ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

...

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

enumerates them in the following order: "the nature of sin, and of its results and entailments;" "God's free grace in Christ offering salvation . . . to all who, in penitence and faith, would call on God, through Christ, for pardon and salvation; "the character and work of Christ, his person and sacrifice; "justification by faith;" "the necessity of the new birth;"" the certainty that rejecters of the proffered grace “cannot see the kingdom of God;" and "the assurance of the completeness of the work of the soul's practical redemption." "These several points, (themselves an indivisible unity, with their necessary and natural implications,) are the essential doctrines of Methodism-these and no others-which all of its ministers are bound in good faith to cherish and defend; but, beyond these, and if nothing repugnant to them is held or taught, it allows to all the utmost freedom of thinking and speaking." "The exposition and defense of these doctrines in Wesley's Sermons, and in his didactic and controversial writings, have been generally accepted as at once correct in substance and felicitous in manner; and, therefore, they are accepted as, in a secondary sense, "standards of doctrine;" although mingled with these are extraneous matters which nobody is required to believe, and which not a few decidedly and openly reject. For more than a hundred years the Methodist pulpit and press, its public prayers and exhortations, its "experiences," and its hymns have embodied its theology in living forms.” *

These emissions from "memory and conviction," shed some light on the real answer to the question, "What are the Methodist doctrinal standards?" In a secondary sense, at least, we learn that they are to be found in Wesley's writings, in the issues of the Methodist press, and in Methodist hymns-all of which may be thoroughly studied at leisure.

Wise men change their opinions, and the learned critic seems to have changed his since April, 1879, at which epoch he held that the Methodist Episcopal Church had a "definite documentary system of belief, by law established," and "that whatever is contained in the Articles of Religon,' or the Ritual, (as it was in 1808,) is part of the creed of Methodism, which it is presumed that the whole Church agrees to as agreeable to the Word of God, and which every minister engages to teach, as of di

*Independent," December 1, 1881.

vine authority." But he did not then believe, nor does he now, that the "definite documentary system of belief, by law established," comprised in the Articles and Ritual of 1808,"contain all of the commonly accepted and well-ascertained doctrines of the Gospel, as held and taught by the Methodist Episcopal Church; and therefore that the proper guardians of the Church's orthodoxy must care for and protect other articles of faith than those formally legalized by the organic documents of the body." This earlier and more thoroughly considered deliverance in the editorial department of the "National Repository" of April, 1879, p. 363, is historically justifiable.

66

Beyond the articles and the ritual, we certainly have no documents of any kind that can be referred to as decisively authoritative in matters of theological beliefs." The Methodist Episcopal Church has, from the beginning, held and taught more than is contained in any of its formally recognized standards."

"

If we ask whether this surplus may not be found in John Wesley's Sermons and Notes on the New Testament, and whether those are not included among the doctrinal standards of Methodism, Dr. Curry makes answer that "other documents, as the Doctrinal Tracts,' Wesley's Sermons, and his Notes on the New Testament, once had a kind of official recognition as standards of doctrine; but they were never legally accepted as such, nor was there at any time general acceptance of some things taught in them, and they have ceased entirely to be so recognized." +

Wesley's writings are no longer standards of doctrine to American Methodists-" were never legally accepted as such," not even as to the doctrines which are distinctive of that form of evangelical Arminianism of which, under God, he was the founder! How much of historical credibility there is in this statement, we will shortly endeavour to point out. Meanwhile, if "one asks for the standards of Methodist doctrines, what must be the answer?" Dr. Curry answers his own query in the words: "First, we find twenty-five Articles of Religion." So far all is clear. All parties are agreed that among the Methodist doctrinal standards are:

I. The Articles of Religion. These are first indicated as

*"National Repository," April, 1879, p. 360.

+ Ibid.

under the protection of constitutional law in the first Restrictive Rule. But the Articles are entirely silent on "such important subjects as the Christian sabbath, the Scripture doctrine of marriage, and the whole subject of eschatology, beyond the naked fact that there is to be a future life, judgment, and everlasting life after death." True-and they are also silent on the subject of the "Witness of the Spirit," and on "Christian Perfection," on both of which Methodist theology lays special emphasis. For these and other reasons we concur with the opinion that "it seems most likely that these articles were never intended to serve as a complete system of doctrine, and it is very certain that the accepted doctrines of Methodism have always been wider than the ground covered by them."*

So far as we can ascertain from the histories and biographies of Methodism, no corporate attempt has ever been made to formulate "a complete system of doctrine." Methodist preachers have always been too busy in disseminating what they hold to be the essential doctrines of Christianity to undertake an achievement of that kind. Scholarly divines, belonging to national Churches, may find congenial employment in fabricating complete doctrinal standards. Methodists have always found such a task to be supererogatory. They had expositions of all the essential doctrines of God's word in the writings of Wesley that satisfied their most pressing spiritual needs while only "United Societies," in other Churches; and when they organized themselves into an independent and distinct Church of Jesus Christ they adopted an Episcopal form of government, and with it an abridgment of the Articles of the Anglican Episcopal Church, and thus became the Methodist Episcopal Church. "Our Articles of Religion" were superadded to "our present existing and established standards of doctrine" at the Christmas Conference of 1784.

