On Early Protestantism and the Adopting Act
Michael Lynch agrees with Guy Waters and believes a presbytery may forbid a minister from teaching any exception he may have to the church’s confession. Lynch argues that this is consistent with the approach of early Protestantism. He’s right on the merits but wrong on the details…
On Taking Exceptions and Ordination Vows
Over at Reformation 21, Guy Waters, Professor of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary-Jackson, argues forcefully that a presbytery has the right to tell its members that they are not allowed to teach any exceptions they may have to the Westminster Standards. Waters is addressing this in the context of the PCA, which is similar to my own denomination. I previously wrote on this subject within the EPC, but I believe that the overarching principals are the same.
While Waters was helpful in showing that the PCA has a record of formally stating that presbyteries have this right (a matter in which I was evidently incorrect), he does not adequately address the issue of conscience as it relates to ministerial vows. When ministers take their vows of ordination, they sincerely receive and adopt the Westminster Standards as containing the system of doctrine found in the scriptures. This ordination vow is the same between the PCA and EPC. That pledge can only be made in sincerity if there is an implied “except where I have informed my presbytery that I disagree.” Otherwise it is disingenuous…
On Exceptions and the Binding of Conscience
A few years ago I was sitting in a presbytery meeting of the PCA where several candidates for ordination were under examination. All had taken exception to the Westminster Standard’s prohibition on recreation on the Lord’s Day, and those exceptions had been accepted by the presbytery. A few members of the presbytery informed the candidates that though the exceptions were granted, they were not allowed to teach them as they contradicted the confession. This elicited a large amount of discussion from the gathered presbyters, and the overwhelming consensus reached, and later affirmed at a following meeting after consultation with the PCA’s stated clerk, was that in granting the exception, the presbytery was allowing the candidates to teach what they believed. To do otherwise would be to bind their conscience to something they did not believe scripture commanded, which in turn would violate the Westminster Standards.
In other instances, I have seen candidates take exceptions where they affirm paedocommunion or reject that divorce is permissible under any circumstances. In both cases the candidates stated that they would bind their own conscience and refrain teaching these positions. My observation is that the presbyteries approved them only because of those assurances, although I know pastors who voted against allowing either exception or ordination on the grounds that you cannot forbid a minister from teaching what they believe…
