Sam Waldron has written an article responding to a controversial piece by Shawn Wright ("Should you use the 1689 London Confession in your church?"), which was posted last month at the 9Marks website.
Waldron's article is also posted at the 9Marks site, with a very gracious introduction from Mark Dever, Executive Director of 9Marks Ministries.
I have no dog in this fight, since I don't hold to every detail of the 1689 Confession's Sabbatarianism anyway. The church where I serve uses a different (though still fairly detailed) doctrinal statement, which was written by the elders here long before I came. But I nonetheless think the 1689 is a fine confessionin some significant ways superior to the 1644 London Baptist Confession, which I do affirm without reservation. (By the way, I think there's much to be said for using the historic confessions, rather than writing a brand new one every time we plant a church. That's a slightly different issue than the debate between Wright and Waldron. But only slightly.)
Anyway, I read both articles, and I agree in principle with Waldron's objections to Wright's rationale. Here's the money quote:
Wright’s position requires that the church confess only as much as its newest, baptized member understands and believes. This is clearly wrong. Surely the Bible requires the church to believe and confess much more than this. The great Reformation confessions are treasuries of what the church had come to believe over the previous 1600 years. The confession of the church must not be held hostage to the immaturity of its youngest members. The youngest members must be nurtured redemptively and lovingly up into the fullness of its faith.
I'm glad 9Marks posted the follow-up. Waldron's article is wonderfully clear, and his discussion of the role of doctrinal statements says exactly what I would have wanted to sayonly Pastor Waldron says it far more elegantly and succinctly than I could have.