This paper defends the received account-that the Westminster Assembly maintained that all salvific actions of God are particular in intention-against a revisionist argument that it allowed that some salvific actions of God may be universal in intention. This paper defends the received account-that the Westminster Assembly maintained that all salvific actions of God are particular in intention-against a revisionist argument that it allowed that some salvific actions of God may be universal in intention. This paper defends the received account-that the Westminster Assembly maintained that all salvific actions of God are particular in intention-against a revisionist argument that it allowed that some salvific actions of God may be universal in intention. This paper defends the received account-that the Westminster Assembly maintained that all salvific actions of God are particular in intention-against a revisionist argument that it allowed that some salvific actions of God may be universal in intention.