One of the most common excuses offered for human creeds is, that “We
want something to keep us together—something to bind us in union.”
This apology is based virtually upon the same two preposterous
assumptions we have before mentioned. It assumes, with great apparent
innocence, that the Bible can not keep us together, that it cannot bind
us in union. Then it assumes, with much modesty, that a human creed
_can_ keep us together—bind us in union—_can do_ what the Bible _can
not do_. This, it appears to us, should startle any good man at once.
These assumptions are arrogant in the extreme, and not only arrogant,
but made without any regard to facts. Do human creeds keep churches
together? We assert, fearless of successful contradiction, that the
whole history of human creeds proves that they do not keep churches
together. Let us take one look at three of the most popular creeds in
this country, and see what they have done in keeping churches together.
How has the Baptist creed succeeded? Has it kept the Baptists together?
By no means. From the one original Baptist stock we have now not less
than nine or ten parties of Baptists. How has the Presbyterian creed
succeeded in keeping its adherents together? It is thought to be a very
wise and powerful document. Has it kept Presbyterians together? It has
succeeded no better than the Baptist creed. With all its adhesive
power, Presbyterians, within the last century have sundered into
some eight parties. This needs no commentary. How has the Methodist
Discipline succeeded? It is itself nothing but an offshoot of the
Episcopalian creed, which did not prevent the Methodists from stranding
off from the established church. The Discipline has not been in
operation more than one hundred and twenty years. How has it succeeded
in keeping Methodists together during that period? During that time
Methodism has stranded into some eight or ten fragments. What comment
this furnishes upon the efficacy of human creeds to cement together.
Other creeds have done no better; and yet, in the face of all this, men
want human creeds to _keep them together_!
All history shows, beyond all dispute, that wherever human creeds have
prevailed, divisions have abounded, partyism has increased, and unity
has been diminished. But where the people had confidence in the Bible,
the law of God, the “perfect law of liberty,” union has more widely
extended, and peace has more generally prevailed. Why then, in the name
of reason, hold on to human creeds to keep churches together, when
they have so universally failed, and refuse the Bible, which has never
failed?
Faith in a creed can not convert persons, or bring them to God. If they
are Christians at all, faith in God, the Redeemer and Savior of men,
in the Word of God, in the Gospel of Christ, has made them such, and
to God and the word of his grace they should commit themselves, their
everlasting trust, and not allow themselves to be divided by human
creeds.