| Historic Documents in American Presbyterian History THE TEXT OF THE AUBURN AFFIRMATION AND CONSERVATIVE RESPONSE
 [Auburn, NY: The Jacobs Press, 1924] The Auburn Affirmation was first published in January of 1924. Affixed to that document were the names of 150 pastors and elders within the Presbyterian Church of the U.S.A. A subsequent printing issued on May 5, 1924 contained the final list of signators, numbering 1274 names, with a post-print addendum of another 20 names and notice of the removal of one name, that of the Rev. George E. Caesar of Little Rock, AR. The text of the document is reproduced here as an aid in the discussion of the errors contained in the Auburn Affirmation, and to provide any necessary context for the quotations that may be found in other documents posted at this site. The text, shown below, is taken from the first printing and has been cross-checked with the May 5, 1924 printing issued by The Jacobs Press, Auburn, NY.
 Confessional response to the Affirmation, in retrospect, might seem to have been slow in coming, but that is something of a misimpression, largely because the early responses were published in journals not readily available now. In addition, some conservatives were of the view that the Auburn Affirmation was of no great consequence and would soon pass from memory. After those first early responses by Machen, Kennedy and Craig, the matter did seemingly pass for a time, unti the 1930's. For some reason, it was not until then that some conservatives sought to bring charges against some of the men who had signed the Affirmation. Among the first of these responses in the 1930's was the sermon preached in the Holland Memorial Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia, on Sunday morning, 21 February 1932, by the Minister, The Rev. H. McAllister Griffiths. That sermon was quickly reprinted in Christianity Today [Philadelphia: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co.; Samuel G. Craig, editor], 2.10 (Mid-February 1932): 4-8.  Finally, in the 1940's there was a separate series of articles by Southern Presbyterian authors, as they sought to oppose a union of the PCUSA and the PCUS, one of their primary arguments being that the Affirmation was highly indicative of the spiritual status of the northern denomination. Conservative Responses : [scroll down to view the text of the Affirmation]:
 
        1924 - J. Gresham Machen, "The Virgin Birth"1925 - David S. Kennedy, "Liberty Within Evangelical Bounds"1925 - J. Gresham Machen, "Shall the General Assembly Represent the Church?"1925 - David S. Kennedy, "An Inclusive Christian Church"1932 - H. McAllister Griffiths, "The Heretical 'Auburn Affirmation': A Menace to the True Peace and Purity of the Presbyterian Church."1935 - Gordon H. Clark, "The Auburn Heresy"1942 - Daniel S. Gage, "The Auburn Affirmation"1944 - Wm. Childs Robinson, "The Effect of the Auburn Affirmation"1944 - Rev. Willis Thompson, " 'Timely Topics' and the Auburn Affirmationists"1944 - Daniel S. Gage, "Dr. Lingle and the Auburn Affirmation"1946 - Wm. Childs Robinson, "The Liberal Attack Upon the Supernatural Christ" Additional treatment of the subject, pro and con, may be found in the following : 
        Loetscher, Lefferts A., The Broadening Church: A Study of Theological Issues in the Presbyterian Church since 1869. University of Philadelphia Press, 1957, pp. 117-120; 134-135.Longfield, Bradley J., The Presbyterian Controversy: Fundamentalists, Modernists & Moderates. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991, p. 77-103. [includes extended treatment on Henry Sloan Coffin]Macartney, Clarence E., Chapter XVI: "For the Faith," in The Making of a Minister. Great Neck, NY: Channel Press, Inc., 1961; pp., 183-201.North, Gary, Crossed Fingers: How the Liberals Captured the Presbyterian Church. Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1996, pp. 534-581.Noyes, Morgan P., Chapter Ten: "Standing Fast for Liberty," in Henry Sloan Coffin: The Man & His Ministry. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1964; pp. 161-179.Quirk, Charles Evans, The 'Auburn' Affirmation: A Critical Narrative of the Document Designed to Safeguard the Unity and Liberty of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America in 1924.Iowa City, IA: The University of Iowa, 1967; Ph.D. dissertation, 2 volumes, xv, 543 leaves; 28 cm.
________________, "Origins of the Auburn Affirmation," Journal of Presbyterian History 53.2 (Summer 1975): 120-142.________________, "A Statistical Analysis of the Signers of The Auburn Affirmation," Journal of Presbyterian History 43.3 (September 1965): 182-196.
Rian, Edwin H., The Presbyterian Conflict. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1940, pp. 29-59.The Presbyterian Guardian, 2:86; 6:19; 7:96, 143; 20:200 and — (1.) Letter from V.K. Beshgetoor Asking to Have His Name Removed From the List of Signers, 2:259.
 — (2.) "Have the Auburn Affirmationists Forgotten Their Appeal to Charles Hodge?" (by Frank Hamilton), 3:8-9.
 — (3.) "A Reminder From a Strange Source" (by Paul Woolley), 6:111.
 — (4.) "The Southern Church and the Auburn Affirmation" (by L.W. Sloat), 8:35-36.
 — (5.) "The Auburn Betrayal" (by Murray Forst Thompson), serialized in 10:113-114, 125-127, 133-134, 154-155, 165-167 and 11:24-25.
 — (6.) " 'The Auburn Betrayl' : A Review" (by T.R. Birch), 11:60.
 — (7.) "Still an Issue" (by L.W. Sloat), 21:104.
The United Presbyterian, (26 April 1934): 9-13; (27 August 1936): 12; (25 November 1956):  9.
 
