HoD: does track six need a remix?

                            We believe that Jesus Christ has become the propitiation

                            for the sins of the world, that he rose from the dead, and

                            that he ever liveth to make intercession for us.

                            Sixth doctrine of The Doctrines of the Methodist New Connexion (1838)

 

                            We believe that the Lord Jesus Christ has by His suffering

                            and death made an atonement for the whole world so that

                            whosoever will may be saved.

                            Sixth doctrine of The Doctrines of The Salvation Army

 

                            Irrevocable: not to be recalled, withdrawn, or annulled

                             Gage Canadian Dictionary

 

T he release of a new edition of The Salvation Army’s Handbook of Doctrine has sparked a lot of thought, started many conversations, and has elicited several questions.

 - Why publish a new edition of the Handbook of Doctrine?

 - Do we need a new edition of the Handbook of Doctrine?

 - Was there anything wrong with Salvation Story?

 - Can Salvation Story and the new Handbook of Doctrine work together? (They are similar; there are a few differences. Put together do the two texts make each other stronger? Reflecting on the changes I have observed throughout the text, I still have not read the entire book, was there anything else that could have been reworded or reworked?)

 - Could/should a doctrine or doctrines have been reworded or reworked?

 - Will this edition be reworked or reworded in a generation or two, or less?

I’m sure there are questions I have not thought of, I have not asked yet, or that wouldn’t even come to mind for me. The following thoughts are centered on some things I’ve read about, thought about, and conversations I’ve had with friends I love, respect, and look up to.

During our time at CFOT in Winnipeg, my sisters and brothers in Christ / in training and I had a two-part class entitled “Salvation Army Theology.” I enjoyed the class. We took a comprehensive look at various theologies and schools of thought that fall under the umbrella of Christian Theology. We learned about Church and Salvation Army history. The bulk of the class consisted of looking at The Doctrines of The Salvation Army, their history and basis in scripture. The lectures and notes were informing. Discussion was lively. Learning and thinking was accomplished.

One very lively discussion was about our sixth doctrine and the fact that it may be missing a word or two. To be honest, I didn’t think much about it at the time. I saw what was being said and could understand it; but it wasn’t a deal breaker for me. It’s still not a deal breaker for me, but I do believe it’s worth talking and thinking about.

I believe the word “resurrection” or words “and resurrection” should be added to our sixth doctrine. There may be people who agree or disagree. There may be people who feel a certain way about another doctrine or two. Whichever side of the debate or debates we fall on, there’s no denying the importance of having these conversations and thinking through these elements of our spiritual journeys.

Let’s care enough to read, study, think, and ask questions; it’s all part of the journey.

Let’s dive in…

Both Salvation Story and the new edition of Handbook of Doctrine contain The Doctrines of the Methodist New Connexion. This is more than appropriate. Our first General and cofounder William Booth was an ordained minister of the New Connexion whose doctrines were said “to be ‘those of Methodism, as taught by Mr. [John] Wesley.’” (Salvation Story, Pg.: 130). In fact, the writers of Salvation Story, referring to The Salvation Army’s statement of beliefs, state: “While their origin is nowhere stated, their roots are clearly in the Weslyan tradition. The articles bear a striking similarity in words and content to Methodist New Connexion doctrines…” There are differences, but they are “slight editorial modifications, chiefly of punctuation…” (Salvation Story, Pg.: 130).

I agree and disagree. Both sets of doctrines are valuable and it’s easy to see the minor differences between the two. However, there is a scriptural and theological thought lost in translation from the sixth doctrine of The Methodist New Connexion to the sixth doctrine of The Salvation Army: the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I am definitely not the first person to notice this or say anything about it. I won’t be the last person to notice this or say anything about it if it does not change. It strikes me as more than odd that we would not allude to or make explicit reference to the resurrection of Jesus Christ in our doctrine of the atonement. Lining up the two sets of doctrines, where relevant, we can clearly see “he [Jesus Christ] rose from the dead” in the sixth doctrine of the Methodist New Connexion and no allusion to or statement of Christ’s resurrection in our sixth doctrine; why?

Jesus Christ was adamant about His resurrection: “Then he began to teach that the Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.” (Mark 8:31, NRSV, emphasis mine).

In his letter to the Corinthians Paul was very clear about the importance of Jesus Christ’s resurrection: “…if Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation has been in vain and your faith has been in vain.” (1 Corinthians 15:14, NRSV). The Apostle goes on: “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.” (1 Corinthians 15:17, NRSV).

Jesus Christ’s resurrection is the central belief and most important element of Christianity. All other thoughts, elements, and beliefs flow from and follow the proclamation that Jesus Christ is risen from the dead.

N.T. Wright, leading and respected voice in Christian thought and New Testament studies in particular, has written numerous volumes of works. The most relevant for this topic is Surprised By Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church. Very early in the book Wright makes the point of how “impossible it is to account for the early Christian belief in Jesus as Messiah without the resurrection.” (Pg.: 48). Without Jesus Christ’s resurrection “we are of all people most to be pitied.” (1 Corinthians 15:19, NRSV).

Before someone says it or thinks it: I know; we mention the resurrection in our eleventh article of faith. It seems to me, however, with the content and within the context of the doctrine to be referring to the general resurrection of believers. With no prior mention of Jesus Christ’s resurrection in our statement of faith, have we put a scriptural and theological cart before the horse? To paraphrase Paul: “If Christ has not been raised from the dead; we, nor anyone else, will be raised from the dead.” (See 1 Corinthians 15).

Our sixth doctrine, as stated, leaves us with a penal substitution-like view of the atonement. If we were to include an explicit reference to the resurrection of Jesus Christ it would make it clear that Christ’s work through the atonement is not limited to the “punishment” side of things. We have removed the word “propitiation,” but we are left with a propitiatory-like understanding of the atonement. The suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is about the forgiveness of sins and new creation; it’s a very real and spiritual renewal.

Propitiation, like or dislike it, is only half the story. We need the resurrection of Jesus Christ to complete the entire story and work of the atonement. To have one without the other would be like reading the Gospels and leaving out Christ’s resurrection or watching a film trilogy without the third film. We would only have part of the story. We would be lost. Christ’s suffering and death has paid for and erased our sins. Christ’s resurrection has broken the power of sin.

In The History of The Salvation Army: Volume II, 1878-1886 Robert Sandall writes: “By the Deed Poll of 1878 the doctrines of The Salvation Army therein contained were declared irrevocable.” (Pg.: 129). In fact, “The Foundation Deed of The Salvation Army, 1878″ is an appendix in this volume and William Booth wrote: “…the religious doctrines professed believed and taught by the Members of the said Christian Mission are and shall for ever be as follows:…” and the doctrines are listed. (Pg.: 288).

Why?

Commissioner Charles Baugh wrote a short volume/commentary on our doctrines, published in 1950: We Believe:- The Doctrines of The Salvation Army. In chapter one, entitled “Unchangeable Doctrines,” he writes: “…not the slightest desire has thus far been shown by those in authority to change or modify our doctrines. Neither can they be changed. They remain and ’shall for ever be’ unchanged.” (pg.: 7).

Why?

No one would accuse The Salvation Army of not believing in Jesus Christ’s resurrection. Every relevant section on our sixth doctrine in every edition of our Handbook of Doctrine and Salvation Story includes references to Christ’s resurrection being vital to the forgiveness of sins and the work of the atonement. We read about the resurrection in scripture. We sing about the resurrection. We preach about the resurrection. We, like every man, woman, and child on the face of the earth depend on the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Why not make the logical move and include “resurrection” or “and resurrection” in our doctrine of the atonement?

Our sixth doctrine is not wrong or heretical as stated. However, it would be so much more Biblically accurate, and therefore so much more powerful, if an explicit reference to Jesus Christ’s resurrection were included in the actual statement and language of the doctrine.

“Christ the Lord is risen today, Hallelujah!

 Love’s redeeming work is done; Hallelujah!”

