The Theology of the Westminster Standards: Historical Context and Theological Insights

by J.V. Fesko

For centuries, countless Christians have turned to the Westminster Standards for insights into the Christian faith. These renowned documents--first published in the middle of the 17th century--are widely regarded as some of the most beautifully written summaries of the Bible's teaching ever produced.

Church historian John Fesko walks readers through the background and theology of the Westminster Confession, the Larger Catechism, and the Shorter Catechism, helpfully situating them within their original context. Organized according to the major categories of systematic theology, this book utilizes quotations from other key works from the same time period to shed light on the history and significance of these influential documents.

Genres: Theology, History, Church History, Religion, Reference, Nonfiction, Christian

448 pages, Paperback

First published June 30, 2014

About the author

J. V. Fesko graduated from the University of Aberdeen in Scotland, UK, with an earned Ph.D. in theology. Dr. Fesko's interests include systematic theology, applied soteriology (union with Christ, justification and sanctification, and the ordo salutis), sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Reformed dogmatics, as well as the integration of biblical and systematic theology. He was the pastor of Geneva Orthodox Presbyterian church from 1998 to 2009. He is now presently the Academic Dean and Professor of Systematic and Historical Theology at Westminster Seminary California. He is also an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

Reviews

[Parker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Any candidate for ministry in a presbyterian denomination really ought to read this book (though I acknowledge I could be a bit biased toward my professor on this point). As Fesko states in the conclusion, there are a number of unrecognized and unexamined differences between the theology of confessional presbyterians in the 21st century and the theology of the confession itself. The historical backgrounds discussed here go a long way toward clarifying what the westminster divines meant by what they wrote -- and especially where they intentionally left room for disagreement.

As I read the book, I found myself thinking often of the Truly Reformed(TM) crowd and their dogmatic assertions about psalm-singing and other secondary issues. Another major benefit to Fesko's work is it equips the reader to show our TR brothers that they're actually far less informed than they think they are.

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fesko, J. V. The Theology of the Westminster Standards.

Rather than giving a paragraph-by-paragraph analysis of the Westminster standards, Fesko aims to connect Westminster’s theology with the life and thought of the seventeenth century. This seems simple enough, but it entails a number of other methodological points: He is more likely to tell you what the individuals writing the Confession thought rather than what the Confession actually says, though the latter is certainly there. Moreover, especially in light of the Federal Vision debates, there is a temptation to play a certain theologian against the Standards. Fesko, fortunately, makes such a move very difficult.

Historical and Theological Context

Fesko wastes little time in debunking the Calvin vs. Calvinist thesis. Calvin was neither the norm for the Confession nor did the Confession mark a break from Calvin.

The Doctrine of Scripture

Given the Dark Ages of the 20th Century, one might be surprised to find Fesko begin, not with Scripture, but with God’s Book of Nature, especially as both connect to the doctrine of God. Against the rationalists, natural theology is quite limited. Against the biblicists, it actually communicates information. By not beginning immediately with Scripture, Fesko is able to employ a neat counter to the Romanist claim of “The Church was before the Bible.” Using the distinction between the verbum agraphon et engraphon, “the unwritten and written word,” he points us back to God’s spoken word. This effectively undercuts all canon arguments that Rome may use.

Returning to “the light of nature,” Fesko connects it with the more familiar claim of “good and necessary consequence.” Plainly put, our faculties have to be reliable, for if they were not, we could not even communicate. Reason, to be sure, is not the ground of our doctrines, but neither can it be dismissed.

God and the Decree

This section is difficult but important. I do not want to get into whether Edwards believed in contingency or not. Whether he did or did not, the divines, aside from some unguarded comments from Owen, did. In other words, they rejected a strict, causal necessity between events.

We can set up the problem this way: if God is pure act (and he is), and God’s decree is before time (and it is), does this not entail that all my actions are causally determined? With Turretin we must answer: “distinguo.” The short answer is no, but that is not adequate since in one sense my actions are embedded within the effects of God’s decree. To get through this problem, Fesko employs the historic Reformed distinction, lost to 20th century pop Calvinism, of the necessity of the consequence and the necessity of the consequent.
The necessity of the consequent is a stronger type of necessity. It is more akin to the logical and irresistible force of an if…then statement. To oversimply matters, the necessity of the consequence, by contrast, is more of a hypothetical necessity. It is related to contingent events. Contingency for the divines did not mean something happened without a cause. Rather, it is something that could have been otherwise. Therefore, God’s decree is contingent in at least one sense: nobody or nothing was forcing God to create. This actually safeguards human freedom. Without God’s decree to create, there could not be free human choices.

