Page:On the Revision of the Confession of Faith.djvu/32

24, its logical exactness, the richness of its phraseology. It will perhaps be more useful to occupy ourselves with some remarks upon a few of the chief objections that are most commonly brought against it. Thus, by a negative path, we may yet, perhaps, find our way to some increased appreciation of its excellences.

1. It is frequently said, for instance, that the Confession is too formal, logical, analytical, theological in its form; and a creed more vital and religious is desiderated. It is not infrequently contrasted with the earlier Reformation creeds in this respect. There is this much truth underlying this objection: that the earlier Reformers needed to vindicate their position as Christians, in breaking away from the historical Church, and the form and contents of the creeds of the first age are affected by this fact; whereas by the middle of the seventeenth century it was not their Christianity that the Puritans needed to vindicate (that was evident to all men), but their doctrine that they desired to bring to a clear expression. In this sense the Westminster Confession is a theological rather than a religious document. It is a doctrinal standard; its purpose is to define truth rather than to apply it. As such it is analytical and logical in its order and forms of statement, and seeks to present the truths of God in a concatenated system which will appeal to the devout mind and instruct it in the truth, rather than directly to lay them on the heart. This can be esteemed a fault only if we misconceive the purpose and uses of a Confession as analogous to those of a sermon. If we understand, as we ought, a Confession to be a document intended to testify to the truth, to stand as a test of sound teaching, and to serve as a text-book of doctrine, we shall ask it to be more "religious" than "theological" in form