Article I: Introducing Chapter 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith
The opening chapter of the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), entitled “Of the Holy Scripture,” is foundational not only to the Confession’s overall theological system but to the entire Protestant tradition that arose out of the Reformation. For the Westminster divines, who convened from 1643 to 1653 amidst civil unrest and deep ecclesiastical divisions, the Bible stood as the sole, sufficient, and ultimate authority in matters of faith and practice. Their decision to position “Of the Holy Scripture” as the Confession’s first chapter was neither coincidental nor perfunctory; rather, it testified to their conviction that every subsequent doctrine—be it on the nature of God, salvation, sacraments, or church polity—had to rest upon the unshakeable bedrock of the inspired written Word.
This first Article introduces Chapter 1 of the WCF from three interlocking perspectives: (1) the historical and political context that shaped the Assembly’s theological approach, (2) the confessional and polemical necessity of stating Scripture’s primacy, and (3) the broader Reformed tradition of “confessional bibliology” that regards Scripture’s text as providentially preserved, “kept pure in all ages” (WCF 1.8). Each of these vantage points reveals a church standing at a crossroad between the medieval vestiges of Rome’s reliance on extra-biblical tradition and the newly reasserted principle of Sola Scriptura championed by the continental Reformers and their English-Puritan counterparts.
1. Historical and Political Setting of the Westminster Assembly
1.1. The Climate of the 1640s
The gathering of English and Scottish divines (clerics, theologians, and parliamentarians) known as the Westminster Assembly occurred during the English Civil War, a tumultuous period in which the monarchy, Parliament, and diverse religious groups vied for dominance. The Puritan impulse had grown significantly through the early decades of the seventeenth century, championing a “further reformation” in worship and doctrine. Many Puritans found the existing Anglican structures insufficiently reformed, believing that the via media stance of the Church of England retained too much ceremonialism and hierarchical vestige from Rome.
Simultaneously, the theological controversies swirling on the European continent—Arminianism, the lingering aftershocks of the Council of Trent (1545–1563), Socinian speculations—filtered into England and Scotland. The Westminster Assembly was tasked not only with unifying divergent factions among English Protestants but also with articulating a coherent and self-consciously Reformed expression of faith capable of withstanding Roman counterarguments and the “novelties” advanced by radicals and sectarians.
1.2. Driving Motive for Addressing Holy Scripture First
From the outset, the Assembly recognized that the question of ultimate authority undergirded every other point of doctrine. If Scripture were not demonstrated as the supreme rule for determining truth, any subsequent statement—on justification, the church, or the sacraments—could be cast aside by appealing to either contradictory traditions or private revelations. Thus, the opening lines of WCF 1.1—“It pleased the Lord … to commit the same wholly unto writing”—make an explicitly foundational claim: God’s salvific revelation is now contained in, and limited to, the canonical books of Scripture. That necessity arises from human fallenness, from the progressive closure of special revelation, and from the dangers of relying on ephemeral traditions or individual impressions that cannot sustain the weight of the Christian faith.
1.3. Intellectual Climate and the Confession’s Approach
This approach was not invented by the Westminster Assembly in a vacuum. Rather, it was the culmination of earlier Reformed confessional statements, such as the French Confession of 1559, the Scottish Confession of 1560, and the Belgic Confession of 1561, all of which grounded Reformed identity upon the principle of the written Word’s finality. Nevertheless, the Westminster Confession’s articulation of that principle, especially in the context of the later seventeenth century, represented a mature and systematic statement that would echo through English-speaking Presbyterian and Congregational churches well into subsequent centuries.
2. The Confessional and Polemical Necessity for Stating Scripture’s Primacy
2.1. Roman Catholicism and the Council of Trent
By the mid-seventeenth century, the Roman Catholic Church, through the decrees of Trent, had explicitly anathematized those who denied that unwritten traditions stood on equal footing with Scripture. The fourth session of Trent (1546) had already proclaimed the authority of the so-called “deuterocanonical books” (what Protestants label the Apocrypha) and declared the Latin Vulgate to be the authentic scriptural text, thus giving the Roman Magisterium substantial leverage to interpret or supplement biblical teaching by way of church tradition. The Westminster divines recognized that a thoroughly biblical theology could not stand if Scripture was diluted by extraneous texts or overshadowed by a teaching office claiming interpretive infallibility. Hence, in WCF 1.3 and subsequent sections, they make crisp distinctions against the Apocrypha and unwritten traditions.