Hypothetical Universalism

Fesko is not saying the divines believed in hypothetical universalism, although some did. He is not saying the Standards teach it, for they clearly do not. Rather, this discussion highlights the conversations that took place connecting God’s decree with the intent of Christ’s satisfaction. That last word is important, for the Reformed Orthodox, especially outside of Britain, were more likely to speak of “satisfaction” than “atonement,” thus doing away with the need for the TULIP acronym.

Fesko argues: “The Confession was written in such a way as to accommodate and allow hypothetical universalism while at the same time denying Remonstrant views on the extent of Christ’s satisfaction.” To support this claim, he offers the following taxonomy:
Universal satisfaction → Arminians
Sufficient/efficient distinction: the death was applied to all but effective only to the elect.
Universal sufficiency but not applied to all. He says Ursinus held this view (Commentary, 222-224) as did Witsius (Economy, 2.9.2, 6).
Strict particularism; e.g., John Owen.

It is a good taxonomy, but it does not deal, at least not yet, with the more nuanced views of Davenant and Ussher. But before we can get to them, Fesko gives a helpful summary of Edward Calamy’s views. For Calamy, the price was sufficient for all; he further distinguishes between “absolute intention for the elect” and “conditional intention for the reprobate.” He even goes so far to say that “Christ died for all on the condition that they believe” (MPWA, 522).

Moreover, there are two types of hypothetical universalism. Fesko explains that Davenant’s views cannot be lumped with Amyraut’s. Nor can Ussher’s, seeing that he says Christ’s death renders humanity fit for pardon.

Amyraut, on Fesko’s reading, does not link the hypothetical decree of predestination with the hypothetical extent of salvation. There is a distinction between predestination to faith and predestination to salvation.

Fesko has given us a fascinating discussion, but we would have liked to see a more extensive interaction of Davenant’s views related to 3.6 of the Confession.

Conclusion
The only possible drawback to this book is its limitation for class usages. The preacher will almost certainly have to consult more traditional commentaries on the Confession. On the other hand, Fesko’s background work is stellar and will certainly represent the leading scholarship in the decades to come.

[Joe Johnson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Crazy good scholarship. Love Fesko’s attention to detail going thru the minutes and annotations of the assembly (and sermons, works, and journals of a individual divines) Also love his emphasis on the historical context of the divines. The point he continually made about the difference between Calvin’s views/“Calvinism” and the Reformed faith put forward in the Standard was fascinating.

Not exactly a commentary on the confession that I thought it’d be. But actually much more helpful than most commentaries I’ve read.

[Zach Byrd · Rating 5 out of 5]

Academically astute, pastorally applicable. Fesko writes a fantastic book showing both the breadth and profundity of this Westminster Confession as historically situated. Two of his related themes are the nature of compromise in the Confession and the extensiveness of the source material exceeds John Calvin.

As a churchman, this book encourages both theological charity and integrity. If the themes and contents of this work were heeded, it would do much good in the Reformed world.

[Ben Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

A solid guide to one of the most remarkable theological documents produced by the Protestant wing of the church in the wake of the Reformation. Fesko’s theological analysis of the Standards is sharp; but the common myths he dispels throughout — namely, that the WCF is just a reprise of Calvin’s theology — is worth the price of the book.

This book should be read by those who call themselves Reformed and by those who don’t. Much of what passes for Reformed theology today — by its boosters and its knockers — is a bastardized version of what the real Reformed tradition is all about.

[Samuel Kassing · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an informative read. I didn’t know a lot about the Westminster Standards but having now read this I have a much clearer grasp on the historical context of the standards.

I would probably recommend Letham’s work on the standards first though. Fesko just gives insights which are generally charitable and centrist but at times can seem a little out of left field.

Overall this is an excellent work and I recommend it to anyone who is looking to learn more about the Westminster Standards.

