To take exception to the Confession’s doctrine of the Christian Sabbath is no minor thing.

 

To take exception to the Confession’s doctrine of the Christian Sabbath is no minor thing. It ends up tinkering with the theological symmetry of the whole. Denying the formulation of 22.7 necessarily affects other doctrinal formulations within the Confession. Philip S. Ross, while discussing taking exception to the Sabbath by adherents to the WCF, comments:

 

. . . let me say that biblical law, with its Sabbath, is no easily dispensable part of the Reformed doctrinal infrastructure. . . . Attempts at performing a precision strike on the Sabbath produce an embarrassing amount of unintended damage. Strike out the Sabbath and you also shatter the entire category of moral law and all that depends on it.[1]

 

Ross likens the Confession to a garment in the following words:

 

Were the Westminster Confession a garment, you would not want to pull this ‘minor’ thread, unless you wanted to be altogether defrocked.

. . . Unbuckle the Sabbath, and you are well on your way to mastering theological escapology.[2]

 

These are strong words. Ross’ point is that the Confession contains a system of doctrine. Pull one string out of it and you tamper with other aspects of the garment.

 

__________________________

[1] Philip S. Ross, From the Finger of God: The Biblical and Theological Basis for the Threefold Division of the Law (Fern, Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus Publications Ltd., Mentor Imprint, 2010), 5-6.

[2] Ross, From the Finger of God, 5. Ross is interacting with a statement made by Tim Keller.