How shall we think about the
"Essential Tenets of the Reformed Faith"?

Eugene TeSelle
Witherspoon Society Issues Analyst

[6-16-04]

Every candidate for ordination in our church is asked, "Do you sincerely receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith . . . ? While the constitution speaks of "essential tenets," it does not spell them out anywhere; instead it gives us the Book of Confessions and asks us to consider it in the light of Scripture. That leads to the rhetorical question, "Doesn't this church know what it believes?" At least one overture will be coming to the 2004 General Assembly asking for a specific determination of the essential tenets. On reflection, the issue is not as simple as it may first appear.

I. What is the meaning of "essential tenets" in American Presbyterianism?

The term was coined in answer to demands in England and especially Scotland for "strict subscription" to the Westminster Confession of Faith. Presbyterians in America, with the Adopting Act of 1729, took a different approach. They required ordinands to assent to the "essential and necessary" doctrines of the Westminster Confession and the catechisms, as "good forms of sound words and systems of Christian doctrine," but permitted them to state their "scruples" and left it to the presbytery to judge whether these were within legitimate bounds, not affecting "essential and necessary" articles of doctrine, worship, or government.

The Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., from 1788 until 1967, asked ordinands whether they affirmed the Westminster Standards as "containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures." This was interpreted, of course, in the spirit of the Adopting Act of 1729 and the agreements of reunion between Old Side and New Side (1758), Old School and New School (1869-70), the PCUSA with the Cumberland Presbyterians (1903), and the PCUSA with the United Presbyterians (1958).

These reunions would not have happened without the spirit of the Adopting Act. The PC(USA) as we have it today is the product of that spirit. The flexibility of language must be interpreted, not as a fall from some imagined clarity and rigor in the past, but as the founding spirit of our church from its very beginnings.

With the adoption of the Book of Confessions (1967) the UPCUSA rephrased the ordination questions as well. Today all persons being ordained must state that they will be "instructed," "led," and "guided" by the confessions of the church, but it is understood that these are "in obedience to Jesus Christ" and "under the authority of Scripture.

II. How has the reformed faith been stated?

When we look at our confessions, we discover that they differ not only in content (I'll come to that later) but even in the manner in which doctrinal affirmations are made.

For starters, our confessions differ in the order in which topics are discussed. The Second Helvetic and the Westminster begin with Scripture. The classic creeds follow the order of the baptismal formula: Father, Son, Holy Spirit. C-67 and the Brief Statement follow the order of the "apostolic benediction" (2 Cor 13:14): the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit.

The Westminster Confession does not speak of the "system of doctrine contained in the Scriptures"; it uses the quite different language of "the whole counsel of God" (C-6.006) as communicated through Scripture. This re-focuses doctrinal issues in a fruitful way. While "the whole counsel of God" involves theoretical assertions about God and Christ, what is emphasized is the good news of salvation and renewal; to put it another way, its primary concern is with God not before but in and through the work of salvation. Similarly the Second Helvetic is interested in "what pertains to a saving faith and the framing of a life acceptable to God" (C-5.002). This is also the tone of the Confession of 1967 and the Brief Statement adopted in 1991, both of which contain helpful summaries of the good news of grace.

One overlooked formulation of "the whole counsel of God," stated as gospel rather than law, and in practical rather than theoretical language, is found in the third chapter of the Form of Government (G-3.0100-0401). It tells about God's activity toward the human race, God's reconciling action in Jesus Christ, and the mission of the church as "the provisional demonstration of what God intends for all of humanity"; then it spells out the life of the church in proclamation and action, calling for an attitude of "openness" to God's contemporary action, the diversity of its own membership, and a "continuing reformation of the church ecumenical."

