During
that sojourn I came to the conviction that the entire project of “big tent”
evangelicalism is failing. Whereas broad evangelicalism used to mean John
Stott, now it encompasses Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, and Gregory Boyd. The tent
pegs of evangelicalism’s big tent have been moved out too far. It can no longer
support the weight of its own contradictions.
So, in
August of 2013 I ran to confessionalism. Specifically my ordination was
transferred to the Presbyterian Church in America and I became the Lead Pastor
of a PCA congregation. The experience has been like finding an oasis in a
desert. It has been like discovering a GPS after meandering blindly through an
unknown country. Too dramatic? It does not feel that way to me. It is nearly
impossible to effectively put down error and nurture unity within a church
whose minimal statement of faith is only able to identify the grossest of
heresies.
A church
needs something more than a statement of faith that encompasses mere
Christianity. As one of my fellow pastors put it recently, “a church’s
confession needs lots of words.” Indeed. For example I know of an Old Testament
professor who rejects much of the Bible but nevertheless insists on affirming
inspiration. What he means by “inspiration” is radically different from what
the church has historically affirmed. For this reason, a church which desires
to maintain a biblically faithful and historically orthodox doctrine of
Scripture must now be careful to use “lots of words” in explaining it. A church
desiring to be doctrinally conservative can no longer state that they believe
the Bible to be “inspired, truthful, and authoritative” and expect to properly
guard its doctrinal boundaries. It sounds ridiculous perhaps. But such is the
state of mere evangelicalism.
There are
at least three reasons why I joyfully fled to a confessional church and
denomination.
1. Only confessionalism is able to adequately
guard a church’s doctrine.
Paul
writes to Timothy that the church is the “pillar and buttress of the truth”
(1Timothy 3:15). Elsewhere he tells his young apprentice to “guard the pattern
of sound words that you heard from me” (2 Timothy 1:13). One of the essential
qualifications of the elder is that he must be “able to teach” (1 Timothy 3:2).
What is more, “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he
may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who
contradict it” (Titus 1:9). I argue that a comprehensive confession of faith is
what makes this possible. “No creed but the Bible” is simply not realistic. It
fails to reckon with the fact that most Christians do not know the Bible well
enough to have a properly formed system of doctrine which can defend against
error. An excellent confession of faith, like the Westminster Confession of Faith or London Baptist Confession, properly summarizes Scripture thus
equipping the church with not only a tool for instruction but a buttress
against error.
2. Only confessionalism is able to
adequately guard a church’s unity.
A church
is not simply an umbrella organization for various individual’s ministries and
hobbies. A church is not a convention hall for loosely connected groups of
evangelicals. Confessions of faith act as a remedy against the balkanization of
a local church. Essential to a church’s unity is agreement in doctrine and not
just of the merest sort. A church cannot limit its statement of faith to that
of the average para-church ministry and expect to maintain its unity for the
long haul.
A few
years ago I explained in a staff meeting why our leadership would not be
endorsing a particular book. The book in question was then, and continues to be,
enormously popular. The issue was discussed in three consecutive staff meetings
with plenty of push back from several. My perspective was backed up by two
other pastors on staff as well as some of the elders. But there was nothing in
our rather mere statement of faith that spoke to the particular errors of the
book in question. As a result no consensus was ever reached, no final decision
made, and division rose as a result. Paul makes clear in Romans 16 that those
who cause division in a church are not those who guard sound doctrine but those
who seek to undermine it.
Without a
clear confession of faith a church will a) be ruled by whoever has the most
influential voice or b) break into various camps holding mutually exclusive
positions on important matters. What it will not have is durable unity.
3. Confessionalism is properly
aspirational.
I owe this
insight to Carl Trueman’s book The Creedal Imperative. Confessions of
faith are not first and foremost defensive. Rather they represent the
aspirations the church holds for its members. Trueman writes: “[Confessions of
faith] represent that which the church aspires to teach its members…If a church
has a six-point creed or confession, she essentially communicates to her people
that these six things, and only these, are important. Everything else is so
minor that it forms no part of its identity” (177, 178). A church ought to
desire something more for God’s people. A church ought to desire its members to
be mature and maturing in their knowledge of God’s powerful and profitable
Word. A church ought to aspire to more than simple agreement on the broadest
possible doctrinal categories. It ought to aspire to greater things than simply
“majoring on the majors.” Again, Trueman writes: “A good confession becomes not
a stick with which to beat people…but an exciting map of the territory of
biblical truth and something to which to aspire” (180).
None of
this means that confessional churches are safe from the machinations of the
enemy and the sins of its own members. We are still south of heaven after all.
Confessional churches can and do struggle mightily. However, a confessional
church within a confessional denomination is far better equipped to deal with
the inevitable threats that arise.
No comments:
Post a Comment