Rome, Confessionalists, and Biblicists all have some kind of Pope

Peter Leithart, in response to Jason Stellman’s resignation from the PCA and assumed departure to Roman Catholicism (link), makes some wonderful observations, insights, and appeals in his post: Peter J. Leithart » Blog Archive » Who’s got the gateway drug?. I appreciate the admitted tension Leithart functions within as what I would call a “confessional biblicist” – a sample of which you will find in the following quote:

Confessionalists, after all, place a great deal of emphasis on the tradition of Reformed theology, embodied especially in Reformed confessions. Throughout the debates of the past few years, I have presented mainly biblical arguments for my positions, and kept historical concerns subordinate. My opponents have typically been much more interested in testing my views by the Westminster Confession. The touchstone of their theology is a piece of the Reformed tradition as much as, and in some cases more than, Scripture. Confessionalists claim that the Confession provides standard exegesis of Scripture, to which Reformed theologians have to submit. Confessional Reformed theology thus has a natural affinity for Rome that biblicists like me don’t share. Confessionalists want the Confession to be a paper Pope. It’s not surprising that some find the paper Pope inadequate, and go searching for a live one. (If, as some will charge, Scripture is a paper Pope, it’s one whose ring I gladly kiss.)

Larry Bray says:

June 8, 2012 at 9:11 am

Sure, if you redefine what a Confessionalist is Leithart makes sense. But to define what it is to be confessional by Leithart’s experience is to replace the objectivity of the term with an anecdotal concept.

And the experience that Leithart speaks of is most likely the experience he went through during his heresy trial. Thus it is a particular expression of confessionalism found within the context of rooting out heresy that he is referring to.

At any rate, to set up Scripture and Confession as being against each other is an improper manner of speaking to begin with. The Roman Catholic “church” admittedly teaches from traditions outside of Scripture, Confessional Christians subscribe to Confessions that are rooted in Scripture. Apples and oranges.

Scott Kistler says:

June 8, 2012 at 12:26 pm

This was a fascinating article. I found his future-oriented understanding of theological development a bit disorienting, but also exciting. At first it seems open to abuse, but it’s obvious with Leithart that everything relates back to Scripture, so I don’t worry about it for him. His characterization of confessionalism and Roman Catholicism as being based on a tragic metaphysics was pretty provocative.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply