San Diego Presbytery issues "guidelines" for examining candidates

by Gene TeSelle, Witherspoon Society Issues Analyst  
[6-25-03]

On June 17 the Presbytery of San Diego adopted a document entitled Essential Tenets and Reformed Distinctives. It describes itself as "guidelines for preparing and evaluating candidates through the Committee on Preparation for Ministry, directing [sic!] incoming ministers through the Committee on Ministry and the Presbytery of San Diego, and educating and training." Within a few days it was posted on Presbyweb and attracted attention throughout the church.

(The document is 31 pages long, and is available on the Presbytery website, in PDF format.)

Any reflective reader of the document is likely to raise several questions: Why did you do it at all? Why did you pick out these themes? Why do you phrase these as you do? And why do you frame it primarily in terms of exclusions?

The document came out of the presbytery's committees on Ministry and Preparation for Ministry; apparently the chief drafters were the Rev. Kirk Bottomly of Fallbrook and the Rev. Mark Slomka of La Jolla, both pastors of "confessing" congregations. According to the introduction it grew out of a number of actual situations in which these committees did not want to disappoint a candidate for ministry or a congregation that had just called a pastor, even though there were misgivings about the person's views. These committees are characterized as "the primary credentialing committees of our presbytery," delegated by the presbytery to perform a "gatekeeping function." They felt a need, therefore, for a summary of "essentials" or "theological non-negotiables," not only for making judgments at the point of examining candidates but in giving helpful advice to potential elders about what it means to be Presbyterian. Thus it is described as a "tool for instructing our congregations," as a "reference for training our prospective church officers," and as "guidelines" for preparing and evaluating candidates.

There is a broader context, of course. The document picks up the recent slogan that "theology matters," repeats the judgment "we are in the midst of a theological crisis," and declares that the church is ordaining people who "do not know or believe the essential tenets expressed in our confessions." Both the framework and the content indicate that it comes down on one side of a current controversy, in the course of which we have already seen witch hunts being conducted, individuals being targeted, and judgments being made on the basis of overly simple stereotypes. Paul Rolf Jensen, having filed charges against nearly two dozen Presbyterians over issues of sexuality, has now broadened his strategy to filing accusations of heresy that would prevent a minister's transfer to another presbytery.

The drafters were aware of treading on contested ground. While anyone being ordained must "sincerely receive and adopt the essential tenets of the Reformed faith," the Presbyterian church has resolutely refused to specify what those "essential tenets" are. The drafters knew that they could not insist upon anything more than what is contained in the Book of Confessions and the Book of Order (this was made clear when the General Assembly in 1927 adopted the Swearingen Report that resolved the last fundamentalist controversy). They knew about the Adopting Act of 1729, which permitted candidates to state their "scruples" about the Westminster standards and gave presbyteries the responsibility to judge whether these were within legitimate bounds. They knew that they might be accused of insisting on strict "subscription" to their statement, and they deny any such intent; the document declares that it is not intended to be a "strict formulation" and "has no authority in itself" but only offers "guidelines" which a committee may use "at its discretion" in assessing a candidate. Since the principal purpose of the document is to be "helpful" in training, educating, and guiding, they acknowledge that it could be misused as a "blunt and inappropriate instrument" in situations that require sensitivity and compassion rather than harsh judgment.

Yet they also quote a statement in the classic principles of church order (G-1.0302), adding their own interpretation of it: "Every Christian church, or union or association of particular churches [such as the Presbytery of San Diego] [emphasis in the original], is entitled to declare the terms of admission into its communion, and the qualifications of its ministers and members." Here the Presbytery of San Diego appears to be claiming for itself the powers assigned to the constitution of the PC(USA).

The body of the document has three parts: six "essential tenets," seven "Reformed distinctives" (the use of this word as a noun seems to be a "distinctive" of the evangelical subculture), and "questions for examination," inviting candidates to "look over them so that we may have a conversation about them."

"Essential Tenets"

The "essential tenets" include the authority of Scripture, God, humanity's original righteousness and fall into sin, Jesus Christ as the incarnation of the eternal Word, Jesus Christ's atoning work, and salvation by grace through faith. Under each heading there is a summary statement, backed up with citations of Scripture and the confessions, and then a declaration (often appropriating the stirring language of the Barmen Declaration) of "what is not affirmed." This, of course, is the basis on which positions will be judged to be off base.

Frequently a doctrinal perspective is phrased in such pejorative language that it seems to condemn itself, when in fact it may not be a "position" so much as an open question that deserves, in the declared spirit of this document, serious consideration and careful formulation. That kind of wording makes it all too easy to "pin" a candidate as holding a doctrine that "attempts to subordinate biblical authority to any human authority, cultural norm, or ideology," "distorts the gospel message or holds it captive to culture," or "elevates sociology, psychology, education or any other discipline above the clear witness of Scripture."

Statements like these seem to ignore the confessions' own awareness of the need to interpret Scripture, to say nothing of doctrine. Even the 16th-century Second Helvetic says we must consider the language used, the circumstances, and the need to interpret everything with the "rule of faith and love" (C-5,010). The Scots Confession similarly says, "We dare not receive or admit any interpretation which is contrary to any principal point of our faith, or to any other plain text of Scripture, or to the rule of love" (C-3.18). The Confession of 1967 is even more explicit about the influence of "views of life, history, and the cosmos which were then current" (C-9.29).

