Why the 1788 Revision?

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

I wold like to have a discussion on why the 1788 American revision of the Westminster Confession by the American church was necessary and any historical as well as theological reasons for the removal of certain texts and the modification of others.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

...and by the way "because they were wrong" is not a sufficient answer...

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Although the seeds of pluralistic Enlightenment thinking can be traced back a long ways (the 1598 Edict of Nantes, the cry for toleration by Independents and Nonconformists in the 17th century, the 1729 Adopting Act of Synod, etc.), the 1788 American revisions to the Westminster Confession (which makes it a different confession than the original promulgated in 1646, as I have argued elsewhere) parallels in large measure the Constitutional Convention that took place in Philadelphia in 1787 at the same time and place the united Presbyterian Synods of New York and Philadelphia met to propose what became the 1788 American revisions. Gary North, Political Polytheism, pp. 543-547, discusses this historical parallel in some detail. The removal of the establishment principle from the Westminster Confession coincides with the antiestablishmentarianism (or voluntaryism) of the U.S. Constitution promulgated at the same time.

 

[jwithnell]

I'm working off the top of my head here, but if memory serves me correctly, the changes were to remove a role for the national king and to remove references to the pope as the Antichrist. If my memory is correct, the latter was important because some in the reformed circles saw the consolidation of power in Rome under a pope as the start of the Antichrist from which predictions could be made regarding the time of the return of Christ. In other words, the reason to change the pope reference wasn't necessarily due to a warming of relations with Rome, but to nip a theological dead end.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

The removal of the reference to the Pope as Antichrist was not part of 1788 revisions. That was left in place until the 1903 revisions.

 

[Scott1]

Can someone tell us exactly what the "revisions" were?

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Can someone tell us exactly what the "revisions" were?

The link in post #3 provides a list of the revisions made in 1788.

 

[Scott1]

The OPC web site has a summary of the changes that might be helpful:
American Revisions to the Westminster Confession of Faith

It says of the changes:

Though the American revisions to the Confession of Faith are not insignificant, yet, compared to the total length of the Confession, they are quite minor, involving 145 words out of 12,063. Below is a comparison of the two versions

Maybe someone can figure out how to display the changes in table format on a post so we can view them conveniently and do side-by-side comparison.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Keep in mind that the OPC revisions do include two revisions made in 1903 rather than 1788 (for example, the Pope as Antichrist deletion). Also keep in mind that the Westminster Larger Catechism (WLC 109) was revised in 1788 as well.

 

[Scott1]

The OPC web site, in an article by Dr Hart, explains the substance of the revisions in 1789:

The substance of the revision was to reformulate the Westminster Divines' teaching on the civil magistrate. The Westminster Assembly had been called by Parliament, and its affirmations about the role and function of the government, especially in ecclesiastical matters, reflected a situation in which the state exerted control over the church as part of the price of religious establishment. The American revision of 1787-1789 took into account the new situation in the United States, where the state had no authority over the church.


The most notable revisions were made in the chapters on the civil magistrate and synods and councils in the Confession of Faith. In the original version of chapter 23, the Divines declared that "for the better effecting whereof, [the civil magistrate] has the power to call synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God" (23.3). Reverence for George Washington aside, the prospect of giving him the power to call an assembly or synod did not make much sense by 1789. So the American revision changed that section to assert that civil magistrates, as "nursing fathers," had the duty "to protect the church of our common Lord, without giving the preference to any denomination of Christians above the rest, in such a manner that all ecclesiastical persons whatever shall enjoy the full, free, and unquestioned liberty of discharging every part of their sacred functions, without violence or danger" (23.3). Gone was the power of the state to convene an assembly and the duty to insure that such church bodies conducted their business "according to the mind of God."


Furthermore, the American revision went on to affirm the principle of religious freedom and asserted that the civil magistrate had a duty to protect that liberty, even including the freedom of infidels: "It is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the person and good name of all their people, in such an effectual manner as that no person be suffered, either upon pretense of religion or of infidelity, to offer any indignity, violence, abuse, or injury."


American Presbyterians undertook a similar revision in chapter 31 on synods and councils. Here they deleted entirely section 2 from the original version, which gave further direction to civil magistrates about their participation in ecclesiastical assemblies. The civil magistrate was mentioned in the revised chapter only in paragraph 4 (old number 5), which now stated that the church is not to "handle or conclude" any matter of civil polity, except for "cases extraordinary," to satisfy the conscience of the church, or to comply with a request from the civil magistrate.