Still Waters Revival Books - Creeds, Confessions and Covenants - Separation, Unity, Uniformity, etc. - Puritan Hard Drive
Kevin Reed
Writing to ministerial students, Samuel Miller gives the following advice:
Be careful to give clear doctrinal instruction concerning the plan of salvation to those who are anxious and inquiring. I have observed it to be the manner of some, in conversing with such persons, to deal chiefly in tender and solemn exhortation; under the belief that the grand object aimed at ought to be to impress the conscience and the heart, rather than to impart doctrinal knowledge. But it ought to be remembered that neither the conscience nor the heart can ever be suitably impressed but through the medium of truth. It is only as far as gospel truth is apprehended, that any genuine scriptural exercises with regard to it can exist.[1]
Because genuine spiritual life is inseparably connected with gospel truth,
Miller repeatedly issues calls for doctrinal integrity. His most prominent
statements on doctrinal purity are found in the small book on creeds and
confessions, and his open letters to Presbyterians on "Adherence to Our
Doctrinal Standards." These works are primarily concerned with preserving
truth, especially in times of doctrinal declension. Miller defends the use of
creeds, in general; and he also defends the Westminster Standards, in
particular.
Doctrinal integrity, then, must be viewed from various angles. As an
individual concern, correct doctrine is essential as the basis of true
conversion and personal piety. As a corporate concern, sound doctrine is
necessary to establish and maintain ecclesiastical order.
Some historical information may serve as background to Miller's treatment of
confessionalism. During the early days of American Presbyterianism, the
structure of church government was somewhat loose. The first American Presbytery
was formed in or around 1705. Styled the Presbytery of Philadelphia, this
judicatory was composed initially of seven members.
By 1716, the judicatory had grown large enough that it was subdivided into
four new presbyteries, the largest of which had only six ministers. These new
presbyteries then composed the larger assembly, known as the Synod of
Philadelphia, which met annually.
During these formative years, the Presbytery and Synod functioned without
any official creed or plan of government. Doubtless, the Westminster Standards
were used among the churches; and many of the ministers had immigrated to
America, after previously receiving ordination abroad in which cases they
subscribed the Confession prior to their arrival in America.
The Westminster Standards were officially adopted by the American
Presbyterian Church in 1729. At that time, the Synod of Philadelphia was the
highest judicatory in the church. The Adopting Act, which was passed on 19
September 1729, reads as follows:
Although the Synod do not claim or pretend to any authority of imposing upon other men's consciences, but do profess our just dissatisfaction with, and abhorrence of such impositions, and do utterly disclaim all legislative power and authority in the church, being willing to receive one another as Christ has received us to the glory of God and admit to fellowship in sacred ordinances, all such as we have grounds to believe Christ will at last admit to the kingdom of heaven, yet we are undoubtedly obliged to take care that the faith once delivered to the saints be kept pure and uncorrupt among us, and so handed down to our posterity; and do therefore agree that all the ministers of this Synod, or that shall hereafter be admitted into this Synod, shall declare their agreement in, and approbation of, the Confession of Faith, with the Larger and Shorter Catechisms of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster; as being in all the essential and necessary articles, good forms of sound words and systems of Christian doctrine; and do also adopt the said Confession and Catechisms as the confession of our faith. And we do also agree, that all the Presbyteries within our bounds shall always take care not to admit any candidate of the ministry into the exercise of the sacred function but what declares his agreement in opinion with all the essential and necessary articles of said Confession, either by subscribing the said Confession of Faith and Catechisms; or by verbal declaration of their assent thereto, as such minister or candidate shall think best. And in case any minister of this Synod, or any candidate for the ministry, shall have any scruple with respect to any article or articles of said Confession or Catechisms, he shall at the time of his making said declaration declare his sentiments to the Presbytery or Synod, who shall, notwithstanding, admit him to the exercise of the ministry within our bounds, and to ministerial communion, if the Synod or Presbytery shall judge his scruple or mistake to be only about articles not essential and necessary in doctrine, worship, or government. But if the Synod or Presbytery shall judge such ministers or candidates erroneous in essential and necessary articles of faith, the Synod or Presbytery shall declare them uncapable of communion with them. And the Synod do solemnly agree, that none of us will traduce or use any opprobrious terms of those that differ from us in these extra -essential and not necessary points of doctrine, but treat them with the same friendship, kindness, and brotherly love, as if they had not differed from us in such sentiments.
Later that day, all the ministers present, except one who declared himself
unprepared,
after proposing all the scruples that any of them had to make against any articles and expressions in the Confession of Faith and Larger and Shorter Catechisms of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, have unanimously agreed in the solution of those scruples, and in declaring the said Confession and Catechisms to be the confession of their faith, excepting only some clauses in the twentieth and twenty-third chapters, concerning which clauses the Synod do unanimously declare, that they do not receive those articles in any sense as to suppose the civil magistrate hath a controlling power over Synods with respect to the exercise of their ministerial authority; or power to persecute any for their religion; or in any sense contrary to the Protestant succession to the throne of Great Britain.
The Synod observing that unanimity, peace, and unity, which appeared in all
their consultations and determinations relating to the affair of the
Confession, did unanimously agree in giving thanks to God in solemn prayer and
praises.
In addition to the Confession of Faith and Catechisms, the Synod also
adopted the Westminster Directory for the Public Worship of God in the
following manner:
A motion being made to know the Synod's judgment about the directory, they gave their sense of that matter in the following words, viz: The Synod do unanimously acknowledge and declare, that they judge the directory for worship, discipline, and government of the church, commonly annexed to the Westminster Confession, to be agreeable in substance to the word of God, and founded thereupon, and therefore do earnestly recommend the same to all their members, to be by them observed as near as circumstances will allow, and Christian prudence direct.[2]
Two aspects of the Adopting Act deserve special attention: (l) the nature of
subscription; and (2) the matter of "scruples." All subsequent
developments, respecting confessionalism among American Presbyterians, turn
upon these two issues.
In the Adopting Act, subscription is viewed as a man's personal
confession of his faith. Except for any
noted "scruples," subscription is a public declaration of what each
man fully believes not merely an agreement to "articles of peace."[3] Thus, when the church adopted the Confession, she took it
as a constitutional document; and when an individual subscribes this creed, he
owns it as his personal confession.
With reference to "scruples," it should be observed that the ones
stated in 1729 were used largely to clarify a portion of the Confession against
false or vague constructions which might be forced upon it. Scruples were not blatant denials or public opposition to leading
articles contained in the standards.
In the Synod of 1729, the only scruples mentioned referred to false
constructions placed on isolated clauses in the 20th and 23rd chapters of the
Westminster Confession. After discussion, the Synod declared that "they do
not receive those articles in any sense as to suppose the civil magistrate hath
a controlling power over Synods with respect to their ministerial authority; or
power to persecute any for their religion; or in any sense contrary to the
Protestant succession to the throne of Great Britain."[4]
Thus, the Synod unanimously resolved its difficulty by stating the nature of
these faulty suppositions which were not really part of the Confession anyhow.
At no point was any obvious doctrine of the Confession called into question.[5]
Samuel Miller's own licensure provides another illustration with reference
to scruples. In a letter written in 1836, Miller describes his own history:
When I was licensed by the Presbytery of Lewes, between forty and fifty years ago, just before standing up to make the profession and engagement required of candidates for license, I informed the Presbytery, that the only article in the Confession of Faith concerning which I had the smallest doubt, was a short clause in the fourth section of the 24th chapter, which treats of "Marriage and Divorce." The clause was this: "The man may not marry any of his [deceased] wife's kindred nearer in blood than he may of his own, etc." I had happened, a few weeks before, to listen to a discussion of the question, whether a man might lawfully marry the sister of his deceased wife; and my mind was brought into a state of doubt on the subject. Of this I thought it my duty candidly to inform the Presbytery, assuring them, that I could heartily adopt every other article of the Confession. They unanimously concluded this doubt was not a valid obstacle to my subscribing in the usual form, which I accordingly did, and was forthwith licensed.
