Introduction
The Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), completed in 1646, stands as one of the most comprehensive theological formulations of Reformed Christianity. However, during its drafting and ratification process, theological debates arose among the Westminster Divines, leading to several proposed amendments, including one that sought to revise the doctrine of justification by removing explicit affirmation of Christ’s Active Obedience. This amendment, presented by a minority faction in 1647, was ultimately rejected but has left a lasting theological footprint.
This article explores the historical development of this amendment, how it has influenced modern-day Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC) congregations, particularly those affirming the Joint Federal Vision Statement (JFVS), and how it ultimately deviates from Reformed orthodoxy.
The 1647 Minority Amendment and Its Historical Context
1. The Westminster Confession’s Original Teaching on Justification
The majority of the Westminster Divines affirmed that justification includes the imputation of Christ’s entire obedience—both His:
- Active Obedience (His perfect fulfillment of the law), and
- Passive Obedience (His suffering and death on the cross).
This is clearly articulated in WCF 11.1, which states that believers are justified:
“not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone; not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them.”
2. The Minority Objection to Active Obedience
A minority faction within the Assembly dissented from this formulation, arguing that only Christ’s death (Passive Obedience) was necessary for justification. They proposed an amendment to remove or modify the Confession’s explicit reference to Christ’s obedience being imputed to believers.
Their rationale was influenced by Neonomian tendencies, which held that believers are justified by faith in Christ’s atoning work alone, but not by His lifelong law-keeping. Some believed that Christ’s Active Obedience only qualified Him as a sinless sacrifice, rather than being imputed to believers for their righteousness before God.
This amendment was ultimately rejected in 1647, as the majority upheld the full imputation of Christ’s righteousness—Active and Passive. However, this debate would later resurface in theological disputes across Reformed history.
The Influence of the Minority View on the Federal Vision Movement
1. The Emergence of Federal Vision Theology
The Federal Vision (FV) movement emerged in the late 20th and early 21st centuries as a challenge to traditional Reformed understandings of justification, covenant theology, and sacramental efficacy. It was officially articulated in 2007 through the Joint Federal Vision Statement (JFVS), which many CREC churches affirm today.
FV theologians, such as Douglas Wilson, Peter Leithart, and James Jordan, argue that justification is covenantal rather than forensic, meaning that righteousness is not imputed as a legal declaration but rather experienced within the covenantal relationship with Christ.
2. How the 1647 Amendment Resurfaces in CREC and FV Thought
The minority view of 1647, which opposed the imputation of Active Obedience, has been functionally revived in the Federal Vision movement in the following ways:
- Shift from Forensic Justification to Covenant Justification – The Westminster majority upheld justification as a one-time forensic declaration, while FV theology blurs justification with covenant faithfulness, making it less about Christ’s imputed righteousness and more about covenantal perseverance.
- Emphasis on Union with Christ over Legal Imputation – FV theologians often argue that righteousness is not imputed to believers in a legal sense but is instead shared with them through union with Christ. This downplays Christ’s Active Obedience as the ground of justification.
- Rejection of the Law-Gospel Distinction – The Westminster majority clearly distinguished between the Covenant of Works (law) and the Covenant of Grace (gospel). However, FV proponents blur this distinction, making obedience to the covenant a condition for final salvation, rather than relying solely on Christ’s perfect obedience.
By de-emphasizing or outright rejecting the imputation of Christ’s Active Obedience, Federal Vision theology echoes the 1647 minority amendment and represents a significant departure from traditional Reformed orthodoxy.
How the Minority View and Federal Vision Deviate from Reformed Orthodoxy
1. The Imputation of Active Obedience is Essential to Reformed Theology
The Reformed tradition, as upheld by the Westminster Confession, the Belgic Confession, and the Heidelberg Catechism, has always affirmed that Christ’s Active Obedience is essential for justification. Without it, believers would only be restored to a state of innocence, rather than having the positive righteousness of Christ accounted to them. In this context, the “state of innocence” refers to the condition Adam had before the Fall—morally pure but without confirmed righteousness. Before sin entered the world, Adam was innocent, yet he had not attained the positive righteousness required for eternal life. If Christ’s work only removed our sins through His Passive Obedience (His suffering and death), believers would be restored to a state of innocence similar to Adam’s before the Fall, but they would still lack the righteousness necessary for justification. However, Christ’s Active Obedience—His perfect fulfillment of God’s law—is imputed to believers, granting them not only the removal of sin but also the positive righteousness required to stand justified before God. Without this, salvation would leave believers sinless yet not fully righteous, falling short of the full requirements for eternal life.
Scripture supports this doctrine:
- Romans 5:19 – “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”
- Philippians 3:9 – Paul seeks to “be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith.”
2. The Minority View (and FV Theology) Leads to Justification by Works
By rejecting Active Obedience, both the 1647 minority and Federal Vision theologians subtly shift the basis of justification from Christ’s perfect righteousness to the believer’s own covenantal faithfulness. This has serious theological consequences:
- It blurs justification and sanctification, making perseverance a condition for maintaining righteousness rather than a fruit of it.
- It makes obedience a co-condition with faith rather than a response to grace.
- It contradicts the Reformation doctrine of sola fide by suggesting that final justification depends on a believer’s covenant faithfulness rather than Christ’s completed work.
3. The Danger of Covenantal Nomism in Federal Vision
The Federal Vision rejects the traditional Reformed understanding of law and gospel by teaching a covenantal nomism, where believers are justified by faith but remain justified by covenantal faithfulness. This undermines assurance and returns to a form of legalism, much like Roman Catholicism or the New Perspective on Paul.
Reformed theology, by contrast, teaches that:
- Christ fulfilled the law perfectly in our place (Active Obedience).
- His righteousness is fully imputed to us at the moment of faith (Justification).
- Good works are the fruit, not the basis, of justification (Sanctification).
Conclusion: Reaffirming Westminster’s Orthodox Doctrine
The 1647 minority amendment seeking to remove the imputation of Christ’s Active Obedience was a theological misstep, rightly rejected by the Westminster Assembly. However, its legacy has resurfaced in Federal Vision theology, particularly within CREC congregations that affirm the Joint Federal Vision Statement.
This departure from Reformed orthodoxy is not merely a minor doctrinal difference but strikes at the heart of justification by faith alone. By rejecting Christ’s Active Obedience, the Federal Vision movement undermines the very foundation of the gospel, leading toward a works-based system of justification that is foreign to both Scripture and the historic Reformed tradition.
As the heirs of the Reformation, we must stand firm on the truth that justification is by faith alone in Christ’s imputed righteousness alone—a doctrine essential for both assurance and the glory of God in salvation.
Venmo: @reformedfaithinsights
Reformed Faith Insights 