as it is appreciated and respected and held in reverence as the place in which the Wisdom of God "plays" (Prov 8.22 ff.). Humanity has its part in this "playing" but has no right to take the game over. For the "game", the "play" has its own rules, set not by humankind but by God. Of all living beings, only humankind has the ability to come on the scene to spoil the game, to break the rules and insist on making the game its own. Our confession of God as Creator and of our own formation and calling in God's image brings with it the awareness of certain boundaries set for our research and technology. If human beings are to remain in the image of God, owing their identity not to themselves or their own achievements but to the God "who ever preserves the world by his counsel and eternal providence" (Heidelberg Catechism, Question 26), we have to respect these boundaries and dare not transgress them.

God's covenant promise: case study on a Reformed theme

God's covenant relationship to humankind

God graciously offers a covenant relationship to humankind. Again and again God calls into being a pilgrim people. God faithfully keeps this promise in all generations, opening the possibility of praise and liberation to all who will hear. As followers of Jesus Christ and members of his church, we of the Reformed tradition are among those called to respond to this divine initiative through a life of doxology and responsibility for promoting justice, peace, and the integrity of creation.

But we, who know God's promise well, have repeatedly abandoned, rejected, perverted, or ignored it. We know best of all that the new covenant to which we are heirs was bought with a price which even the prophets did not fully foresee: the cross of Jesus Christ. There is thus a radicality about our covenant faith. We are challenged to a life of freedom from all that would stand in the way of the work of God's grace in and through us. There is a sense in which the covenant promise is best understood by those who suffer most, who live under constant threat, who have sacrificed much for the gospel. Before reflecting further on this, we would offer these lines as a testimony to God's covenant promise:

"God has established a covenant for the whole world. As a free gift of grace, we embrace the covenant through faith in Jesus Christ. In company with all our brothers and sisters in Christ, we are called today to a new faithfulness.

"We confess our sin and failure; we are part of the evil of the world, of its violence, neglect, injustice. We have not sought God's rule in the midst of life. We have not been loyal to the church, the body of Christ on earth.

The God who is Creator of the world and guides its history, whose power dazzles our imagination and whose wisdom transcends our grasp, has come to us in seeking weakness, in Jesus Christ, born in a stable. A suffering Saviour, crowded [sic] to a cross, he died for the sin of the world. He rose from the dead, restoring the broken covenant. He is our peace, and reigns in the power of love stronger than death.

We are given to receive and share in the Lord's love for the world, to fulfil the commandment of love, for God and for our neighbour, for the world created and redeemed in Jesus Christ. We are enabled in the power of God's spirit to witness to the good news in Jesus Christ, to do good, to seek justice and peace, to preserve and care for the world, until all people shall be free.

God alone is our security. In life and death, our chief comfort is that we belong to God through our faithful Saviour Jesus Christ."

What would it mean for our Alliance community of confessing churches and confessing movements to bear witness by its very existence to God's covenant promise? The theme of the covenant has been central in much Reformed theology and we have much to gain by recovering that tradition. But we must also seek in doing so to hear afresh the testimony of scripture, which has often been distorted by our applications and appropriations of the idea of God's covenant.

The theme of the covenant in the history of Reformed theology

Very early in our tradition the theme of the covenant was given a prominent place. Zwingli, Bullinger and Calvin, for example, all appealed to it in defence of the practice of infant baptism. They likened baptism to circumcision as the sacramental sign and token of membership in the covenanted people of God. Calvin also gave special attention to the eucharistic association: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood." He emphasized in his controversy with the Lutheran Westphal that the communion cup signifies the covenant sealed by the blood of Christ, not simply the blood itself, but the promise therein conveyed to us.

The 16th and 17th centuries developed and articulated the concept of the covenant in three significant directions.

