Home

Thanks to recent events, the whole business of the Church of God Declaration of Faith has become more important. Those of us who teach at Church of God institutions such as Lee University—even when that teaching isn’t theological in nature—are required to avoid teaching that which is contrary to the Declaration of Faith. Our ministers are required to periodically reassert their fidelity to the Declaration. This has essentially made the Declaration a fixed document; that fixture is something that is relatively new to our church.

That being the case, a group of professors at our church’s Pentecostal Theological Seminary have put together an article-by-article commentary entitled We Believe: An Exposition of the Church of God Declaration of Faith. They have done so in a very readable (not always academics’ strong suit) form. When I refer to “the author” or “the authors” in my own article-by-article commentary on the book (which appears below,) I am referring to the author of the specific commentary on the specific article.

With all that, my thoughts on the book are as follows:

• The book’s first chapter is a reflection on the opening statement of the “Declaration of Faith”: We believe. The author takes an approach that echoes the justification for changing the original English translation of the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds in the Novus Ordo Missae from “I believe” to “We believe.” He emphasises the communal nature of belief, which should put paid to the endless whining that churches like the Church of God overemphasise the individual and his or her faith. (The Novus Ordo Missae, formulated in Latin, never changed from the singular, but the translation reverted to the original in the last decade. The 1979 BCP does in one way in one place and another way in another.)
• The section on the Scriptures (Article I) puts the Scriptures on the high, inspired plane that they in fact hold. The Scriptures are not an artifact from the past but a powerful, present reality. Any revelation of the Spirit that comes must not contradict the Scriptures, which curtails extremes from both left and right. One interesting thing is that, since the Septuagint was quoted in the New Testament, the author states the “Paul would consider translations to be infused with the Spirit just like the original Hebrew or Greek,” which is a bold statement for someone outside of Eastern Orthodoxy. Another very interesting point is that he manages to get through the whole thing without getting into the issue of inerrancy; his position is that the veracity of the Scriptures is guaranteed by their inspiration.
• Turning to the Trinity (Article II,) the treatment of this difficult subject draws on some basic theology that many today across the spectrum would like to discard. I think, however, that the time has come to re-examine the whole issue of subordinationism, something I do at length in My Lord and My God: A Layman Looks at the Deity of Christ and the Nature of the Godhead. This is especially true in view of the rise of “functional subordinationism,” which I deal with (and is mentioned more than once in the book) in my piece Why Sydney Anglican Subordinationism is Lame.
• On Jesus Christ (Article III) the section starts with the following: “The heart of our faith is not a set of doctrinal statements. The heart of what we believe is a person.” The author also delivers a strong, non-Catholic pushback against a purely judicial view of the atonement, based on the Wesleyan roots of modern Pentecost. He is also uneasy with the Apostles’ Creeds statement “suffered under Pontius Pilate” because it detracts from the reality that all of us shared in the crucifixion of Our Lord.
• With Sin and Repentance (Article IV) we have as straightforward of a presentation on the topic as one could want. It is in some way reminiscent of the gospel presentations that we taught at Church of God Lay Ministries, and uses not only those Scripture verses but also those of the Comfortable Words in the Holy Communion, which additionally speak of the need of repentance after initial conversion.
• It makes sense that a discussion on justification, regeneration and the new birth (Article V) would pick up on the previous two articles. Here the author deals with two topics which Church of God ministers and laity deal with on a routine basis: the idea of unconditional perseverance (even when coupled with an Arminian view of justification) and the relationship between justification and regeneration, where the author uses adoption as a way of relating the two.
• The discussion on sanctification (Article VI) is a much needed clarification on two topics poorly understood by advocates and opponents alike of the whole concept of sanctification after salvation: what “perfection” really means in a Wesleyan context, and whether sanctification is an event or a process (the author posits that it has elements of both.)
• Turning to the related topic of holiness (Article VII,) this section does something that doesn’t happen very often in the Church of God, at least in this country: it avoids an extended discussion of the legalistic way in which the whole concept has been historically applied. Instead he equates holiness to a way of life which is in stark contrast to much of which passes for Christian behaviour.
• I discuss the topics of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit (Article VIII) and speaking in tongues (Article IX) in my work Born to be Alive: A Pentecostal Layman Looks at the Second Chapter of Acts. I think that the case for modern Pentecost would be strengthened—and given better historical continuity—if Pentecostal authors would make a stronger connection between the Baptism in the Holy Spirit and supernatural gifts and manifestations in general. The history of the church shows that you can have supernatural manifestations without the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, but once you have the Baptism in the Holy Spirit you will have supernatural manifestations. This is necessary in light of a lot of the radical cessationism that passes for “orthodoxy” these days.
• Concerning baptism (Article X) the author goes into a very detailed Biblical explanation of the subject that leans toward a more ordinance view of the subject (as opposed to a sacramental one.) He also gives a rationale for believers’ baptism, which I cover in my post Why I Support the Idea of Believers’ Baptism.
• The authors of the section on divine healing in the atonement (Article XI) waited until the very last to state that we—all of us—are anointed to pray for healing. If there is one thing that needs to be underlined in the Charismatic-Pentecostal world, it’s that “the anointing” is not restricted to just a few. As Bossuet pointed out, if we are Christians, and Christ means “the anointed one” we are anointed.
• The subjects of the Lord’s Supper and foot washing (Article XII) receive good, detailed Biblical treatment, which is a hallmark of the book in general. But, as is the case with baptism, the whole distinction between sacrament and ordinance isn’t really explained, a confusion compounded by the editor’s note at the end of the section and evidently one that goes back to the beginnings of the church. Sooner or later our church is going need to determine which we are doing, especially as it relates to the Lord’s Supper and our general adoption of Bill Clinton’s Eucharistic Theology–It Depends on What ‘Is’ Is.
• It is no surprise that our church takes a premillennial view of the Second Coming of Christ (Article XIII.) Going past that, the author takes the opportunity to include advocacy for a pretribulational view of the Rapture. As the editor’s note at the end points out, it is not necessary to be “pretrib” in order to be in conformity with the Declaration of Faith, something that Dr. F.J. May, a seminary colleague of several of the authors of the book, pointed out many years ago.
• It always amazes me that, in a culture as secular as ours has become, that so many glibly express the hope that someone they don’t like should “burn in Hell.” But the article on the last things (Article XIV) gives a Biblical view to push back against both the vindictiveness of our day and the sappy universalism that has plagued Christian churches in the past and still does today. It serves as a suitable wrap for the book, as this article does for the Declaration of Faith.

We Believe: An Exposition of the Church of God Declaration of Faith is a very nice treatment of a topic that has become important in the life of our church. One thing that would have been nice to include brief bios of all of the contributors, something that would have been useful to the reader and uplifting to the academics. The viewpoint diversity of the various authors—while not without risk for the whole enterprise—helps to make the book reflective of the fact that our church is not a monolith but a gathering of believers, each with his or her own gifts.