Why No Statement of Faith?

In the eighteenth century, Benjamin Franklin was acquainted with Michael Welfare, one of the leaders of the Dunkers, a religious sect first organized in Germany in 1708. The Dunkers were different and far more conservative than many religious groups both then and now. They sought to interpret and apply the New Testament as literally as possible. They rejected apostolic succession, emphasized the Lord’s Supper, and practiced trine baptism where the one baptized was immersed three times. “They saluted one another with a ‘kiss of peace,’ dressed in plainest clothing, covered the heads of women at services, anointed their sick with oil for healing and consecration, refrained from worldly amusements, refused to take oaths, go to war, or engage in lawsuits” (Handbook of Denominations 65). Consequently, the Dunkers, or Brethren as they are also known, were a very controversial group in colonial America.

            In his Autobiography Franklin relates a conversation he had with Welfare. The Dunkers’ beliefs were frequently misrepresented, so the patriot printer urged Welfare to consider publishing a statement of faith outlining the sect’s main doctrines. Welfare, however, resisted the idea and explained his aversion to religious creeds.

“When we were first drawn together as a society," says he, "it had pleased God to enlighten our minds so far as to see that some doctrines, which we once esteemed truths, were errors; and that others, which we had esteemed errors, were real truths. From time to time He has been pleased to afford us farther light, and our principles have been improving, and our errors diminishing. Now we are not sure that we are arrived at the end of this progression, and at the perfection of spiritual or theological knowledge; and we fear that, if we should once print our confession of faith, we should feel ourselves as if bound and confin'd by it, and perhaps be unwilling to receive farther improvement, and our successors still more so, as conceiving what we their elders and founders had done, to be something sacred, never to be departed from.”

            There is nothing wrong with committing one’s beliefs to writing. But a creed (from Latin credo meaning I believe) implies authority, and once written it will, whether intentionally or unintentionally, become a standard by which decisions of doctrine and practice are weighed. John H. Leith observed in his book, Creeds of the Churches, “Once creeds have come into being, they begin to shape history also” (3). That is precisely the danger that compelled Michael Welfare to reject Ben Franklin’s suggestion to publish a statement of faith for the Dunkers. Welfare and his Brethren believed that they had discovered the truth, but they wanted subsequent generations to look to the Bible for the basis of their faith and practice, not to a statement of faith written by fallible men.

            In recent times, even some churches of Christ, who have historically rejected creedal confessions, have posted statements of faith in their meeting places and on their websites. Is it wrong to let people know what to expect when they visit our assemblies? Of course not. Is it wrong to write down the main tenets we accept? No. But we must beware of following the world in codifying religious doctrine to distinguish ourselves from other religious groups. If someone wants to know what we believe, let us sit down and open our Bibles together. The scriptures are an all-sufficient source for religious doctrine (2Ti. 1:13; 3:16-17; 2Pe 1:3). God’s will has been fully revealed (Jude 3). We do not need any further revelation, condensation, or codification. What we need are open minds and honest hearts to read, understand, accept, and obey the word of God. God has already written us a creed. Let us be content with it. -JME