[Jamie · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fascinating and engrossing read. If there were an Olympic Games for researchers, Dr. Fesko would be the gold medalist... maybe even the logo.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

I disagreed with the author in a few areas, but, on the whole, it is a good discussion of the doctrine of the Westminster Standards and the theological and intellectual context in which the Assembly did its work.

[Josh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Anyone interested in either the history of theology or in Reformed theology beyond 5 points and an affirmation of God’s sovereignty would do well to familiarize themselves with the resulting documents of the Westminster Assembly, the Westminster Standards. The richness of these documents is put on display with J.V. Fesko’s new book from Crossway, The Theology of the Westminster Standards.

Fesko introduces the reader to the Standards by emphasizing the need to understand them in their context, both of the “who” wrote them and the “when and where” they were written. Fesko argues that a “challenge to a proper understanding of the Standards is when contemporary historians and commentators read the Standards through the grid of later theological developments.” So, for this reason, he seeks to help the reader investigate the Standards “in their original context.”

“Early modern Reformed theologians had a slightly different outlook on life and theology than we do today, and despite whatever similarities in doctrine and conviction are shared with theologians in the twenty-first century, the differences can be significant.”

Part of reading the Standards in their context is attempting, as much as possible, to see arguments and interpretations through the eyes of the divines(those who framed the Standards). While this is difficult, Fesko’s does well to take the reader into the theological world of the 17th century and, because of this, allows the reader to pick up on details of debates, discussions, and controversies that “often pass unnoticed by contemporary readers but were well known to theologians of the period.”

One of these details is an over-emphasis of the influence of the great Genevan reformer that modern readers so often impose upon the Standards, the divines, and early Protestantism as a whole. Fesko goes to great lengths to slay the caricature, oftentimes wittingly or unwittingly perpetuated by its adherents-especially neo-Calvinists of the YRR variety, that Reformed theology as a whole and the Standards in particular are simply an outworking of the theology of John Calvin. Fesko shows that the divines of the Westminster Assembly quoted from a long list of theologians and traditions in floor debate and that Calvin, in comparison, fared pretty weakly to his counterparts.

Calvin’s esteem and perceived influence has been exaggerated in the present day. While Calvin was certainly influential, the extent of citations and correspondence between Calvin and other Reformers shows that in his own day Calvin was one theologian among many others…claims about Calvin’s supposed influence over the rest of the tradition should be governed not by contemporary estimation of Calvin’s theology but by historical primary-source evidence.

This, needless to say, is in no way to disparage Calvin. But it is to emphasize the facts that the Standards were not the result of a monolithic school of thought and that there were many theologians and eras of theology that the Standards are indebted to beyond simply Calvin.

I was struck by how well the Standards themselves dealt with nuanced and controversial issues. In many areas the theological precision of the Standards truly stands out. For example, in formulating the Standards position on the Word of God, the divines went to great efforts to combat the position of Rome on the supremacy of the Church over the Scriptures.

But embedded in this opening paragraph is a crucial element that distinguishes Reformed belief from Roman Catholic convictions and serves as a leitmotif throughout this first chapter on Scripture. Going back to the writings of Heinrich Bullinger (1504–1575) and earlier, Reformed theologians explained the nature of the Word in terms of the verbum agraphon et engraphon, the “unwritten and written word.” This was an important distinction, one that emphasized that God’s spoken Word took precedence over his written Word. It might not be immediately apparent, but giving priority to the unwritten (or spoken) Word of God meant that the Word of God existed first, prior to the church. By contrast, Roman Catholics argued that the church existed first and then created the Word. If the church existed first, then its authority was equal to that of Scripture; but if the Word existed first, then the church, naturally, was the product of the Word and hence subject to its authority.


Bullinger, for example, writes, “Their doctrine, first of all taught by a lively expressed voice, and after that set down in writing with pen and ink, is the doctrine of God and the very true word of God.” The Word of God begins not with what is written, which would naturally raise questions related to the Canon, but with what is spoken. The unwritten Word of God gives rise to the written Word of God. This type of distinction appears in the works of those such as Wolfgang Musculus (1497–1563), Bucanus, and Leigh. It was also confessed quite early in the Reformation in the Ten Theses of Bern (1528), which state, “The holy catholic church, whose sole head is Christ, has been begotten from the Word of God, in which also it continues, nor does it listen to the voice of any stranger” (§ 1). In other words, the divines do not advocate that the Bible itself is a dead letter, a book containing dusty propositions to be affirmed or denied. Rather, the written Word is a vehicle or instrument for the Word of God by which he continually speaks to the church. As Bullinger writes in the Second Helvetic Confession, “God himself spoke to the fathers, prophets, apostles, and still speaks to us through the Holy Scriptures” (1.1). And likewise, the divines affirm that the supreme authority in the church by which all controversies of religion are adjudicated is “no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture” (1.10).

