I often see sometimes among the more über Reformed Anglicans that the WCF is an Anglican confession and those who devised it were Anglican divines. This seems to be on its face untrue but then I see educated men like Gerald Bray implying it as well. Thoughts?
The Westminster Confession was meant to be the confession of the Church of England as approved by Parliament after the Civil War. I suppose in that sense it was (briefly) the confession of the established English church and therefore "Anglican". But I agree it's a bit of a leap to call it Anglican today
I've also read that episcopal divines were invited to participate but none showed up due to Charles I forbidding all loyal subjects not to attend. Wikipedia has a list page of all divines which may be interesting (assuming it's accurate): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Westminster_Assembly
I thought as much. I do find it interesting that Anglican divines did attend the Synod of Dort where Bishop George Carleton was given a special position of honor.
All in all... from what I see... the WCF and its catechisms are faithful to the majority of the 39 articles. the confession took the articles into heavy account when it was written. The only places the confession errs from anglican teaching is on the canon of scripture and the form of church government...
The Westminster Divines were Presbyterians and Congregationalists. I was under the impression all others were excluded but I see I was wrong. I know the Particular Baptists held to a similar covenantal view of that expressed by Anglican John Tombs (anti paedobaptism) and that found in the word of John Owen (commentary on Hebrews) but it was a minority view and excluded.