How Are They to Believe?

By Robin G. Jordan

For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them. But the righteousness based on faith says, "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?' " (that is, to bring Christ down) or " 'Who will descend into the abyss?' " (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.

For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

But how are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!" …So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. (Romans 10:5-15,17 ESV)

North America has a definite need for an Anglican body that upholds the beliefs and principles of the reformed Church of England and maintains its witness against the innovations in doctrine and worship that it rejected and disowned at the Reformation. The Anglican Church in North America has shown little inclination to take up the banner of confessional Anglicanism and to restore the Reformation formularies to a central place in the teaching and life of the Church. The ACNA does not share the view of the GAFCON Theological Resource Group that the Articles, while written in the midst of the sixteenth century debates about Christian doctrine, “remain critically important for the church today.” [1] In its Fundamental Declarations the ACNA treats the Articles much in the same manner as The Episcopal Church, which relegates the Articles to the “Historical Documents” section of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer. (It is noteworthy that the same Prayer Book is widely used in the ACNA.) Rather the ACNA has adopted the non-confessional Anglicanism of the Anglican Church of Canada and The Episcopal Church, which has done so much damage to biblical doctrine in these churches in the course of their history.

Already the Anglican Church in North America is doubled-minded in regards to the essence of Gospel teaching. Like the people of Israel in the time of prophet Elijah it limps along between two opinions with one part of the church preaching sacraments and good works and another salvation by faith. As Elijah drew to the attention of the people of Israel, they could not bend a knee to Baal and kiss him and also serve the LORD. “If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal, follow him” (1 Kings 18:21). Elijah then proposed a test.

“Then Elijah said to the people, ‘I, even I only, am left a prophet of the LORD, but Baal's prophets are 450 men. Let two bulls be given to us, and let them choose one bull for themselves and cut it in pieces and lay it on the wood, but put no fire to it. And I will prepare the other bull and lay it on the wood and put no fire to it. And you call upon the name of your god, and I will call upon the name of the LORD, and the God who answers by fire, he is God.’ And all the people answered, ‘It is well spoken.’ Then Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, ‘Choose for yourselves one bull and prepare it first, for you are many, and call upon the name of your god, but put no fire to it.’

And they took the bull that was given them, and they prepared it and called upon the name of Baal from morning until noon, saying, ‘O Baal, answer us!’ But there was no voice, and no one answered. And they limped around the altar that they had made. And at noon Elijah mocked them, saying, ‘Cry aloud, for he is a god. Either he is musing, or he is relieving himself, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.’ And they cried aloud and cut themselves after their custom with swords and lances, until the blood gushed out upon them. And as midday passed, they raved on until the time of the offering of the oblation, but there was no voice. No one answered; no one paid attention.

Then Elijah said to all the people, ’Come near to me.’ And all the people came near to him. And he repaired the altar of the LORD that had been thrown down. Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, to whom the word of the LORD came, saying, ‘Israel shall be your name,’ and with the stones he built an altar in the name of the LORD. And he made a trench about the altar, as great as would contain two seahs of seed. And he put the wood in order and cut the bull in pieces and laid it on the wood. And he said, ‘Fill four jars with water and pour it on the burnt offering and on the wood.’ And he said, ’Do it a second time’ And they did it a second time. And he said, ‘Do it a third time.’ And they did it a third time. And the water ran around the altar and filled the trench also with water.



And at the time of the offering of the oblation, Elijah the prophet came near and said, ‘O LORD, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, let it be known this day that you are God in Israel, and that I am your servant, and that I have done all these things at your word. Answer me, O LORD, answer me, that this people may know that you, O LORD, are God, and that you have turned their hearts back.’ Then the fire of the LORD fell and consumed the burnt offering and the wood and the stones and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. And when all the people saw it, they fell on their faces and said, ‘The LORD, he is God; the LORD, he is God.’ And Elijah said to them, ‘Seize the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape.’ And they seized them. And Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon and slaughtered them there” (1 Kings 18:22-41 ESV).

Like a double-minded man, a double-minded church is unstable in its ways (see James 1:8) It is not firm or steady and is subject to caprice. It is like a child, “tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine” (Ephesians 4:14 ESV). A church that is not of one mind regarding the essence of Gospel teaching can plant a hundred thousand churches and accomplish nothing since it offers life with one hand and takes it away with the other.

