Do you wonder what it means to be a confessional Presbyterian? It is one thing to understand Presbyterianism, a form of church government and worship; it is another to understand the importance and value of confessions or creeds.

We have some resources to help understand Presbyterianism, of course; but this post is especially meant to highlight resources on confessionalism, as understood by Presbyterians, which are available at Log College Press.

Samuel Miller, The Utility and Importance of Creeds and Confessions (1824);
Francis Robert Beattie, "A Brief Description of the Great Christian Creeds" and "The Nature and uses of Religious Creeds" in The Presbyterian Standards: An Exposition of the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms (1896);
Robert Lewis Dabney, "The Doctrinal Contents of the Confession—Its Fundamental and Regulative ideas; and the Necessity and Value of Creeds" in Memorial Volume of the Westminster Assembly, 1647-1897 (1897);
James D. Tadlock, "The Relation of the [Westminster] Standards to Other Creeds" in Memorial Volume of the Westminster Assembly, 1647-1897 (1897);
B.B. Warfield, The Significance of the Westminster Standards as a Creed (1898); and
Egbert Watson Smith, The Creed of Presbyterians (1901).

These works have much to say about why we need to articulate Scriptural truths in creedal form, and how they benefit the church. Take a look and consider especially what Miller, Beattie, and Dabney have to say about the need for creeds.

In a previous post, we highlighted Ashbel Green's Commentary on the Westminster Shorter Catechism. Today we point out two important commentaries on the Westminster Confession of Faith, one by a Northern Presbyterian (Archibald Alexander Hodge's Commentary on the Confession of Faith) and one by a Southern Presbyterian (Francis Beattie's The Presbyterian Standards). Hodge's book is familiar to most Presbyterian students of theology and church history, but fewer are aware of Beattie's volume - which is a shame, because he interacts with all three of the Westminster Standards together, and thus his work is particularly helpful.

As an example of Beattie's theological sensibilities, I have appreciated his comment on the relationship between the covenant of grace and the covenant of redemption in light of WLC #31:

"Sometimes the distinction is made by theologians between what is called the covenant of redemption and the covenant of grace. According to the former, God enters into covenant with his Son, giving him a people whom he redeems and assuredly saves. According to the latter, God enters into covenant with his people to redeem and save them by his Son, as the Mediator whom he has appointed. In the first case, God and the Son are the parties to the covenant, and the Son is the surety for his people; and in the latter case, God and the elect are the parties, and the Son is the Mediator between them. The Standards do not distinctly recognize this twofold aspect of the covenant. They speak of a second covenant, commonly called the covenant of grace, according to which God has been pleased to provide for and secure the salvation of the elect. This distinction may be regarded as a valid one, so long as the idea of two covenants is not entertained. Strictly speaking, there can be only one covenant, but that covenant may be viewed in the twofold aspect, which this distinction implies. The Scripture terms mediator and surety, as applied to Christ, quite justify this twofold view of the covenant of grace, though the covenant itself is always one and the same."

Though not all will agree with this formulation, I believe all will agree that Beattie is a man who has wrestled with the Scriptures and the text of the Standards. Tolle lege!

Blog