Soon afterwards my doubts were
removed, and I became satisfied that the Confession of Faith, in relation to
the matter in question, took the wisest, safest, and most Scriptural ground. For
a number of years before I ceased to be a pastor, I thought it my duty to
decline sanctioning any matrimonial connection condemned by the clause referred
to, and to set my face in every proper way against it.[6]
As an accessory to subscription, ministers (and elders) in the Presbyterian
Church are required to take an ordination vow stating they "sincerely
receive and adopt the Confession of Faith of this church, as containing the
system of doctrine taught in the holy scriptures."[7]
This vow is designed to underscore the
authority of the doctrinal standards, not relax them. Its plain import is one
of an affirmation of faith, not a
denial.
Yet, in one of the most perverse subterfuges of modern ecclesiastical
politics, this vow is often treated as a negation. It is regarded by some as an
escape clause, as if its purpose was to enable church officers to assent to the
confessional "system" in general, without any implied commitment to
any of the particulars. In this line of thinking, church officers are free to
disregard individual articles of our creed at their pleasure, with impunity, so
long as they pay lip-service to the "system" contained therein. Thus,
theordination vow is turned upside down, and employed as an instrument of
denial.
Samuel Miller notes the dangers of such loose subscription. He asserts that
confessional subscription is "not a mere formality, but a very solemn
transaction, which means much, and infers the most serious obligation."[8] Consequently, he regards an evasive subscription as
"a SOLEMN PERJURY."[9] And he warns the church of
the danger of allowing officers to adopt the confessional standards "with
an avowed laxity of construction, or an evident mental reservation, altogether
inconsistent with Christian probity."[10]
The issue of subscription was crucial during the Old School/New School
controversy of the 1830s. As the New School gained in influence, the practice
of loose subscription became more widespread. This laxity, in turn, allowed the
growth of many heresies in the church. Only the decisive measures taken in the
General Assembly of 1837 provided a temporary shift toward stricter confessionalism.[11]
"There is nothing new under the sun," and, sadly, today the
practice of loose subscription is the reigning position, even within so-called
"conservative" Presbyterian denominations. Under the pretext of
listing scruples, while sitting under examination of Presbytery, candidates for
ordination may openly state their opposition to leading articles of the
Confession. The presbyters seem especially gratified if the candidate's denial
is expressed in tones of regret, with a touch of esteem for the creed he has
just denounced.
For example, the practice of sabbath-keeping is one of the least popular
(almost non-existent) practices in contemporary culture. Further, it is not
accepted by the broader "evangelical" community. Hence, it is not
uncommon to hear the sabbath routinely spurned by candidates for ordination.
This denial is regarded even more palatable if one makes a passing reference to
Calvin, or the "continental view" of the sabbath even if the
candidate has not the slightest idea of Calvin's real views on the matter,[12] or if
the candidate's practice bears no resemblance to the observance of the Lord's
Day among the Reformed churches on the continent of Europe.
Likewise, candidates boast of many other departures from biblical principles
of worship. Ministers and candidates alike advocate "will-worship";
liturgical practices and religious observances of human origin are adopted in
clear violation of scriptural and confessional teaching. Some church officers
have even advocated the use of "pictures of Jesus" and other graven
images for instructing children and the unlearned which is nothing but a
rehash of the old Romish contention that images serve as the "books of the
laity."
Through such evasions and denials, the Westminster Standards are discredited
in the church. And, what is worse, the ten commandments are abridged to eight
or seven or six or whatever happens to be in vogue at the time. Even the
most basic Protestant rule of biblical authority (sola scriptura) has
been questioned, as some church courts will ordain men who believe in
continuing revelation.
Further, the confessional doctrine of salvation which one might ordinarily
assume to be basic to the whole "system" has been progressively
eroded. As Presbyterian Churches have obtained more influence from broad
"evangelicalism," many Presbyterians have adopted methods of
evangelism and church growth which were cultivated in the fields of
Pelagianism. We are now told we must adopt a more "positive" approach
to evangelism; the biblical doctrines of original sin, human depravity, and
human inability are thrust into the background, if not discarded altogether.
"Decisionalism" prevails; and the old doctrines respecting
regeneration and conversion have been laid aside. The church's mission strategy
is plotted on the basis of the latest demographic studies, rather than biblical
imperatives.
