These are good models of how the church made progressive statements of doctrinal refinement as secular theory waned or heresy was illuminated. Many of us remain unconvinced that merely because the PCA in particular or American Presbyterianism in general did not declare an opinion on every conceivable issue in their early years, that therefore no subsequent doctrinal advance or clarification can occur. Throughout church history, some orthodoxies were clarified under the intense heat of heresy. Most of us have experienced similar trajectories in our own individual lives, churches, and denominations. The biblical presumption is that sanctification s progress will even affect doctrinal and formal declarations of faith.
Confessional growth can occur as part of the believing community s sanctification.
Certain commitments were made explicit, and neither of these acts need be interpreted as creating a conceptually new approach so much as trying to hold fast to the faith. Many of us will appreciate a well-grounded study and discussion of these issues. From the outset, however, arguments that are based on the three unproven assumptions might best be reserved until the foundational presuppositions are more widely proven. To attempt to study such important issues without either addressing these premises or without being conscious of dependence on shaky ground will not foster the best dialogue in the church. Thus, these three methodological premises ought to be held in check, and the presuppositions of modernity, accommodation, and tradition ought not be preferred over the presuppositions of antiquity, antithesis, and sanctification.