A reader wrote to us recently and asked about my political agenda and the political agenda of the RPCNA (see Comment). That’s a good question, and worthy of a more thorough answer than one could supply in an editor’s note.

This reader’s question came in response to her informal survey of Witness content over a year. Most often, though, when someone questions the editor’s agenda, it is in response to a particular article he/she did not agree with. Only rarely will someone ask about agenda when they tend to like the content as is. Again, though, interest in the purposes of a denomination’s magazine are quite reasonable.

My agenda is rather simple. I desire this magazine to be both a servant to and a good representation of the RPCNA. I want to uphold our standards as they are, to reflect our congregations and agencies as they are, and to encourage us toward the goals we have set for ourselves—goals present in our own doctrinal and ministry credos. These aren’t just my personal goals; they are written into the purpose statements of our board and our publications, and they are the conviction of each of our board members and staff.

That all seems uninteresting on its face, and uncontroversial. But it’s not easy. At times our articles have exposed some uncomfortable tensions between belief and practice, or some significant disagreements about important issues. A few times we’ve been criticized for reporting the truth. And there are some who would prefer that we adopt a different agenda, to try to change the denomination’s standards by first changing hearts and minds through the magazine.

To bend to such pressures, or, worse, to adopt that strategy, is extremely dangerous. During our tenure as editors, we’ve witnessed the terrible fruit, the divisiveness, distraction, and even heresy that results when a Reformed magazine decides to be more “progressive” in its beliefs than its own denomination. Being progressive is not my job. Putting an unbiblical hedge around our standards is not my job either. Those who don’t think that our doctrinal standards, as written, give us a lot to aspire to, haven’t read them lately.

It is a complex task to try to reflect all that in a couple dozen printed pages each month. It’s an impossible task, really. So we must try to work in a complementary way with your local congregation, your presbytery, and your denominational agencies. We’ve tried to keep the magazine well rounded, to keep it relevant, to keep calling all of us to what we have committed ourselves to. Rather than act as though we are a center of wisdom and knowledge, we try to herald the good work that is being done in our congregations and other entities. And we’ve tried to fill in the gaps or to point the way forward when we sit in a unique position to do so.

So that’s the agenda. If you had a question about what to expect, hopefully this article helped. And if we don’t stay on task, you’ll be able to point the way for us.