  

Writer: Mark Braye and his wife Nancy are officers in Essex, Ontario, Canada. They have two children, pictured above, Hannah and Micah. The four of them love to play and watch Sesame Street.

             

7 Comments to HoD: does track six need a remix?

1. Hi Mark…

   Thanks for your post.

   I agree with you that this doctrine is in need of urgent change. The omission of any reference to the resurrection is a critical mistake and needs to be corrected. I don’t see any need to apologise for this. You are right in saying that this is central to the Christian faith, and however much it is stated in the HoD (whichever edition you choose to refer to) unless it is in the Articles of Faith it remains seriously problematic.

   As for the quote from Commissioner Baugh… that is, frankly, laughable. I must go and look that one up…

   Thanks for a thoughtprovoking post.

   Adam
Adam Couchman on May 24th, 2010

2. Adam, thanks for the feedback; always welcomed.

   Commissioner Baugh’s short volume has value; I hope it doesn’t look like I was trashing it. That being said, it’s too bad it seems it can only be “those in authority” who can “modify” and make our official statements of faith more Biblically accurate. Chapter one’s title says a lot more than the two words it uses.

   markbraye
markbraye on May 26th, 2010

3. I’m wondering how Baugh’s statement squares with doctrine #1?

   Seems to be placing the doctrines on a level with scripture, if they are “unchangeable.”

   It’s also kind of ridiculous, since they obviously didn’t spend a lot of time working on these doctrines. The fact that there is no mention of Christ’s resurrection just proves the point. If you’re going to claim something is that perfect, you’d think you would have slaved over it for a long time.

   I don’t think this is a healthy understanding of doctrine. We need to have a bit more humility in recognizing the limitations of our attempts to summarize the truths of the gospel. To say that these articles are forever unchangeable implies that there’s nothing more to be said. Even Catholics wouldn’t go for something like that - they might not be willing to alter past statements of an official nature, but they will always supplement them with new insights (which can often take things in quite new directions).

   James
James on May 26th, 2010

4. ‘The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the words of our handbook of doctrine stand forever’ it seems.

   Craig G.
Craig Gaudion on June 5th, 2010

5. Well written Mark, very interesting. Regarding:

   “Jesus Christ’s resurrection is the central belief and most important element of Christianity.”

   I don’t particularly agree with this statement. I do believe that the resurrection is half of our most central belief, but I believe that Christ’s death is the other half. When either either side is omitted we rob ourselves of Christ’s true achievement.

   So, that said, I do feel that the addition of ‘and resurrection’ to doctrine #6 could be beneficial, but if we’re going to talk about that doctrine, I’d much prefer to chat about how the ‘whosoever will may be saved’ is being forgotten in our Army’s day to day practical mission

   In Christ,

   Tim
Tim Girling on July 8th, 2010

6. Commissioner Baugh’s comment does seem to hold some sway though as my understanding is that the International Doctrine Council does not actually have a mandate to change the doctrines!

   Graeme
Graeme on July 10th, 2010

7. I know I’ve come late to this discussion - but a couple of points.

   When I was in Training (Messengers of The Truth - Australia Eastern Territory), we had a doctrine tacher - Major Bram Lucas - who continually said ‘We have 1 doctrine, but 11 articles’. He would vigourously correct us when we referred to a doctrine number …

   So… the entire doctrine, when taken in its’ entirety, does mention both death and resurection. The 11th article is just as much part of the 6th article. Both are incomplete without the other as they are all - with the other 9 articles - one doctrine.

   As it is, it makes perfect sense, and there is a logical argument moving from article 1 through to article 11.

   We do not need the resurrection to find salvation. The 6th article as it is elludes to the fulfillment of the OT sacrificial system of forgiveness. The sacrificial lamb never came back to life on the alter, but the people were forgiven. We need the resurrection to give us hope. This is the distinction between us and sects like the Saducees in Christs’ day. That is why Paul said ‘we are of all men most pitied’, if we do not believe in the resurrection - because we have salvation without hope. Even the pagans had hope of an afterlife.

   Just a few thoughts.

   Graeme Randall
Graeme Randall on August 31st, 2010

Leave a comment