Added to the foregoing errors, the church now suffers from an endless series
of aberrant theological fads, ranging from dispensational prophetic
speculations to paedocommunion. Presbyterianism has degenerated to become, what
R. L. Dabney once described as, "the Omnibus Presbyterian Church."[13]
In principle, this lax subscriptionism differs little from theological
liberalism. Both are pious frauds, for both are exceedingly dishonest. The
difference is merely found in the object of accommodation. Theological liberals
accommodate to the humanistic spirit of the age, while "conservative"
Presbyterians accommodate to the broader "evangelical" community. The
net effect is the same: the Confession is robbed of any substantial authority
in the church. The confessional standards serve simply as a window dressing, a
vague link to the past.
In the present climate, Miller's writings are almost as timely as when they
were first penned. Presbyterian Churches desperately need to have their
doctrinal integrity restored.
During the summer of 1824, Miller addressed students on the subject of
"Creeds and Confessions." That lecture formed the basis of his
published work, The Utility and Importance of Creeds and Confessions (1824). In 1833, the work was revised and enlarged
for publication; it was subsequently reprinted several times. Now reissued in
this volume, Miller's book presents a cogent case concerning the lawfulness and
usefulness of creeds.
It was also during the turbulent decade of the 1830s that Miller produced
his notable "Letters to Presbyterians." As the Old School/New School
conflict became more heated, Miller wrote a series of open letters which were
published serially in 1833, in a periodical, The Presbyterian. Later that year, all of these epistles were
gathered into one volume, Letters to Presbyterians on the Present
Crisis in the Presbyterian Church. Written
for the general membership of Presbyterian Churches, these letters possess more
vigor and immediacy than most of Miller's seminary writings. He exhorts his
readers to adhere firmly to the confessional standards, and to realize the
gravity of the issues at stake.
Speaking of the Confession of Faith, Miller writes:
Will you suffer one article of it after another to be nullified, in fact, by reckless subscription, until its whole dignity and authority shall perish together? In other words, will you suffer men of coarse and ductile consciences, with the philosophy and the language of Pelagianism on their lips, to be guilty of the solemn, dishonest mockery of subscribing your Calvinistic creed, and entering your judicatories?[14]
Such questions are still apropos, as is Miller's closing exhortation:
"These questions must soon be decided. The crisis is approaching. God
grant that you may decide them in such a manner as most effectually to promote
his glory, and the purity and edification of our beloved Zion."[15]
Footnotes for Introductory Essay
1. Samuel Miller, Letters on Clerical Manners and Habits (Philadelphia:
Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1852), p. 124.
2. Records of the Presbyterian Church in the United States
of America Embracing the Minutes of the General Presbytery and General Synod
1706-1788
(l904; rpt. New York: Arno Press, 1969), pp. 94-95.
4. Records, p. 95.
5. For an excellent discussion of the confessional teaching on
the role of the Magistrate, consult, Thomas M'Crie, The Unity of the Church (1821; rpt. Dallas:
Presbyterian Heritage Publications, 1989), "Appendix," pp. 135-206.
M'Crie has a superb discussion explaining what the Confession does and does
not
teach in the oft-misunderstood sections on the Magistrate.
Likewise, it should be noted that the
General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, upon adoption of the Confession, 22
August 1647, provided a word of clarification concerning the limits of the
Magistrate's role in relation to the church. See the "Act Approving the
Confession of Faith," in The Confession of Faith; the Larger and
Shorter Catechisms (Glasgow: Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland,
1976), pp. 14-15.
6. Cited in Samuel Miller [the younger], The Life of Samuel
Miller, DD. LL.D. (Philadelphia: Claxton, Remsen and Haffelfinger,
1869), Vol. I, pp. 55-56.
10. Letter to Presbyterians (Philadelphia: Anthony Finley, 1833), p.
205.
11. See Life of Miller, Vol. II, pp. 325-47. A good general
account of the Old School/New School conflict is found also in Benjamin Morgan
Palmer, The Life and Letters of James Henley Thornwell (1875; rpt.
Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1974), pp. 181-209.
12. See John Calvin's Sermons on the Ten Commandments (Edited and
translated by Benjamin W. Farley, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980),
especially, pp. 97-132.
13. R. L. Dabney, Discussions (1891; rpt. Harrisonburg: Sprinkle
Publications, 1982), Vol. II, p. 472 ff.
Go to The Utility and Importance of Creeds and
Confessions.