Posing Problems in the Westminster Confession of Faith

[JohnMartin]

According to Wiki the Westminster confession is the standard confession of faith for the Anglican Church, which has been adopted and modified by other denominations.

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a Reformed confession of faith. Drawn up by the 1646 Westminster Assembly as part of the Westminster Standards to be a confession of the Church of England, it became and remains the "subordinate standard" of doctrine in the Church of Scotland and has been influential within Presbyterian churches worldwide.

In 1643, the English Parliament called upon "learned, godly and judicious Divines", to meet at Westminster Abbey in order to provide advice on issues of worship, doctrine, government and discipline of the Church of England. Their meetings, over a period of five years, produced the confession of faith, as well as a Larger Catechism and a Shorter Catechism. For more than three hundred years, various churches around the world have adopted the confession and the catechisms as their standards of doctrine, subordinate to the Bible.

If problems presented below with the confession of faith are unresolvable, the Anglican faith is in error.

The Westminster Confession of Faith

Chapter I
Of the Holy Scripture
I. Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men unexcusable;[1] yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of His will, which is necessary unto salvation.[2]Therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal Himself, and to declare that His will unto His Church;[3]and afterwards for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing;[4] which makes the Holy Scripture to be most necessary;[5] those former ways of God's revealing His will unto His people being now ceased.[6]

[3] HEB 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets.

and afterwards for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing;[4] which makes the Holy Scripture to be most necessary;[5] those former ways of God's revealing His will unto His people being now ceased.[6]

2 Timothy 1:13-14 Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus;

[14] guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.
2 Timothy 2:2 and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.

On the canon of scripture -

II. Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testament, which are these: Of the Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, I Samuel, II Samuel, I Kings, II Kings, I Chronicles, II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Song of Songs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. Of the New Testament: The Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, The Acts of the Apostles, Paul's Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians I, Corinthians II, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians I , Thessalonians II , To Timothy I , To Timothy II, To Titus, To Philemon, The Epistle to the Hebrews, The Epistle of James, The first and second Epistles of Peter, The first, second, and third Epistles of John, The Epistle of Jude, The Revelation of John. All which are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of faith and life.[7]

III. The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture, and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings.[8]

IV. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.[9]

1 TH 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

[thewriteranon]

According to Wiki the Westminster confession is the standard confession of faith for the Anglican Church, which has been adopted and modified by other denominations.

No it's not. It's primarily a Presbyterian confession. It was written for the Church of England but it is by no means the standard confession for the Anglican Church. The standards for the Anglican Church are the Nicene, Apostles, and Athanasian Creeds. The Book of Common Prayer is followed in liturgy and prayer life. And the 39 Articles are received as expressions of the Anglican response to certain doctrinal issues (though they are interpreted quite differently between types of churches; my own Anglo-Catholic/Orthodox Church approaches them very differently than an Evangelical Presbyterian-oriented church would).

ETA: If you had read the wiki just a little bit further, you would have seen that it was adopted primarily by Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and Baptists, all non-conformists, i.e. those who were fundamentally un-Anglican.

[JohnMartin]

No it's not. It's primarily a Presbyterian confession. It was written for the Church of England but it is by no means the standard confession for the Anglican Church. The standards for the Anglican Church are the Nicene, Apostles, and Athanasian Creeds. The Book of Common Prayer is followed in liturgy and prayer life. And the 39 Articles are received as expressions of the Anglican response to certain doctrinal issues (though they are interpreted quite differently between types of churches; my own Anglo-Catholic/Orthodox Church approaches them very differently than an Evangelical Presbyterian-oriented church would).

ETA: If you had read the wiki just a little bit further, you would have seen that it was adopted primarily by Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and Baptists, all non-conformists, i.e. those who were fundamentally un-Anglican.

The wiki page says the Westminster confession is a confession of the Church of England as part of the Westminster Standards.

Here are some problems to consider in the 39 Articles -

XI. Of the Justification of Man.
WE are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort; as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification.

Problem - if faith is an act done by man, why is faith not a work that causes justification? Afer all faith is a work is it not?

2We always thank God for all of you, making mention of you in our prayers 3and continually recalling before our God and Father your work of faith, your labor of love, and your enduring hope in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Problem - if faith is not an act done by man, why is faith required to cause justification?

Problem - if faith is a work informed by charity, why does only faith justify, when faith without love is worthless (1 Cor 13:2)?

Problem - if faith alone justifies, why does faith justify and love does not justify, when love is greater than faith (1 Cor 13:13)?

Problem - if faith alone justifies, is faith an instrument whereby Christs righteousness is imputed to one's account?

Westminster Larger Catechism

Question 70: What is justification?
Answer: Justification is an act of God's free grace unto sinners, in which he pardons all their sins, accepts and accounts their persons righteous in his sight; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them, and received by faith alone.
Question 71: How is justification an act of God's free grace?

