A further
look at the United Methodist Church’s Articles of Religion -- as stated in a
previous post:
The United
Methodist Church has several sources that historically define its “doctrinal
standards.” These include the church’s
Confession of Faith, the General Rules, John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes on the
New Testament and Wesley’s Standard Sermons.
Also, in this roster of foundational documents are the church’s Articles
of Religion. In 1784 when the American
Church was chartered, John Wesley provided these Articles for the church. Wesley had composed 24 statements, and the
American church added a 25th that was America-specific. They have always been authoritative in
Methodism and the church included them in its Discipline from 1790 on. The fourth article is:
Article
IV — Of the Holy Ghost
The
Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is of one substance,
majesty, and glory with the Father and the Son, very and eternal God.
The first
several articles work together to provide a strong Trinitarian
affirmation. This article is a simple restatement
of a large section of The Nicene Creed.
The early church controversy that the Council of Nicaea addressed had to
do with the nature of the Holy Ghost/Spirit.
The heresy stated that the Spirit was of inferior nature to the Father
and the Son, and that the Father issued the Spirit from the Father’s nature
alone. Nicaea affirmed that the Spirit
was of like nature of both Father and Son.
It stated that while there are separate persons within the mystery of
the Trinity, that the Three were at the same time One.
The
Methodist movement affirms and employs the Nicene Creed both as theological
statement and as liturgical element.
It is
interesting that for some the most troubling part of Article IV is the use of “Ghost.” The Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit issue is a result
of an effort to differentiate between the Third Person of the Trinity in the
New Testament and the references to the “spirit of God” in the Old. Some older translations even print “spirit”
in all lower-case letters in the Old Testament and resort to printing “SPIRIT”
or “HOLY SPIRIT” in all upper-case type in the New Testament. These folks offered “Holy Ghost” as a way of
differentiating between the two entities in print.
As is
often the case, the original reason for such practices got lost to memory. But, for a group of folks, because some of their old Bibles – and old
liturgical practices – used “Ghost,” they stubbornly adhered to this
usage. John Wesley, while fully
understanding the nature of the issue kept true to his preference for adhering
to ancient practices in the face of the modern.
He also maintained that “Holy Ghost,” as it appears in liturgical
pieces, is more poetic. He cites the
Gloria Patri and observes that “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to
the Holy Spirit…” provides a metrical stumbling block. He didn’t see it as an obstacle to Christian
understanding or practice. And, he further
notes, that for Methodist documents to use one term in some places and a second
in others does far more damage than an adherence to an established practice.
No comments:
Post a Comment