The Confession of 1967 makes four strong assertions along this line in the section on "Reconciliation in Society." Even as they state the need to express Christian faith in the world, they also caution against actions in society that distort the faith. Those who want to draw boundaries might consider the following boundary-line issues in the church's witness:

• "Congregations, individuals, or groups of Christians who exclude, dominate, or patronize others, however subtly, resist the Spirit of God and bring contempt on the faith which they profess" (C-9.44);

• ". . . the church which identifies the sovereignty of any one nation or any one way of life with the cause of God denies the Lordship of Christ and betrays its calling" (C-9.45);

• "A church that is indifferent to poverty, or evades responsibility in economic affairs, or is open to one social class only, or expects gratitude for its beneficence makes a mockery of reconciliation and offers no acceptable worship to God" (C-9.46);

• "The church comes under the judgment of God and invites rejection by society when it fails to lead men and women into the full meaning of life together, or withholds the compassion of Christ from those caught in the moral confusion of our time" (9.47).

Thus there are diverse modes of approaching the question of "essential tenets," but it is important to proclaim "the whole counsel of God" in a way that remains gospel and does not become primarily law.

III. How have the "essential tenets" been listed?

When we set about specifying the "essential tenets," we find that the content differs as much as the modes. Some lists try to be comprehensive, while others concentrate on what is central. Some emphasize what is distinctive to the Reformed tradition, others what is shared with other traditions.

It is interesting that Presbyterians today seem to avoid predestination as an essential tenet of the Reformed faith, even though that was the trademark of the Reformed tradition for several centuries. The 1986 document on The Confessional Nature of the Church starts a longer list of points concerning which the Reformed tradition has changed: the exact nature of predestination, the role of women in the church, the legitimacy of artistic representations of Christ, the relation of the church to the "civil magistrate," the importance of missions, and so on.

When people try to list the chief emphases of Reformed theology, they usually mention
• God alone,
• Scripture alone,
• Christ alone,
• grace alone, and
• faith alone.

During the impassioned debates of recent years, many in the PC(USA) have pointed to the "Great Ends of the Church" (G-1.0200):
• the proclamation of the gospel for the salvation of humankind;
• the shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God;
• the maintenance of divine worship;
• the preservation of the truth;
• the promotion of social righteousness; and
• the exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven to the world.

Adopted by the United Presbyterian Church in 1916 as a supplement to the Westminster Confession, they were carried over in the union that constituted the UPCUSA in 1958. They have been seen as a consensus statement that can be agreed to across the theological spectrum.

In a very different vein, a set of five Presbyterian "fundamentals" was adopted by the General Assemblies of the PCUSA in 1910, 1916, and 1923 as "essential and necessary articles of faith." They included
• biblical inerrancy,
• virgin birth,
• substitutionary atonement,
• Christ's bodily resurrection, and
• his miracles.

Then they threw their point away by adding that "others are equally so."

Subsequent General Assemblies reversed course, on the grounds that the General Assembly has no power to add ordination requirements beyond those spelled out in the Book of Order, that it is inappropriate to insist on exact formulations that have only human authority, and that diversity must be respected in a spirit of tolerance.

In 1965 the Presbyterian Lay Committee was organized and funded by J. Howard Pew with the stated purpose of opposing the Confession of 1967 and the entire concept of the Book of Confessions. The Lay Committee recognized that the inclusion of other confessions would compromise the exclusive authority of the Westminster standards. The Lay Committee was thus setting itself in the tradition of "strict subscription" and resisting the historic Reformed position that doctrinal statements are confessional in character, not claiming an authority of their own.

Recently we have seen the enunciation of a new "three fundamentals" by the self-proclaimed "confessing church movement" -- infallibility of Scripture, no ordination of homosexuals, and salvation through Christ alone.

The Presbytery of San Diego in June of 2003 adopted a list of "guidelines," including six "essential tenets," seven "Reformed distinctives," and a long list of "questions for examinations" that reinforce many of the same points. While the presbytery claims that it is not demanding "strict subscription," there are justifiable fears that these "guidelines" will be used in exactly that way, as a litmus test by which to admit or exclude candidates for ordination.

