Confessions are not Scripture - John M. Frame

The following statement from an introductory essay explaining the Reformed Faith caught my eye this evening and I want to share it with you.  It is very refreshing to see an undoubted 'reformed theologian' stating categorically that "Confessions are not Scripture."  They are not to be treated as infallible, nor are they to be regarded as "ultimately normative."

This is the great problem for churches and denominations that are basically unsure of what it is they believe.  They do not believe that Scripture is clear enough for churches or for individuals as to the fundamentals of the faith they profess, so they must have a 'confession' to keep everyone right.

Frame's suggestion that churches ought to be able to revise their confessions and creeds will raise hackles for some ultra-reformed men who see their confession as sacrosanct, untouchable.

Then for him to say that it must also be possible and permissible for members and officers to dissent from the creed within some limits. 

Frame is refreshingly honest and correct in what he says here, and is a view that I have subscribed to for many years.  So long as a man accepts the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the infallible Word of God and the only rule of faith and practice, how strict he is to any man-made confession is largely irrelevant.

When any confession is placed equal to, or, in practice higher than, the Scriptures, by any church, that church has become sub-orthodox because it has subverted biblical authority in the life of the church.  This also has the effect of making it all but impossible for the church to reform its life and witness according to the teaching of the Scriptures.

Read this paragraph and tell me what you think.

"Confessions are not Scripture, and they should not be treated as infallible or as ultimately
normative. Indeed, I believe it is important that in a church fellowship it be possible to revise the
creeds, and for that purpose, it must also be possible for members and officers to dissent from
the creed within some limits. Otherwise, the creed will, practically speaking, be elevated to a
position of authority equivalent to Scripture. A "strict" view of subscription in which ministers
are never permitted to teach contrary to any detail of the creed might be seen as a way to protect
the orthodoxy of the church. However, in my view, such a view is actually subversive
of orthodoxy, because it is subversive of biblical authority and sufficiency. Under such a form of
subscription, Scripture is not given the freedom to reform the church according to God's will.