The point here is that the Word produces the church; the church does not produce the Word.

While precise and often quite explicit, one area that Fesko highlights is the “deliberate ambiguity” of the Standards on certain issues, an ambiguity that “can only be discovered by reading the Confession and catechisms in tandem with the minutes of the assembly and works of the period.” Whether ambiguous or direct, implicit or explicit, Fesko’s research allows the reader to hear much of the floor debate on issues like antinomianism, hypothetical universalism, millenarianism/chiasm, two Kingdoms, the regulative principle of worship, the papacy as antichrist, dual justification, and much more and to see why the divines said what they did…or did not.

Fesko’s work on the imputation of the active obedience of Christ (IAOC) is a microcosm of the scholarship of this work. Fesko’s attention to detail is second to none in this chapter and he makes his argument forcefully and graciously. He compares the number of speeches for and against IAOC, he lists objections to IAOC and then the positive case made for it. He also engages the implicit case against IAOC based on removal of “whole” and a comma that was mistakenly omitted from copies, as well as the cultural context of “obedience and satisfaction” as passive and active obedience. In all of this, Fesko does not leave the novice in the dust and keeps the reader’s interest piqued.

Fesko presents the entire book in historical context. He begins by looking at the assembly itself and what led to these theologians being gathered to amend the 39 Articles. After introducing the historical context of the calling of the Westminster Assembly in 1643, Fesko proceeds to look at specific issues addressed in the Standards in light of debates at the Assembly and its immediate context because,

Historical context is all-determinative for understanding the theology contained in the Westminster Standards. As helpful and necessary as popular commentaries on the Standards are, a contextually sensitive reading of the documents must first be established. What political and theological concerns did the divines have, and how do these concerns appear in the Confession and catechisms? Who were the dialogue partners of the divines, whether positively or negatively?

So, I can definitely make the point that The Theology of the Westminster Standards is a pleasure to read. While it gets pretty deep at points, Fesko seems to take care to never leave those without formal theological education in the wake of his scholarship. While I am sure there are many who could/would argue the historical and/or theological nuances of Fesko’s conclusions, I am definitely not informed enough to even think of trying. However, as one with relatively little interaction with the Westminster Standards prior to this work, I can assure you that this is a wonderful introduction to the history and theology of the Westminster Standards and time well spent for anyone with the least bit of interest in the British Reformation or Protestant theology.

Fesko says from the beginning that the “aim of this study is to set the Standards in their original historical setting and explore the world of the seventeenth century…(and) my hope is that this brief exploration of the marvelous world of seventeenth-century Reformed theology will be interesting, instructive, and edifying for saints living in the twenty-first century and beyond.”

This is exactly what has been accomplished. Fesko provides the reader with an historical theology of the Westminster Standards that will serve the Church for a long, long time.

*I received a copy of this book for review purposes.

Download an excerpt of the book

J. V. Fesko (PhD, University of Aberdeen) is academic dean and associate professor of systematic and historical theology at Westminster Seminary California. In addition to serving as an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, he is the author of a number of books related to the Reformation, including What is Justification? and Justification: Understanding the Classic Reformed Doctrine.

