The Catholic or Eastern Orthdox Churches are creedal; so, as I understand it, is the Anglican/Episcopal Church. These churches accept the historic Christian Creeds as binding definitions of Christian doctrines. Although the Anglicans have 39 Articles of Faith, these Articles are not strictly binding on Anglicans as a test of orthodox Anglican belief.In a couple of other threads I have looked at and posted in, people have mentioned Churches being confessional or creedal. What is the difference? Which denominations would be considered confessional, and which denominations would be considered creedal?
How about Methodists and Baptists? Are they creedal or confessional?The Catholic or Eastern Orthdox Churches are creedal; so, as I understand it, is the Anglican/Episcopal Church. These churches accept the historic Christian Creeds as binding definitions of Christian doctrines. Although the Anglicans have 39 Articles of Faith, these Articles are not strictly binding on Anglicans as a test of orthodox Anglican belief.
Lutherans, Presbyterians, some Reformed Churches are confessional: they have denominational confessions (the Augsburg Confession, the Westminster Confession) which at least in theory are binding on their members.
I only heard this distinction a few days ago in another thread so hopefully I have parsed it correctly. If not someone will correct me.
Contemporary Baptists would be neither, I think, though at one time they had something on the order of a Confession. Southern Baptists are rather strongly anti-creedal, in my experience. You need to realise that not all Protestant sects can be divided into ‘creedal’ or ‘confessional’ categories. I was raised in the Campbellite tradition (‘Christian Churches’, ‘Disciples of Christ’, ‘Churches of Christ’, etcetera), where the rule was “No creed but the Bible” and “any creed which is shorter than the Bible is unBiblical; any creed that is longer than the Bible is unBiblical; any creed that is different than the Bible is unBiblical; any creed which is the same as the Bible is superfluous”.How about Methodists and Baptists? Are they creedal or confessional?
So would that make Methodists a combination of creedal and confessional?Methodists subscribe to the Articles. They also say both the Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds.
So far as I understand it, the Articles of Religion are NOT a ‘Confession’ in the way that the Westminster Confession or the Augsburg Confession are. So, no: the Methodists would NOT be a ‘Confessional Church’. And by the way: so far as I know, all ‘Confessional’ churches accept the Creeds, but not all ‘Creedal’ denominations accept any sort of ‘Confession’. So one can be EITHER a ‘Creedal’ or a ‘Confessional’ denomination, but one is never both simulataneously. And, as I noted earlier, one can also be a ‘non-Creedal’ denomination.So would that make Methodists a combination of creedal and confessional?
This is a matter of definition. There are Anglicans and Methodists who would regard the Articles as confessions. Those of us who see Anglicanism and Methodism as subordinate to the authority of the historic Catholic Church are unwilling to treat them as such, and certainly the Anglican tradition (and Methodism as a derivative thereof) has not stressed confessions in the way the Lutherans and Reformed (defining Anglicanism here as non-Reformed, though in many respects it is historically part of the Reformed tradition) do. The Articles are briefer than other 16th-century doctrinal statements and reflected a less thorough process of doctrinal debate and consensus. Still, they can be treated as confessions and often have been.So far as I understand it, the Articles of Religion are NOT a ‘Confession’ in the way that the Westminster Confession or the Augsburg Confession are.
Hi Edwin,This is a matter of definition. There are Anglicans and Methodists who would regard the Articles as confessions. Those of us who see Anglicanism and Methodism as subordinate to the authority of the historic Catholic Church are unwilling to treat them as such, and certainly the Anglican tradition (and Methodism as a derivative thereof) has not stressed confessions in the way the Lutherans and Reformed (defining Anglicanism here as non-Reformed, though in many respects it is historically part of the Reformed tradition) do. The Articles are briefer than other 16th-century doctrinal statements and reflected a less thorough process of doctrinal debate and consensus. Still, they can be treated as confessions and often have been.
Edwin