One would hope that these perspectives of the confessions are not being dismissed as distorting the message of the Bible. In some circles, that seems to be exactly how they are viewed. A recent article by John H. Adams (The Layman Online, February 24, 2003) opposed any notion that Scripture is "culturally biased" or that its interpretation can be "culturally shaped." He objected, furthermore, that our Book of Confessions offers Presbyterians a "multiple choice" approach to major issues, and he contrasts it unfavorably with the Westminster Confession. This is the same tune that was sung in 1965 when the Lay Committee was formed in order to fight C-67 and the whole Book of Confessions. Contempt is still being poured on the confessions of the PC(USA) and the fullness of their teachings.

The positions condemned in the San Diego document include these: that the Scriptures "contain the Word of God but are not in themselves the Word of God" (compare C-9.27, which says that the Spirit "bears unique and authoritative witness through the Holy Scriptures, which are received and obeyed as the Word of God written"); identification of God as a "goddess" (we know where this comes from, but is the implication that God is a "male god"?); the notion "that sin is part of [God's] original plan to educate and improve humankind" (compare C-6.014-021, which was worded quite intentionally by the Westminster Assembly to permit supralapsarianism -- a position advocated more recently by Reformed theologians as varied as Schleiermacher and Barth, who hold that God condemns for the sake of saving).

There is repeated insistence that biblical narratives, especially of the miracles, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, are "historically true" and also that these events are "supernatural." The meaning of the latter term shifts considerably, moving well beyond either the literal meaning of sentences or empirical confirmation of those sentences, for the document itself speaks of the "supernatural reality and power of the kingdom of God," suggests that Christians "experience a supernatural dimension to their life," and asserts that the sacraments involve "a supernatural presence" and "supernaturally perform what they signify," though it denies that the sacraments "confer grace whether or not they are received in faith."

There is much concern that "atonement, substitutionary sacrifice, expiation for sins on the basis of Christ's death," might be rejected as "obsolete, unworthy, unessential, or irrelevant," or that language about his "substitutionary death" in taking on the "curse" for sin might be considered "primitive, barbaric, violent, and unworthy of God." Such language seems to foreclose reflection on a complex topic. It is in fact moderated by a passage very similar to one in the Confession of 1967 (C-9.09), though it is not cited, to the effect that salvation is described using various kinds of language.

Finally, there is repeated insistence that Jesus Christ is the sole mediator and source of salvation, without acknowledgment of many questions, raised by the confessions themselves, concerning the scope of salvation and how it is mediated to those outside the sphere of Christian proclamation (C-3.04, C-5.086-092, C-6.066, 6.192C-9.31).

"Reformed Distinctives"

The "Reformed distinctives" offer some relief from this dogmatic atmosphere, probably because they are framed in language that is proclamatory and pastoral, practical rather than theoretical, and in this sense more in the spirit of Calvin and Barth, to name only two principal (though "subordinate") authorities in the Reformed tradition. The seven distinctives are election for salvation and service, covenant and covenant life, the sacraments, sanctification and the work of the Holy Spirit, the priesthood of all believers, the mission of the church, and stewardship.

Several aspects of the Book of Confessions, however, seem to be missing, even in this proclamatory and practical context.

The classic confessions had a section on "the civil magistrate" (C-3.24, C-5.252-260, C-6.127-130), though they were written in an age quite different from our own, raising as many questions as they answer. The Confession of 1967 has much to say about "reconciliation in society" (C-9.43-47), and the Brief Statement, citing Scripture and the earlier confessions, mentions Jesus' relationships with the powers of his time (C-10.2), condemns the way we "accept lies as truth, exploit neighbor and nature, and threaten death to the planet entrusted to our care" (C-10.3), and calls on us "to unmask idolatries in Church and culture, to hear the voices of peoples long silenced, and to work with others for justice, freedom, and peace" (C-10.4).

The Confession of 1967, following in the spirit of earlier confessions (especially the Barmen Declaration!) warns against religion, including Christian religion, as perhaps the chief instance of human pride, corrected repeatedly by the reconciling word of the gospel and often benefiting from the insights of non-Christians (C-9.41-42; cf. also C-9.12-13).

The same confession, building on an older Reformation tradition about the way the gospel is to be proclaimed, warns against the church's inclination to over-identify the gospel with any nation, any way of life, any class, any finite reality. It makes four strong points in the section on "Reconciliation in Society" (I use the inclusive language version):

Precisely in connection with proclamation of the gospel we are called to do more than make judgments of orthodoxy.

Questions for Examination

This section is commended to examiners and examinees as points for "conversation." The six essentials and seven distinctives are briefly summarized and pointed questions are asked, with the same emphases as before.

Perhaps the chief value of this section is as a study guide for those going into ordination examinations, either the written ones read by the Presbyteries' Cooperative Committee or the oral ones before the presbytery. It will doubtless function much like the "crib notes" that circulate among seminarians as they look ahead to these examinations. It is helpful in raising a number of topics -- for "conversation," if the document's self-characterization is in fact followed. One would hope, then, that examinees will not feel obliged to repeat the formulations they find here, and that examiners will not use the document as a litmus test by which to condemn those who cannot in sincerity use these formulations but can offer additional perspectives and alternative language.

We should probably expect this document to be adapted and adopted by other presbyteries. At best it can be a discussion-starter. It is not unrealistic, however, to fear that it will be used precisely as a "blunt instrument" to condemn those who fail to use the shibboleths that prevail in some circles but are by no means an adequate expression of the Reformed faith and its confessions. If it should be used as a Procrustean bed to trim ordinands to its dimensions, there will be every reason for filing judicial complaints about the document and those who implement it.