Endorsements

“One of the ways of demonstrating the abiding relevance of our confessions is to understand the conversations and debates from which they emerged. John Fesko has done precisely this. Digging around each plant in the Westminster garden, Fesko exposes the rich soil that still nourishes our faith and practice. I picked up this book expecting to find a resource to be consulted, but found myself reading the whole work through with rapt attention. There is gold in these hills!”
Michael Horton, J. Gresham Machen Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics, Westminster Seminary California; author, Calvin on the Christian Life

“Finally we have a solid analysis and an expert portrayal of the theology of the Westminster Standards in which the time of its writing and its direct influence are also described. John Fesko has gathered an enormous amount of information that makes this book a sourcebook par excellence. He does the church and its theology a great favor with this overview, helping us to understand the Westminster Confession and catechisms not only in their theological context, but also in their relevance for today.”
Herman Selderhuis, Professor of Church History, Theological University of Apeldoorn; Director, Refo500, The Netherlands

“Drawing upon a significant body of recent research, John Fesko has written an admirably clear and accessible study of the teaching of the Westminster Confession. By situating the successive chapters in their original seventeenth-century setting, he provides an informed exposition of their content and significance. This study will be immensely useful not only for theological students, but for all who require a better understanding of the most important Reformed confession in the English-speaking world.”
David Fergusson, Professor of Divinity and Principal, New College, University of Edinburgh

“Seldom has an exposition of the Westminster Standards been as useful as John Fesko’s Theology of the Westminster Standards. Dr. Fesko understands the necessity of placing these monumental documents in their proper contexts. He has uncovered a massive amount of contemporary literature and expertly explains the theological statements of the Standards in the light of these works. For everyone interested in confessionalism, this is an essential volume. It will be a standard work for decades to come.”
James M. Renihan, Dean and Professor of Historical Theology, Institute of Reformed Baptist Studies

“Fesko’s volume is an outstanding and very welcome addition to the growing field of literature on the Westminster Confession of Faith. In these pages Fesko goes straight to the primary sources, skillfully mining relevant sixteenth- and seventeenth-century texts in order to explain the historical and theological developments leading up to the assembly. Moreover, he provides fresh and insightful analysis of the theology of the Confession itself. Do you want to grow in your knowledge and understanding of the Reformed faith in general, and the theology of the Westminster Confession in particular? If the answer is yes, then pick up and read this marvelous book. I heartily commend it!”
Jon D. Payne, Presbyterian Church in America church planter, Charleston, South Carolina; Visiting Lecturer, Reformed Theological Seminary; Series Editor, Lectio Continua Expository Commentary on the New Testament

“This book is awesome!”
Josh R. Skinner, Marketing Czar/Office Morale Monitor at TheTrailer Guys, Church Member at Calvary Baptist Church, Author of A Review of J.V. Fesko’s The Theology of the Westminster Standards

[David Goetz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A helpful and cogent contribution to our understanding of the background/context and theology of the Westminster Standards.

Fesko looks at the Standards' teachings on the major doctrines of our faith, following the structure of the Confession and bringing in the Larger and Shorter Catechisms when necessary. He draws on or argues with very few contemporary sources, almost entirely working with the Standards themselves, the Minutes of the Assembly, the theological works of the divines themselves, and the works of the authors who most influenced the work of the Assembly. Basically, Reformed theology flowing from Westminster is indebted to Calvin (as almost everyone knows) but also to a host of other thoughtful pastors from the Patristic era, the Middle Ages (Aquinas and Scotus, for example, were well known to these men), and the 100+ years since Luther. Fesko's book will expose you, by direct quotation, to the writings of many theologians whose works are no longer in publication, or whose works have never been translated into English, but who nonetheless greatly influenced the theology of Westminster (William Whitaker, Samuel Bolton, Anthony Burgess, John Davenant, George Gillespie, Edward Leigh, Amandus Polanus, et al.). He also shows the indelible imprint of James Ussher and the Irish Articles on the formulations of the Standards. Fesko also does a great job of showing where the Standards are polemical (vis-a-vis Roman theology, Arminianism, Socinianism, etc.), which can be easy to miss given the absence of anathemas such as one finds in the documents of the Council of Trent or in the Augsburg Confession. He also argues pretty effectively, pace T.F. Torrance and a few others, that the Standards, read contextually, are not dry scholasticism and do not teach an "exaggerated moralism" (Torrance's term, reserved especially for the Larger Catechism) but accentuate adoption and union with Christ and are pleasantly inclusive with respect to many of the signature Reformed doctrines. There's also a nice annotated bibliography at the back.

