# Revisions in the WCF?



## SmokingFlax (Nov 5, 2004)

A few years ago (when I first started looking at the reformers and puritans) I came across an article that mentioned that some of the articles in the Westminster Confession of Faith (I believe) were altered in the 19th century with a softened stance against Rome.

I recently picked up G.I. Williamson's study guide of the WCF and was wondering if this version reflected the original documents or an update(?). Or, perhaps my memory is failing me on this and the article was speaking of some other puritan document (like the larger catechism)(???).

Can anyone help me on this issue? Thank you.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Nov 5, 2004)

The only changes I know of is in regards to the anti-Christ being changed from the pope to a general description of the anti Christ.

try this http://www.bpc.org/wsc/index_wsc.html

blade


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 5, 2004)

There are also revisions with respect to the Civil magistrate:



original 21.4 had "and by the power of the civil magistrate." at the end
original 22.3 had "Yet it is a sin to refuse an oath touching any thing that is good and just, being imposed by lawful authority" at the end
original 23.3 had "yet he has authority, and it is his duty, to take order that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed, and all the ordainances of God duly settled, administrated, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he has power to call synods, to be present at them and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God" after the first clause
original 24.4 had "The man may not marry any of his wife's kindred, nearer in blood then he may of his own: nor the woman of her husband's kindred, nearer in blood than of her own" at the end
original 25.6 had "but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God" at the end
 31 had this as the second paragraph, which was wholly removed: "As magistrates may lawfully call a synod of ministers, and other fit persons, to consult and advise with, about matters of religion; so, if magistrates be open enemies to the Church, the ministers of Christ, of themselves, by virtue of their office, or they, with other fit persons upon delegation from their Churches, may meet together in such assemblies"


----------



## SmokingFlax (Nov 5, 2004)

Fred,

Thanks again for the info.

Are you sure that 21.4 -"and by the power of the civil magistrate." is the right spot? It makes more sense at 20.4 dealing with Christian liberty, and liberty of conscience.

[Edited on 5-11-2004 by SmokingFlax]


----------



## jfschultz (Nov 5, 2004)

> _Originally posted by SmokingFlax_
> A few years ago (when I first started looking at the reformers and puritans) I came across an article that mentioned that some of the articles in the Westminster Confession of Faith (I believe) were altered in the 19th century with a softened stance against Rome.
> 
> I recently picked up G.I. Williamson's study guide of the WCF and was wondering if this version reflected the original documents or an update(?). Or, perhaps my memory is failing me on this and the article was speaking of some other puritan document (like the larger catechism)(???).
> ...



These changes were adopted by the first General Assembly of what is now the PCUSA. (I think it was in 1789.) It is held by the conservative Presbyterian denominations that branch from there, such as the PCA and OPC. Being from these branches, G.I.Williamson follows the same.

The Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, which does not branch form the original PCUSA, retains the original. However they have added marginal notes. For Chapter 23 paragraph 3 there is a colon just before the difference Fred mentioned above. The note here reads "We _reject_ the portion of paragraph 3 after the colon."


----------



## SmokingFlax (Nov 5, 2004)

Why then does Williamson's study guide include the portions that Fred delineated above???


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Nov 5, 2004)

SF,
Answer to your first question: Yes, 20:4, not 21:4.

2nd question: Williamson's guide is simply maximally comprehensive. It's not a study of "the revised, typical American form of the confession" but of the thing, as is. And so, sometimes he states things like this:

p156-7, re. 20:4 "The italicized words are deleted by many American revisions of the Confession. No doubt the reason for this deletion has been a desire to remove all danger of encouragement to the interference of the State in purely ecclesiastical matters. History indicates that the fear of civil abuses in punishment of this kind is not groundless. However we would defend the original formulation..."

I think its a good thing to have such a comprehensive treatment, because one is not left ignorant of changes gone by in some, and perhaps even one's own denomination. You now know something which is even left out of the fine print in our Confessional standards (but note the typical preface where such matters are often mentioned, but not in detail).


----------



## SmokingFlax (Nov 5, 2004)

Hmmmmmmm ...I don't seem to recall him mentioning the revisions in the preface. I'll have to go back and check. Thanks.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Nov 6, 2004)

I was not clear to you. Sorry.

By "_typical_ preface" I meant prefaces to published Westminster Standards used by PCA and similar churches as their official documents. Those sometimes (not always) contain a blurb along the lines of admitting up front that _their_ particular edition is a "revised" version, but without detailing the revisions. In contrast, Williamson has included the original form (as there are some churches who still use the original) and also deals with the facts of the revisions in his commentary. Thus his volumes are automatically given the broadest appeal. And we are better informed about the history of Confessional interpretation.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Nov 6, 2004)

To the best of my knowledge, only two American Presbyterian denominations hold to the Westminster Confession as it was originally written without revisions -- the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA), which also has a Testimony which carries greater constitutional authority and which takes exception with the Confession at numerous points; and the Presbyterian Reformed Church (PRC) which holds to the original without any exceptions.


----------