First, the main line of dogmatic theological development in the Reformed tradition in the late 16th and 17th centuries moved increasingly in the direction of making "covenant" a cornerstone of its theological systems. The distinction came to be drawn between a "covenant of works" made by God for Adam and Eve in paradise and a "covenant of grace" announced immediately after the Fall (Gen 3), proleptically realized in the Old Testament history and finally established in Jesus Christ. This is the perspective, for example, of the Westminster Confession, but also of the greatest Reformed dogmatician of the mid-17th century, John Cocceius. In this tradition the covenant was not generally understood as an "alliance" or "contract" between God and humankind, but as a divine stipulation, self-commitment and promise according to the pattern; " I shall be your God and you shall be my people. Therefore follow my commandments and in them you will find life." This corresponded closely to the authentic biblical understanding, but came to be obscured by the two other developments of major significance in the same period.
Second, there developed the idea of "covenant" as a solemn, mutually binding obligation - in effect a "compact" or "contract" into which peoples or groups entered with God, their rulers or each other. Some historically significant examples come out of the Scottish church:
1. the Scottish "Covenant" of 1581 - sometimes described as the "Second Scots Confession" - which was a mainly anti-Roman Catholic manifesto subscribed by the king and nobles of Scotland announcing their commitment to reject Roman Catholic heresies;
2. the "National Covenant" of 1638 in which leading representatives of the Scottish church committed themselves to resist the ecclesiastical policies of Charles I and Archbishop Laud; and
3. the "Solemn League and Covenant" of 1643, by which the Scottish church and parliament bound themselves in alliance with the English parliament in opposition to King Charles and for the reformation and restoration of the churches of England, Wales and Ireland according to the model of Scottish Presbyterianism.
In the subsequent conflicts following the Restoration of the monarch in the person of Charles II in 1660, the upholders of the tradition of Presbyterian resistance were known simply as "the Covenanters", the name by which they are remembered to this day. But while their motto was indeed "For Christ's Crown and Covenant", the covenant from which they were named was primarily the covenant to which they had committed themselves and which in many cases they sealed with their blood as martyrs for their faith. This "covenanted commitment" was less to God's covenant as witnessed in the Bible than to the covenant into which these people had entered as their response to the promise and challenge of the gospel. This idea of "covenant" went on to make history, not least through Rousseau's articulation of the "social contract" underlying all human society, a major theme of the Enlightenment and a fundamental basis of modern democracy. But it represents at best a reduction of the divine covenant to a personal and social commitment on the part of the individuals or groups.
Third, a certain use of covenant language, which had first been developed in Anabaptist circles in the 16th century, found a new home in the 17th century in the Puritan and Congregationalist branches of the Reformed family. The point of similarity to the Anabaptists was the sense of the need to separate Church and State, to see and project the church as a voluntary covenanted community of the converted - living, certainly within the context of "the world", yet distinguished from it. The Congregationalist tradition came to emphasize and focus upon the local "gathering of the saints" as a covenanting fellowship, ever and again articulating its faith and commitment, not by the mere reception, recitation and repetition of given formulae, but by new affirmations of belief which were to be tested for their authenticity. Special importance was given to the statements of belief and doctrine which ministers submitted on their call to pastoral charges. This "covenant community" was based on "covenanted fellowship" between its members and between minister and congregation.

Contemporary usage in the Reformed family

These historical traditions and their subsequent development since the 17th century have on the whole obscured rather than clarified the biblical sense of God's covenant. Too often the term has been used in association with closed communities regarding themselves as especially privileged. It is all too easy to slip into the assumption that we have set up the covenant, that it belongs to us, that it gives a special place to our particular group, that we are - in contrast to others -a special "covenant people". The use of the idea of the covenant associated with the "laager" mentality of Afrikaner Reformed Christians in South Africa is an especially clear case. Here the covenant is regarded as a bargain entered into with God to ensure victory over the black inhabitants of the land, and the Afrikaners regard themselves as a new chosen people, a new Israel. Less sinister, but equally misleading, is the common assumption that the biblical concept of the covenant can properly be invoked to solemnize human undertakings and commitments of an ecclesiastical, legal, economic or otherwise contractual nature. Use of the "term "covenanting" in church union negotiations is particularly open to misunderstanding unless this unbiblical derivative of the original term is carefully explained and related to the divine promise to and claim upon the people of God.

Behind all these problems lies a profound misunderstanding of the biblical word berith. It is regularly translated by such terms as, in English, "covenant", "alliance", "federation" or "compact"; in French, "alliance" or "féderation"; in German, "Bund"; in Spanish, "pacto" or "alianza". All of these terms, with their legal, diplomatic, commercial and economic associations, are generally understood to refer to a "contract" entered into by partners on mutually acceptable conditions. But that is not what the Old Testament berith or the New Testament diatheke means. These both speak of a disposition, commitment and requirement established by one party or person for another, or for others. God's covenant is not a contract which is offered to us for our agreement: it is God's gracious disposition which establishes the basis for God's relation to us and our relation to God. This becomes apparent if we listen afresh to scripture.

Listening again to scripture

God's covenant promise is a theme which appears in a variety of contexts in scripture. In the Old Testament, God establishes a covenant relationship with Noah, promising the preservation of creation and of human life (Gen 9); with Abraham, promising him descendants and making him a blessing for all humankind (Gen 12-17); with Israel at Mt Sinai, promising to be their God and choosing them as God's own people (Ex 19-24; Dt 5); with David, promising to establish his house as a permanent dynasty for Israel.

The Sinai covenant has often been distinguished from the other Old Testament covenants as being binding on both God and Israel. It has been understood as a mutual, reciprocal covenant in contrast to a promissory covenant which is only self-obligating. However, this distinction may be overdrawn, and may obscure a more basic truth about the biblical concept of covenant: God's gracious actions on behalf of creation and humanity, and the constant need for our grateful and faithful response to God.

In each of these Old Testament contexts, it was God who initiated and established the covenant, creating a relationship with the person or group and making a commitment to them and on their behalf. Even when Israel was accused of breaking the Sinai covenant, it was not their covenant with God which they broke, but God's covenant with them (e.g., Dt 29.25; Jer 22.9; 31.32). Although obedience to God's law was expected of Israel under that covenant, the covenant itself was understood as God's - God's promise, election, and offer of relationship with Israel.