A few noteworthy parts are where Fesko shows Westminster affirming divine sovereignty as the ground of contingency, not as prohibiting it (though the argument wasn't as full on this point as I would've liked); where he explicates the notion of second causes in his discussion of human freedom vis-a-vis the decree of God; where he carefully delineates the covenant of works and the covenant of grace and demonstrates federal theology to be the "architectonic principle" of the Standards (125), though he doesn't really explore the question of the Mosaic covenant's relation to the covenants of works and grace; where he highlights the common Reformed appeal to the sufficient / efficient distinction in thinking of the scope of redemption but shows that Westminster chose not to employ the distinction in order to make room for hypothetical universalism; where he talks about the various functions of the law of God; and where he shows how commonly the Reformed, like the Lutherans, held a doctrine of two kingdoms (or sometimes three!).

Anyway, definitely recommended if you're interested in a fuller understanding of the Westminster Standards or of Reformed theology in general, especially the 17th-century variety.

[Michael Boling · Rating 5 out of 5]

As noted by theologian Dr. John Frame, the Westminster Confession of Faith “completed in December, 1646, is the last of the classic Reformed confessions and by far the most influential in the English-speaking world.” Furthermore, its influence within the Reformed community and the adoption of its contents as informative to how a great many denominations view and approach matters of theology requires us to take the necessary time to understand how this confession was formed, what it contains, and why it matters. Since the Westminster Confessions deal with matters of foundational theological truth, a book addressing these confessions from that perspective certainly makes sense. Dr. J. V. Fesko, in his book The Theology of the Westminster Standards: Historical Context and Theological Insights efforts to provide the reader with informative insight into the issues the Westminster Divines sought to engage as well as how these confessions remain important for us today.

For starters, this is a very in-depth book. Fesko does an excellent job of situating the discussion within the historical time period of when the Westminster Assembly met. No work within history is written in a vacuum to include the development of the Westminster Confessions. Thus viewing these confessions and approaching them as did the original authors is important. Throughout this book, Fesko does a great job of establishing the setting that drove the addressing of a particular issue following that discussion with how the confession influenced later theologians and how we are to understand and apply the issues elaborated in the confession in our lives today. Thus he moves from history to the present day in a way that provides a depth of understanding necessary when studying such an important confession of faith as the Westminster Confessions.

Some have averred that the Westminster Divines rooted their entire theological approach upon the writings and thoughts of John Calvin. Fesko pulls the proverbial rug out from under that assumption noting that the Westminster Divines engaged a large number of theologians, both in a positive and negative light in the formation of the confessions. In his chapter on the historical and theological context of the Westminster Assembly, Fesko shares a lengthy list of names and the number of times that particular theologian was cited by the Westminster Divines. If anything, this list reveals “the need to illuminate the Westminster Standards by the surrounding theological sources and conversation partners of the period” which was not limited as asserted by some to merely the beliefs and writings of Calvin.

After providing a solid historical context for the reader, Fesko then engages the specific elements outlined in the Westminster Confessions. He does so in a style reminiscent of systematic theology as he takes a specific theological topic such as the Doctrine of Scripture, Justification, Sanctification, and the Church (to name just a few of the subjects he addresses) and then notes how those various theological subjects are noted in the confessions. As he did with the initial chapter on the historical background of the confessions, Fesko provides in the subsequent chapters the broader historical context thus providing the reader with a helpful glimpse into the ecclesiological and often cultural issues of the day that impacted the Westminster Assembly’s viewpoint on these doctrinal issues.

For example, in his discussion on the covenants, Fesko aptly notes the reality that critics of the doctrine of the covenants such as J. B. Torrance claim “God’s dealings with man are always, even pre-fall, on the basis of grace, whereas in a covenantal structure theologians construed the relationship between God and man contractually, legally.” In response to such an assertion, Fesko comments “the Confession embodies the teaching of the Reformers, though in a more nuanced and developed form. Moreover, Calvin was not the only theologian contributing to the development of the Reformed tradition.” Fesko then provides the reader with a journey through the covenantal structure found in Scripture as well as noting the works of numerous theologians throughout church history who write and affirmed the doctrine of the covenants. This historical and theological journey helps the reader better understand once again that Calvin was not the sole underwriter of the Westminster Confessions and that the confessions are rooted in sound theological doctrine.

