Westminister Theology Tolerates Non-Gospel Ministers

I was brought up within the Presbyterian Church in Ireland and was well into my teens, possibly 19, when we had our first evangelical minister.  So for all those years, and for many prior to that, there was no Gospel ministry in my church.  I know that an unregenerate sinner cannot hear the Gospel in a saving way even where it is preached, but in my case there just was no Gospel.

But, and here's the important point, our ministers all subscribed the Westminster Confession of Faith, and they appear to have believed - if they even believed in being saved at all - that God would save sinners in His own way and time.  So Gospel preaching was not even necessary.

All of these ministers without exception were held in high esteem as presbyters, and one of them was even in one of his sermons preparing the congregation for his election as Moderator.  They were in good, full and regular standing with the church; yet they did not preach the Gospel. 

How can this be?  Well they all subscribed, that is, under-signed, the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) as the confession of their faith, and so long as they did that, there was no problem within the church.  What I am saying is that WCF theology and especially its soteriology does not require Gospel preaching to be done in any particular congregation.  If a minister does preach the biblical Gospel then that's a bonus; but it is not required.  If it was, then the church would take whatever steps are necessary to remove those ministers who do not preach the biblical Gospel and open the way for true evangelicals to occupy the pulpits instead.

I find it difficult to believe that the soteriology of WCF is not detrimental to Gospel work within the churches. When churches do not only tolerate but defend and protect non-Gospel preaching ministers - and elders and other communicant church members who oppose the Gospel - what does that say about the destructive impact of WCF soteriology on those churches?

If, or since, this is the case, surely it is not before time that evangelical theologians take a serious look at WCF soteriology, which teaches that Christ died only for the elect, and come up with a more biblical expression of what the Gospel really is.

Any views?