Towards a doctrine of Scripture

There is a danger in any area of Christian thought that we talk past one another, objecting to caricatures of what another Christian thinks, rather than to what they actually think. It is a tragedy whenever it happens, because it means that careful understanding (which is the grounds for charity) is replaced with a climate of suspicion. So we need to express what we think with great care, and that is as much about affirming what we do believe to be true as it is about denying what is not true. If we are not careful both to affirm and to deny, the danger is that we (i) hear someone affirm something, (ii) deduce that they must therefore affirm something else, when (iii) in fact, they deny that thing. We then conclude that we don't agree with them, when in fact we are disagreeing with an inference that we have drawn, but our sparring partner would not. So we fall out with a straw-man, but we have just committed identity theft. That straw man shares a name, birthday and appearance with a real live Christian; even though our straw man has stolen that Christian's identity, it is the Christian we fall out with.

Now let's apply this to the doctrine of Scripture.

For those who have not yet met these fine statements, there are two documents out there that were agreed by about 300 evangelical theologians in 1978 and 1982. Those gatherings took place in Chicago, so they have become known as the Chicago statements. They are:

The Chicago statement on Biblical Inerrancy

and

The Chicago statement on Biblical Hermeneutics.

Their great strength is that they contain both affirmation and denial.

The other place to turn, for an Anglican church, is to our own foundation documents. The 39 Articles of Religion are still the doctrinal standard for the Church of England (according to Canon A5). 3 of the 39 touch on Scripture.

• Article VI lists the books that are to be considered Scripture: "Holy Scriptures containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of Holy Scripture, we do understand those Canonical books of the Old and New testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.
  • Of the names and number of the Canonical Books:
    • Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, The First Book of Samuel, The Second Book of Samuel, The First Book of Kings, The Second Book of Kings, The First Book of Chronicles, The Second Book of Chronicles, The First Book of Esdras, The Second Book of Esdras, The Book of Esther, The Book of Job, The Psalms, The Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, or the Preacher, Cantica, or Songs of Solomon, Four Prophets the Greater, Twelve Prophets the Less,
  • And the other books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine; such are these following:
    • The Third Book of Esdras, The Fourth Book of Esdras, The Book of Tobias, The Book of Judith, The rest of the Book of Esther, The Book of Wisdom, Jesus the Son of Sirach, Baruch the Prophet, The Song of the Three Children, The Story of Susanna, Of Bel and the Dragon, The Prayer of Manasses, The First Book of Maccabees, The Second Book of Maccabees,
  • All the books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them canonical."
• Article VII talks about the Old Testament to make clear that it is as much Scripture as the New Testament: "The Old Testament is not contrary to the New; for both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man, being both God and man. Wherefore there are not to be heard which feign that the old fathers did look only for transitory promises. Although the law given from God by Moses, as touching ceremonies and rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet, notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the commandments which are called moral."
• Article XX talks about the power of the church to determine its doctrine: "The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith; and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God's word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ: yet, as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of salvation."

Finally Canon Law of the Church of England expresses the relationship between the teaching of Councils of the Church and the teaching of Scripture thus in Canon A5:

"The doctrine of the Church of England is grounded in the Holy Scriptures, and in such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the said Scriptures. In particular such doctrine is to be found in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, The Book of Common Prayer, and the Ordinal."