# Quality of Binding of this Westminster Standards Edition



## ZackF (Feb 6, 2017)

I currently have this paperback version that is falling apart. The other day I heard the infamous crack that accompanies most glued books after a time. Does anyone have this version? How well is it constructed? I want something that I can keep a long time and eventually rebind when it becomes necessary.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 6, 2017)

This and the PCA version are pretty sturdy. I don't have my copy at hand to know if it is sewn bound, or if the later printings are.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Feb 6, 2017)

I haven't had any problem with mine, and the pages are sewn then glued with a casewrap cover (and its on sale right now).

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 6, 2017)

Now, some of these are prettier and most have the 'right text'. I also prefer the aesthetics of double column proof texts which the Scottish versions have. But I wouldn't put any of the below to the use you'd put the OPC to; certainly not my favor format which dates to 1736 (based on the 1728 edition which set the customary format and contents still kept in print in the Free Presbyterian CofS edition of the Scottish standards).

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## ZackF (Feb 6, 2017)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Now, some of these are prettier and most have the 'right text'. I also prefer the aesthetics of double column proof texts which the Scottish versions have. But I wouldn't put any of the below to the use you'd put the OPC to; certainly not my favor format which dates to 1736 (based on the 1728 edition which set the customary format and contents still kept in print in the Free Presbyterian CofS edition of the Scottish standards).



Lovely collection. Having one of those in excellent condition would be fabulous though I'd never use it. The same reason I wouldn't by a high-end bible. It would sit boxed up in a closet and not read until I kicked off. My daughter might then appreciate it and actually use it. 

Furthermore, you probably have a "watch" scouring Ebay and other places for such treasures. I wouldn't stand a chance.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 6, 2017)

My goal was to collect examples of the editions from which the traditional text was descended, those accepted by the public, became popular, and were copied by subsequent printers. The goal was to have the sources to trace where various textual mistakes came in (they all added mistakes over 350 years). I basically obtained what I needed, lacking only the 17th century examples, which are on EEBO and elsewhere and cost a mint. So I'm mostly out of the market. If I would suggest any it would be the one the FPP edition is from, the 1855 Johnstone & Hunter edition. One in fine condition probably would hold up to even moderate use; the problem is find one in any condition. I suspect the perished with use; but it also may be the case some survive in fine bindings which would be cool to find.


ZackF said:


> Lovely collection. Having one of those in excellent condition would be fabulous though I'd never use it. The same reason I wouldn't by a high-end bible. It would sit boxed up in a closet and not read until I kicked off. My daughter might then appreciate it and actually use it.
> 
> Furthermore, you probably have a "watch" scouring Ebay and other places for such treasures. I wouldn't stand a chance.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 6, 2017)

Since I mentioned it, below is the lineage of the traditional text in the popular accepted editions which basically followed each other. Dr. Carruthers first did this work but sort of lost the trail in the 18th century in spots.
I have to do an image as something funky happened with the numbers in the first edition of The Confessional Presbyterian (2005) from which this comes; so I can't cut and paste the plain text. This is from page 57.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Taylor (Feb 7, 2017)

I have this edition. The paper is pretty high quality, the printing is very crisp, and the binding is very solid. It is smyth-sewn, and the case binding is covered in a synthetic paper (I think) that looks and feels rather nice. I have no doubt mine will last the rest of my life. If you like the Westminster Standards, this is, in my opinion, the edition to get. It is compact, as well.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## greenbaggins (Feb 7, 2017)

The OPC version is very well produced. It is sewn and compact as mentioned. It is not the original version, but has the earlier changes integrated (on the Pope as antichrist, laws of consanguinity, and the role of the magistrate).

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## JimmyH (Feb 7, 2017)

Instead of Amazon the OPC website has the Confessions available at a lesser price.
https://store.opc.org/SearchResults.asp?Search=Westminster+Confession+of+faith&Submit=
It is durable and though the print is slightly smaller than that of the Free Presbyterian Publications (Glasgow) edition it is still worth getting.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## reaganmarsh (Feb 7, 2017)

I recently picked up the PCA edition at a used bookstore for 50 cents. It's in excellent condition, and very well made. I have every confidence it'll hold up well!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## JimmyH (Feb 7, 2017)

Here are 3 editions side by side, the Free Church Publishers has larger print, and is well bound. An example of a 1855 edition, and the PCA edition.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 7, 2017)

Interesting; my 1855 is more the size of the FPP edition. Can you post the back of the title page where the license should be? In the back of my mind I have the idea there were two sizes in 1855.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 7, 2017)

I looked more closely and the title page indicates this is a version of the edition first published in 1851. The 1855 is larger format and has the line under "Printed by Authority" of "with the special words of the proof-passages printed in _italic _face".

Johnstone & Hunter

The Johnstone & Hunter editions were dominant from 1851 through the end of the century. There are three distinct types. Carruthers’ Johnstone “A” was stereotyped and published in 1851, and was very likely set from an edition of Francis Orr and Sons, because of the addition of Mark 9:43 as a Scripture proof text at WLC 29. Johnstone “B” is the 1855 large format edition with the reintroduction of the italics in the Scripture proofs, which had first been introduced by Rothwell in 1658. Johnstone “C” is a small compact edition first published in 1860, and reprinted many times through the end of the century. Graham and Heslip in Belfast published a photo-reprint of this type in 1933. Copies of this edition where purchased by the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, and there are also Free Church editions with additional matter issued as the _Subordinate Standards and Other Authoritative Documents of the Free Church of Scotland_. One of the two variants which Carruthers assigned to Johnstone “B,” is apparently incorrect (Carruthers, 85, 133). Variant #155 should rather be assigned to Johnstone “C” (See Endnote E). Coldwell, "Examining the Work of S. W. Carruthers: Justifying a Critical Approach to the Text of the Westminster Standards & Correcting the 18th Century Lineage of the Traditional Scottish Text,” The Confessional Presbyterian 1 (2005), 59.​

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## JimmyH (Feb 7, 2017)

I continually did searches on ABEbooks for Johnstone & Hunter and one day it paid off. Got this from a bookseller in Scotland at a reasonable price. The print is slightly smaller than the current PCA edition, but still nice to have.
There are italics in the Scripture proofs, but not in the quoted Scripture, rather in instructions as in question 189 to read 'Ps. cxlv. _throughout_', for example, instructing to read to the end of a Psalm.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 7, 2017)

Thanks for that. I went and looked on my shelf and I have a shabbier example of that same 1855 duodecimo ed. with that license. It, the 1855 octavo, and the later duodecimo (mine is 1886) are compared below. I think they had a fire and lost the plates of the first two because the last is reset which you can see in the comparison shot of pages 18-19. The 1855 Octoavo is famous for resurrecting the emphasis of portions of the scripture proofs in italic face that were introduced by Rothwell in 1656 (ie they are not official to the assembly and are often nonsensical). But the octavo would still be the one to find in a super nice binding.

Reactions: Like 2


----------

