Recovering Doctrinal Integrity II: The Rule of Faith

This third essay in the series addresses the section of the Articles of Religion that are known historically as the Rule of Faith. The Rule of Faith identifies the ultimate authoritative source for the church from which all other teaching and practice must be judged. In the original Thirty-Nine Articles this section contains two statements on the authority of Holy Scripture and one on the place of ecumenical creeds. They comprise a total of seven sentences plus a list of the books of the Bible. The Rule of Faith for the Church should be that simple and that easy to locate.

Article VI – Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation Article 5 Abridged Version

<The Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of faith or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the Holy Scripture, we do understand those canonical books of the Old and New Testaments of whose authority was never any doubt in the church. The names of the canonical books are:

Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, The First Book of Samuel, The Second Book of Samuel, The First Book of Kings, The Second Book of Kings, The First Book of Chronicles, The Second Book of Chronicles, The Book of Ezra, The Book of Nehemiah, The Book of Esther, The Book of Job, The Psalms, The Proverbs, Ecclesiastes or the Preacher, Cantica or Songs of Solomon, Four Prophets the Greater, Twelve Prophets the Less.

And the other Books, as Hierome saith, the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine; such are these following:

The Book of Judith, Baruch the Prophet, The Book of Tobias, Jesus the Son of Sirach, The Third Book of Esdras, The rest of the Book of Esther, The Fourth Book of Esdras, The Book of Wisdom, The Song of the Three Children, The Prayer of Manasses, The Story of Susanna, The First Book of Maccabees, Of Bel and the Dragon, The Second Book of Maccabees.

All the books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive and account Canonical.>

The GMC follows the example of the Methodists in America since 1784 by omitting any reference to the apocryphal books. The argument I hear most frequently for the omission is that including them in the Articles gives them a higher status than they deserve; but read the Article. The plain sense of the words is exactly the opposite. The purpose of their inclusion is to forbid them from being applied to establish any doctrine. 

These books are commonly read by Christians. I read and study them. They are available in most every translation of the Bible. Some Christian traditions refer to them as deuterocanonical—a second canon. The original words of Article V deny them deuterocanonical status and refer to them merely as other books.

These other books, or apocrypha, are useful for the Christian in the study of life and manners. They may be illustrative of God’s acts among his people in the intertestamental period even if they are not an actual record of such. They are not the inspired word of God—they are not Holy Scripture. By omitting this section of the Article, it is as though the Church has not evaluated apocryphal literature and makes no claim one way or the other.

Most pastors and Sunday School teachers have encountered the person who has discovered one of the lost books of the Bible and wants to know why the Church has been hiding this. The redacted portion of the Article is the part that declares the Church did not lose or hide anything. The apocryphal books have been studied. Some have benefit for Christian study, but not for doctrine.

If we continue to avoid the reference because we are afraid it might be misinterpreted so as to give them higher status than they deserve, then we are falling into the same trap as 1784: We are more concerned with opposing a possible heresy than promoting a Christian truth. Furthermore, the new paragraph 104 in the Traditional Doctrine and Discipline of the Global Methodist Church gives the additional safeguard the canonical books are the plumb line “against which all other authorities must be measured.”

The questions ought to be: Is it true that these books do not constitute a second canon? Is it true that these books are not to be applied to establish any doctrine? Is it true that these books may be read for example of life and instruction of manners? If this is so, then we should recover our doctrinal heritage and recover the language to the text.

All of this can be resolved by adding one sentence from paragraph 104 of the TDD to the last line of the first paragraph of Article VI so it reads, “The canonical books of the Old and New Testaments are the primary rule and authority for faith, morals, and service, against which all other authorities must be measured. The canonical books are…”

Article VII Of the Old Testament Article 6 Abridged Version

<The Old Testament is not contrary to the New: for both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to Mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and Man, being both God and Man. Wherefore they are not to be heard, which feign that the old Fathers did look only for transitory promises. Although the Law given from God by Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral.>

This Article has survived intact from the original Thirty-Nine.

Article VIII. Of the Three Creeds Omitted from the Abridged Version

<The Three Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanasius’s Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles’ Creed, ought thoroughly to be received and believed: for they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture.>

While this Article is still missing from the Global Methodist Articles, the intent of the Article is restored in the TDD through a new paragraph 105: Foundational Documents for Our Doctrinal Standards. That paragraph has the effect of amending Article VIII by replacing the Athanasian Creed with the Definition of Chalcedon. It is a wise substitution.

I like the Athanasian Creed. Something about me likes proclaiming anathemas…something not good I expect. I must work on that. The Athanasian Creed is almost 700 words trying to explain what cannot be explained. The Definition of Chalcedon is far more helpful and is accepted in the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican, and Reformed churches.

TAKEAWAYS

Everything that is accomplished in paragraphs 104, 105, and 106 of the TDD regarding the Rule of Faith can be more easily attained.

• Restore the original Articles in their original language.
• Add one sentence to the end of the first paragraph of Article VI
• Amend Article VII to substitute “Definition of Chalcedon” for “Athanasian Creed”.

Even if we retain the new paragraphs, and there is good cause to do so, this corrects the inconsistency of removing a premise from one place while retaining it in another. The Rule of Faith becomes eight sentences instead of its original seven.