The purpose of this paper is not to establish whether or not Thomson’s articulation was correct, but to examine how Thomson argued that his understanding of Church polity would ensure the peace and purity of the church. It helps to better understand the objective of Thomson, in order to illustrate his reasoning and argumentation, to understand the conflict better, to understand the main points of departure between the two groups. Special attention needs to be given to the work of Thomson in order to understand what drove the Old Side to oppose the New Side. This present study will analyze Thomson’s point of view in response to the objections of the New Side. Rather than the individual conflicts, it will focus on the ideological motivations and justifications that went behind them.

The footnote at the beginning of the Minutes of the Presbyterian Church in America states, “Unfortunately, the first leaf of the minutes of this presbytery is missing… The date of organization is generally accepted as 1706, in Philadelphia.”¹ The absence of the first pages is fitting for the young ad hoc church. Though many churches gained support both logistically and monetarily from the Old World, a small group of ministers convened in 1706 to form the first Presbytery without formal Old World associations, “The formation of American Presbyterianism lacked strategic thinking, aristocratic patronage, political heroics, and even stunning theological wisdom.”² These first fifty years of Presbyterianism in the North American colonies proved to be a period of controversy and division, but also one of concord and consensus. Consisting of an amalgamation of various backgrounds, ethnicities and previous ecclesiastical associations, the newly formed Presbyterian Church began the arduous task of forming its identity.³ The young Church would need to decide the constitution by which it would be organized, the doctrinal confession to which it would adhere, and the method by which it would handle dissenters and disagreements. Not long after the church unanimously adopted the Westminster Confession and Catechisms with the Adopting Act of 1729, it endured bitter battles of dissension for the following two decades that would test the nature of their previous sense of consensus.⁴ The strained unity of the young Church eventually ended in 1741, when the presbytery of New Brunswick left the synod of Philadelphia.

Significant conflicts began very early in the life of the church and, by 1741, two opposing groups formed in its ranks, traditionally deemed the Old Side and the New Side. The lines of disagreement were often drawn very closely between particular presbyteries, although these two groups did not emerge until conflicts climaxed in 1739–41. Prior to this, a variety of divisions resulted from conflicts between presbyteries. Historically, three categories are assigned to the various conflicting groups, until 1741, when two of the groups were subsumed under the heading of New Side.

Most studies of colonial Presbyterianism have assumed at least three distinct ‘parities’ in the Synod: 1) the Scotch-Irish (also known as the subscriptionists or the Old Side); 2) the New Englanders (also known as the moderates, anti-subscriptionists, or the New York Presbytery); and 3) the revivalists (also known as the Methodists, Log College men or New Brunswick Presbytery)—the latter two comprising the New Side.⁵

Some of these initial disputes were over subscription to the Westminster Confession, the practice of itinerant preaching, the method of revivalism, the process of examination of candidates for ministry and how the purity of ministry should be maintained. The Old Side typically refers to the Synod of Philadelphia and the New Side refers to the presbyteries of New York and New Brunswick during the schism of 1741.⁶

These conflicts, however, were mere symptoms or outworking of a much more elemental conflict. As Thomas Cornman argues, many of the initial conflicts began prior to the period of revival.⁷ The more integral and principal conflict was one of church polity and the nature of the authority of Synods, “The battles leading to the eventual schism were about the locus of authority that would govern the Presbyterians of the American colonies. This struggle exhibited itself in all four of the major areas of contention within the Presbyterian Church between 1722 and 1741.”⁸ The opposing groups that formed differed essentially on the nature of the authority of church judicatories, either presbyteries or Synod, to make binding acts. The New Side advocating a limited authority, particularly Synod’s authority to regulate the ordination and licensure of candidates for ministry. The Old Side supported the authority of church judicatories to make binding rules on those in the Synod and the respective presbyteries represented. The difference proved to be no small discrepancy and would lead to the agitation of the major conflicts in the period.

Known for their resistance to revivalism, the Old Side has often been portrayed in the academic literature as divisive, cold, rationalistic and immoral.⁹

Read More