After my last post Dr. Clark was kind enough to add a comment with a link to the following post on his blog:
Is the Confession of the Substance of Our Faith? « Heidelblog
In it he expands on the distinction between 'substance and accidents' of the reformed faith. He also delves into the entire matter of strict subscription vs good-faith subscription vs. system subscription. When all is said done he really doesn't like any of these three approaches to dealing with our creeds and confessions.
In short, he prefers a different approach altogether -- subscribing to creeds and confessions 'because' (quia in Latin) they are a biblically faithful summary of Scripture. He likens the trends in modern Presbyterianism to be on a different trajectory because it subscribes to creeds and confessions 'insofar as' (quatenus in Latin) they faithfully summarize Scripture. He would like to see Reformed churches jump to the quia rail and amend their creeds and confessions via the normal process of introducing an overture and convincing the church that a certain section is in need of clarification. That is an interesting proposition worthy of further consideration. The difficulty of the PCA amending the Westminster Confession of Faith is that a super majority (over 75%) is required at the initial General Assembly, then a similar majority of the presbyteries must concur, and finally the following General Assembly must approve by that same margin. A tall order indeed.
From where I sit good faith subscription seems to be working.
2 comments:
Dave, thanks for the summary since I didn't take time to read Dr. Clark's essay.
I'd never dissected the various types of subscription before. When I subscribed to the WCF I considered it a "good faith subscription" (with exception noted) to the WCF "quia" (because) the WCF is "a biblically faithful summary of scripture."
Changes in confessional statements never happen overnight. In Dr. Clark's system, what should members do in the period (probably years in length) leading up to a formal change in the confessional statements? Subscribe with exceptions? Subscribe against conscience? Refuse to subscribe? A thorny problem.
I wonder how many confessional churches have ever met the PCA's threshold for modifying its confessions (75% GA, 75% congregations, and 75% GA again). Wow.
Joe,
Subscription is a thorny problem: giving lip service to things you don't believe is wrong (that is the weakness of strict subscription but also Dr. Clark's 'quia' approach. No confession is perfect). Allowing any exception is also highly problematic.
I'd like to think that we could practice good faith subscription while applying Dr. Clark's 'quia' distinction. I guess that it would look like this: "I wholeheartedly affirm the doctrines of the WCF as Biblical. However, there is this issue (recreation on Sabbath, length of creation days, etc.) that I beg to differ on." As long as those doctrines are 'accidents' of the reformed faith then there should be some wiggle room.
The high threshhold to change the WCF is a deterrent to even trying to put forth an overture! I know that the American version was amended (removing the pope as antiChrist) but I cannot recall the date right off hand. I
Post a Comment