The late Philip Edgcumbe Hughes believed that the rediscovery of the Thirty-Nine Articles, after a period of neglect and depreciation, would do much to strengthen the Church in its teaching and its witness. [2] As the GAFCON Theological Resource Group notes in Being Faithful: The Shape of Historic Anglicanism Today, the Thirty-Nine Articles “have long been recognized as the doctrinal standard of Anglicanism, alongside the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal.” Their authority comes from their agreement with the teaching of Scripture. [3] The GAFCON Theological Resource Group goes on to note: “The Articles make no attempt to bind the Christian mind or conscience more tightly than Scripture does on matters of doctrine and Christian living. However, acceptance of their authority is constitutive of Anglican identity.” [4] They further note: “The Jerusalem Declaration calls the Anglican Church back to the Articles as being a faithful testimony to the teaching of Scripture, excluding erroneous beliefs and practices and giving a distinct shape to Anglican Christianity.” [5]

Thirty-Nine Articles, agreeing as they do with the teaching of Scripture, offer a single-mindedness and stability that is lacking in the Anglican Church in North America.

In The Thirty-Nine Articles: Their Place and Use Today J. I. Packer and R. T. Beckwith identify four functions that historically the Articles were intended to fulfill. The first function was to back the Church of England’s claim to being “a true apostolical church, teaching and maintaining the doctrine of the apostles.” For the English Reformers catholicity and apostolicity were matters entirely of doctrine. [6]

The second function Packer and Beckwith identify was “to safeguard the truth of the gospel, for the good of souls, the welfare of the church itself, and the glory of God.” “The Articles were intended to ensure that the gospel of justification by faith and salvation by grace,” they write, “so long lost before the Reformation, should not be lost to the church again.” [7]

The third function was “to bring unity and order into the church…in the realms of both doctrine and discipline.” The Articles “were meant to guard the pulpit as the Prayer Book guarded the reading desk,” Packer and Beckwith note. “They were also meant as doctrinal standards for interpreting the Prayer Book.” [8]

The fourth function was “to set bounds to the comprehensiveness of the Church of England.” “They were meant to ensure that all Anglican clergy, whatever their views on other matters,” Packer and Beckwith further note, “should unite in teaching an Augustian doctrine of sin and a Reformed doctrine of justification and grace - should, in other words, unite in proclaiming what the Reformers took to be the New Testament gospel.” [my emphasis] [9]

Packer and Beckwith conclude that these four jobs still need to be done today as in the past. The Thirty-Nine Articles are, just as the catholic Creeds are, still able to perform these tasks. [10]

In its wording of its Fundamental Declarations the Anglican Church in North America has circumvented the use of the Articles to fulfill these four very important functions in that body. The result is the double-mindedness and instability seen in the ACNA.

Philip Edgcumbe Hughes opens the first chapter of his Theology of the English Reformers with these words:

“In England, as in other countries, the Reformation of the sixteenth century was in its essence a spiritual movement flowing from the rediscovery of the gospel of divine grace to which the pages of the Holy Scriptures bear testimony.” [11]

In the Anglican Church in North America the gospel of grace that was rediscovered in the sixteenth century is in real danger of being lost again. Multiplying churches only makes sense if it serves the cause of the gospel. New churches are more effective in reaching the lost and evangelizing them than existing ones. However, if the message that a church is proclaiming is not the gospel, then any multiplication of churches is to serve human vanity. It certainly does not fulfill Christ’s commission to his church: “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. (Mark 16:15 ESV)

Endnotes:

[1] Nicholas Okoh, Vinay Samuel, and Chris Sugden, General Editors, Being Faithful: The Shape of Historic Anglicanism Today, (London: The Latimer Trust, 2009), 36.
[2] Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, “The Thirty-Nine Articles: A Re-Statement in Today’s English - Preface,” Theology of the English Reformers, (Abington, PA: Horseradish, Publisher, 1997), appendix.
[3] Okoh, Samuel, and Sugden, Being Faithful, 35.
[4] Ibid., 35.
[5] Ibid., 36.
[6]James I. Packer and Roger T. Beckwith, The Thirty-Nine Articles: Their Place and Use Today, (Vancouver BC: Regent College Publishing 2007), 67.
[7] Ibid., 67.
[8] Ibid., 68.
[9] Ibid., 68-69.
[10] Ibid., 69-70.
[11] Hughes, Theology of the English Reformers, 29.