Resources on the Covenant of Grace and the New Covenant

Resources On the Covenant of Grace and the New Covenant

Topics

Podcast Episodes

Articles and Quotes

Resources On The Unity Of The Covenant Of Grace

Reformed theology teaches and the Reformed Churches confess that the Old and New Testaments are fundamentally unified in important ways. The triune God of the New Testament is the God of the Old Testament. The Apostle John says that God the Son, the Word, who became incarnate (John 1:14) is the person of the Holy Trinity through whom all things came into being and without whom nothing was created (John 1:1–3). Another way to express this unity is to say that there is one covenant of grace with multiple administrations. The covenant of grace that was revealed and began to be externally administered in redemptive history after the fall, in the promise by God of the Seed of the Woman who was to crush the head of the serpent and whose heel would be stricken by the serpent (Gen 3:15). The covenant of grace was progressively revealed more clearly through redemptive history in the promise of salvation to and through the Noahic covenant (Gen 6:18), and again through Abraham (Gen 12:1–3), that God would bless all the nations of the earth through him (Acts 2:39b), that God would give him a seed that would number more than the stars in the sky (Gen 15:5, 6), and finally in Genesis 17:7, “And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you,” which the prophets and apostles paraphrased and repeated repeatedly through Scripture (e.g., Jer 32:38–41; Joel 2:28–32; Acts 2:39). The Lord said that he gave the land to the Israelites not because of their obedience but because of his gracious covenant he made with Abraham (Deut 9:5). God was gracious to Israel because of his gracious covenant with Abraham (2 Kings 13:23). The Apostles invoked the covenant of grace in their explanation of redemptive history (Acts 3:25; 7:8). Against the Judaizers, the Apostle Paul explicitly contrasted the Abrahamic covenant of grace as prior to and more fundamental than the Mosaic covenant (Gal 3:15–29). To the Roman congregation he argued that we are Abraham’s children (Rom 4[all]).

In light of all this, it is no wonder that the Reformed Churches confess that there is essentially one covenant of grace throughout redemptive history that is variously administered, under types and shadows under the Old Testament and openly in the New Testament. According to the Reformed understanding of Scripture the covenant of grace was not merely revealed under the types and shadows but rather it was substantially present in, with, and under the types and shadows. The New Covenant is the covenant of grace without the types and shadows but it is the present administration of the covenant of grace that has been present in salvation history since Genesis 3:15.

The Reformed Confessions

Belgic Confession (1561)

For that reason we detest the error of the Anabaptists who are not content with a single baptism once received and also condemn the baptism of the children of believers. We believe our children ought to be baptized and sealed with the sign of the covenant, as little children were circumcised in Israel on the basis of the same promises made to our children. And truly, Christ has shed his blood no less for washing the little children of believers than he did for adults. Therefore they ought to receive the sign and sacrament of what Christ has done for them, just as the Lord commanded in the law that by offering a lamb for them the sacrament of the suffering and death of Christ would be granted them shortly after their birth. This was the sacrament of Jesus Christ.

According to Reformed theology, the ground of infant baptism is God’s promise to Abraham. They are entitled to participate in the external administration of the one covenant of grace as it is administered in under the New Covenant as covenant children were entitled to receive the sign of admission to the visible covenant community under the types and shadows.1*

heidelberg catechism

74. Are infants also to be baptized?

Yes, for since they belong to the covenant and people of God as well as their parents, and since redemption from sin through the blood of Christ, and the Holy Spirit who works faith, are promised to them no less than to their parents, they are also by Baptism, as the sign of the Covenant, to be ingrafted into the Christian Church, and distinguished from the children of unbelievers, as was done in the Old Testament by Circumcision, in place of which in the New Testament Baptism is instituted.

The churches of the German Palatinate repeated this approach in the Heidelberg Catechism. Notice how the Reformed Churches appeal to the “sign of the covenant” instituted under the Old Testament (i.e., Abraham) to inform New Covenant practice.

second helvetic confession (1566)

And since there is always but one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, Jesus the Messiah, and one Shepherd of the whole flock, one Head of this body, and, to conclude, one Spirit, one salvation, one faith, one Testament or covenant, it necessarily follows that there is only one Church (ch. 17).

The Second Swiss Confession, written by Heinrich Bullinger c. 1561, at the request of Frederick III, Elector Palatinate,  explicitly confessed “one faith, one testament or covenant” and thus “one church.” This is the same argument that Bullinger had been making since 1534 (De testamento), which Zwingli had been making against the Anabaptists since 1523.

canons of dort

Since we are to judge of the will of God from His Word, which testifies that the children of believers are holy, not by nature, but in virtue of the covenant of grace, in which they together with the parents are comprehended, godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom it pleases God to call out of this life in their infancy (Canons of Dort, 1.17).

In their response to the Remonstrants, who alleged that the Reformed theology condemned infants to hell, the Reformed Churches of the Netherlands, France (in absentia), the British Isles, Geneva, et al. appealed to the unity of the covenant of grace to explain their doctrine that believers whose children die infancy trust that such children are with the Lord.

westminster confession of faith

7.4. This covenant of grace is frequently set forth in Scripture by the name of a testament, in reference to the death of Jesus Christ the Testator, and to the everlasting inheritance, with all things belonging to it, therein bequeathed.

7.5. This covenant was differently administered in the time of the law, and in the time of the gospel: under the law, it was administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances delivered to the people of the Jews, all foresignifying Christ to come; which were, for that time, sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah, by whom they had full remission of sins, and eternal salvation; and is called the old testament.

27.5. The sacraments of the old testament, in regard of the spiritual things thereby signified and exhibited, were, for substance, the same with those of the new.

The Westminster Divines explicitly confessed multiple administrations of “[t]his covenant.” When the divines spoke of “the law’ and “the gospel” in this context, they were using the traditional historical distinction between the Old and New Covenants. The divines were not saying that Moses is only law theologically or that the New Testament is only gospel theologically but were merely using the language used by the church since Irenaeus (c. AD 170).

helvetic consensus formula (1675)

Canon XXIV: But this later Covenant of Grace according to the diversity of times has also different dispensations. For when the Apostle speaks of the dispensation of the fullness of times, that is, the administration of the last time (Eph 1:10), he very clearly indicates that there had been another dispensation and administration until the times which the Father appointed. Yet in the dispensation of the Covenant of Grace the elect have not been saved in any other way than by the Angel of his presence (Isa 63:9), the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (Rev 13:8), Christ Jesus, through the knowledge of that just Servant and faith in him and in the Father and his Spirit. For Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Heb 13:8). And by His grace we believe that we are saved in the same manner as the Fathers also were saved, and in both Testaments these statutes remain unchanged: “Blessed are all they that put their trust in Him,” (the Son) (Ps 2:12); “He that believes in Him is not condemned, but he that does not believe is condemned already” (John 3:18). “You believe in God,” even the Father, “believe also in me” (John 14:1). But if, moreover, the holy Fathers believed in Christ as their God, it follows that they also believed in the Holy Spirit, without whom no one can call Jesus Lord. Truly there are so many clearer exhibitions of this faith of the Fathers and of the necessity of such faith in either Covenant, that they can not escape any one unless one wills it. But though this saving knowledge of Christ and the Holy Trinity was necessarily derived, according to the dispensation of that time, both from the promise and from shadows and figures and mysteries, with greater difficulty than in the NT. Yet it was a true knowledge, and, in proportion to the measure of divine Revelation, it was sufficient to procure salvation and peace of conscience for the elect, by the help of God’s grace.

Written by J. H. Heidegger and Francis Turretin against the Amyraldians and others and adopted by the Swiss Reformed Churches until the first quarter of the 18th century, the Swiss Consensus reflected the broad and deep Reformed agreement that there is one covenant of grace, which is administered (dispensed) variously throughout redemptive history. Notice how they were at pains to stress the unity of salvation, that the church, under both testaments, were saved by grace alone, through faith alone. The covenant of grace was present in, with, and under the types and shadows and revealed more fully under the New Covenant.

NOTES

1. Theodore Beza, in his 1560 Confession, wrote:

This definition pertains to the sacraments of the old as well as to the new covenant and shows the difference between them.
First, those of the ancient covenant or alliance were ordained only until the coming of Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 10:4); but these of the new alliance are established until the consummation and end of the world (Heb. 12:27).
The second difference of the sacraments of the ancient alliance directed the faithful to Jesus Christ who was to come; but these of the new alliance direct us to Jesus Christ already come (1 Cor. 10:2–4; Augustine, Three books against the Letters of Petilian, Bk. 2, 37.87; “Tractate 26.12” and “Tractate 45.9,” on John). The third difference is in the signs and ceremonies which differ greatly (Augustine, Letter to Januarius, 54.1; Christian Doctrine, Bk. 3, 9.13). The fourth is in the number of them and in the measure of their signification. For, as St. Augustine says, we now have fewer sacraments than our elders, easier and of better signification, and as a consequence of much greater efficacy and power. Here are all the differences which we find. And to conclude, the one and the other proceed and come only from one author, i.e., from the goodness of God only (Heb. 1:1); and they both tend to no other end but to make man a partaker of Jesus Christ, to enjoy eternal life, as St. Paul declares (1 Cor. 10:2–4; Rom. 4:11) and St. Augustine (“Tractate 26.12,” on John). (ch. 32)

We do not cease to communicate baptism to young children even though their faith is unknown to us. We have said before that it is requisite that they should be partakers of the fruits of the sacraments (Acts 8:36–37). And it is not very likely that they have faith because they do not have the use of understanding (Deut. 1:39; Rom. 10:14, 17), except God works in them extraordinarily (which does not appear to us).
First, there is now the same reason for baptism which was once in circumcision (called by St. Paul “the seal of righteousness which is by faith,” Rom. 4:11), even the express commandment of God by which the male children were marked the eighth day (Gen. 17:12).
Second, there is a special regard to be had to the infants of believers, for although they do not have faith in effect such as those do who are of age, yet they have the seed and the spring in virtue of the promise which was received and apprehended by their elders. For God promises not only to be our God if we believe in Him, but also that He will be the God of our offspring and seed; yes, to the thousandth degree, i.e., to the last end (Ex. 20:6). Then by what right or title do they refuse to give them the mark and ratification of what they have and profess already? And if they allege further that although they come from faithful elders or parents, does it not follow that they are of the number of the elect and as a consequence that they are sanctified (for God has not chosen all the children of Abraham and Isaac, Rom. 9:6–8), the answer is easy. It is true, all those are not of the kingdom of God who are born from believing parents, but with good right we leave this secret to God to judge who alone knows it (2 Tim. 2:19). Nevertheless, we justly presume to be the children of God all those who are the issue and descended from believing parents according to the promise (Gen. 17:7; 1 Cor. 7:14). For it does not appear to be the contrary to us. Accordingly, we baptize the young children of believers, as has been done from the time of the apostles in the church of God (Origen, Commentary on Romans) and we do not doubt that God by this mark (joined with the prayers of the church, their assistants) seals adoption and election in those whom He has eternally predestined, whether they die before the age of discretion or whether they live to bring forth the fruits of their faith in due time, and according to the means which God has ordained (ch. 48).

James T. Dennison Jr., Reformed Confessions of the 16th and 17th Centuries in English Translation: 1523–1693, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2008–2014), 284–285, 293–94.

Resources On Conditions In The Covenant Of Grace

Some thoughts relative to the current discussion about the nature of conditions in the covenant of grace: First, we cannot get this right unless we distinguish between the covenant of works and the covenant of grace. Part of the problem in this discussion is that the covenant of works is either rejected or neglected. I understand the exegetical and historical reasons why that happened and have addressed them at length in print and online. Beginning in the early 1560s in Heidelberg Reformed theologians began articulating explicitly what at least some had been implying prior, that God made a legal covenant with Adam before the fall, which covenant he had the ability to fulfill as the federal representative of all humanity. This formulation was confessed by the Westminster Divines in the mid-17th century in the Westminster Standards (e.g., WCF 7.2, 19.1,6; WLC 30, 97; Savoy Declaration 6, 7, 19, 20). The divines used the expression “covenant of works” 4 times in the confession alone.  They set up a strict contrast between the covenants of works and grace. Since, in the modern period, many have abandoned this distinction the table is set for confusion of the principles of works and grace and this is what has happened.

Both the covenants of works and grace offer eternal fellowship with God but they have different instruments or conditions. The condition of the covenant of works was “perfect and personal obedience” (WCF 7.2). Properly speaking, in his perfect actively suffering obedience, Christ has met the condition of the covenant of works for us and has made with us a covenant of grace. The sole instrument (WCF 11.2, Belgic Confession art. 22)  of the covenant of grace is true faith in Christ the obedient, righteous Mediator. Please remember that grace is not code for a soft covenant of works. It is a covenant of grace because Christ has met the terms of the covenant of works. He gives his benefits to us freely, through faith alone. “For by grace you have been saved, through faith” (Eph 2:8).  The benefits of the covenant of grace (justification, sanctification, and even glorification) are a free gift. See this post for more explanation.

Second there are two great mistakes to avoid in talking about conditions relative to the covenant of grace:

  1. To confuse conditions with faith (nomism)
  2. To reject conditions altogether (antinomianism)

There is no need to make either of these mistakes. The nomist puts conditions (e.g., obedience) where only faith can be in the covenant of grace, as the instrument through which we receive Christ and all the benefits of the covenant of grace (salvation). The antinomian rightly rejects that use of conditions but he also rejects the notion of obedience to God’s holy law as a consequent condition or consequent obligation. The nomist, on the other hand, is dissatisfied with obedience as a consequent obligation. He fears that unless our present or future standing with God is contingent upon and received at least partly through our obedience that people will lack sufficient motivation to obey. The confessional Reformed tradition rejects both of these errors. We affirm that sinners are saved by grace alone (sola gratia) through faith alone (sola fide) and that sinners were saved in order that they might be graciously sanctified by the Holy Spirit, in union and communion with Christ.We affirm that sinners are saved unto good works not by or through them.

Finally, this discussion will be greatly enhanced if we distinguish between is and through. It is the case that believers will be sanctified and will produce fruit as evidence of justification and salvation (Belgic Confession art. 24). That fruit and evidence is logically and morally necessary. No one who is sins impenitently (please read this before commenting below) can expect to see heaven. Please notice that I did not say “no one who sins can expect to see heaven.” In that case no one could expect to see heaven. What is at question is what are the indicators of true faith. One of them is genuine sorrow for sin. We confess:

87. Can they then not be saved who do not turn to God from their unthankful, impenitent life?

By no means, for, as the Scripture says, no unchaste person, idolater, adulterer, thief, covetous man, drunkard, slanderer, robber, or the like shall inherit the Kingdom of God (Heidelberg 87)

No one who willfully and impenitently ignores God’s holy moral law, who refuses to acknowledge his sins, who refuses to confess them, and who does seek to be sanctified can rightly be considered a believer. Such a person should be under ecclesiastical discipline. Nevertheless, the internet is not a church court and we as individuals are not authorized to make that judgment.

The logical and moral necessity of penitence for sin does not make our obedience and good works instruments of our salvation.

The truth is that, after the fall, none of us, even with the help of grace,  is capable of meeting the conditions of the covenant of works. The gospel is that Christ obeyed as the substitute for wretched, hell-deserving sinners and that, in the covenant of grace, he freely justifies, sanctifies, and saves us. Part of that free salvation is our gradual, gracious conformity to the image of Christ.

Here are the resources:

Resources On The Internal/External Distinction In The Covenant Of Grace

When God said to Abraham, “And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your children after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your children after you” (Genesis 17:7)  and “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised” (Gen 17:9–10; ESV) he both extended and elaborated upon the pattern already established under Noah. The outward administration of the covenant of grace has always included families. God included in the external administration of the covenant of grace made with Noah: “But I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you” (Genesis 6:18; ESV). That pattern traces back to the promise made to our first parents after the fall, the protevangellion, the first promise of the gospel: “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your child and her child; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel” (Gen 3:15). The promise was that there was come a headcrushing child, whom we know to be Jesus of Nazareth, who came as the last Adam (Rom 5:12–21; 1 Cor 15:45), the obedient substitute for all of God’s elect, would come. That promise, however, was to be administered outwardly through believers and their children. That is why Eve said, “I have gotten a man with the help of Yahweh” (Gen 4:1). She thought that this child was the one whom the Lord had promised. He was not but the child did come. He was born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried. He was raised on the third day. He is ascended and seated at the right hand of the Father as the reigning King until his glorious return (Acts 2; all).

The church under the types and shadows always administered the promise of the covenant of grace, the promise that God would be the God of believers and their children, to believers and their children. The Lord repeated the Abrahamic promise through Jeremiah, “I will give them a a heart to know me, for I am Yahweh; and they will be my people, and I will be their God, for they will return to me with their whole heart” (Jer 24:7) and “I will be their God, and they shall be My people” and “they shall be my people, and I will be their God” (Jer 32:38). The promised the New Covenant was to include believers and their children. That is why the Apostle Peter told the Jews gathered at Pentecost, “Because the promise is to you and to your children, and to for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call” (Acts 2:39). The administration of the New Covenant was to include believers, their children, and gentiles.

In Scripture, the outward administration of the covenant of grace is distinguished from the inward reality. Participation in the outward or external administration of the covenant of grace is not dependent upon having already received the inward or internal reality (new life and true faith). Rather, it is through the regular participation in the outward administration that the Lord ordinarily bestows in the inward realities. To demand that one have what is administered in and through the visible church (the Christ-confessing covenant community) before admitting the children of believers into the visible church is like demanding that children already have milk in order to enter the store.

Note: Artwork by Sarah Perkins. (c) Illustrated Theology. For more see The Canons of Dork.

The biblical way of thinking about the covenant of grace is to recognize that there is only one covenant of grace but that it has been administered in various ways. Under the types and shadows, the Lord administered the covenant of grace through bloody sacrifices and signs, e.g., circumcision. Those signs pointed forward to the fulfillment of the promised Savior but the covenant of grace was already present in, with, and under the types and shadows.

The language of the Reformed churches is most helpful here:

74. Are infants also to be baptized?

Yes, for since they belong to the covenant and people of God as well as their parents, and since redemption from sin through the blood of Christ, and the Holy Spirit who works faith, are promised to them no less than to their parents, they are also by Baptism, as the sign of the Covenant, to be ingrafted into the Christian Church, and distinguished from the children of unbelievers, as was done in the Old Testament by Circumcision, in place of which in the New Testament Baptism is instituted.

We baptize children in recognition of the promise and their relationship to the covenant of grace but the external administration of the covenant of grace is a reality. The children of believers must be admitted externally/outwardly to the visible covenant community. Thus, in our liturgies we sometimes speak of the children of believers having an “interest” in the covenant of grace and a “right” to the sign thereof. Interest here does not mean curiosity but a stake in the covenant of grace, a relationship to it. So, we confess that the children of believers “belong to” the covenant of grace and that the benefits are promised to them, but they are also to be “ingrafted.” Both things are true simultaneously.

RESOURCES

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

Subscribe to the Heidelblog today!