Furthermore, some response or responsibility on the part of the people was implicit at least even in the so-called "promissory" covenants. God's promise to Noah, never again to destroy all flesh by a flood, did not mean that God would never again act in judgement against human wickedness. Thus, implicit in that covenant promise was the obligation of humanity for righteousness. Abraham and his descendants were similarly expected to claim God's covenant promise through the sign of circumcision. The history of the Davidic kingship in the books of Samuel and Kings is ample testimony that the descendants of David had a responsibility to God in relation to God's covenant promise to David.

Thus, in these as well as the Sinai covenant, the relationship and promises offered by God had to be claimed, and response had to be made, by the people for whom those covenants were made. Even the new covenant (Jer 31.31-34) offered to God's people after the Babylonian exile required a response. What was new was that God promised to make possible that response by writing the law on the human heart.

In the New Testament, the eucharistic saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood" (I Cor 11.25; Mt 26.28; Mk 14.24; Lk 22.20), indicates that God's covenant promises are now offered in Jesus Christ to all humankind. Through Christ's self-sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins, the new covenant promised in Jer 31.31-34 has been fulfilled (Hebrews 8-10), Yet this new covenant, and its promises of salvation, must also be claimed. Our acceptance of God's gracious offer - our commitment, response, and witness to new life in Christ - must also be made and renewed again and again.

Implications of the covenant theme for the World Alliance of Reformed Churches

Against this biblical background, the initial question arises again: What might it mean for our community of confessing churches and movements to bear witness to God's covenant through its existence? Clearly, our member churches and Christians within them bear witness to God's covenant promise in their particular situations through their acts of confession - spoken, written and lived. But can we not as an Alliance also bear witness together by bringing to global expression the myriad articulations of God's promise in the responses of these confessing communities of faith? Can we not as an Alliance give common testimony to God's gracious offer of relationship with and for all humanity?

As we seek to articulate such a common testimony, it is important to remember that we do not thereby enter into a covenant with one another. Rather, we bear witness and make a common response to God's covenant. We should remember as well that in claiming God's covenant promises we do not take them as our own special possession. Rather, we proclaim them as offered to and for all humanity, including all Christians and all persons of other faiths, and to and for all creation.

Therefore, it is also important for the Alliance to support actively such initiatives as that of the World Council of Churches for a "Covenant for Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation." To this end, the Alliance has already addressed the World Council offering clarification of the biblical sense of the covenant promise. But we need also to continue reflection on the issues of justice, peace and the integrity of creation both within the Alliance and in dialogue with all Christians.

A common affirmation

The following affirmation is an attempt to testify to the faith which we share as a Reformed family. It is offered as an example of how such a common affirmation might be articulated. This particular affirmation is organized under the rubrics of the apostolic benediction:

the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,
the love of God, and
the fellowship of the Holy Spirit.

As with all human confessing, it is partial and inadequate. Yet it is offered to the glory of God and as a witness to our common faith - mindful of the many situations in which human beings bear witness to that faith in grave adversity, trusting in God's promised faithfulness and in that alone:

"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with us all."

We praise you O Christ!
You are God with us, Word made Flesh.
Your grace frees us from the burden of sin.
In your humanity we know what it is to be human.
You reconcile to God those turned against God and one another.
You liberate the oppressed.

We confess our guilt
when churches teach the inferiority of brothers and sisters,
when confessors of faith are persecuted,
when advocates of human freedom are silenced,
when we are silent while men, women and children are tortured.

In gratitude for your liberating grace we pledge to become
reconcilers in church and world,
witnesses to the beauty and dignity of all your children,
healers of the wounds of the oppressed,
creators of just structures in church and society.

We praise you, O God!
Who in your love created the world to mirror your glory,
who in your image gifted woman and man with reason and creativity,
who in your wisdom endowed nature with its delicate balance,
who in your providence gave resources sufficient for all.

We confess our guilt
when we are silent while the arms race threatens to destroy the planet,
when we plunder the earth depriving future generations,
when we live greedily at the expense of others.

In gratitude for your providential love we pledge
to oppose making and using nuclear weapons,
to stand against uses of technology which endanger life,
to adopt lifestyles which guard resources for future generations.

We praise you, O Holy Spirit!
You sustain and renew all life.
You assure us that we belong to Christ.
You call us into a community of obedient service.
You open our ears and hearts to the Word.
You nourish us to fullness of life through the sacraments.
You empower us to declare the gospel against all oppressive forces in church and world.

We confess our guilt
when we fail to read the signs of the new age,
when we despair in the face of overwhelming evil,
when the powerless are stripped of human dignity,
when our sisters are denied their equality in the body of Christ,
when we stand divided at the table of the Lord.

In gratitude for your sustaining presence we boldly pray:
Fill us Holy Spirit!
Teach us to walk in your freedom rather than our certainties,
that we may be in your light rather than our darkness,
that we may live in hope rather than despair,
that we may embrace life rather than death.

Amen and Amen.