Exceptions to the Confession - for Presbyterians

Status
Not open for further replies.

C. Matthew McMahon

Christian Preacher
What do you think are "six" allowable "exceptions" to the Westminster Confession?

In other words, what are six areas of subscriptuon to the standards that in the acceptable parameters of being "deviant" but not "serious error."

I'll give one:
I would say "the distinguishing of the antichrist." The Pope may not be "THE" antichrist, though he is "an" antichrist.
 
Allowable for whom? For teachers? Office bearers? communicant members?

By the way: The American Revision does not include the "Pope =anti-Christ clause", hence there is no need of citing an exception there for the majority of Confessional Presbyterians.
 
Here's what I said to my presbytery:

(for the record, the first exception was ruled "not exceptionable" per stated policy)

Fathers and Brothers of the Presbytery,

I state with firmness of conviction that I hold to no exceptions to the Constitutional documents of the Church, save that which appears below:

1) WCF XXI.5 Though it may have been the intent of the writers to limit singing in worship to the inspired Psalter, I believe singing the whole theology of Scripture (in uninspired hymns) has biblical warrant. (This appears to be the majority position in the PCA.)

2) WCF VII.4 I am very much in doubt that the term "œTestament" meaning a "œwill" is so "œfrequently set forth in Scripture" as was assumed in 1646. In my view it is much more consonant with the historical, religious usage of the Greek term (as we find in the Septuagint) to translate the word with fair consistency as "œcovenant," which in fact modern translations have tended toward since 1900.
 
Originally posted by Peter
Why the number six?

I can see six allowable thus far, and was just curious as to others.

For office bearers Dan.

So far we've named three:

1) antichrist
2) psalms
3) testament

Others?

[Edited on 8-8-2005 by webmaster]
 
1. Chapter XXIII Of the Civil Magistrate
(i.e. 1789 revision or original)

2. Chapter XXIV Of Marriage and Divorce, Section IV
(The PCA revision excludes "The man may not marry any of his wife's kindred, nearer in blood then he may of his own: nor the woman of her husband's kindred, nearer in blood than of her own.")
 
Originally posted by Dan....
By the way: The American Revision does not include the "Pope =anti-Christ clause", hence there is no need of citing an exception there for the majority of Confessional Presbyterians.
This was one of the 1903 revisions, not one from 1788. The OPC chose to adopt two of the 1903 revisions, of which this is one, but not the rest.
The break down as I've determined it for this revision is as follows:
Pope as the Antichrist in CF 25.5
BP (1938); PCUSA (1903); PLAN {of union 1949}: "œThe Lord Jesus Christ is the only head of the Church, and the claim of any man to be the vicar of Christ and the head of the Church is unscriptural, without warrant in fact, and is a usurpation dishonoring to the Lord Jesus Christ." PCUS (1939) "œThe Lord Jesus Christ is the only head of the Church, and the claim of any man to be the vicar of Christ and the head of the Church, is without warrant in fact or in Scripture, even anti-Christian, a usurpation dishonoring to the Lord Jesus Christ." Both versions are in BOFC. OPC (1936) and PCA (1973) omit everything after "œbe head thereof." ARP (1976): "œThere is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can mere man in any sense be the head thereof."
What is known as the consanquity clause has an interesting history as well, but was only first revised in the mainline PCUS/PCUSA in 1886 (interesting same year; I believe there may have been "talks" at the time).
Consanquity Clause in WCF 24.4
The last sentence of 24.4 deleted: ARP; (2001); BP (1938); OPC (1936); PCA (1973); PCUS (1886); PCUSA (1886). RPCNA rejects the last sentence of the paragraph as well (Testimony, 24.21-22). The PCUSA/PCUS went further later; the PCUSA (in 1953) and the PCUS (in 1963) rewrote the original chapter 24 on marriage and divorce. The text of both chapters are incorporated in the PCUSA Book of Confessions, adopted at the union of the PCUS and PCUSA.
The chapter on the Civil Magistrate received treatment far earlier as most know and some have already noted.
The Civil Magistrate--CF 23.3
RPCNA rejects everything after the colon. ARP(1799) and PCUSA(1788) rewrote this section. Following PCUSA are: Book of Confessions; BP, OPC, PCA; PCUS; PCUSA/UPCUSA. The original UPCNA (1858) also changed this.
CF 20.4 and 31.2 have also received revision in various branches of American Presbyterianism.
 
