Puritan Board Sophomore
As part of the Act, Declaration and Testimony of the Associate Presbytery (1736) after the Secession, some of Professor Simson's errors, as a professor of divinity in Glasgow within the Church of Scotland, are enumerated. I found the following in particular interesting as it addresses a hedonistic interpretation of WSC 1 which has recently prevailed among what could be considered the Young, Reformed, and Restless crowd.
6. Mr Simson likewise affirms and maintains,--That "a regard to our own happiness, and the prospect of our eternal felicity and blessedness in the enjoyment of God in heaven, ought to be our chief motive in serving the Lord upon earth*." He also affirms, upon the answer to the first question of the Catechism,--That "our glorifying God being the means,--is subordinate to our enjoyment of him for ever which is our ultimate end:" and That, "were it not for the prospect of happiness, we could not, and therefore would not serve God."--As Mr Simson perverts the doctrine held forth from the scriptures cited upon the answer to the first question of our Larger and Shorter Catechisms: So as the Committee of the General Assembly 1727 very justly observe (State of the Process p. 277) What is set forth in the above article is contrary to the instinct of that new nature the Lord endueth all his people with in regeneration; which makes them, by the further influence of grace, desire to serve God for himself and his supereminent excellencies and not merely or chiefly for the prospect of their own happiness; whence it is their greatest burden, that they cannot more serve him for himself. And considering how much all men are bound to make the glory of God their chief end, though yet they are called herewith to pursue happiness; and likewise that it is through a prevailing respect to God's honour and glory, and not a mere or chief respect to our own happiness, that the difference between nature and grace is to be cleared to the doubtful Christian. Therefore,--it is no small dishonour to God, to teach what is set down in the above articles and that the contrary was necessary to be taught.