jpfrench81
I have however heard this offered as a solution to people taking exception to various points of the confessions and instead try to come up with a new confession that people could strictly subscribe to.
You have swerved into something here.
Most people who are "confessional" (a basic, necessary attribute of "reformed theology") would not be focused on coming up with a new confession. They might be thinking in terms of their one "scruple" (exception). It will always be the case among mankind, beset by the sin of pride to carve out one's own niche in order to stand out (not that the confession is infallible, either- they are not).
In that case, each denomination has a process for amending a statement or proposition in their standards (confession).
Some people, who are not really understanding "confessing" think in terms of what they can get by with in theology and still fit in.
Some may disagree, but from all I have observed, this is not at all the case. "Exceptions" are few and far between or are really quite minor among reformed churches. If the exceptions have more impact, the person is not allowed to teach them (often). For churches overcome by liberalism, following the confession is not even an issue because they have either revised to produce ambiguity or duplicity, or do not really follow them at all.
And remember, the confessions generally required for subscription on Puritan Board have many, many similarities. A Pastor once told me, "The 3 forms of unity and the Westminster Standards... its the same theology."
The wording of the London Baptist Confession and the Westminster Confession, in many places is identical.
What's amazing is how very much alike the historic confessions are (which also confirms a reformed tenet- the perspicuity (understandability, clarity) of Scripture.
Sometimes when people who do not fully understand what a confession is, what role it plays (e.g. it is a summary of doctrine contained in Scripture, not infallible, yet what the church "confesses"), or what all the confession contains, they approach it kind of like it's a "mix and match" set of doctrines so they find their personal belief system.
That's not really what a confession is. It is a reflection of what a group of believers, holds forth as a summary of doctrine of scripture and "confesses" to the world.
The confession gives the person accountability and a basis of unity. New believers are often going to take a long time to understand, for example the doctrine of predestination. It takes a lot of comprehensive study of all of Scripture to get that. Many people, left to their own without teachers (elders) God has called to carefully handle that many never get to that.
A Confession holds believers together as a basis of unity, as well as accountability.
In the "broadly evangelical" world (majority of churches out there), the notion is the church is only a loose association of consenting adults and each person decides their own doctrine. Whatever they think at the time is what is pre-eminant.
Reformed theology does not view the individual or Christ's (visible) church that way.
In reformed theology, we believe Scripture teaches covenant community. The church is a community, chosen by God, ordained by God and is bound together by covenant to serve God in this world. This is why you are more likely to have church discipline in a reformed church than in a broadly evangelical one.
John Calvin said to have a true church one must have at least right preaching of God's Word, right administration of the Sacraments. He also implied, at least, one must have church discipline.