Task force examines clash over Scripture in confessions
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, February 24, 2003
DALLAS – The Theological Task Force on Peace, Purity and Unity took a look at a 36-year-old confessional dilemma that has paralleled the loss of 1.72-million Presbyterians in the mainline denomination, beginning the year after Presbyterians adopted a multiple-choice Book of Confessions.
Excerpt from the
Confession of 1967, Chapter 2
The Scriptures, given under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, are nevertheless the words of men, conditioned by the language, thought forms, and literary fashions of the places and times at which they were written. They reflect views of life, history, and the cosmos which were then current. The church, therefore, has an obligation to approach the Scriptures with literary and historical understanding. As God has spoken his word in diverse cultural situations, the church is confident that he will continue to speak through the Scriptures in a changing world and in every form of human culture. That dilemma came to a head with the Confession of 1967 which, for the first time in the history of America’s Presbyterian Church, said Scripture was culturally biased and that modern interpretation also could be culturally shaped.
With increasing tendency, Presbyterians who argue that the denomination should allow the ordination of practicing homosexuals are claiming that Scripture condemning homosexual behavior was based on the cultural norms of Biblical times and that they are irrelevant for today.
In contrast, the Westminster Confession, the standard for the Presbyterian Church (USA) and its predecessor denominations, did not allow culture to diminish Scripture’s authority or reshape its doctrines.
The task force read three statements about the nature and interpretation of the Bible from three confessions: the II Helvetic, Westminster and the Confession of 1967. The focus of one of the task force’s discussions during its meeting in Dallas on Feb. 19-22 was the contrast between Westminster and the Confession of 1967.
Excerpt from Westminster, Chapter 1
… All which are given by inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life. … The authority of the holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or Church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the Author thereof; and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God. … The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture, is the Scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it may be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly. … The Supreme Judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decress of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture. As has been their practice during all five of their meetings, the members of the task force did not suggest that any one confessional standard should govern the denomination’s view of Scripture. But they did note – some with apparent surprise – that Westminster and the Confession of 1967 said entirely different things about Scripture.
Westminster does not claim that Scripture is inerrant, but it comes close. It describes the “infallible truth” and “divine inspiration” of Scripture – and it says the canon is closed, that there is no divine revelation beyond the recorded truth of Scripture.
“The main focus of Westminster appeared to be Scripture as the sufficient, authoritative, powerful way we know God and as a rule of faith and life, divinely inspired,” said Joan Kelley Merritt of Bellevue, Wash.
She was one of three task force members who reported their impressions after small groups considered the three confessional statements on Scripture.
The Rev. Jack Haberer, pastor of Clear Lake Presbyterian Church in Houston, gave the report of the small-group discussion about the Confession of 1967.
Haberer said there are marked differences between Westminster and C-67, as it is called. “The traditional Presbyterian keyword of righteousness becomes reconciliation” in C-67,” he said. “These are very pungent words that carry a lot of weight.” Also, C-67 “highlights Christ over the written word. People say, ‘The Jesus I know would never teach that way. C-67 tends to get used that way.'”
The first chapter of Westminster forms what Dr. Mark Achtemeier, professor of theology at Dubuque Theological Seminary in Iowa, called “epistemology;” that is, that it is a summary of how one can know the Christian faith and the saving work of Christ, not a document to be worshipped itself.
C-67 addresses Scripture in its second chapter, referring to the Bible as the written word (with a lower case “w”) and Jesus as the “Word incarnate” – “the one sufficient revelation of God is Jesus Christ, the Word of God, to whom the Holy Spirit bears unique and authoritative witness through the Holy Scriptures, which are received and obeyed as the word of God written.”
C-67 “does give some legitimization to the theological diversity in the church – not an unlimited range, but there is a range of theological diversity … that is invited as over and against Westminster,” Haberer said. “Some people see it as the bane of the church. We need to be aware of that.”
Jack HabererWhile C-67 “does not define the boundaries, we can define the center, which is Jesus Christ,” he added.
Haberer, who is president of Presbyterians For Renewal, has played a prominent role as a traveling spokesman for the denomination’s effort to promote “unity in diversity.” He once was one of the leaders of a national campaign to thwart a movement to repeal the denomination’s “fidelity/chastity” ordination standard.
One member of the task force suggested that Westminster, by beginning with the Bible instead of Jesus, had the wrong priority.
But Dr. John “Mike” Loudon of First Presbyterian Church in Lakeland, Fla., said Westminster said plenty about Jesus and the nature of God, but that Westminster began intentionally to frame the basis on which people could make assertions about the Christian faith and the saving work of Christ.
Dr. Milton J. Coalter, acting president of Louisville Theological Seminary, said Westminster starts with the Bible and the view that “there is nothing new under the sun. The test is, is it of the devil or Christ? You check that against the Scripture. Is there a Christ separate from the Scripture? Where do you get revelation if not from Scripture? Where do you test those experiences if not from Scripture? I find the thing on C-67 peculiar. I don’t know Christ other than through Scripture.”
Likewise, added Loudon, “We don’t know morality apart from Scripture.”
But Achtemeier said C-67 does “authorize a more faithful practice than does Westminster … precisely over this question of the human context of Scripture.” He said Westminster “cuts off textual inquiry.”
Dr. Barbara Wheeler, president of Auburn Theological Seminary, said there is another source for knowing Jesus – “by Christ’s own body. Westminster is pretty negative about councils and human decisions, and C-67 does correct that.”
But Wheeler added, “If anything happens that this denomination comes apart, I want to take Westminster.” With a big grin, Loudon responded: “You’ll take Westminster; we’ll take the endowment.”
Achtemeier was encouraged by the edginess – thoroughly polite, nonetheless – of some of the conversation over Westminster and C-67.
“I am relieved to be out of the gate on some of the issues that are vital here,” he said. “I really don’t have the feeling that we have major divisions simmering. I find that hopeful and exciting.”
The Rev. Gary Demarest, a retired California pastor who is co-moderator of the task force, issued a word of caution: “We don’t advance the kingdom by attacking and destroying each other. What is happening here is affirming my belief that the essence is attitude.”
After a discussion of the confessional statements about Scripture, Coalter sounded as if he were ready to get on with the business of facing the issues that divide the denomination. “I don’t think raised voices or excited voices among us is a bad thing,” he said.
Again, though, Demarest urged caution: “The Westminster Task Force on Peace, Purity and Unity met 1,160 days over six years with 151 people.”