Mr. Ball and Mr. Smith may be correct in asserting that the knowledge and commitment of the ministers and elders at the outset were less than ideal; however, I would assert that the second ordination vow and the enrollment record obligated the future members and courts of the PCA to a Thoroughly Reformed position. 

I have read with interest the submissions of Bill Smith and Larry Ball relative to the theological orientation of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) at its founding.

While I was not a member of any of the groups that contributed to the founding of the PCA, I did have the privilege of working with two of the principals who were directly involved in drafting versions of the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, which were eventually approved as the theological constitution of the PCA.

In my opinion, Mr. Smith and Mr. Ball have both overlooked very important factors relative to the theological orientation of the eventual ministers and elders of the PCA. They asserted that the founding officers of the PCA were generally not Reformed – that they were not in the main what might be called strict subscriptionists to the Westminster Confession and Catechisms.  Surely, this characterization was not exhaustive for there were some men who were viewed as Thoroughly Reformed (“TR”) – one such was even named. I would assert that there were others as well.

However, I would suggest that the evaluations offered by Mr. Smith and Mr. Ball are flawed because of their oversight.  What was it that they overlooked?

In the first place they have overlooked the second ordination vow:

“Do you sincerely receive and adopt the Confession of Faith and the Catechisms of this Church, as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures; and do you further promise that if at any time you find yourself out of accord with any of the fundamentals of this system of doctrine, you will on your own initiative, make known to your Presbytery the change which has taken place in your views since the assumption of this ordination vow?”

Moreover, the Presbyteries were required to transcribe in their records the obligations required of ministers at their ordinations, which were to be subscribed by all admitted to membership:

“I, [name of minister], do sincerely receive and subscribe to the above obligation as a just and true exhibition of my faith and principles, and do resolve and promise to exercise my ministry in conformity thereunto.”

Some of the Presbyteries incorporated this obligation into a ceremony that was held annually, and in which the ministers subscribed their names to the same obligation.

Now, Mr. Ball and Mr. Smith may be correct in asserting that the knowledge and commitment of the ministers and elders at the outset were less than ideal; however, I would assert that the second ordination vow and the enrollment record obligated the future members and courts of the PCA to a Thoroughly Reformed position.  That is, unless Mr. Ball and Mr. Smith wish to accuse those founding officers and themselves of “crossing their fingers” (with apologies to Mr. Gary North) when they adopted the Confession of Faith, the Catechisms, and the Book of Church Order as constituent parts of the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church in America.

Unless substantial amendments have been made to the PCA’s BCO subsequent to 1996, the PCA is still committed to a Thoroughly Reformed theology, government and cultus.

I like, Mr. Smith, have no dog in this debate because I am no longer in the PCA.  I was, however, a member for nearly twenty years beginning in 1976 just three years after the founding of the PCA.

Vaughn E. Hathaway, Jr. is a Teaching Elder of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church and lives in Charlotte, NC.