Let me preface this article with just a brief word about the importance of creeds and confessions in the history of the Christian church, particularly for those visitors who are not really familiar with creedal formulations. Creeds and confessions are an organized and systematic summary of fundamental doctrines taught in the Bible, presenting what R. C. Sproul described as "a coherent and unified understanding of the whole scope of Scripture." Their purpose is to reflect the authoritative truth of God revealed in Scripture and protect the church against false teachings that stray from sound doctrine, in accordance with the God-given duty of the church to guard and contend for the true faith once for all delivered to the saints. Some creeds are ecumenical, affirmed by the universal Christian church (e.g., Nicene Creed), while confessional standards are more particular, affirmed by specific denominations (e.g., the Dutch Reformed subscribe to the Three Forms of Unity: The Belgic Confession, the Canons of Dort, and the Heidelberg Catechism). Given their critical importance, I personally believe that questions pertaining to creeds and confessions should be taken seriously.
Having said that, I encountered just such a question posed by a young-earth creationist who didn't understand how someone could claim to be faithful to the Westminster Confession of Faith while at the same time maintaining a view on origins seemingly at odds with its statements regarding that subject. (He was confounded by typically orthodox Presbyterians affirming and defending the earth being several billion years old.) For example, it says that God created the world and everything in it "in the space of six days." As far as he was concerned, those who wrote the Confession in the seventeenth century meant six consecutive normal days, which he took to be the common and traditional understanding of that period. With the context now established, he posed his question: "Since confessional documents reflect what the writers understood the Bible to be saying, can one promote a view not intended by the writers and yet still be faithful to the Confession?" I don't think a simple answer is possible upfront because, to me, it feels like there is a bit of nuance here that needs to be unpacked first. Now, I could be wrong about this—after all, I am just an average layman with no expertise—but here is what I think.
To the best of their ability by the grace of God, those responsible for composing the Confession—they were called "divines" (i.e., Doctors of Divinity or theologians)—meant nothing other than what Scripture meant. As such, any view that is produced by a careful and responsible exegesis of Scripture, consistent with sound hermeneutic principles, should also be faithful to the Confession. If the divines thought that the days of creation were normal 24-hour days but the meaning in Scripture was, for example, indefinitely long ages, then the meaning in Scripture is what the Confession intends. As far as I know, what the divines as individuals happened to believe is not entirely relevant, as the Confession is not a biographical sketch of seventeenth-century divines but a summary of biblical doctrine. The Confession is self-consciously subordinate to Scripture, serving to reflect and affirm the fundamental doctrines taught in Scripture. Even the authority of confessional documents is derivative, as they are authoritative only to the extent that they reflect and affirm the only supreme authority, the inspired and infallible word of God. So it's the meaning contained in Scripture which the Confession intends to communicate, not the beliefs of seventeenth-century divines. (Moreover, it is Scripture that is authoritative, inspired, and infallible, not the Confession or the divines who composed it, nor the traditional views of their era.)
As explained in the "Report of the Creation Study Committee" from 1999 by the Presbyterian Church in America, what was meant in the Westminster Standards by the phrase "in the space of six days" should be determined by what they wrote as the Westminster Assembly, not what they thought as individuals. "It is not a sound principle of interpretation to take the statements of individuals as defining the intent of a deliberative body." [1] Francis Beattie would have agreed with this, for as he writes in his commentary on the Westminster Standards, "It is not necessary to discuss at length the meaning of the term days here used. The term found in the Standards is precisely that which occurs in Scripture. [...] The caution of the teaching on this point, in simply reproducing Scripture, is worthy of all praise" (emphasis mine). [2] It is also worth adding that the Assembly was seeking to confess the faith common to all, notwithstanding the advanced learning of the divines themselves (e.g., consider the reserved infralapsarian language in the Standards, despite the force of supralapsarian views).
So with all that said, here now is a more succinct answer: Can you promote a view that was not believed by those who composed the Confession and yet still be faithful to the Confession? Yes, because the writers are irrelevant. However, you cannot promote a view contrary to Scripture and still be faithful to the Confession.
Now, to go a little bit further, this gentleman believed that you can hold a view that differs from the underlying meaning of the Confession but you are then not being faithful to the Confession. If the Confession means whatever Scripture means, then the problem is much worse than this fellow implied. A view that differs from the meaning of the Confession is not even faithful to Scripture, much less the Confession. The word of God says that he made everything in "six days" (Exo. 20:11) so that's what the Confession says, and it means precisely and only whatever Scripture means. So, these "six days" which the Confession mentions, are they 24-hour periods or indefinitely long ages? As I understand it, that is an exegetical question concerning Scripture, not a biographical or historical question concerning the divines or the church.
John M. Bauer
@JohnMBauer1
Approx. 1,000 words
Footnotes:
Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from the Holy Bible, English Standard Version (ESV), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
[1] "Report of the Creation Study Committee," Studies and Actions of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America, 27th General Assembly (PCA Historical Center – Archives and Manuscript Repository for the Continuing Presbyterian Church, 1999).
[2] Francis R. Beattie, The Presbyterian Standards (1896; repr. Greenville, SC: Southern Presbyterian Press, 1997), 80–81.
No comments:
Post a Comment