Marrow Man
Drunk with Powder
The following statement was posted on a public forum by a friend (and fellow minister). I certainly do not agree with the statement, since it puts the confession in the dock and assumes that "exceptionalism" (I just coined that term!) instead of confessionalism is the default position. However, I am mainly inquiring as to the validity of statement by the church history professor alluded to. If someone could provide a quote or an anecdotal account, that would be appreciated. Other discussion on chapter 23 of the WCF might also be helpful.
Indeed, in a Presbytery exam for ordination, one should be ready to defend exceptions. I would also add that one should be ready to defend a statement of full subscription to the Standards. In the ARP Church, chapter 23 on the Civil Magistrate has been rewritten to the point of being unintelligible. A statement of subscription to that chapter will leave us wondering as to whether or not you have read it. I am told that Westminster Theological Seminary Prof. Paul Woolley in his Church History classes told young men that if they said that they fully subscribed to the Confession of Faith and Catechisms without exceptions that they hadn’t read them! I agree!