August 2001

At its stated meeting on January 27, 2001, the Presbytery approved a recommendation from the Administrative Committee appointing a study committee to “bring recommendations to presbytery concerning allowable exceptions on views of creation.”

In his February 9 letter to the Creation Study Committee (CSC), Moderator RE Burkhalter stated that our mandate was to “provide a recommended position to presbytery on allowable biblical positions concerning Genesis 1ff.”

The six committee members are TE’s Tom Hawkes, chairman (Uptown), Jerry Currin (North Hills), and Joel McCall (Lakeshore) & RE’s Bob Tarte (Uptown), Miles Smith (North Hills) and Howie Donahoe (Christ Covenant). (After Smith and Currin became members of the new Triad Presbytery, they were not replaced and did not vote on the final recommendations.)

We recognize the important and sensitive nature of this committee’s work. Since the doctrine of creation is fundamental to our faith, it is a very important topic. It is therefore natural that presbyters want to examine, closely and carefully, a candidate’s views on creation. At the same time we recognize that each person’s view is held with some considerable passion, making this a very sensitive subject.

It is this committee’s desire to help maintain both the doctrinal purity and the ecclesiastical peace of our denomination by suggesting an approach to the examination of creation views that upholds our unwavering commitment to the authority and inerrancy of scripture while at the same time allowing for some latitude in matters of exegesis where there has been, historically, some variation of interpretation among inerrantists.

The 92-page report of the PCA’s Creation Study Committee can be found on the web. Visit www.PCANEWS.com and click on the current Monthly Discussion Topic and then select Creation from the list.

Committee Tasks

Beside the primary task of bringing recommendations to the Presbytery concerning allowable exceptions on views of creation three other documents were referred to the CSC.

1) The CSC was to recommend a response to an overture from Faith PCA of Mt. Mourne. That overture requested Presbytery:

“To deny licensure or ordination to any candidate whose creation view departs from the Biblical and traditional Westminster Confession view of 6-24 hour days, UNLESS he can, from Scripture, not science, sufficiently and succinctly, justify to the gathered presbyters, not only the possibility of another view, but ALSO the NEED for another view.” (Emphasis original.)

2) Also referred to the CSC, as information, was a two-page paper by TE Bartel on Romans 8:20-22 and its relation to the question of pre-fall animal death.

3) The PCA’s Creation Study Committee report that was presented to the 28^th GA in Tampa in June 2000 was also referred to this committee as information to consider in its recommendations.

Recommendations

I. Confessional & Exegetical - The CSC recommends that Presbytery not adopt a particular interpretation of the confessional phrase “in the space of six days” and allow some latitude in the understanding of the length of the creation days as long as the person being examined can substantially agree with the SSET, supporting their view from Scripture. (Appendix C is offered as information. It was not debated or adopted by the CSC.)

II. Operational - CSC recommends Presbytery adopt the attached “Slippery Slope Exam Tool” and “Tough Questions List” to be used as tools in examinations for licensure, ordination and transfer (Appendix A & B). Each man seeking licensure, ordination or transfer shall summarize his creation views in writing, interacting with the SSET and the TQL. This summary shall be no more than two pages and shall be included in the reports of the Candidates and Credentials Committees and mailed with the docket. Prior to floor exams, the examination committee shall remind the presbyters that the purpose of the exam is to discover a man’s views, not to debate them.

III. The CSC recommends that Presbytery answer the overture from Faith PCA by referring them to these new guidelines for examining candidates and by denying their specific request that required conformity to a 6-24 hour day view in order to be licensed or ordained. (Reasons are offered in the Rational for Recommendations.)

IV. In response to the paper submitted by TE Bartel, the CSC recommends that the issue of the death of animals before the fall not be used as the test for the orthodox interpretation of Genesis 1-3. (Appendix E offered as information. It was not debated or adopted by the CSC.)

Rationale for Recommendations

Confessional

The Westminster Confession of Faith 4:1, Larger Catechism # 15, and Shorter Catechism # 9 each affirm that God’s work of creation was done “in the space of six days” and concern has arisen amongst some in our Presbytery, and in the PCA, that constitutional integrity requires the further specification that these six days were each 24 hours in length (i.e., Calendar Day view).

Below is a summary of reasons why CSC does not recommend adding this further specification. (cf., Appendix C)

1. The PCA’s Creation Study Committee did not conclude that the Calendar Day view was the only proper interpretation of the language of the Westminster Standards (see pp. 2358-2367 as well as the quote below).

Second, the most famous nineteenth-century commentators on the Confession (Shaw, Hodge, Beattie and Warfield) all held day-age views and asserted that the Confession was unspecific on the matter. (PCA CSC Report, p. 2309)

2. Requiring the Calendar Day view as the only permitted view would be a departure from the practice of the PCA to date.

For instance, in light of the discovery and/or interpretation of new historical evidence regarding the Confession’s teaching on creation, some who hold to an “exclusive Calendar Day view” have been encouraged to press vigorously for the whole denomination to adhere to that view and that view only. This would be, irrefutably, a change in the practice of the PCA. (p. 2313, Emphasis added)

3. While there is little doubt that the majority if not all, of the Westminster divines individually held some form of the Calendar Day view, it is not clear that they intended to preclude all other views. (Appendix C)

4. Throughout the history of the Reformed church since Westminster, the length of the creation days has not been an issue of confessional fidelity.