i asked my Pastor this question with reference to the 3 common exceptions in the PCA's Southwest Presbytery and he said that the most common exceptions are:
1-recreation clause of Sabbath
2-6 24 hr days of the Creation week (OEC and FI are allowed under the PCA creation report)
3-singing hymns rather than EP (CCM is allowed)



btw in the 1840's there were 3 GA trials on the consanguinity clause
see: http://www.peterwallace.org/dissertation/4conscience.htm
 
1. Sabbatarianism
2. EP
3. Creation as 6 literal 24 hour days
4. Millennial views
5. pope as the antichirst
6. celebration of holidays
 
Here is what is listed:

1) antichrist
2) psalms
3) testament
4) recreation clause on the Sabbath
5) Civil Magistrate clause removal / addition
6) Marriage and Divorce
7) Millennial views
8) Creation as literal 6

I would also throw in there

9) general equity clause (which allows for Theonomy)

Which of these 9 do you think we should really allow/not allow as exceptions?

Should we "allow" an exception on creation? the law (Sabbath)?
 
1. "in the space of six days"
2. "Testament"
3. "singing of psalms"
4. "recreations"
5. "should not marry with ... papists"
6. "Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist"
7. "[give the bread and the cup] to none who are not then present in the congregation."

Oops, I went over the limit there.
 
"Should we 'allow' an exception on creation? the law (Sabbath)?"

I would say yes for the first, but the second is more problematic.
 
Originally posted by webmaster
Here is what is listed:

1) antichrist
2) psalms
3) testament
4) recreation clause on the Sabbath
5) Civil Magistrate clause removal / addition
6) Marriage and Divorce
7) Millennial views
8) Creation as literal 6

I would also throw in there

9) general equity clause (which allows for Theonomy)

Which of these 9 do you think we should really allow/not allow as exceptions?

Should we "allow" an exception on creation? the law (Sabbath)?

Numbers 1, 5 and 6 are already built into the WCF used by 95% of Presbyterians, so I see no need to concern oneself unless you are in a body that does not accept the American revisions.

Number 7 is not an exception unless one is historic premil (in which case it might be permissible) or dispensational premil (in which case it would not). The confession is neither amil or postmil.

Number 3 is a difference of language, not substance, hence inherently permissible.

Number 2 is permissible, and the de facto interpretation of 95% of WCF churches.

Number 4 is permissible within bounds - recreation with the kids is OK, walks, etc, attending professionla sports, etc. is not

Number 8 is permissible, but I would restrict the teaching.

I would also restrict the teaching on Number 9. (Sorry Jacob).
 
Fred, what are some other exceptions you've run into with candidates?

(Not kooky ones like "I deny the Covenant of Works" - which they do in the South Florida Presbyterary. But ones that would not be "such a big deal for the PCA, or OPC for that matter.")
 
Originally posted by webmaster
Not kooky ones like "I deny the Covenant of Works" - which they do in the South Florida Presbyterary.

Are those who deny this Covenant coming from RTS Orlando? If not, where are they coming from?
 
Originally posted by fredtgreco
[
I would also restrict the teaching on Number 9. (Sorry Jacob).

I am in a very good mood at the moment so I will simply smile and laugh at myself on that one!:lol::D
 
Originally posted by webmaster
Fred, what are some other exceptions you've run into with candidates?

(Not kooky ones like "I deny the Covenant of Works" - which they do in the South Florida Presbyterary. But ones that would not be "such a big deal for the PCA, or OPC for that matter.")

By far the most common are creation (FW, DayAge) and Sabbath (both recreation and "Continental view" ).