Answer: Although Christ, by his obedience and death, did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to God's justice in the behalf of them that are justified; yet inasmuch as God accepts the satisfaction from a surety, which he might have demanded of them, and did provide this surety, his own only Son, imputing his righteousness to them, and requiring nothing of them for their justification but faith, which also is his gift, their justification is to them of free grace.

Question 72: What is justifying faith?
Answer: Justifying faith is a saving grace, wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit and Word of God, whereby he, being convinced of his sin and misery, and of the disability in himself and all other creatures to recover him out of his lost condition, not only assents to the truth of the promise of the gospel, but receives and rests upon Christ and his righteousness, therein held forth, for pardon of sin, and for the accepting and accounting of his person righteous in the sight of God for salvation.

Problem - if the pardon of sin is achieved by faith alone, what is the role of repentance as a grace from Christ?

Problem - if Christs righteousness is imputed to one's account, why is the man justified and not only his account?

Problem - if justification is by faith alone, then justification can only be lost when one sin's against faith and does not believe. Yet St Paul clearly teaches that other sins exclude one from the kingdom (heaven) and thereby cause damnation. How does the Anglican teaching on justification by faith alone square with St Paul's teaching on salvation?

Problem - According to the longer catechism, justification is by faith alone, where faith in an instrument which causes the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the believer. What evidence is there from scripture that faith is an instrument?

Question 73: How does faith justify a sinner in the sight of God?
Answer: Faith justifies a sinner in the sight of God, not because of those other graces which do always accompany it, or of good works that are the fruits of it, nor as if the grace of faith, or any act thereof, were imputed to him for his justification; but only as it is an instrument by which he receives and applies Christ and his righteousness.

Problem - if there is no explicit evidence for faith as an instrument, what assurance does one have that faith actually does what Anglicanism says it does? After all if faith as an instrument is merely a conclusion found by interpreting a text, it is merely the opinion of men, is it not?

Problem - if the Holy Spirit dwells within Christians to help them live new life and die to sin, why doesn't the indwelling action of the Holy Spirit cause justification, rather than faith alone?

Question 75: What is sanctification?
Answer: Sanctification is a work of God's grace, whereby they whom God has, before the foundation of the world, chosen to be holy, are in time, through the powerful operation of his Spirit applying the death and resurrection of Christ unto them, renewed in their whole man after the image of God; having the seeds of repentance unto life, and all other saving graces, put into their hearts, and those graces so stirred up, increased, and strengthened, as that they more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life.

Problem - if the Holy Spirit is the creator, why does the new creation not cause justification but rather, only faith?

Problem - if faith alone theology is problematic, doesn't this mean the Anglican faith is therefore eclectic and in error?

Problem - if Christ acts a priest on the cross as a sacrifice, and as an intercession to the Father in heaven, why is the perfect work of Christ on the cross require Christ's priestly intercession in heaven?

Question 44: How does Christ execute the office of a priest?
Answer: Christ executes the office of a priest, in his once offering himself a sacrifice without spot to God, to be a reconciliation for the sins of his people; and in making continual intercession for them.

Problem - if Christ's has priestly intercession in heaven what is the relationship to the work of the cross?

Problem - if justification occurs by faith alone, then justification occurs when faith is had. Yet St Paul teaches sanctification and justification occur together in baptism.

1 Cor 6:11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Question 77: Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?
Answer: Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification, yet they differ, in that God in justification imputes the righteousness of Christ; in sanctification his Spirit infuses grace, and enables to the exercise thereof; in the former, sin is pardoned; in the other, it is subdued: the one does equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation; the other is neither equal in all, nor in this life perfect in any, but growing up to perfection.

Problem - if justification is the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the believer, why wouldn't the imputation of Christ's righteousness rather be an imputation that ontologically follows upon sanctification, whereby the Christian is set free from sin and made holy as an intrinsic cause of Christ's righteousness? In other words, imputation should really mean grace has been infused, making the Christian holy, rather than imputation follows upon faith alone, regardless of holiness. If the latter, then it seems God is involved in a blasphemous lie of calling a sinner righteous when the sinner is not made holy by the Spirit. The confusion created by the Anglican articles requires clarification.

Problem - if baptism washes away sins, why doesn't baptism cause justification, but only faith causes justification?

Question 165: What is Baptism?
Answer: Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein Christ has ordained the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, to be a sign and seal of ingrafting into himself, of remission of sins by his blood, and regeneration by his Spirit; of adoption, and resurrection unto everlasting life; and whereby the parties baptized are solemnly admitted into the visible church, and enter into an open and professed engagement to be wholly and only the Lord's.

JM

[JohnMartin]

IX. The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.[23]

X. The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.[24]

[thewriteranon]

The wiki page says the Westminster confession is a confession of the Church of England as part of the Westminster Standards.

