http://greatwolf.blogpeoria.com/2006/12/20/this-this-or-how-the-westminster-confession-should-be-used/ Just a quiet corner of the Net where I will come to sit and think and write. Maybe you will find that I have something worthwhile to say. Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:17:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 http://greatwolf.blogpeoria.com/2006/12/20/this-this-or-how-the-westminster-confession-should-be-used/#comment-28230 Ian Hamilton Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:47:24 +0000 http://greatwolf.blogpeoria.com/2006/12/20/this-this-or-how-the-westminster-confession-should-be-used/#comment-28230 I am puzzled as to why "strict subscription" should be equated with elevating the WCF to the level of Holy Scripture. That this may happen and has happened I do not doubt for one moment. The WCF too often has been treated like a sacred cow within the Presbyterian tradition - though rarely today. Two thoughts: First, historically, what is today called "strict subscription" was what the Scottish church required of its ministers and elders (until the later years of the 18th century). Warm experimental Calvinists such as Thomas Boston would have subscribed the WCF simpliciter and ex animo. It was the confession of "his" faith. There is no sense in Boston that he treated the Confession as if it were Holy Scripture - he knew 1.10, 31.4 and SC 2 too well. Second, I don't know what "honest" subscription means in practice. Considering "the heart is deceitful above all things...", I cannot begin to conceive where "honest" subscription leads - except that in the Sctottish church it has led inexorably to unbridled liberalism. I am not a "jot and tittle" subscriptionist. There must be room for scruples or whatever else they are called, as judged by the church. Whatever else, we must labour to assert that God's word is, as the SC states, our "only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy (God)" I am puzzled as to why “strict subscription” should be equated with elevating the WCF to the level of Holy Scripture. That this may happen and has happened I do not doubt for one moment. The WCF too often has been treated like a sacred cow within the Presbyterian tradition - though rarely today. Two thoughts: First, historically, what is today called “strict subscription” was what the Scottish church required of its ministers and elders (until the later years of the 18th century). Warm experimental Calvinists such as Thomas Boston would have subscribed the WCF simpliciter and ex animo. It was the confession of “his” faith. There is no sense in Boston that he treated the Confession as if it were Holy Scripture - he knew 1.10, 31.4 and SC 2 too well. Second, I don’t know what “honest” subscription means in practice. Considering “the heart is deceitful above all things…”, I cannot begin to conceive where “honest” subscription leads - except that in the Sctottish church it has led inexorably to unbridled liberalism.
I am not a “jot and tittle” subscriptionist. There must be room for scruples or whatever else they are called, as judged by the church.
Whatever else, we must labour to assert that God’s word is, as the SC states, our “only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy (God)”

]]> http://greatwolf.blogpeoria.com/2006/12/20/this-this-or-how-the-westminster-confession-should-be-used/#comment-7695 Watchful Wed, 20 Dec 2006 17:22:41 +0000 http://greatwolf.blogpeoria.com/2006/12/20/this-this-or-how-the-westminster-confession-should-be-used/#comment-7695 It does seem as though it is either one or the other with most people these days. You either hate all confessions and creeds, or you elevate them to the level of scripture. I don't believe either approach is Biblical! It does seem as though it is either one or the other with most people these days. You either hate all confessions and creeds, or you elevate them to the level of scripture. I don’t believe either approach is Biblical!

]]>