Confessional Subscription in the RPCNA

One of the distinguishing characteristics of a Reformed or Presbyterian church is their commitment to confessions — they are confessional churches. Simply defined, a confession is a statement of doctrinal belief for the purpose of giving public testimony and promoting the fellowship of the church upon agreed fundamental teachings of Christianity. In short, a confession is an ordered doctrinal summary of what the Bible teaches. As E.H. Klotsche wrote: “The object of a confession is, not to find out what God teaches, for this we find in the Scriptures, but to show what we believe.” Enduring examples of these Reformed confessions would be the Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Unity.

A confessional church is one that has expressed agreement with (or subscribed to) a particular confession. For such a church, a confession isn’t simply a body of opinions but is a statement of what is believed to be the truth of Scripture. As such, the confession becomes a way to help promote unity, to regulate teaching, and to guard against error.

Of course, it’s one thing for the ecclesiastical body to adopt a particular confession as the confession of the church, and another for individual members to do the same. In the least, confessional churches often require, as a qualification, that the officers of the church — elders and deacons — express their own personal commitment to the confession of the church. As J Aspinwall Hodge wrote: “Men are at liberty to refuse to be connected with a society, but if they voluntarily enter, they must submit to its terms of admission and to its laws” (What is Presbyterian Law?, p. 24).

It is important to the Protestant tradition that this commitment is conscientious and not on the basis of blind obedience or an implicit faith. Implicit faith refers to the belief that someone should accept whatever the church believes even if they don’t know it — “I believe whatever the church believes.” Rather, the confession is to be subscribed to in an intentional and informed way expressing one’s commitment to it because of one’s belief that it is biblical.

But even within confessional churches, a question that has brought debate and plenty of complexity is the degree to which subscribers are bound to a confession. Historically, there have been a number of practices, the most common including:

Strict Subscription: This form of subscription requires individuals to agree with every doctrine in the confession. In The Practice of Confessional Subscription, Morton Smith wrote that strict subscription “does not require the adoption of every word of the Confession and Catechisms, but positively believes that we are adopting every doctrine or teaching of the Confession and Catechisms” (p. 186).

System Subscription: This form begins with the whole confession — every word, phrase, and doctrine — but permits a degree of disagreement when it is determined by the ecclesiastical body that such disagreement does not undermine the system of theology in the confession. Charles Hodge defined it this way: “We do not expect that our ministers should adopt every proposition contained in our standards. This they are not required to do. But they are required to adopt the system; and that system consists of certain doctrines, no one of which can be omitted without destroying its identity” (“The General Assembly,” Princeton Review 39.3, July 1867, p. 509).

Substance Subscription: Unlike system subscription, this form of subscription does not begin with the whole confession but only certain doctrines contained in the confession. In this, substance subscription is a lowest common denominator form requiring subscription only to those doctrines deemed most important. Charles Hodge noted that these core doctrines are usually the “essential and necessary doctrines of Christianity” (Constitutional History of the Presbyterian Church, vol. 1 p. 152).


Among these forms — especially the first two — there’s varying strengths and weaknesses. Strict subscription, for example, has a certain appeal. But every confession is subordinate to the Bible. Where a doctrinal conclusion is not biblical it should be revised or rejected. Philip Schaff wasn’t wrong to observe: “The value of creeds depends upon the measure of their agreement with the Scriptures. In the best case a human creed is only an approximate and relatively correct exposition of revealed truth, and may be improved by the progressive knowledge of the Church, while the Bible remains perfect and infallible” (Creeds of Christendom vol. 1, pp. 7-8). At least practically, strict subscription makes improvement or amendment by individuals or the church unrealistic if not somewhat impossible.

Unlike strict subscription, system subscription permits for a degree of disagreement — so long as the ecclesiastical body determines that the system of doctrine is not undermined. Defining or even attaining consensus as to what the system is, may not be simple. JG Vos seemed a little too optimistic when he wrote that the system of doctrine “is precisely Calvinism, or the Reformed Faith, in distinction from contrary systems of doctrine which are set forth in other creeds of the post-Reformation era” (Blue Banner Faith and Life, vol. 1, no. 7, July-Sept 1946, p. 139). Deciding what is and what is not within the system of the Reformed faith can, practically speaking, be fairly subjective and ultimately determined by the majority opinion of an ecclesiastical body.

Given the challenges and inherent difficulties present in either form of subscription, it would seem the suggestion of wisdom that brothers in the Lord and of like-minded faith can have intramural discussions in charity and for the purpose of iron sharpening iron.

Since 1939 in the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA) the commitment of ordination is in the form of system subscription. The current query asks: “Do you believe in and accept the system of doctrine and the manner of worship set forth in the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, and the Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, as being agreeable to, and founded upon, the Scriptures?”

This ordination commitment requires that those who would be or are ordained must present conscientious scruples to the overseeing court of the church — since it belongs to the courts to determine “cases of conscience” (WCF 31.3). The ecclesiastical body has the responsibility to determine if an exception will be given. Synod adopted the following: “That the church recognize the right of its courts, under carefully safeguarded conditions […] to allow a member, licentiate, or ordained minister to hold a conscientious scruple with regard to some specific part of the church’s subordinate standards, and that such objections be filed in the records of the Presbytery” (Minutes of Synod 1968, p. 133).

The rationale for system subscription in the RPCNA is usually related to two important confessed doctrines. First, “God alone is Lord of the conscience” (WCF 20.2). Insisting that officers in the church agree with every doctrine of the standards does not, of itself, destroy the liberty of conscience. But permitting some liberty to the individual even in matters publicly confessed by the church, an added degree of protection is afforded to guard against that possibility. Second, “All synods or councils, since the apostles’ times, whether general or particular, may err; and many have erred” (WCF 31.4). Infallibility does not belong to the church, and the doctrinal statements of it are reformable and amendable. While strict subscription wouldn’t deny this, again, permitting a degree of disagreement aids fostering an ecclesiastical environment that can more simply, perhaps, act on it.

Admittedly, system subscription comes with complexities and likely with inconsistencies, and a measure of danger. There are wrinkles that have not been ironed out and may never be. But it allows service in a church that is continuing to be sharpened, strengthened, and if the Lord is willing more and more perfected as we look to the day when Christ will do what no confession of faith can — truly and fully make us one.