Why Do We Need Creeds?
Creeds and confessions are summaries of the doctrine that
Christians believe to be taught in the the Bible. For instance, if
we were to both read the New Testament and you were to ask me to
write down what I believe that it teaches about Christ, I might draw
up the following 7 point list:
1) Jesus is the only begotten Son of God
2) He was miraculously conceived of God, the Holy Spirit
3) He was born of the Virgin Mary
4) He was crucified, he died, and he was buried
5) On the third day after his crucifixion, he arose bodily from
the dead
6) He then ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of
God, the Father
7) He will come again to judge the living and the dead
If I wanted to be really pedantic, I might write down all the
places in Scripture I believe these points are being taught, thus
creating "proof texts" for my list. The above list is essentially
the same as the points taught in the Apostles Creed, one of the
earliest "standards" used by the Church to summarize it's beliefs.
The word "creed" comes to us from the Latin "Credo" or "I
believe" Both creeds and confessions are essentially recapitulations
or summaries of the teachings of scripture, but creeds tend to be
shorter and far less comprehensive and were usually developed to
address particular heresies. The 4th century Nicene Creed, for
instance was formulated expressly to combat a Christological heresy
called Arianism, which denied the deity of Christ and taught that He
was a created being (sadly this belief has been revived by modern
day cults such as the Jehovah's Witnesses). Some creeds such as the
Apostles Creed (the version we have today dates from the 8th
century) were originally intended to be used as statements of faith
to be assented to by new believers at their baptism. The church has
always had and used creeds as statements of faith -- for instance,
the Hebrew shema "Hear O Israel..." can be considered to be a creed
of the OT church. Indeed, only in this age has it become common to
assume that handing someone a Bible is a good answer to the question
"what do you believe?"
Most confessions on the other hand, date from the time of the
Reformation and are more comprehensive statements intended to survey
and reflect all of the important doctrines (particularly those
regarding salvation) taught in Scripture.
Confessions tend to divide the teachings of the Bible topically
rather than mirroring the Bibles own internal order, and as such
they are "systematic" in their presentation of theology. The
presentation of this theology is also from a "whole Bible"
perspective, so a teaching on the nature and attributes of God, for
instance, will reflect the completed revelation of the entire canon
of Scripture. Because of this, the process of "proof texting" every
doctrine is sometimes difficult if not impossible, because no proof
text can sufficiently encompass the whole testimony of the
redemptive historical message contained in the Bible. In fact most
heresies tend to be tied to one or more proof texts isolated from
their larger biblical context.
Confessions are frequently regarded as less important or
significant than creeds, because creeds are often viewed as
ecumenical reflections of the belief structure of the entire
Christian church rather than individual portions of it -- but as the
New Dictionary of Theology points out, this argument is less
substantial than it may appear:
"In this debate, confessions are often compared to their
disadvantage with the creeds, but the contrast is frequently
overdrawn. Most confessions were certainly productions of dividing
or divided churches, but so to was the Chalcedonian Definition.
Both confessions and creeds were formed to exclude erroneous
beliefs; both were historically conditioned by the heresies they
refuted. The creeds' limitations (e.g. none mentions the Lord's
Supper; they together contribute little on the atonement) and
obscurities (cf. 'descended into hell' in the Apostle's Creed, to
say nothing of the technical terms of Nicaea and Chalcedon) are
far more obvious than those of the confessions, which are normally
more balanced and thorough. If confessions are more controversial,
creeds are more minimal and have in practice lost more completely
than confessions their originally basic function as touchstones of
orthodoxy. This is however not true of the Apostles' Creed."
["Confessions of Faith" from New Dictionary of Theology,
Ferguson, Wright, & Packer, eds. IVP, 1988]
Catechisms, which are often included as part of the standards of a
church, were developed to systematically teach biblical doctrine. By
memorizing the questions and answers in a catechism, children and
adults learn the system of theology the church believes to be the
witness of scripture. Catechisms often go into greater detail on
specific points than confessions are able to, as is the case with
say the extended analysis that the Westminster Larger Catechism
devotes to the Lord's Prayer and Ten Commandments.
While Scripture is inerrant and normative because it's ultimate
author -- God -- is infallible, confessions are the products of
fallible men and thus it is entirely possible that they contain
error. It should not be assumed that because these men were capable
of erring that they necessarily did, however. It is possible, for
instance, that the Westminster Confession is an entirely accurate
(if not exhaustive) reflection of the doctrine contained in
Scripture. But regardless of whether confessions do or do not
contain error, only the Holy Scriptures are normative and inspired,
and as such confessions must never be viewed as having anything
other than a subordinate or secondary role.
Perhaps the greatest contribution of standards is in their value
as a means of preserving the unity of the Church. In theory, by
concisely setting forth that which the Church as a body believes is
taught within Scripture, confessions provide a standard that ensures
that the teachings of individual ministers will be in harmony with
the witness of scripture and the teachings of their fellow elders.
The prospect of schism and heresy is thus minimized and individual
believers may grow in knowledge without being tossed to and fro by
every contrary wind and wave of doctrine. Teaching will also thus be
uniform regardless of which individual church in a communion they
happen to be worshipping at. Standards also ensure that worship is
uniform and biblical, thus making worship intelligible to individual
members regardless of where they happen to be worshipping and
preventing the embarrassing possibility that individuals will be
prevented by conscience from worshipping in a church within their
own denomination.
In modern times the practice of subscription to standards has
become increasingly lax in most confessional denominations, and as a
result what an individual church member hears in a worship service
usually has more to do with the individual beliefs of a Pastor
regarding the teachings of the Bible, than the standards he has
subscribed to. In a world that places a premium on "newness" this
tends to mean that there is a trend away from "old fashioned" or
"dogmatic" doctrine and towards new interpretations. It also means
that uniformity of worship within a denomination is gradually
dissolving as worship in individual churches moves in different
directions in accordance with the tastes of the ministers and
congregation.
Finally, in looking at Standards, it is important to keep in mind
the intention of the authors. When we consider the Westminster
Confession, for example, it is good to remember that the individual
divines who drafted this great document were not primarily concerned
with matters of taste, but rather that they produce a document that
was as accurate a reflection of the doctrine they believed the Bible
taught as was humanly possible. To this great end they vowed:
"I do seriously promise and vow, in the presence of Almighty
God, that in this Assembly whereof I am a member, I will maintain
nothing in point of doctrine but what I believe to be most
agreeable to the Word of God; nor in point of discipline, but what
may make most for God's glory and the peace and good of His
Church."
May our own teaching be ever likewise constrained!
|