A controversy over whether ministers must subscribe (affirm) the
Westminster Confession of Faith had preoccupied Presbyterians in Scotland, Ireland and England for some time. In America, the
Synod of Philadelphia initially had no official confessional statement, as American leaders tried to maintain unity and avoid division. By the 1720s, however, a number of factors forced the synod to consider codifying its theology and polity. The question of subscription was initially raised in reaction to the synod's lenient treatment of Robert Cross, a young pastor from
New Castle Presbytery found guilty of
fornication in 1720. Other issues included instances of clerical sleeping during worship and disputes between ministers and their congregations in New York. In 1724, New Castle Presbytery began requiring its ministerial candidates to affirm the statement, "I do own the Westminster Confession as the Confession of my faith." A synod-wide requirement to subscribe to the
Westminster Standards was first proposed in 1727 by
John Thomson of New Castle Presbytery and was supported by Presbyterians with Scotch-Irish and Scottish backgrounds. Thomson argued that the theology contained in the Westminster Standards, though not the document itself, had scriptural authority. The Scotch-Irish were convinced, based on their experience in the Old World, that refusal to subscribe tended to be the first step toward
Arminianism and other beliefs that were incompatible with
Calvinism. They believed strict adherence to the Westminster Standards was the best way to prevent such deviation. Presbyterians from New England, led by
Jonathan Dickinson, opposed the idea on the grounds that requiring subscription would deny the
sufficiency of the Bible in matters of faith and life and effectively elevate a human interpretation of scripture to the same level of scripture. Dickinson preferred that the
Bible be affirmed as the common standard for faith and practice. Rather than scrutinizing the beliefs of ministerial candidates, Dickinson thought it would be more helpful to examine their personal religious experience. Ethnic and cultural tensions fed the controversy because New Englanders also felt that the Scottish and Scotch-Irish clergy were attempting a takeover of the synod. The Scotch-Irish party outnumbered the New Englanders, and the number of Scotch-Irish ministers and churches only increased over time as immigration continued. Some New Englanders accused their opponents of using subscription to purge the synod of English
Puritanism. ==Enactment==