A survey of recent PCA history and practice yields the following. First, it has been assumed in the conservative Reformed community for more than 150 years (on the strength of the witness of Shaw, Hodge, Mitchell and Warfield) that the Confession articulates no particular position on the nature and duration of the creation days and that one’s position on the subject is a matter of indifference. (p. 2312)

5. The creation question was not an issue of confessional fidelity when the PCA formed in 1973.

Second, and in that light, many of the founding fathers of the PCA took their ordination vows in good conscience while holding to non-literal views of the creation days or while holding to that issue as a matter of indifference. It would be less than charitable for any of us to view them as unprincipled. (p. 2312)

6. At the GA level, there is no judicial precedent supporting the contention that non-Calendar Day views are exceptions to the Standards. On the contrary, there have been seven cases in which the PCA has established a degree of flexibility regarding a man’s view of the creation days. (Appendix C)

7. Diversity exists among presbyteries regarding what constitutes an exception to the Standards on this issue. The CSC surveyed the 53 English-speaking PCA presbyteries and only 23% of those responding consider every non-Calendar Day view to be an exception to the Standards and only 4 of those 7 restrict the teaching of such views. (Appendix D: PCA Survey)

8. Central Carolina’s own recent practice has not regarded non-Calendar Day views as exceptions. Within the last year, Presbytery has received men holding other views without recording them as exceptions: For example, TE Hiatt - Analogical (ordination), RE Burkhalter - Framework (licensure), TE Marcey - Day-Age (transfer).

9. The 29th GA in Dallas declined to adopt Overture 7 from Calvary and Overture 23 from Mississippi Valley. These overtures asked the Assembly to stipulate that “the Westminster Standards’ phrase ‘in the space of six days' means that the six days of creation were days of normal duration.” The overtures would have required every candidate who did not hold the Calendar Day view to request an exception to the Confession.

Exegetical

The SSET (Appendix A) is drawn largely from the statements of the PCA’s CSC on what is required for a creation view to be orthodox. Below are consensus conclusions from that denominational study committee report.

The orthodox view includes the following elements: that Scripture is the inerrant Word of God and self-interpreting, the full historicity of Genesis 1-3, the unique creation of Adam and Eve in God’s image as our first parents, and Adam as the covenant head of the human race. A necessary corollary of this view is the fact that the curse and the resultant discord in the universe began with the sin of Adam. It is the incomprehensible God who has revealed himself clearly in nature and in Scripture. He has revealed exactly what He intended, and those area which are not revealed belong to the Lord our God (Deut. 29:29). (PCA CSC Report, p. 2366 of website document.)

All the Committee members join in these affirmations: the Scriptures, and hence Genesis 1-3, are the inerrant word of God. Genesis 1-3 is a coherent account from the hand of Moses. That history, not myth, is the proper category for describing these chapters; and furthermore that their history is true. In these chapters, we find the record of God’s creation of the heavens and the earth ex nihilo; of the special creation of Adam and Eve as actual human beings, the parents of all humanity (hence they are not the products of evolution from lower forms of life.) We further find the account of an historical fall, that brought all humanity into an estate of sin and misery, and of God’s sure promise of a Redeemer. Because the Bible is the word of the Creator and Governor of all there is, it is right for us to find it speaking authoritatively to matters studied by historical and scientific research. We also believe that acceptance of, say, non-geocentric astronomy is consistent with full submission to Biblical authority. We recognize that a naturalistic worldview and true Christian faith are impossible to reconcile, and gladly take our stand with Biblical supernaturalism. (p. 2367)

Operational

The CSC’s operational recommendation should: 1) save the Presbytery time during floor exams and 2) help Presbytery more fully understand a man’s views prior to those exams. This is accomplished by requiring all candidates for licensure, ordination and transfer to summarize their creation views in writing, and requiring the Candidates and Credentials Committees to include this summary in their reports mailed with the docket.

The SSET is not intended to have constitutional weight. It has no direct relation to the vows taken for ordination or licensure (BCO 21-5 and 19-3). It is primarily intended as a tool for the Candidates and Credentials Committees to use to quickly understand the parameters of a man’s view.

While the SSET is intended to serve as a public, consensus boundary for the presbytery, a reservation is not necessarily an automatic disqualification. However, it signals to the presbytery, the candidate, and the calling church an area that will be closely discussed. On the other hand, if a candidate supports the statements on the list, he can reasonably expect his creation view will be acceptable to Central Carolina Presbytery. In such a case, the candidate and the presbyters should expect little time to be devoted to the creation issue during the exam. At the same time, it is important for every presbyter to appreciate and support the right of other presbyters to vote their conscience on this issue.