Fesko also does his due diligence to note aspects of theological debate to include various statements made in the confessions. For instance returning to the discussion on the doctrine of the covenants, Fesko notes “the Confession represents the common opinion on the connection and association of the moral law, the covenant of works, and the Decalogue given in the Mosaic covenant.” He rightly notes that even amongst the Westminster Divines there was debate about just how the covenants related to one another with various viewpoints being presented to include at least five different perspectives on how the covenantal structure is outlined in Scripture. Each of these perspectives continues to share some degree of popularity even today. What this demonstrates is that the Westminster Assembly and the particular confessions they developed on the covenants “embody the broad strokes of the Reformed tradition…The divines acknowledged what early Reformers such as Tyndale, and later Rollock, contended, namely, that God did not speak to man apart from covenant, whether Adam in the garden, Israel at Sinai, or the new covenant in Christ.” Based on that fact, they felt the need to address the issue of covenants and in doing so, they acknowledge their importance in the confessions and rightly so.

This is just a small sampling of the level of historical and theological detail Fesko provides the reader in this very insightful and helpful book. The doctrines addressed in the Westminster Confessions are truly some of the fundamental elements of the faith. While they are certainly the product of human creation and thus by no means perfect in every detail, what Fesko demonstrates in this book is they remain an important tool for studying Scripture. As he rightly notes in the conclusion to this book, “Once we have competently grasped the theological content of the Standards, we are better equipped to understand the Scriptures and enter into theological dialogue with our forebearers.” This book enables the reader to do just that, namely to better understand why the Westminster Assembly developed the Westminster Standards (Confessions) and why they continue to be important for us in our study of Scripture.

I highly recommend this book and especially for Bible College and Seminary Students. It is a book I know I wish I would have had access to in a number of classes, both church history and theologically related. Given the breadth of information provided by Fesko, this will be a tool and resource I will return to many times in my future studies.

I received this book for free from Crossway Books for this review. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

[Adam · Rating 5 out of 5]

5/5 - Par Excellence

Fesko's "The Theology of the Westminster Standards" is an academic benchmark—and should remain so for some time. This is the kind of work that takes years to assemble, the result of meticulous and labored research.

Fesko provides profound insight into the formation of the Westminster Confession, going beyond the minutes of the assembly to explore the broader context and theological issues the divines were grappling with. Areas of disagreement are hard to find because the historical research is nearly airtight. Any gaps are difficult to detect, and for those who wish to investigate further, his selected bibliography offers a guide to additional sources.

Anyone seeking to learn more about the Westminster Confession of Faith—or related confessions like the Savoy Declaration or the 1689 London Baptist Confession—should read this work.

[Creeds, Confessions, and Catechisms · Rating 4 out of 5]

Crossway sent me a copy of “The Theology of the Westminster Standards: Historical Context & Theological Insights” by J. V. Fesko in exchange for an honest review.

This book is dense but delightful. The cover and page layout is well-done and it looks nice on the bookshelf. Fesko does an excellent job giving great detail on the context along with rigorous analysis. I greatly appreciated the lengths he went to to make the reader aware of each side on the debates and controversies. The only negative I found was his section on Psalmody. I don’t think his conclusions in that section bear out in the historical record. In general, this tends to be a weak point in modern commentaries on Westminster. Nevertheless, the book is overwhelmingly an excellent resource for those who wish to learn from Westminster. I highly recommend this book.

[Christian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Such a good survey of the Westminster Standards. Fesko's treatment is historically sensitive, evidenced in his constant appeal to the primary texts, and his goal (besides surveying the theology of the WS) of showing that Reformed theology is more than just "Calvinism," as well as the nature of the WS as a consensus document, was clear throughout and convincing. Probably the best beginner/intermediate introduction to the theology of the Westminster Standards, mainly because it isn't just a commentary (explaining doctrine), but gives historial context in order to understand the WS more broadly.

[Matt Crawford · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a great general overview of not only the puritans but specifically the Westminster divines. I must admit that I am a baptist, but I was hoping to see more of church government or covenant theology. Or at least dived into deeper. The chapters are long and lengthy. I am not sure if that’s a pro or a con, but I often had to break up my reading sessions. All around it was a great read and since I cannot take class from Fesko it was a good substitute.

[Justin Dillehay · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this because it was on James Renihan's required reading list for his class on the Second London Confession. For appreciating the historical context of the Westminster Confession and its offspring, this is a must read.

