Some time ago, I had an extended e-mail conversation with my sister about “objective truth.” I share it with you because it is conversations like these that push me to organize, crystallize, and articulate the things that would otherwise float randomly suspended in my mind and life like sugar added to cold iced tea. As you may have experienced in the happy hunting ground of Bible Belt faith, drive-by questioners of your religious tradition are often more interested in confirming what they have already decided than in listening to and learning from what you have to say. That’s why I most often choose to extend the conversation before answering such pointed questions as “Do Presbyterians believe in objective truth?” so that I can fully respond to the questions behind the question, as well as the fears and the assumptions already held.

Yes, this is irritating to the questioner, and assumes some things about him or her. But it also provides an opportunity to carry on a conversation rather than exchange monologues. Hesitation number two (in addition to the above) is the difficulty of expressing what I believe without bringing in my own assumptions about what the person I’m answering believes. I find it most helpful and least incendiary to stick to what I believe, however difficult this may be, so here goes:

Yes, I believe in objective truth, here on earth, in the midst of all of life’s uncertainties, complexities, and mystery. Jesus Christ, as God’s unique son, as salvific gift to all humanity, incarnate as God’s living Word, revealed through God’s inspired written word, experienced through the Holy Spirit, is the foundation of all truth I experience as objective. Institutional religion has the potential and the record of being both one to clarify and confuse that truth. Nevertheless, the gathered body of worshiping and serving believers is our best hope of more clearly understanding objective truth.

The watchwords of the Reformed tradition are, “Ecclesia Reformata, Semper Reformanda”, often translated, “The Church reformed, always reforming.” It is not the truth that needs reforming, but our understanding of it. One hundred fifty years ago, most in the church held that slavery was an institute and practice that was supported by and in keeping with the fundamental teachings of scripture. Since then, the Presbyterian church has reformed. Little more than fifty years ago, most people in the Presbyterian church believed that only men could and should exercise elected and ordained leadership in the church. Since then, the Presbyterian church has reformed.

These reforms did not come as a result of democratic or secular pressure, or from bowing to the least common denominator. They came when people of faith, who demonstrated the gifts of the Holy Spirit, challenged the practices of an institution that sought to be guided by the same Spirit. Peter’s similar experience is recorded in Acts 10 & 11. Not all people or churches believe the same thing about these two reforms. That does not necessarily mean that one knows more of God’s objective truth than the other. The Book of Order says it this way: G-1.035 Differences of Views

[5] That while under the conviction of the above principle [“That truth is in order to goodness…”] we think it necessary to make effectual provision that all who are admitted as teachers be sound in the faith, we also believe that there are truths and forms with respect to which men of good characters and principles may differ. And in all these we think it the duty both of private Christians and societies to exercise mutual forbearance toward each other.

This mutual forbearance and its practice are the struggle and gift of community life within congregations and denominations, as well as between people of diverse faith backgrounds.

© 2006 Todd Jenkins