2.2. Radical Enthusiasts and Subjective Revelation
While Roman Catholicism threatened biblical sufficiency from one side, radical sects—whether Anabaptists, Familists, or other enthusiasts—did so from another. Certain groups downplayed the written Word in favor of an “inner light” or direct, ongoing prophetic revelations. As William Whitaker extensively documented in A Disputation on Holy Scripture, many self-proclaimed prophets and sectarians throughout church history had subverted or rejected parts of the canon. Chapters of that treatise demonstrate how the early Church Fathers, the Reformers, and subsequent orthodox writers repudiated such moves. The WCF, by grounding authority wholly in the canonical Scriptures, precluded recourse to private or subjective revelations and elevated the covenant community’s interpretative work within Scripture’s bounds.
2.3. Confessional Bibliology and the “Kept Pure” Clause
Whereas the Confession’s authors had to respond to these dual threats (Roman Catholic augmentation and radical minimization of Scripture), they also advanced what contemporary scholars label “confessional bibliology.” This perspective insists that the Bible, as received in its Hebrew and Greek canonical texts, was providentially preserved for the church’s use. Garnet Howard Milne’s work, Has the Bible Been Kept Pure? The Westminster Confession of Faith and the Providential Preservation of Scripture, addresses at length how the Assembly’s statements in WCF 1.8 reflect confidence that, despite textual variations and historical accidents of transmission, God had preserved His Word substantially intact and accessible. Milne’s arguments dovetail with Whitaker’s own, showing that while minor scribal corruptions exist, the essential integrity of Scripture is unassailable.
This confessional bibliology deeply informs WCF Chapter 1. Although the Assembly recognized that translations were not themselves inspired in the strict sense, they affirmed that the “authentical” text remains in the Hebrew and Greek originals, which have been—and continue to be—preserved in God’s singular care and providence. In the present day, adherents to confessional bibliology trace their lineage back to these divines, seeing in the Confession’s language a bulwark against the extremes of textual hyper-skepticism on one side and mechanical dictation theories on the other.
3. The Broader Reformed Tradition Anchored in Scripture
3.1. Antecedent Reformation Confessions
To appreciate fully the significance of placing Holy Scripture at the Confession’s forefront, one must situate it within the genealogical lineage of Reformation confessions. The French Confession (1559), penned largely by Calvin and his colleagues, begins with an emphasis on Scripture’s exclusivity: “We believe that the Word contained in these books … has proceeded from God, and receives its authority from him alone…” The Belgic Confession, drafted by Guido de Brès (1561), opens with articles on knowing God through creation and Scripture, rapidly leading into a statement affirming the 66-book canon, distinct from the Apocrypha. The Scottish Confession (1560) likewise dedicates early chapters to Scripture’s necessity and sufficiency.
Westminster drew upon these confessional precedents. But the Assembly’s unique historical vantage—occurring almost a century after the onset of the Reformation—allowed it to consolidate and refine previous statements while firmly rejecting new challengers. No mere recapitulation of earlier Reformed positions, WCF 1 stands as a theological apex combining biblical exegesis, patristic testimony (particularly through the lens of Reformed argumentation), and Puritan spirituality.
3.2. Intersecting Theologies: Soteriology, Ecclesiology, and Worship
The reason Reformed theology so strongly upholds Scripture’s authority is that Scripture alone mediates the full knowledge of God’s salvific plan. For the Reformed tradition, soteriology—one’s understanding of salvation—is dependent on biblical exegesis of covenant theology, the doctrines of grace, and the sufficiency of Christ’s atoning work. Hence, to deviate from Scripture’s clarity or sufficiency is to open the door to Pelagian or semi-Pelagian errors, to textual expansions that are not genuinely apostolic, or to novel traditions.
Likewise, the Confession’s later chapters on the church and the sacraments flow from the premise that Scripture alone dictates how God’s people gather and worship. As the subsequent sections of WCF 1 clarify (1.4–1.10), the church can err, councils can err, and individual interpreters can err. But the Scripture stands above these vicissitudes, functioning as the “norming norm” (norma normans) rather than a “normed norm” (norma normata).
4. Methodological Foundations and Scholarly Contributions
4.1. The Written Word as Principium Cognoscendi
Philosophically, the Reformed churches typically speak of Scripture as the principium cognoscendi, or the epistemological foundation from which knowledge of divine truth flows. In that sense, all theological method in Reformed orthodoxy is hermeneutical method: how best to read, interpret, and synthesize God’s self-revelation in canonical text. By affirming at the Confession’s outset that Scripture is “absolutely necessary” for saving knowledge, the Westminster divines made an epistemic claim that what can be known truly about God and redemption must be known through the biblical witness.
