God’s Two Books: William Perkins on the Creeds
The role of the great ecumenical creeds and confessions in the Church is a subject of great importance which strikes at the heart of catholicity. Unfortunately, many today are quickly eschewing creedal subscription in favor of a more Biblicist approach, pitting Scripture against the creedal statements, often utilizing the battle cry of sola Scriptura as the justification. Indeed, in many ways, sola Scriptura has become a wax nose for many Protestants today. As Michael Allen and Scott Swain have rightly observed:
The doctrine of sola Scriptura must be one of the most frequently misrepresented tracts of Christian teaching. It suffers not only from polemical mischaracterization by its critics but even from painful description from its supposed adherents. Sola Scriptura suffers from segmentation. Oftentimes it is pulled loose, extracted from its wider doctrinal context. In such a scenario, its true spiritual habitat is lost, and this piece of teaching is forced to address questions it cannot possibly manage to satisfy.¹
Of course, this has been an issue for the entirety of the Church’s history, yet it appears that the antagonism against creedal subscription has grown in recent years. Some have reported that reputable evangelical theologians outright reject the creeds when it does not match their biblical interpretation, which has led to a number of heretical doctrines being popularized, such as the Eternal Subordination of the Son or a denial of eternal generation.²
Whatever the reasons for the allergy to confessions of faith in the church today (perhaps a fear of being associated with the Roman Church), the result is a turning away from the long held biblical and creedal truth in favor of solo Scriptura, a “bastard child nursed at the breast of modern rationalism and individualism.”³ What proponents of solo Scriptura fail to realize, is that there lies a great danger in throwing off the creeds of the Church. Creedal subscription helps the Church contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints (Jude 3).
This is precisely one of the main criticisms against the Protestant doctrine of sola Scriptura given by the Roman Church during and immediately following the Reformation. Heirs of the Reformation needed to defend their beliefs against the claims of Rome, showing that their beliefs were not novel, but accorded with the true faith which was passed down in the school of Christ since the beginning. This then leads to our vital questions. For the answers, we will turn to the great Puritan forefather, William Perkins.⁴
Perkins: A Reformed Catholic
William Perkins serves as an important figure in these discussions. Considered one of the “trinity of the orthodox,” Perkins once stood as one of the most published Christian authors, being translated into numerous languages with multiple editions. It would be difficult to oversell his monumental influence. Thomas Goodwin, a Westminster divine, wrote a generation after Perkins’s death that “the town was then filled with the discourse of the power of Mr. Perkins’ ministry, still fresh in most men’s memories.”⁵ The late theologian J.I. Packer wrote that “no Puritan author save Richard Baxter ever sold better than Perkins, and no Puritan thinker ever did more to shape and solidify historic Puritanism itself.”⁶ His view of the Christian life was wholistic and transformative, and was “long at the heart of English Protestantism.”⁷
Perhaps most importantly for this subject, is that Perkins ministered during the time of the Council of Trent, and regularly responded to Cardinal Bellarmine in his writings.⁸ In 1598, Perkins penned the treatise A Reformed Catholic to show “how near we may come to the present Church of Rome in sundry points of religion, and wherein we must dissent.”⁹ This of course, is not to say that Perkins was uncritical of Rome. He writes, that “it is a notable policy of the devil, which he has put into the heads of sundry men in this age, to think that our religion, and the religion of the present Church of Rome are all one for substance: and that they may be reunited as (in their opinion) they were before.”¹⁰ Nevertheless, Perkins sought to utilize truth in the service to the Church wherever it was found.¹¹
Since Perkins wanted to defend the truth of the Reformed faith, he needed to show not only where the Reformed system differed from its Roman counterpart, but also where there was substantial agreement. Thus, Perkins popularized the term “Reformed Catholic,” which he defines as “anyone that holds to the same necessary heads of religion with the Roman Church; yet so as he pares off and rejects all errors in doctrine whereby the said religion is corrupted.”¹² These doctrines, such as the Trinity, are found best exemplified in the ecumenical creeds, such as the Apostles’ Creed, or the Nicene Creed. The creeds hold a high place of authority in the mind of Perkins. Writing of the Apostles’ Creed, Perkins describes it as “indeed the very pith and substance of Christian religion, taught by the apostles, embraced by the ancient fathers, sealed by the blood of martyrs, used by Theodosius the Emperor as a means to end the controversies of his time, and hereupon hath been called the rule of faith, the key of faith.”¹³
For religion to be true then, it must be both scriptural and creedal in nature. This is not to place an unhealthy emphasis on creeds over Scripture, however, as even a passing glance at Perkins’s exposition of the Apostles’ Creed will show that it is replete with Scripture.¹⁴ Yet, because the Creed agrees with Scripture and has long been utilized as a rule of faith, Perkins places a high value on its authority. Writing of creedal and ecclesiastical documents, he says, “Now both these kinds of books may be called God’s Word, so far forth as they agree with Scripture.”¹⁵ Perkins provides a distinction between that which is truly and properly God’s word—Scripture—and God’s word which is an ecclesiastical document that agrees in substance with Scripture and is therefore to be treated as such.
Note the clear and helpful distinction by Perkins:
Ecclesiastical writings are all other ordinary writings of the church consenting with [the] Scriptures. These may be called the word of truth of God, so far forth as their matter or substance is consenting with the written Word of God; but they cannot be called the Scripture of God, because the style and phrase of them was set down according to the pleasure of man, and therefore they are in such sort the word of God as that also they are the word of men.¹⁶
Therefore, Perkins has no issue with extrabiblical language, categories, or writings so long as they are faithful to the text and deduced by good and necessary consequence, and faithful to Scripture.¹⁷
No doubt, this statement would strike some as concerning in today’s theological discourse, where creedal interpretation is fluid, and oftentimes, optional.
