During Westminster's revising of the 39 articles a difference of opinion became apparent amongst the divines concerning justification. Some elderly divines took issue with the active obedience teaching, and it was resolved (according to Daniel Featley) to not make an issue out of it. This accounts for the neutral wording which was adopted by the Confession and Catechisms. Thomas Gataker, perhaps the most renowned of those divines who rejected the idea, wrote a work on justification which he would not publish because he knew it was out of accord with the views of his brethren. It was, however, published posthumously.

The Savoy was made up of the younger generation of Puritan theologians, and Puritanism by this time had fully accepted the teaching that the imputation of Christ's righteousness included His active obedience to the law and passive obedience in His death. The way Savoy states the matter is liable to misapplication, and there are not a few who speak as if two things are imputed to believers, active and passive obedience; but it should be noted that the Scriptures only speak of the "righteousness" or the "obedience" of the one being the basis of the justification of the many (Rom. 5:18, 19). It is correct to say Christ's own compliance with the demands of the law is included in this imputation of righteousness, but there is no basis in Scripture to say that the active obedience in and of itself is imputed for righteousness.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."