 
 THE TEXT OF THE AUBURN AFFIRMATION: 
        
          | An Affirmation |  
          | designed to safeguard 
            the unity and liberty of the |  
          | Presbyterian Church 
            in the United States of America |  
          |  |  
          | Submitted for the 
            consideration of its ministers and people |  
          |  |  |  
          |  | We, the undersigned, ministers 
            of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, feel bound, 
            in view of certain actions of the General Assembly of 1923 and of 
            persistent attempts to divide the church and abridge its freedom, 
            to express our convictions in matters pertaining thereto. At the outset 
            we affirm and declare our acceptance of the Westminster Confession 
            of Faith, as we did at our ordinations, "as containing the system 
            of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures." We sincerely hold 
            and earnestly preach the doctrines of evangelical Christianity, in 
            agreement with the historic testimony of the Presbyterian Church in 
            the United States of America, of which we are loyal ministers. For 
            the maintenance of the faith of our church, the preservation of its 
            unity, and the protection of the liberties of its ministers and people, 
            we offer this Affirmation. |  
          |  |  |  
          | The church'sguarantee of liberty
 (1) concerning
 the interpretation
 of the Confession
 of Faith, and
             | I. By its law and its history, 
            the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America safeguards 
            the liberty of thought and teaching of its ministers. At their ordinations 
            they "receive and adopt the Confession of Faith of this Church, 
            as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures." 
            This the Church has always esteemed a sufficient doctrinal subscription 
            for its ministers. Manifestly it does not require their assent to 
            the very words of the Confession, or to all of its teachings, or to 
            interpretations of the Confesion by individuals or church courts. 
            The Confession of Faith itself disclaims infallibility. Its authors 
            would not allow this to church councils, their own included: "All 
            synods or councils since the apostle's times, whether general or particular, 
            may err, and many have erred; therefore they are not to be made the 
            rule of faith or practice, but to be used as a help in both." 
            (Conf. XXXI.iii). The Confession also expressly asserts the liberty 
            of Christian believers, and condemns the submission of the mind or 
            conscience to any human authority: "God alone is lord of the 
            conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments 
            of men which are in anything contrary to his Word, or beside it, in 
            matters of faith or worship. So that to believe such doctrines, or 
            to obey such commandments out of conscience, is to betray true liberty 
            of conscience; and the requiring of an implicit faith, and an absolute 
            and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason 
            also." (Conf. XX, ii). |  
          |  |  |  
          | [p. 2] 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 | The formal relation of American 
            Presbyterianism to the Westminster Confession of Faith begins in the 
            Adopting Act of 1729. This anticipated and provided for dissent by 
            individuals from portions of the Confession. At the formation of the 
            Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, in 1788, the 
            Westminster Confession was adopted as the creed of the church; and 
            at the same time the church publicly declared the significance of 
            its organization in a document which contains these words: "These 
            are truths and forms, with respect to which men of good characters 
            and principles may differ. And in all these they think it the duty, 
            both of private Christians and Societies, to exercise mutual forbearance 
            towards each other." (Declaration of Principles, v). |  
          |  |  |  
          |  | Of the two parts into which our 
            church was separated from 1837 to 1870, one held that only one interpretation 
            of certain parts of the Confession of Faith was legitimate, while 
            the other maintained its right to dissent from this interpretation. 
            In the Reunion of 1870 they came together on equal terms, "each 
            recognizing the other as a sound and orthodox body." The meaning 
            of this, as understood then and ever since, is that office-bearers 
            in the church who maintain their liberty in the interpretation of 
            the Confession are exercising their rights guaranteed by the terms 
            of the Reunion. |  
          |  |  |  
          |  | A more recent reunion also is 
            significant, that of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church and the Presbyterian 
            Church in the United States of America, in 1906. This reunion was 
            opposed by certain members of the Presbyterian Church in the United 
            States of America, on the ground that the two churches were not at 
            one in doctrine; yet it was consummated. Thus did our church once 
            more exemplify its historic policy of accepting theological differences 
            within its bounds and subordinating them to recognized loyalty to 
            Jesus Christ and united work for the kingdom of God. |  
          |  |  |  
          | (2) 
            concerning the interpretationof the Scriptures
 