What Perkins recognizes, however, is that for faith to be a truly Protestant one, it necessarily must be creedal in nature.
Creedal Triage
Creeds are considered ecclesiastical writings, distinct from divine writings—the Scriptures. Divine writings, found in the Old and New Testaments, are the “pure word of God” and the “Scripture of God” because they were immediately inspirited by the Spirit, thus their authority is divinely absolute and sovereign, “and they are of sufficient credit in and by themselves, needing not the testimony of any creature, not subject to the censure either of men or angels, binding the consciences of all men at all times, and being the only foundation for our faith and the rule of canon of all truth.”¹⁸ Here, Perkins secures his position on the primacy and sufficiency of Scripture, which in turn serves as the foundation for the authority and veracity of the ecclesiastical writings, which are either considered general, particular, or proper. Catholic creeds are considered general, as they are confessed throughout the world by all true Christians.
Naturally, one may be led to ask which creed in particular is to be received as “the truth or word of God” when there are several which have played a vital role in the life of the church. Perkins recognizes the potential dilemma, and offers a triage of sorts that points the reader to a hierarchy of authority in the church. First, he points readers to the “most ancient and principal” Apostles’ Creed. This does not exclude the Nicene Creed or the Athanasian Creed, however, as these are of the same substance of the true faith (found in the Apostles’ Creed), but “in some points penned more largely for the exposition of it, that men might better avoid the heresies of their times.”¹⁹ Clearly, Perkins is concerned about the one true faith that the universal church has confessed through the ages. Since then, the Apostles’ Creed is considered the word of God and is necessary for orthodoxy, so too the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds since they are of the same substance. Thus, to depart from the Nicene Creed or the Athanasian Creed is to depart from the orthodox faith.
The second category, particular ecclesiastical writings, are the confessions of particular churches. For Perkins, this meant the 39 Articles. Today, this would include the Westminster Confession, Second London Baptist Confession, etc. These are authoritative for particular communions, but are subservient to the catholic creeds. Whereas particular writings many be altered by a church or denomination if found out of accord with Scripture, the catholic creeds cannot be changed, unless by consent of the entire universal church. Just as they were the result of ecumenical councils, their alteration would need to be done by ecumenical council. Since this is highly improbable, the authority of the creeds must be observed. Although Perkins does not weigh in here on modern subscription debates, it can be assumed that an elder in a particular communion would necessarily hold to the agreed upon confession. If not, they would be out of accord with their own particular faith.
Lastly, there are the proper ecclesiastical writings. These are the writings of private men. These would include particular works of theologians, their letters, etc. Naturally, these do not have true ecclesiastical authority, and there can be variation among authors and distinct doctrinal emphases present. In each case, Scripture serves as the norma normans, and is what everything else is to be tested by and subject to. Insofar as something agrees with Scripture, it borrows its authority from Scripture, and is to be observed and obeyed.
Relevance for Today
What Perkins provides for the Church in this brief account, is a tool that helps navigate both current and future theological discourse. Particular confessions help decide issues of baptism, eschatology, church government, etc. One can hold differing views on these subjects while still being a member of the Church catholic. The ecumenical creeds serve the Church by preserving the catholic faith and preventing one from holding positions that “strike at the vitals.” For example, today there are debates surrounding the Trinity, Christology, and other areas. How are these to be decided? What is to be considered an orthodox position? First, a position must be biblical. Assuming that both sides believe their view to be biblical, they turn to the ecclesiastical creeds. Those out of accord with these creeds are obligated to correct their course, as they stand in opposition to the faith once for all delivered to the saints.
Notes:
Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain, Reformed Catholicity: The Promise of Retrieval for Theology and Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2015), 50.
See the accounts by Matthew Barrett, Simply Trinity: The Unmanipulated Father, Son, and Spirit (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2021), 215; 219.
Allen and Swain, Reformed Catholicity, 85.
The Works of William Perkins, 10 vols., gen. ed. Joel R. Beeke and Derek W.H. Thomas (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014-2020) – hereafter Works. All references to Perkins’s writings will relate to this set.
As cited in Garnet Howard Milne, The Westminster Confession of Faith and the Cessation of Special Revelation: The Majority Puritan Viewpoint on Whether Extra-Biblical Prophecy is Still Possible (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2008), 49.
J.I. Packer, Puritan Portraits (Ross-Shire, U.K.: Christian Focus Publications, 2012), 130. Kindle.
W. B. Patterson, William Perkins and the Making of a Protestant England (Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 2014, rep. 2018), 5.
See Irena Backus, “Reformed Orthodoxy and Patristic Tradition,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. Herman J. Selderhuis (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 91-117.
A Reformed Catholic, 7:5.
A Reformed Catholic, 7:3.
Perkins even managed to appeal to Aristotle against the doctrine of Transubstantiation. See, A Reformed Catholic, 7:87.
A Reformed Catholic, 7:5.
A Reformed Catholic, 7:4.
Richard Muller notes that Perkins was a “substantial commentator.” Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, 2nd edition, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 4:88. (Hereafter PRRD).
A Godly and Learned Exposition upon Christ’s Sermon in the Mount, 1:651-652.
Exposition of the Creed, 5:7.
See for example his discussion of the communication of the divine essence in Exposition of the Creed, 5:308.
Exposition of the Creed, 5:7.
Exposition of the Creed, 5:8.