Truly Core Christian Doctrines: A Lay Anglican's Take

If you've read my blog for any part of the last year or so, you've probably noticed that I talk about fundamental or "core" Christian doctrines quite a lot, from a magisterial Protestant stance. This week, I'm going to try to tie a couple of those ideas together, using as my anchors a book we've recently finished at church, the Ecumenical Creeds, and the commonly accepted Ecumenical Councils. If you'd like, come along for a mini-book reflection on this ride!

How do we Define a Core Doctrine?

As the saying goes, the one who defines the terms is most likely to win the argument or debate. Between traditions, I get the strong impression that The List of core doctrinal positions of Christianity is still lively debated, so here are the parts of my definition as a reasonably well-educated lay Anglican.

Sine qua non for Being a Christian

As an apple tree cannot grow except from (ultimately) an apple seed, a Christian cannot grow except from the "seed" doctrines. That is, there are some beliefs and practices without which one cannot be considered a follower of Christ. If one assumes that the main purpose of the Bible is to tell us how to live a Christian life, one would go to the Bible and not elsewhere to develop a list of such beliefs and practices.

So, is that the main purpose of the Bible? Based on my understanding of the work of N. T. Wright and other solid biblical scholars, and my own reading of the Scriptures over decades, the Bible tells us the story of God’s work in the world He made that we can know His love.

A rather different set of doctrines develops from assuming the first purpose versus the second.

A slightly different angle to take this shifts us from what was written by men inspired by God in the canon of Scripture toward what the most unifying practices by generations of Christ-followers have been. Michael Ramsey looks at this in The Gospel and the Catholic Church. (Lest you think I've had another theological shift, this is small-c catholic--i.e., the universal church. Michael Ramsey was the Archbishop of Canterbury 1961-1974, one of a decent number translated from the second-in-line bishop's position of York.)

What were Ramsey's main points in this book? First, that there are varied forms of expression of unity within Christianity, from its inception to the present. He has a short list of the best forms of expression which he argues do represent the Church at its core:

• Passion of the Christ--His suffering, death, and resurrection as historically demonstrable and salvific
• Corporate Christian life--we do not live primarily as individuals, but as members of the one Body of Christ (corpus Christi)
• Outward order--episcopacy being the preferred and historic structure of church government. Episcopacy means that individual priests/pastors are subject in all things theological to their bishops, leading to a bit more uniformity of expression than other models of governance.
• Baptism, Eucharist, Apostles, Scriptures, Creeds (chapter 5)--the assumed value of each of these goes beyond the symbolic to the efficacious. That is, Baptism assumes regeneration, the Eucharist assumes the real presence of Christ, and the Creeds form a summary of accepted doctrine.
• Liturgical worship (divine action)--liturgy being the regular guide to the process of worship, which is focused on how God comes down to us

First 500 Years/7 Ecumenical Councils

Another possible criterion is that the doctrinal position was agreed upon within the first 500 years or so of church history, as noted by the Vincentian Canon and described in the first 7 ecumenical councils. (Here's a link from Saint John the Evangelist Orthodox Church summarizing each council's focus.) The priest at a former parish put it this way: if a doctrine wasn't at least discussed in the first 500 years of church history (AD 0-500), it is an innovation and can be safely ignored as Not a Core Doctrine.

What did the first 7 ecumenical councils discuss and articulate positions on? (Anglicanism in general holds to the determinations of the first 4, while other traditions hold to the later ones as well.)

#1, the Council of Nicea (325 AD), the focus was against Arianism which taught that Jesus was a created being only. Its main articulated doctrinal positions involved Christology: Jesus Christ is (1) the Son of God the Father (begotten before time, not created in time), (2) eternal in existence, and (3) of the same essence (a philosophical term) with the Father. (Do you glimpse some lines of the Nicene Creed?)

#2, at Constantinople (381 AD), the focus was against Pneumatomachianism which taught that the Holy Spirit was a created being. Its main articulated doctrinal positions involved pneumatology: the Holy Spirit is equal with the Father and the Son due to sharing the same essence, but proceeds from God the Father (and was therefore not created).

#3, at Ephesus (431 AD), the focus was against Nestorianism which taught that the two natures of Christ didn't coexist eternally. Its main articulated doctrinal positions involved Christology and Mariology: (1) Jesus Christ has two natures, 100% divine and 100% human; (2) Mary is properly called Theotokos (a Greek term) because she gave birth to God in Jesus.

#4, at Chalcedon (451 AD), the focus was against Monophysitism which taught that the human nature of Christ was absorbed into His divine nature. Its main articulated doctrinal positions involved Christology but focused on His human nature: (1) To reiterate, Jesus Christ is fully and perfectly divine and human; (2) also to reiterate, Jesus is begotten from the Father before time; (3) Jesus took on full human nature when he was born of Mary (the Incarnation) but was sinless.

#5, at Constantinople again (553 AD), the focus was on settling disagreements between Nestorians and Monophysites.

#6, yet again at Constantinople (680 AD), the focus was against Monothelitism which taught that Jesus Christ had one will given 2 natures.

#7, again at Nicea (797 AD), the focus was against Iconoclasm which advocated for the destruction of all images used to help focus in worship.

Theological Triage?

A possible process for determining a list of core doctrines as a group is theological triage. I don't hold as strongly to this criterion because the process ends up being subjectively dominated by the loudest voices representing particular theological traditions. Here's a post I wrote at TRB if you'd like to read my earlier thoughts on the topic.

What Doctrines are on my List?

In reflecting on Ramsey's book and the foci of the ecumenical councils, here's my list from an AngloCatholic perspective of what doctrines--specific positions--should be considered core to being a Christian. What groups would this list include? Exclude?

• Doctrines assumed by the ecumenical councils and Ramsey to be uncontested, since they are outlined in the 3 ecumenical creeds:
• God is triune; the Father's main role is Creator, the Sons's, Savior, the Spirit's, Sustainer. The persons of the Godhead are equal to each other in attributes and relate to each other.
• Jesus had an earthly ministry recorded in the canonical Gospels and now dwells alongside the Father.
• There is one church, set apart and universal in the created world; all Christians are saints and receive forgiveness of sins within this church.
• There will be a bodily resurrection of each Christian, just as Jesus was resurrected bodily.
• Additional doctrines emphasized by the first 4 ecumenical councils:
• Christology: Jesus Christ has two united natures, fully divine and fully human, and one will for each nature. While He shares the same essence and eternal existence with the Father by virtue of His divine nature, He took on human nature at the Incarnation and continues to have that human nature as well.
• Pneumatology: the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (and the Son, as stated in the Nicene Creed)
• Mariology: the Virgin Mary can properly be called the mother of God.
• Remaining doctrines based on Ramsey's argument:
• The sacraments of Baptism and Communion/the Eucharist are efficacious for forgiving sins and creating/sustaining faith because Christ is acting in them (priests/pastors are delegated to act in His name). Thus, regeneration occurs in Baptism, and Christ is truly present in the Eucharist.
• The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus are historically true; His suffering, death, and resurrection were efficacious to conquer death on our behalf.
• The canonical Scriptures are to be used in the regular life of the church, which is a corporate relationship with each other and Christ (i.e., de-emphasizing "my personal relationship with Jesus").

What About Other Christian Traditions?

I'll leave this one up to you--especially if you are not from a Lutheran or Anglican Christian tradition, what doctrinal positions would you argue are essential to being a Christian, and why?