The Confession of Faith in Cumberland Presbyterian History
Author: Hubert W. Morrow
Source: The Journal of Presbyterian History (1997-), FALL 1998, Vol. 76, No. 3 (FALL 1998), pp. 187-197
Published by: Presbyterian Historical Society
It is important to consider how Cumberland Presbyterians hold and use our confession of faith. Is it a document we remain in respectful dialogue with, or something we use to shut down discussion? Is it treated as a fixed legal code, or as a humble expression of our shared beliefs that can adapt and change with time? This is particularly relevant given recent debates, where prooftexts and certain interpretations of the Confession have been appealed to as an authority to marginalize significant portions of the church’s membership and leadership.
“The Introduction to the 1984 Confession of Faith describes it as a ‘testimony to Jesus Christ’, stating:
“The purpose of a confession of faith is two-fold: (1) to provide a means whereby those who have been saved, redeemed, and reconciled by God through Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit understand and affirm their faith; and (2) to bear witness to God’s saving activity in such a way that those who have not been saved, redeemed, and reconciled might believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and experience salvation…. All testimony to Jesus Christ is made within the context of the church universal and therefore must not be made in a narrow, sectarian manner or spirit…A confession of faith which is evangelical in purpose and spirit seeks to testify to what God has done and is doing in the world to accomplish the redemption of his children.”
We turn to Dr. Hubert Morrow, Cumberland Presbyterian minister, professor, historian and theologian. Dr. Hubert Morrow’s paper on the Confession of Faith in Cumberland Presbyterian history explores the evolving understanding of the nature and authority of a confession of faith within this particular tradition. In general, it is that a confession of faith is regarded as a living document, representing the working theology of the church, which periodically should be reexamined in light of what the church at a given point in its history believes to be the essential teachings of scripture.
Morrow explores the historical context of the suspension of one-half of Cumberland Presbytery’s ministers in 1805 because of their loose subscription to the doctrines of predestination and limited atonement in the Westminster Confession. He highlights the refusal of these ministers to strictly adhere to the confession on certain points, who argued that the confession was not intended to be an infallible standard standard by which the Holy Spirit must be limited, especially when God calls persons to ministry.
According to Morrow, the Cumberland Presbyterian Church’s history, including it’s bold steps to revise its confession of faith in 1814, 1883, and 1984 reflect the following four key affirmations:
(1 ) It is important that a church confess its faith; that it state in a relatively brief and systematic way what are believed to be the essential theological doctrines found in scripture.
(2) It is important that a church remember at all times that such a confession of faith is a “document of human composure,” and therefore reflects the imperfections and limits of human understanding. It should never become a “paper pope.”
(3) A confession of faith should reflect the “working theology” in the preaching of its ministers and in the beliefs of its informed lay persons, but significant revisions should not be done frequently, simply in response to “pop theology.”
(4) A confession of faith should be used as a guide in the study of scripture, not as a tool in enforcing theological conformity.
Dr. Morrow further characterizes the 1984 Confession of Faith as document that reflects the “working theology” of the church within the specific historical context of the latter decades of the 20th Century.
Morrow’s assertions underscore the critical role of dialogue in the life of the church. The process of developing, studying and interpreting a confession of faith itself exemplifies the dialogue between scripture, tradition, the ongoing process of listening to the Holy Spirit, and contemporary understanding. This dialogue is essential to the church’s collective health and vitality. We are called to engage in ongoing conversations—not adversarial trials—about the interpretation and application of scripture and confession, which deepens our mutual understanding as we share insights with one another.
As the Confession of Faith, 1.07 states, “In order to understand God’s word spoken in and through the scriptures, persons must have the illumination of God’s own Spirit. Moreover, they should study the writings of the Bible in their historical settings, compare scripture with scripture, listen to the witness of the church throughout the centuries, and share insights with others in the covenant community.” (Confession of Faith, 1.07). This “sharing of insights” embodies an ongoing dialogue that ensures the confession remains a living, vibrant, and relevant expression of the Christian faith, rather than a rigid “paper pope” used to exclude those with differing views on contemporary social issues.
While it is understandable that some may feel an impulse to use the confession to exclude or marginalize those who disagree with them, it is important to recognize that such an approach undermine the very principles of dialogue and community that are central to the church’s mission. The confession of faith is meant to guide and unify the church, not to serve as a tool for division. By holding the document with humility, respecting diverse perspectives, and engaging in open, respectful conversations about our differences, we honor the spirit of the confession and the broader Christian call to love and understanding.