I think I know what the confessions of my own church are, thanks.. The Westminster Standards were formed during the Puritan takeover of the government in the mid-seventeenth century. The Church of Scotland may fall in line with the Westminster Confession, but the Church of Scotland is not entirely equal to Anglicanism. Here is the actual quote from the wiki:

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a Reformed confession of faith. Drawn up by the 1646 Westminster Assembly as part of the Westminster Standards to be a confession of the Church of England, it became and remains the "subordinate standard" of doctrine in the Church of Scotland and has been influential within Presbyterian churches worldwide.

Oh, look at that. It was drawn in 1646 during the Puritan takeover and it is something like a standard in the Church of Scotland and Presbyterianism at large. Anglicanism is not Presbyterianism.

As inherent parts of this sacred deposit, and therefore as essential to the restoration of unity among the
divided branches of Christendom, we account the following, to wit: ...4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs
of the nations and peoples called of God into the unity of His Church.

Just in case you had forgotten, episcopal structure and presbyterian structure are not the same thing.

Let's revisit what Wiki says again:

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a Reformed confession of faith. Drawn up by the 1646 Westminster Assembly as part of the Westminster Standards to be a confession of the Church of England,

That does not say it became the standard. It says that the intention was for it to be the standard. In fact Wikipedia then goes on in the other half of the sentence that you seem to be ignoring to say that it became influential in Scotland and in Presbyterianism. Not Anglicanism proper. The article at large speaks of its influence in shaping Presbyterianism and the Church of England drops out. Why? Because the Puritan experiment failed in England after Cromwell's death and the monarchy and the episcopacy were restored. If you are going to critique the Westminster Confession, you need to at least realize which denomination you are criticizing. Anglicanism and Presbyterianism may be brothers, but they are certainly not identical.

[thewriteranon]

I hope you are not addressing me with quotes from the Westminster Catechism. The Anglican Church in North America does not subscribe to or use the Westminster Catechism. I have no interest in defending it.

[Spartacus]

I hope you are not addressing me with quotes from the Westminster Catechism. The Anglican Church in North America does not subscribe to or use the Westminster Catechism. I have no interest in defending it.

He has no interest in conversation except on his own terms

[JohnMartin]

I hope you are not addressing me with quotes from the Westminster Catechism. The Anglican Church in North America does not subscribe to or use the Westminster Catechism. I have no interest in defending it.

Would you be interested in defending the catechism you hold to? What are the official documents of North American Anglicanism? To Be a Christian: An Anglican Catechism seems like a place to start if you wish.

I do not beleive the Westminster confession or catechism can be successfully defended.

JM

[DesertBerean]

Good grief. All organizations have policy statements etc. To reflect their vision, mission, and procedures. How is that forbidden?

[thewriteranon]

Would you be interested in defending the catechism you hold to? What are the official documents of North American Anglicanism? To Be a Christian: An Anglican Catechism seems like a place to start if you wish.

Nope. I'd just prefer not to be confused with a Presbyterian. I have grad school, work, volunteer commitments, and a whole lot of other things going on in my life. I don't have time for shenanigans.

[JohnMartin]

Please note that the following problems are only presented to be read. There is no obligation for anyone to answer all of the problems. The reader may answer any problems as seen fit to do so.

IV. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.[9]

1 TH 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

IX. The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.[23]

X. The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.[24]

[JohnMartin]

Nope. I'd just prefer not to be confused with a Presbyterian. I have grad school, work, volunteer commitments, and a whole lot of other things going on in my life. I don't have time for shenanigans.

As you please my lady.

JM

[JohnMartin]

Good grief. All organizations have policy statements etc. To reflect their vision, mission, and procedures. How is that forbidden?

The Westminster confession is only one of several confessions within the world of Protestant Christianity. Why believe any other them when none of them have any authority other than a denomination founded upon the decisions of a group of men?

For example a quick search on Wiki shows many confessions of faith -

Why bother with any of them when none of them make any claims or can historically evidence any claims of authority for there denominations?

JM

[Raphael]

Good grief. All organizations have policy statements etc. To reflect their vision, mission, and procedures. How is that forbidden?

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

because they might in some way lead people to have a problem with geocentricism.

[JohnMartin]

them and in whose spirit is no deceit (and therefore no sin)?

Ps 32:2 Blessed is the one whose sin the LORD does not count against them and in whose spirit is no deceit.

Does not, "no deceit" infer the sinner has been cleansed from sin within his soul and thereby is not counted as righteousness? Why then believe God forgives sin and declares a sinner righteous whilst remaining a sinner, when Rom 4 and Ps 32 both infer the declaration of righteousness follows upon, or conforms to the interior restoration of the sinner, via an interior righteousness rather than the reformed understanding of imputed righteousness?

Problem - The reformers taught the double imputation as the great exchange. Christ became as sin and was punished in our place, and we sinners receive Christ's righteousness by faith alone, by the imputation of Christ's righteousness to our account.

As Richard Lints as the Andrew Mutch Distinguished Professor of Theology and Vice President for Academic Affairs, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, says -

Others have called it the