I have also seen exceptions regarding:

  • the exclusion of Aramaic in 1.8
  • the use of "passions" in 2.1
  • the implication that all things fall out by secondary causes in 5.2 (a grammatical exception)
  • the language "covenant of works" in 7.2 (not the substance)
  • images of Christ (WLC 109)
  • the expiration of the judicial/civil law in 19.4
  • liberty with respect to alcohol in 20
  • the exclusive nature of the list of elements in 20.3-5

I have also seen some ones that made me think- the best is the one that takes exception to the Standard's language about original sin being linked to our first parents, implying that Eve was somehow involved, and that militated against Romans 5.

Finally, I have heard of whoppers - I won't even go into them here.
 
One of the exceptions that I have been seeing popping up is on peadocommunion but with restrictions concerning teaching this position.
 
Question: How would you define a exception?

I would say that an exception is a view that disturbs the essence or substance of what the Standards teach.
 
Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot
I'm surprised no one has mentioned an exception to the establishment principle as affirmed in WLC #191.

What is the "establishment principle"?

I see nothing in 191 that I would disagree with. :candle:
 
Originally posted by wsw201
One of the exceptions that I have been seeing popping up is on peadocommunion but with restrictions concerning teaching this position.

Yes, this is becoming more and more common. It is also now sure to draw a no vote from me and a speech on the floor.
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot
I'm surprised no one has mentioned an exception to the establishment principle as affirmed in WLC #191.

What is the "establishment principle"?

I see nothing in 191 that I would disagree with. :candle:

The establishment principle is the doctrine that teaches that magistrates and nations have a duty to uphold and confess the true religion.

WLC #191:

Question 191: What do we pray for in the second petition.?

Answer: In the second petition (which is, Thy kingdom come), acknowledging ourselves and all mankind to be by nature under the dominion of sin and Satan, we pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the fulness of the Gentiles brought in; the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption, countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate: that the ordinances of Christ may be purely dispensed, and made effectual to the converting of those that are yet in their sins, and the confirming, comforting, and building up of those that are already converted: that Christ would rule in our hearts here, and hasten the time of his second coming, and our reigning with him forever: and that he would be pleased so to exercise the kingdom of his power in all the world, as may best conduce to these ends.

From whence, we get the concept of a "state" or "established" church. It is directly contrary to the First Amendment of the US Constitution which prohibits the establishment of religion by Congress. The establishment principle has been discussed at some length in various threads. I have recommended works on the subject previously in this thread.
 
I find it very interesting that this is the Scripture citation for that phrase in WLC 191:

1 Timothy 2:1-2. I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
 
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Originally posted by wsw201
One of the exceptions that I have been seeing popping up is on peadocommunion but with restrictions concerning teaching this position.

Yes, this is becoming more and more common. It is also now sure to draw a no vote from me and a speech on the floor.

Been there done that!
 
Originally posted by fredtgreco
I find it very interesting that this is the Scripture citation for that phrase in WLC 191:

1 Timothy 2:1-2. I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

This verse is an important part of the Scriptural testimony of the establishment principle. Note the term "godliness," the promotion of which, as Calvin says, is the chief duty of magistrates, and hence is to be the aim of our prayers.

Calvin on 1 Tim. 2.2:

With all godliness and decency. The second fruit is the preservation of godliness, that is, when magistrates give themselves to promote religion, to maintain the worship of God, and to take care that sacred ordinances be observed with due reverence.

[Edited on 8-9-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]
 
While I am against any exception to the Confession (which amounts to a rejection of a doctrine) of those listed above I think laxity on Sabbath keeping is the worst.

1. Honoring the Sabbath is expressly commanded in the 4th commandment, written by the finger of God, right alongside "honor thy mother and father" and "thou shalt not kill". The mode and means of honoring the sabbath are clearly put down in scripture or easily inferred.
2. It is also very clear in the Confession. With the other exceptions there is at least a little ambiguity.

[Edited on 8-14-2005 by Peter]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top