[Alex McEwen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked that this wasn’t just an examination of the Westminster Standards but a theological and historical primer to better understanding the Standards.

The work would be accessible to a lay audience.

[Josh · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well written historical and theological analysis of the Westminster Standards.

[Michael Rachel · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the best books on the WCF I've read. Fesko is clear, to the point, and his use of primary sources and fn citations is a gift. This was a very intriguing and engaging read.

[T.A. Ward · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating and deeply insightful.

[Grant Carter]

One of the best books I've read in seminary. Made me appreciate the Standards even more.

[Matthew Rawlings · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very helpful historical overview. I need to read Letham at some point as well.

[Marc Scaturro · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book.

This is a great book for understanding the history and theology of the Westminster Standards. I recommend reading this book along with Chad VanDixhoorn’s “Confessing the Faith.”

[Doug Hibbard · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Theology of the Westminster Standards, by J.V. Fesko, is a serious book. That’s the first statement I would make: you’re not in for light reading here. Additionally, you may find yourself needing to either read the actual Westminster Standards or consult your favorite Presbyterian to grapple with the content. After all, why bother with the theology of something you have never read?

Fesko’s work breaks down the collection of documents known as the Westminster Standards, which includes the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, and the Form of Church Government. The focus is on the Confession and two Catechisms.

The material is organized around the general categories of systematic theology, tracing how the Standards speak to the doctrines of Scripture, God, Christology, and more. I would recommend you be familiar with the general academics of theology before tackling these chapters, though this work could be your introduction. A more general introduction, though, would be of benefit to you.

I found the first chapter the most beneficial, as it covers the historical context of the writing of the Westminster Standards. (Technically, I suppose it’s the 2nd chapter, as the Introduction is labeled Chapter 1.) This chapter serves the valuable role of reminding the reader of what is going on, and has gone on, in the world around Westminster when the Standards come into being.

Fesko’s writing style is accessible, but does require a willingness to focus in and read. I recommend a notepad and a Bible close at hand. It is worth your time, especially if you are looking for the historical foundations of Reformed Theology.

If you are a casual reader, you’ll need to stretch out to tackle this one. If your interest in theology is either “gotcha” games for tweetable lines or feel-good only, then you need to give this a pass or be prepared for frustration.

If you’re out for a deeper understanding, this is a good look at Reformed Theology, especially in its initial settings.

Free book provided in exchange for the review.

[Tom F · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thoroughly enjoyed this rather approachable book. The history in itself is interesting, and the doctrines being examined along with the arguments given for, or against, each is quite helpful and really helps to give more depth and understanding to the Westminster Confession.

The footnotes have given me books to look for. Which presents a problem, many of these books are hard to find, and no longer in print. Thankfully, the author wrote an appendix saying where to find some of the most important books cited.

Reformed people who are serious in wanting to understand the Confession and our history should read this book. It is one of the most helpful and interesting books I have read.

I would love to dedicate a shelf or three in my library to this book and many of the sources cited.

[Alex Jackson · Rating 4 out of 5]

I appreciate how John Fesko did not shy away from the depths of the primary sources. I wasn't quite expecting so much of the depth. He is a reliable guide to the confessionally reformed tradition. Many of the primary sources are not sources you hear about today, for example, Edward Leigh or John Arrowsmith. My only concern/criticism coming away therefore is to question whether the breadth of the scope of primary sources are accounted for in Fesko's assessment.

[Richard Chelvan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is not really a review. I only want to make the observation that Fesko did not use or cite Brannon Ellis's superb "Calvin, Classical Trinitarianism, and the Aseity of the Son." I make this observation because he deals at length with Robert L. Reymond's Systematic theology and of Calvin's doctrine of the aseity of the Son.

[Mike · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Historical context is all-determinative for understanding the theology contained in the Westminster Standards." Fesko presents a great analysis of the contexts, the authors, and their theology organized by key doctrines in the Standards.

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read Chapter 4 (on The God of the Decree) to help me with Chapter 4 of my dissertation (on Adam's felix culpa statement in Book 12 of Milton's Paradise Lost).

[Michael Kidd · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fesko is very thorough. This was a helpful book for understanding why the Westminster Divines landed where they did on various issues.