CONSENSUS AND
CREED
Everett
Thomas
Easter Sunday calls us once again
to confess the central truth of our
faith, that Jesus Christ is Lord.
Although we may debate other elements of
our faith, this creed first guided early
Anabaptists and is the core of Mennonite
discipleship around the world today.
But the status of other
parts of the Confession of Faith in a
Mennonite Perspective appears to be
unclear to many members of Mennonite
Church USA. That has created persistent
debate about the authority of the Confession
of Faith itself in these first years
of our new denomination.
Each side in this
debate occasionally caricatures the
other. Some imply that others misuse the
confession of faith as a litmus test for
correct belief. We claim that such use of
the document reduces it to a
"creed." The appellation is
usually meant derisively, as if the
document is misused as some kind of
church law.
On the other hand, some
imply that others view the Confession
of Faith as little more than the
opinion of the majority at one moment in
history. We claim that such a view of the
document empties it of any real authority
and allows church members to decide what
of the document fits their personal
beliefs today.
Both caricatures are
wrong and unfair. The Confession of
Faith is both eternal creed and
carefully crafted consensus.
How we view the
confession is the source issue from which
many other controversies derive.
Membership issues (who can be a member of
the church and who decides), academic
freedom, abortion, women in ministry, and
pacifism are some recent issues to which
the Confession of Faith has been
applied.
There is irony in this
simmering debate about the authority of
our confession. One survey showed that
while 84 percent of us consider Scripture
as the most important source of authority
in our congregation, only two percent
hold "creeds, doctrines, and
traditions" as the most important
authoritythe same importance
attributed to human reasoning and
understanding. The Holy Spirit, however,
was cited by 11 percent as the
second-most important authority (Faith
Communities Today, 2000).
So why all the energy
around how we view the Confession of
Faith? One clue is in the confession
itself. The introduction explains that
the current confession was adopted as our
"statement of faith for teaching and
nurture in the life of the church."
So here is a modest proposal for
partisans on each side of the debate.
For those who worry
that the truths in the confession are not
being earnestly taught by others: Talk
only about how the church can help those
with genuine questions toward faith in
Christ. Explain how the church can create
a nurturing space for genuine
exploration. Talk about grace.
For those who worry
that the confession is being used by
others as a graceless litmus test of
right belief: Explain how the church can
be clear about the cost of discipleship
when inviting unbelievers to faith. Talk
about truth.
Each of us on either
side of this debate begins from a
laudable point, of course. Those who want
the confession to provide certainties are
worried that our church is sliding away
from biblical truth and too easily
accommodates the sins of our culture.
Those who want less rigidity in the way
we hold church beliefs worry that sharp
boundaries will leave us devoid of grace
in the mysterious process by which
Gods Spirit moves in the hearts and
minds of believers and unbelievers alike.
Scripture speaks here
as John 1:17b reminds us that "grace
and truth came through Jesus
Christ."
There is grace in
consensus; there is truth in creed. This
Easter season we declare with absolute
conviction that Jesus is Lord. When we do
so, we also affirm that grace and truth
are both essentials of Jesus
lordship. As subjects of this Lord, we
are called to search our hearts and
consider whether we genuinely care about
the essential that seems most important
to other sisters and brothers whose
confession of faith we share.
Everett J.
Thomas is editor of The Mennonite,MC
USA denominational magazine, where this
editorial first appeared on April 15,
2003.
|