believing the church, or believing in the church
Grammar is a funny thing. What’s the meme? ‘Grammar saves lives: let’s eat, grandpa, vs let’s eat grandpa.’ Bullinger thinks grammar is important for one’s soul; he spends what seems like an inordinate amount of time at the beginning of his ninth sermon discussing what exactly is meant by the lack of the preposition ‘in’ connected to the final articles of the Apostles’ Creed. ‘I believe…the holy catholic church’, not ‘I believe in the holy catholic church.’ What difference does it really make?
Now, spoiler, I’m not sure the grammar itself actually does make that much of a difference, especially given the Nicene Creed’s wording of these articles. But we’ve already seen that Bullinger is a careful shepherd of Christ’s sheep. Why does he take such pains to make this point clear? He’s really making a theological point, not a grammatical point. Discussion over the preposition ‘in’ is just an opportunity to clarify his theology of the church for his parishioners.
So why does this matter? The Roman Catholic church claims superiority over scripture. That’s not what the Catholic church would say about itself; it does pay lip service to the authority of God’s word. But functionally (and certainly theologically), the Catholic church Magisterium is the only body that is authorised to interpret God’s word for God’s people. The Catechism of the Catholic Church glossary entry for ‘Magisterium’ defines it:
the living, teaching office of the Church, whose task it is to give as authentic interpretation of the word of God, whether in its written form (Sacred Scripture), or in the form of Tradition. The Magisterium ensures the Church’s fidelity to the teaching of the Apostles in matters of faith and morals.
This point cannot be emphasised too strongly. This is one of the key dividing points between Roman Catholics and Protestants to this day. This is the point from which all the other divisions flow. This is the source issue. Protestants hold that scripture itself is the final authority. The Roman Catholic church holds that the Church must interpret scripture, and therefore is functionally superior to scripture. Bullinger takes great pains to use the little preposition ‘in’ to make the point that genuine believers need to believe that God has instituted the church, but they are not to rely upon the church in place of scripture. That’s the reason for his emphasis on why the Creed omits the ‘in’ for ‘I believe…in the holy catholic church’.
Why does this matter for us today? I doubt many of us are in Roman Catholic churches. Is this a point we should consider a curiosity of history and move swiftly along? I don’t think so. In fact, I think many Protestants needs a stout reminder of this point. I’m writing in the year of our Lord 2025. Across the UK and the US, the old alliances have either broken down or are breaking down. The Gospel Coalition has become a caricature of itself. Together for the Gospel has disbanded, having suffered significant infighting. The reformedish/evangelical theological consensus of the early 2000s has evaporated. The Young, Restless, and Reformed movement that was so powerful in the US (and didn’t really have that great of an impact in the UK) has collapsed. Numerous megachurches and church planting associations, groups that were significantly influential only a decade ago, are now shadows of themselves if they still exist at all. Moral failure from influential pastors seems to reach near-epidemic proportions. Numerous ministry models and church planting models have been weighted in the balance and found wanting. Both British and American versions of Christianity feel adrift, demoralised, leaderless, cynical, wandering. What can we learn from all this?
One lesson is that our belief is in scripture not in the church. How many of these crises could have been prevented if someone in the church, one of the pastors, one of the elders, anyone in the church, had said: ‘is this actually biblical?’ ‘This model of leadership, this philosophy of church growth, this fellowship of Christian-ish groups, this pattern for church planting, this exciting new idea…is it drawn from the sacred scripture?’ A number of years ago an American business book was widely read within the church as an example of how to do church. The book had nothing to say about the church; it as about business strategy. Many American pastors picked it up and applied it to church growth strategies. Some time later the author of the book issued a public statement that the principles in his book applied only in ‘for-profit’ entities; the ‘not-for-profit’ model looked very different to what he’d written earlier.
I’ve also seen openly sinful behaviour tolerated from pastors because ‘good things are happening here,’ ‘souls are coming to Christ,’ ‘the church is growing’. What about what the word of God says? What about scripture? Does it have anything at all to say about what we see or what we’re doing? Functionally, it seems many Protestants believe their pastors/elders as a mini-Magisterium over the authority of scripture, if scriptural authority even comes into it at all. Do we believe in scripture, or do we believe in the fallible insights of church leaders? Do we, as Bereans, test the teaching of those over us according to the standard of scripture?
And yet, Bullinger is careful to combat the equal but opposite reaction to this trend. He isn’t ashamed to assert the scripture’s teaching that the church is holy and pure, nor does he, as so many do today, reject the authority of the church and the use of pastoral authority because of sinful pastors (more on that later). The church is an assembly of all those throughout history and across the world who look to Christ with genuine faith. This is what ‘catholic’ means; ‘it’s as much to say as this fellowship is universal, as that which extends through all places and ages’; it refers to all true believers. This is a source of such great joy and comfort to us. God has believers all throughout history and all over our world. We’re not alone. We are not the only faithful ones. The church will not die with us. Bullinger continues, ‘what can be more delightful to our ears than to hear that all the saints in heaven and on earth, are our brothers, and that we are members, partners, and fellows with them?’ Bullinger has no place for Christians doing Christianity apart from the church.
Amidst so much failure today, we have to remember this point. The Triune God is working through and purifying his church even today.
Because no man can be made one with God unless he also is holy and pure even as God is holy and pure, therefore we believe that the church is holy, that is, that it is sanctified by God the Father in the blood of the Son and the gift of the Holy Spirit.
What soul-nourishing truths. What hope, hope that fights our sinful temptations to cynicism and apathy. We must remember that Jesus loves his bride, that he is sanctifying his bride, that he is making her radiant and spotless, as beautiful as a bride adorned for her wedding day. It may not seem like this, it may not look like this, it may not feel like this…but it is nevertheless true. There’s no place for rejecting or demeaning this bride. In so far as the church is faithful to her head, Christ, she is holy. Granted, this holiness is never perfect this side of paradise, but this holiness is also genuinely progressing. Bullinger’s sermon calls us to remember: I believe in scripture; therefore I believe in the holy catholic church. And in that order.
Bullinger’s explanation of the forgiveness of sins reminds us of the centrality of repentance in Christian life. We are debtors to God; our sin makes this so. We can’t pay the debt, but God accepts a substitute in Jesus his son. Our sins are covered by his blood.
It’s not the sins of a few men of one or two ages, or a few and certain number of sins which are forgiven; it’s the sins of all men, of all ages, the whole multitude of sins, whatsoever is sin and is called sin, whether it’s original sin or actual sin or any other kind of sin; in short: all sins are forgiven us…because the only sacrifice of Christ is powerful enough to wash away all the offences of all sinners who by faith come to the mercy-seat of God’s grace.
There is forgiveness. For my sins. I can be cleansed. Through Jesus’ blood.
The Creed finishes with the truths of the resurrection and eternal life. Bullinger points to the profound difference life in eternity with God will be in comparison to life in this world today.
So then in the resurrection our bodies will be set free from all evil affections and passions, from all corruption. Our physical being won’t be reduced to nothing; we won’t just become spirit-beings. We’ll keep our own proper bodily nature, but we’ll be cleansed and purified from that which corrupts us. Because of heavenly and divine gifts, we’ll have what’s called not only a spiritual body, but also a glorious and purified body.
Think of it: an earthly body like what we have now, but without disease, without weakness, without mortality, without sin, without temptation. And forever. Never to give way to evil again, never even to want evil again. For eternity. ‘We shall see God face to face, and we shall be filled with the company of God, and we shall never be weary of him.’
Take heart brothers and sisters. At the end of this mortal race is the face of God – the God who loves his church and the God who loves us.
Next, on loving God and our neighbour