Indeed, attempts are currently being made to get the General Assembly to draw up a list of "essential tenets" that would be binding upon all governing bodies. The Presbytery of John Calvin in Missouri has adopted an overture (04-03) calling on the 216th General Assembly to "reorganize and improve" three sections in chapter 2 of the Form of Government (G-2.0200-0500) and make them "essential tenets" to which all ordained persons must subscribe. If adopted, an amendment to the Book of Order would be sent to the presbyteries, with slight rearrangements of these three sections -- but also with the official declaration that these are "among the tenets deemed essential to an understanding of the Reformed faith, as expressed in the confessions of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)."

When we read chapter 2 of the Book of Order, it becomes clear that it is a prelude to chapter 3, cited above, which emphasizes the mission of the church as an expression of God's gracious purposes for humanity. There are many topics, furthermore, that are not mentioned at all in these paragraphs, or are dealt with more helpfully in other places.

In actual experience as they teach and preach, many Presbyterians discover widely admired statements that have never been adopted officially. That happened with A Declaration of Faith, adopted by the PCUS General Assembly in 1976, rejected by the presbyteries, and then approved by the 1977 Assembly for study purposes. Although proposals have been made several times that the reunited PC(USA) include the Declaration in the Book of Confessions, no General Assembly has seen fit to send it to the presbyteries. And yet the Declaration is widely used for teaching and worship, since it is a confession that speaks the language of modern times and deals with contemporary issues while presenting a comprehensive summary of the faith.

IV. Who should make the judgment?

The Presbytery of San Diego, in justifying its adoption of "guidelines" for persons seeking ordination, cites one of the principles of church order (G-1.0302): that every church, union, or association "is entitled to declare the terms of admission into its communion, and the qualifications of its ministers and members . . ." This raises a major issue of procedure.

It is one thing for a governing body to interpret the Book of Confessions and make a judgment whether a person seeking ordination is within legitimate bounds. That is the tradition of American Presbyterianism, which has left this to the governing bodies and has refused to draw up a specific list of essentials. It is another thing for the governing body to add requirements to the Constitution; and it would certainly be doing this if it insisted on use of the exact language of its own statements. This would be a refusal to acknowledge that alternative language might be entirely legitimate, and it would violate the old tradition that a candidate might have permissible "scruples" about some features of the Book of Confessions.

Presbyteries often draw up a list of "suggested questions" for persons wanting to become members of those presbyteries. These are not slanted in one direction or another; neither are they made hard-and-fast requirements. They are intended to ensure that every potential member is treated the same way and that the presbytery gets a reliable understanding of the person's theological perspective. At the same time these presbyteries are careful not to impose their own statements as a binding test.

The responsibility of the ordaining body (the session or the presbytery), and of the person being ordained, cannot be avoided (see G-0108b). Ordination inevitably depends upon a discernment process, and this must be based upon inquiry and dialogue about many aspects of Christian faith and life, not upon set formulas. Not only individuals but presbyteries need to be engaged in continual inquiry.

____

Clearly there are widely differing styles of stating the "essential tenets" of the Reformed faith. Furthermore, the richness of the faith cannot be reduced to a few sentences. If it were to be tried, these affirmations could themselves be interpreted in different ways.

We like to affirm the mystery of God and God's ways. To say that they are mysterious is not, of course, to say that they are unknown; rather it is to say that, even when they are revealed to us and are understood in part, we cannot presume that we have achieved a final and completely adequate formulation. That is why our church says that its doctrinal statements are "confessional," not dogmatic. That is why we acknowledge the legitimacy of different kinds of language and different ways of speaking. And that is why we continue to acknowledge the need for conversation and mutual discernment, without the idolatry of making specific formulations into a shibboleth by which to make quick and easy judgments.

For further reading

Several books deal with the controversy during the Twenties: Loetscher's The Broadening Church (Pennsylvania, 1954), Longfield's The Presbyterian Controversy (Oxford, 1991), and Weston's Presbyterian Pluralism (Tennessee, 1997).