Friday, May 25, 2007

One of the things I love about the Three Forms of Unity is that they provide a big tent under which Reformed confessors can argue theological points with each other. E.g., TFU subscribers can either believe there is such a thing as a covenant of works or that there isn't, and have the room under the tent to discuss it. TFU subscribers can hold to either the Puritan or the Calvinian view of the NT application of the 4th commandment and have room within the tent to discuss it. This, alone, makes the TFU superior to the Westminster Confessions, which insist--to use the aforesaid examples--that one hold to the covenant of works doctrine and the Puritan understanding of the 4th commandment. IMO, the TFU gets it right. They exclude RC, Anabaptist and Arminian heresies and errors, but don't kick fellow Reformed confessors out of the tent. The recent spate of papers produced by synods, assemblies and seminaries (not CANREF, thankfully!) is doing this grievous thing--kicking Reformed confessors with whom one has a theological difference out from under the tent, into the cold and the rain. Grievous.