But some writers argue, and others impliedly admit, that the Articles constitute our sole denominational standards.

The Rev. J. Pullman, in an elaborate article on "Methodism and Heresy," insists that John Wesley and the General Conference of 1784 intended "the Articles of Religion to be the only authoritative creed of the Church under which a minister should be tried," and "that the law of the Methodist

*"National Repository," April, 1879, p. 359.

Episcopal Church knows no heresy outside of the Articles of Religion"! According to this theory, a Methodist preacher may deny the doctrines of the direct and indirect testimony of the Holy Spirit to the believer's adoption into the family of God, and also the doctrine of entire sanctification, and yet not be guilty of heresy. Both of the writer's postulates are discordant with the facts of history, and with the moral convictions and judicial procedures of the Church.

Henry and Harris, on page 69 of their admirable work on "Ecclesiastical Law and Rules of Evidence, with Special Reference to the Jurisprudence of the Methodist Episcopal Church," say:

Again, 207 of the Discipline provides that when a minister or preacher holds and disseminates, publicly or privately, doctrines which are contrary to the Articles of Religion of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and will not solemnly promise to abstain from disseminating such erroneous doctrines, in public and private, [he] shall be dealt with preliminarily as when guilty of gross immorality. Yet, notwithstanding his promise not to disseminate such erroneous doctrines, he is liable to be dealt with canonically before the Annual Conference.

In the revised edition of the same work, (1881,) p. 68, after the words, "Articles of Religion," follows this clause: "or established standards of doctrine," thus taking the authors out of the class of theorists who identify our established standards of doctrine with the Articles of Religion, and who repudiate all

others.

Dr. Miller, one of the clerical counsel of Dr. II. W. Thomas, whose self-sought expulsion from the ministry of the Methodist Episcopal Church has occasioned much discussion by the secular as well as by the religious press, rejects all authoritative standards except the Articles. In his demurrer to the validity of the charges against his client, he urged that there are no authorized standards in the Church in relation to the endless punishment of the wicked; that what are the established standards of doctrine, other than the Articles of Religion, has never been defined by any General Conference; and that there is no established standard of doctrine other than the Articles of Relig ion, or "such doctrine as the one clearly stated in the Book of Discipline, and protected by the first restrictive rule." *

'Independent."

The fact that the General Conference has never formally declared that the doctrinal standards of the European Methodists are also the doctrinal standards of the American Methodists does not prove that they are not. The fact that they are has not been disputed until lately. IIad the attempt to deny it been foreseen it might have been guarded against by formal enactment; but as it was not, the consecutive General Conferences rested on the self-evident truth.

Dr. D. A. Whedon also states that the General Conference of 1784 “received Wesley's abridgment of the Articles of the Church of England, which continue to be their standard of doctrine to the present day." He does not, however, maintain that this abridgment is the only standard of orthodox teaching, but adds the following testimony:

"The theology of the Church is thoroughly Arminian, as it has been from the beginning. In this it agrees with universal Wesleyan Methodism. .. Wesley's doctrinal Sermons, Notes on the New Testament, and other writings, have been its standards of Arminian orthodoxy; while the rigid examination to which all candidates for the ministry are subjected is its chief security that only what is deemed correct and sound in doctrine shall be preached in its pulpits." †

The Methodist doctrinal standards include the first four volumes of Wesley's Sermons, his Notes on the New Testament, and also the "Large Minutes." This proposition will not be challenged so far as the Wesleyan Methodist Churches in Great Britain, Ireland, and the Colonies are regarded. In Great Britain and Ireland the Trust or "Model Deed," of all the churches, which is slightly modified from time to time as social changes may render necessary, contains the following clause:

Nevertheless, upon special trust and confidence, and to the in tent that they and the survivors of them, and the Trustees for the time being, do and shall permit from time to time, and at all times for ever, such persons as shall be appointed at the yearly Conference of the people called Methodists, held in London, Bristol, Leeds, Manchester, or elsewhere, specified by name in a deed enrolled in Chancery, under the hand and seal of the Rev. John Wesley, and bearing date 28th of February, 1784, and no others, to have and enjoy the said premises, in order that they may therein preach and expound God's holy word, and perform all + lbid., p. 171.

"McClintock & Strong's Cyclopedia,” vol. vi, p. 157.

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »