It is asked, eighth, whether the covenant of grace was promulgated in the Decalogue. The famous Cameron, because he did not distinguish carefully enough between the use of the Decalogue and its nature, stated that the Decalogue was neither the covenant of works nor the covenant of grace, but a certain subservient covenant, insofar as like a pedagogue, it drove the elect to seek Christ (Gal. 3:24; Rom. 10:4–5). The celebrated Cocceius with his followers, since he stated that by its violation the covenant of works was plainly abolished, nor did anything remain except the eternal and universal testament of grace until the Israelites’ making of the calf, after which the Decalogue, with the adding of the twofold formula, “Do this and you will live,” and “Cursed be the one who will not remain in all things which are written in the book of the law,” accepted not indeed the essence of the covenant of works, but yet the appearance of it, stated that the Decalogue is the pure, unadulterated covenant of grace.

On the contrary, the rest of the Reformed state that in the Decalogue there is no promulgation of the covenant of grace, but only the renewal of the covenant of works, although that renewal, at least in relation to the elect, had an evangelical use, that it would drive them to embrace Christ. This is so because: (1) the Decalogue has nothing of Christ, nothing of faith in Christ. (2) Even if it did set forth Christ and faith in Christ, which yet we do not grant, yet it still has in addition all moral good works; accordingly we would not be justified by faith alone, because without any doubt we are justified by the observance of the covenant of grace. (3) The Decalogue has all those things (with only the positive commandment excepted, concerning not eating the forbidden fruit) which God stipulated from our first parents in the covenant of works. (4) It is also sanctioned with threats and promises, in the same way as the covenant of works. Therefore nothing prohibits saying that it properly presents the covenant of works again, although in relation to the elect, for an evangelical end and use. Nor is it any hindrance that in it mention is made of that formula which pertains to the covenant of grace, “I am your God,” because entirely nothing is repugnant to urging obedience to the covenant of works by arguments and motives taken from the benefits of the covenant of grace. But we will set aside this argument for its proper place, concerning the dispensation of the covenant of grace under Moses (bk. 8, ch. 2).

Petrus Van Mastricht | Theoretical-Practical Theology: Redemption in Christ, vol. 4, trans. Todd Rester (Reformation Heritage Books, 2023), 45–46 (HT: Joseph Randall).

RESOURCES

• Resources On Republication
• Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
• Browse the Heidelshop!
• Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play
• The Heidelblog Resource Page
• Heidelmedia Resources
• The Ecumenical Creeds
• The Reformed Confessions
• The Heidelberg Catechism
• The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, & Pastoral Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2025)
• Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
• Why I Am A Christian
• What Must A Christian Believe?
• Heidelblog Contributors
• Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to

Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

Post authored by:

• Heidelblog

  

  The Heidelblog has been in publication since 2007. It is devoted to recovering the Reformed confession and to helping others discover Reformed theology, piety, and practice.

  More by Heidelblog ›