To Creedalize or Not to Creedalize
Every once in a while the suggestion is made by some one that if we are to avoid the fate that has befallen the earlier Protestant bodies, with their present internal divisions, their varied and antagonistic groups, their conflicting schools of interpretation, and their higher criticism, we must adopt an official statement of belief, a confession of faith, or creed, as variously phrased, though in the ultimate these expressions mean but one and the same thing.
The contention is that such a course is demanded for disciplinary reasons, to uphold the standards of the church, and to maintain the unity of the faith among the ministry. The dangers, yes, the sinister possibilities of a fixed formula are freely acknowledged by the advocates of such a measure. But they assert that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
That there is ground for concern in certain of these matters is frankly acknowledged, but the remedy suggested is, by this writer, considered inadvisable and perilous, and in direct violation of the unvarying principle that has guided all through the years of our denominational history. The argument set forth really destroys itself, for the various Protestant denominations each have their disciplinary creeds. Yet notwithstanding, they are themselves the subject of those dire internal defections that some ask us to escape by a means that has manifestly proved ineffective where adopted and tried.
The remedy lies not in a creed, but in the eager, reverent pursuit of unfolding light which God purposes to have shine upon our pathway more and more unto the perfect day. This light is to be found in the open, frank, united investigation of truth that was followed by the pioneers of this cause. It is a mistake to think that among the founding fathers there was uniformity of belief on all points of doctrine and prophetic interpretation, as even a casual study of the records will disclose. This very fact should in itself enhearten us. But there was a spiritual unity that bound all together in one co-ordinated whole.
In the early days of this movement there was no hesitancy about candidly examining the positions submitted by a brother believer. Discussions were not always confined to the oral form, but were sometimes conducted through our papers, earnest and honest differences appearing therein. There did not seem to be a haunting fear, in those days, of disintegration through frank, honest discussion of differences. We may well learn from them, for their premises were fundamentally sound. In this way inaccuracies were detected and laid aside; and real strength, growth, and unity ensued. There was no thought of a creed, for they had and followed something infinitely better.
Our seeming need today for some extreme provision is to no small degree the outgrowth of the abandonment of the study habits and attitudes of the pioneers. There are patent reasons for much of this change. In the development and expansion of our work a deepening financial and quota pressure has come upon men, with an accumulation of detail and a draft upon time which have unavoidably altered the study life of the ministry. Other facts and factors have of course had their bearing. In any event, our attitude today toward study, research, investigation, and group consideration, is totally different from theirs.
Beware of the adoption of a creed. Let us seek a real remedy for our needs, not an expedient that will disappoint and fail. One deadening thing about a creed is the stagnation it produces. Crystallizing and codifying the truth received, it drives its stakes. It becomes static, rigid, orthodox, and looks askance, if not with hostility, upon any advance study by men as loyal and true as the ultraconservatives who ultimately control in a situation of that kind. This leads to repression and a kind of odium, if not actual persecution, of those in whose being burns the spirit that animated the pioneers in their search for ever-increasing light and truth. Additional light is never inimical to the light already received. If truth had to be buttressed and walled about, it could never have survived the onslaughts of the centuries. Give it a free field and no favors or repressions, and it will triumph gloriously.
L. E. F.
Balanced Rations
Mission stories and reports are appropriate and needful. A missionary people is entitled to periodic recitals of achievement, and givers of money and of workers to a recounting of results. But such reports, however wholesome, can never take the place of spiritual food for the soul, gleaned directly from the word of God. Reports must not be permitted to supersede such spiritual nutriment, for under such a procedure spiritual anemia will ultimately result, and this will in, turn stanch both the springs of activity and of giving. These two act and react, the one upon the other. Men's treasures are placed where their heart interests lie. We must give balanced rations.
L. E. F.
A Passion for Truth
God does honor and bless every honest, sincere effort to speak in His name, and that despite man's faulty knowledge of His will, and regrettable imperfections in the exposition of the word: But this in no wise furnishes a legitimate excuse for either carelessness or failure to study and to probe as far as we are able into the intent of His revealed will. Pride of workmanship should lead every minister to strive for the greatest accuracy and fidelity possible in this world of limitations. We need to develop a positive passion for truth.
Truth is dishonored by any conscious repetition of error. The honest man will scorn to distort or conceal a fact in order to make a point. Such ideals will lead us to the most accurate, faithful, spiritual exposition of the word that prayerful study and careful investigation can produce. Especially is this principle operative in the case of prophetic exposition, or in a discussion of the signs of our times, wherein historic facts and contemporaneous events are involved. We should see to it that our authorities are dependable, and that our quotations are accurate and not wrenched out of either context or intent.
There is too much loose handling of quotations. Some are prone to use a citation, or a historic or current event, if it fits neatly into a pleasing presentation. In ninety-nine cases out of a hundred it will never be challenged, by the average auditor. But this very fact—that we will unlikely be challenged—may foster carelessness unless there be a persistent passion for truth, a pride of spiritual workmanship, and the highest personal regard for the immaculate ethics of truth. This in no wise hampers or restricts our effectiveness. But it does give a greater freedom and a consciousness of unassailable authority. It is a priceless privilege to witness with the full backing of truth.
L. E. F.
