# Strange revision of the Shorter Catechism



## SRoper (Apr 24, 2011)

In the Wikipedia article on Catechism, there is a strange "modern revision" of the Shorter Catechism:


> Q. What is the chief end of man?
> A. To glorify God and enjoy Him forever!
> Q. What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy Him?
> A. The word of God as heard by all people directly.



No source is given. Any idea where this comes from? It seems Quaker or universalist. I really hope it's not used by any Presbyterian denominations.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Apr 24, 2011)

The only "modern revisions" that I know of were written by the OPC and the EPC. Neither of those match what you quoted.


----------



## Wayne (Apr 24, 2011)

Ran across John Wesley's _Revision of the Shorter Catechism_ earlier today.

Wasn't previously aware that Wesley had meddled in this territory.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Apr 24, 2011)

I haven't really collated the SC, so not sure where that is from; but it is pretty horrible. Not sure if Wiki is the source or what; but the article is heavy on RC catechism stuff. The link at least is to an historical version.


----------



## Michael (Apr 24, 2011)

Well, if it's on Wikipedia it must be solid.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Apr 24, 2011)

I need a new legend.
=wicked sarcasm


----------



## TomVols (Apr 24, 2011)

Wayne said:


> Ran across John Wesley's _Revision of the Shorter Catechism_ earlier today.
> 
> Wasn't previously aware that Wesley had meddled in this territory.


Very interesting. I'd love to see a side-by-side comparison of where he differs.


----------



## SRoper (Apr 26, 2011)

TomVols said:


> Very interesting. I'd love to see a side-by-side comparison of where he differs.


 
If you follow the link, the changes are very clear. He mostly crosses out the parts he disagrees with.


----------



## Wayne (Apr 26, 2011)

> If you follow the link, the changes are very clear. He mostly crosses out the parts he disagrees with.



How very helpful of him.



[see definition above in post #6]


----------