 
 
     [p. 3]   | With respect to the interpretation 
            of the Scriptures the position of our church has been that common 
            to Protestants. "The Supreme Judge," says the Confession 
            of Faith, "by whom all controversies of religion are to be determined, 
            and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines 
            of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence 
            we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the 
            Scripture". (Conf. I, x). Accordingly our church has held that 
            the supreme guide in the interpretation of the Scriptures is not, 
            as it is with Roman Catholics, ecclesiastical authority, but the Spirit 
            of God, speaking to the Christian believer. Thus our church lays it 
            upon its ministers and others to read and teach the Scriptures as 
            the Spirit of God through His manifold ministries instructs them, 
            and to receive all truth which from time to time He causes to break 
            forth from the Scriptures. 
 |  
          |  |  |  
          |  | There is no assertion in the Scriptures 
            that their writers were kept "from error." The Confession 
            of Faith does not make this assertion; and it is significant that 
            this assertion is not to be found in the Apostle's Creed or the Nicene 
            Creed or in any of the great Reformation confessions. The doctrine 
            of inerrancy, intended to enhance the authority of the Scriptures, 
            in fact impairs their supreme authority for faith and life, and weakens 
            the testimony of the church to the power of God unto salvation through 
            Jesus Christ. We hold that the General Assembly of 1923, in asserting 
            that "the Holy Spirit did so inspire, guide and move the writers 
            of Holy Scripture as to keep them from error," spoke without 
            warrant of the Scriptures or of the Confession of Faith. We hold rather 
            to the words of the Confession of Faith, that the Scriptures "are 
            given by inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life." 
            (Conf. I, ii). |  
          |  |  |  
          | Authority 
            under the constitutionfor the declara-
 tion of doctrine
       
 | II. While it is constitutional 
            for any General Assembly "to bear testimony against error in 
            doctrine," (Form of Govt. XII, v), yet such testimony is without 
            binding authority, since the constitution of our church provides that 
            its doctrine shall be declared only concurrent action of the General 
            Assembly and the presbyteries. Thus the church guards the statement 
            of its doctrine against hasty or ill-considered action by either General 
            Assemblies or presbyteries. From this provision of our constitution, 
            it is evident that neither in one General Assembly nor in many, without 
            concurrent action of the presbyteries, is there authority to declare 
            what the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America believes 
            and teaches; and that the assumption that any General Assembly has 
            authoritatively declared what the church believes and teaches is groundless. 
            A declaration by a General Assembly that any doctrine is "an 
            essential doctrine" attempts to amend the constitution of the 
            church in an unconstitutional manner. |  
          |  |  |  
          | Action 
            of theGeneral Assembly
 regarding the
 preaching in the
 First Presbyte-
 rian Church of
 New York City
 