4.2. Influence of William Whitaker
Though he died prior to the Westminster Assembly, William Whitaker’s influence pervades the Confession’s articulation of the biblical canon and Scripture’s authority. His A Disputation on Holy Scripture (published in the late sixteenth century) systematically dismantled Roman Catholic arguments in favor of unwritten traditions, the Apocrypha, and a supposedly infallible ecclesiastical interpretive authority. He especially targeted the Council of Trent’s expansions to the canon and its preference for the Vulgate as an “authentic edition.” Whitaker’s method—examining patristic testimonies, analyzing internal evidence of biblical books, and refuting misreadings of early church councils—was emblematic of the robust scholarship typical of Reformation polemics.
In many ways, Whitaker’s thorough refutations of Roman positions anticipated the more succinct statements in WCF 1.2–1.3, which unambiguously list the 66 canonical books while excluding the Apocrypha. His treatise likewise demolished spurious claims that a merely human ecclesiastical process confers authority on Scripture. By asserting that Scripture itself is inherently authoritative—due to divine inspiration rather than ecclesial decree—Whitaker’s legacy empowered subsequent Reformed confessions to stand firm.
4.3. Contributions from Garnet Howard Milne’s Research
In the modern era, Garnet Howard Milne’s Has the Bible Been Kept Pure? addresses the legacy of WCF 1.8 (“kept pure in all ages”) and clarifies how the seventeenth-century Puritans believed in a providentially preserved text. Milne’s meticulous exploration of primary sources—ranging from John Calvin to the Westminster divines—shows that the concept of textual purity was not a naive assertion that no scribal error ever occurred, but rather a confident stance that God had superintended the overall transmission of Scripture so that His Word remained available in an essentially uncorrupted form. This underlies confessional bibliology’s stance that the “text in common use” among orthodox churches (often identified with the traditional Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Received Text) reflects that providential preservation. Modern textual-criticism debates notwithstanding, the confessional approach remains anchored in the premise that Scripture, as recognized by the church catholic across the centuries, is God-breathed and thus reliable.
5. Concluding Overview and Trajectory
What emerges from this historical survey and theological analysis is the realization that the Westminster Confession’s opening lines on Scripture were neither an afterthought nor a superficial statement. Rather, they amount to a deeply considered theological keystone. As the Assembly prepared to address God’s nature and decree (WCF 2–3), Christ the Mediator (WCF 8), effectual calling (WCF 10), and other cardinal doctrines, they recognized the inseparable bond between biblical authority and every subsequent formulation of truth. Where Scripture is doubted, everything else trembles. Where Scripture is conflated with human tradition, gospel clarity is blurred. Hence, the Confession’s first section stands as a guardrail, ensuring that the church’s confession stems from the unerring scriptural canon.
Thus, we come full circle to the impetus for drafting WCF 1 in a time of upheaval. Civil war and religious conflict in mid-seventeenth-century Britain, theological challenges from Rome, and radical sectarian claims all thrust upon the Puritan-led Assembly the task of reasserting Scripture’s sufficiency, authority, and clarity. Article I of this series sets the stage: without a full appreciation of that confessional stance, we cannot grasp the significance of the Confession’s subsequent chapters. Modern-day heirs of the Reformation—whether Presbyterian, Congregational, Baptist, or other traditions who embrace the WCF as a subordinate standard—remain beneficiaries of the Puritans’ resolve to define the Bible’s necessity and finality. Confessional bibliology further ensures that the abiding convictions of the Reformed tradition—particularly regarding the authenticity and preservation of Scripture—are not overshadowed by contemporary textual controversies or historical revisionism.
In short, the Westminster Confession of Faith’s Chapter 1 functioned, and continues to function, as an anchor for those who hold that only God’s written Word can safely guide the church in faith and practice. The thoroughness and boldness with which that claim is asserted guard the community of faith from every attempt to erode biblical authority, whether by unbridled tradition or unbridled individualism. With these convictions in mind, we turn to the subsequent articles, which delve into the necessity of Scripture in fallen humanity’s condition (WCF 1.1), the nature of the biblical canon (1.2), and the Apocrypha’s exclusion from that canon (1.3). As we do so, we keep returning to the fundamental notion that, for the Westminster divines, Scripture was not merely an ancillary resource but the very foundation upon which the entire edifice of true doctrine is erected and by which the church is perpetually reformed.
