Gospel Guidebook: Getting and Keeping It Right 
한국어 日本語
Problems with the Westminster Confession of Faith's Description of Faith
by Robert P. TerryUpdated May 4, 2026
(For an extended version of this article that includes a discussion on Galatians 5:6 and Ephesians 2:10, please see my article Good Works are NOT Evidence of Faith.)
Reformed theologians teach some important Gospel truths, especially in regard to God's glory and the active and passive obedience of Christ. However, it is not enough to confess these truths, and yet at the same time, misunderstand what it means to believe them. The Reformed tradition does not understand the nature of faith. No further proof is needed than to quote the Reformed mantra, "We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone." This mantra is commonly attributed to Martin Luther who said, "faith is not idle" in one of his discourses on faith in 1520, as well as John Calvin who said, "It is therefore faith alone which justifies, and yet the faith which justifies is not alone" in his Antidote to the Council of Trent in 1547. If the mantra is taken at face value, it is not hard to see that it is paradoxical. First, it says that faith is alone, but then it says that faith isn't alone. Obviously, it can't be both, but because of this mixing of faith with something that is other than faith (presumably good works, or the motions of good works), it ends up nullifying grace.
Salvation isn't by works. Reformed people insist that they agree with this. But, at the same time, they also say that faith produces works or is evidenced by works, or as stated in the mantra above, they say that something other than faith must be present with faith. It makes no sense. If salvation isn't by works, then how can faith faith, which is supposed to be the "alone instrument" (see below), produce works, be accompanied by works, or be evidenced by works? To say that faith produces works is to define faith to include the seed of works, and this might be why Reformed people are so fond of likening faith to a fruit tree that bears fruit. However, the Apostle Paul goes to great lengths to tell us that faith is apart from works, signifying that works are not inherent in faith, nor can they accompany faith. Faith and works are antithetical to each other. To say (or even imply) that faith produces works, is evidenced by works, or is accompanied by works, or that works are inherent in faith is to change the meaning of faith into something that isn't faith.
Faith is plain old belief, the mental attitude of being persuaded by the evidence for a thing. However, in the realm of religion, people are not satisfied with this definition. They don't deny it completely, but they augment it so that it means something more than "mere mental assent." This is the case with all the Reformed confessions and catechisms. For example, the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) says in Chapter 11.2, "Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and his righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification: yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love." This is an unintelligible sentence. Faith cannot be alone and not alone at the same time. At first, I thought the WCF intended to say "[Faith] is the alone instrument: yet is not alone in the person [who has been] justified," which, if intended as a general truth statement, might not be so bad if properly understood of diachronic (i.e., ongoing) faith within the realm of sanctification (even though it would still be highly questionable why the WCF would be talking about sanctification in a chapter on justification), but it is clear that this is not what the WCF intended, for in the very next clause, it clarifies that "[faith] is ever accompanied with all other saving graces...". As another example of inconsistency, the WCF says in Chapter 11.1 that "[justification is] not for any thing wrought in them [i.e., the elect], or done by them, but for Christ's sake alone," but then contradicts this in Chapter 14:1, "The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts." First the WCF says that justification is not because of anything wrought in the elect, but then just three short chapters later says that the elect are saved because the Spirit of Christ works faith in their hearts. Even worse, the WCF goes on in Chapter 14.2 to say, "But the principal acts of saving faith are accepting, receiving, and resting upon Christ alone for justification, sanctification, and eternal life, by virtue of the covenant of grace." Describing so-called "saving faith" as "accepting, receiving, and resting" requires faith to be an appropriating act where the appropriator makes true what wasn't true until it was appropriated. This renders the cross of Christ useless without the appropriator's "heart work" (which, of course, is ascribed to the Spirit of Christ in Chapter 14.1 to obfuscate the implications of having to work for one's salvation). If this weren't bad enough, the WCF goes so far as to say that "accepting, receiving, and resting" are only the principal acts of saving faith. So, what are the non-principal acts of saving faith? The confession tells us that they are "acting differently upon that which each particular passage thereof [i.e., the Word of God] contains; yielding obedience to the commands, trembling at the threatenings, and embracing the promises of God for this life, and that which is to come." So much for justification by faith apart from works! But Reformed theologians continue to wave the banner of faith alone, and their followers continue to nod their heads in agreement. So, how exactly do they rationalize this? Just like the WCF, they simply define faith to include a whole lot of things besides plain old belief.
As for the other confessions and catechisms, they are just as inexcusable in describing faith as an appropriating act (see my critique of the Heidelberg Catechism here). All of them are ashamed of the biblical words "belief" and "believe" and replace them with mystical and elusive words, such as "true faith," "hearty trust," and "upright faith." The Reformed confessions and catechisms have severely corrupted the apostolic Gospel. For the Apostles, the Gospel was simple: Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. Whoever believed this had life in His name. This Gospel is hardly known today. Of course, every one says that they believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, but as soon as they make faith an appropriating act or speak of it as being a "true faith" that is evidenced by good works (see, for example, Heidelberg Catechism Lord's Day 7, 23, and 32 here), they show that they don't believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.