 
   [p. 4]   | III. The General Assembly of 1923, 
            in asserting that "doctrines contrary to the standards of the 
            Presbyterian Church" have been preached in the pulpit of the 
            First Presbyterian Church of New York City, virtually pronounced a 
            judgment against this church. The General Assembly did this with knowledge 
            that the matter on which it so expressed itself was already under 
            formal consideration in the Presbytery of New York, as is shown by 
            the language of its action. The General Assembly acted in the case 
            without giving hearing to the parties concerned. Thus the General 
            Assembly did not conform to the procedure in such cases contemplated 
            by our Book of Discipline, and, what is more serious, it in effect 
            condemned a Christian minister without using the method of conference, 
            patience and love enjoined on us by Jesus Christ. We object to the 
            action of the General Assembly in this case, as being out of keeping 
            with the law and the spirit of our church. 
 |  
          |  |  |  
          | The doctrinal deliverance ofthe General
 Assembly
   | IV. The General Assembly of 1923 
            expressed the opinion concerning five doctrinal statements that each 
            one "is an essential doctrine of the Word of God and our standards." 
            On the constitutional ground which we have before described, we are 
            opposed to any attempt to elevate these five doctrinal statements, 
            or any of them, to the position of tests for ordination or for good 
            standing in our church. |  
          |  |  |  
          |  | Furthermore, this opinion of the 
            General Assembly attempts to commit our church to certain theories 
            concerning the inspiration of the Bible, and the Incarnation, the 
            Atonement, the Resurrection, and the Continuing Life and Supernatural 
            Power of our Lord Jesus Christ. We hold most earnestly to these 
              great facts and doctrines; we all believe from our hearts that the 
              writers of the Bible were inspired of God; that Jesus Christ was God 
              manifest in the flesh; that God was in Christ, reconciling the world 
              unto Himself, and through Him we have our redemption; that having 
              died for our sins He rose from the dead and is our everliving Saviour; 
              that in His earthly ministry He wrought many mighty works, and by 
              His vicarious death and unfailing presence He is able to save to the 
              uttermost. Some of us regard the particular theories contained 
            in the deliverance of the General Assembly of 1923 as satisfactory 
            explanations of these facts and doctrines. But we are united in believing 
            that these are not the only theories allowed by the Scriptures and 
            our standards as explanations of these facts and doctrines of our 
            religion, and that all who hold to these facts and doctrines, whatever 
            theories they may employ to explain them, are worthy of all confidence 
            and fellowship. |  
          |  |  |  
          | Extent of the liberty claimed
 
   | V. We do not desire liberty to 
            go beyond the teachings of evangelical Christianity. But we maintain 
            that it is our constitutional right and our Christian duty within 
            these limits to exercise liberty of thought and teaching, that we 
            may more effectively preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Saviour 
            of the World. |  
          |  |  |  
          | The spirit and prupose of this
 affirmation
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 | VI. Finally, we deplore the 
            evidences of division in our beloved church, in the face of a world 
            so desparately in need of a united testimony to the gospel of Christ. 
            We earnestly desire fellowship with all who like us are disciples 
            of Jesus Christ. We hope that those to whom this Affirmation comes 
            will believe that it is not the declaration of a theological party, 
            but rather a sincere appeal, based on the Scriptures and our standards, 
            for the preservation of the unity and freedom of our church, for which 
            most earnestly we plead and pray. |  
          |  |  |  
          | [p. 6] |  |  
          |  |  |  
          | [The final pages, 6 - 13, of the document present a 
            list of 150 signators to the Affirmation. In the second printing as 
            produced by the Jacobs Press of Auburn, NY on May 5, 1924, the final 
            listing of 1293 names was issued. No further names were added in any 
            subsequent printings of the document. |  ©PCA Historical Center, 12330 Conway Road, St. Louis, MO, 2018. All Rights Reserved. |