There have been recent developments in classical covenant theology by Reformed (Calvinist) pastors and theologians. Wesleyan covenant theology, a variation of classical covenant theology, was designed by
John Wesley, the founder of
Methodism.
Classical covenant theology Covenant structure Meredith G. Kline did pioneering work in the field of
Biblical studies, in the 1960s and 1970s, building on prior work by
George E. Mendenhall, by identifying the form of the covenant with the common
Suzerain–
Vassal treaties of the
Ancient Near East in the 2nd millennium BC. One of the highlights of his work has been the comparison of the Mosaic Covenant with the
Hittite Suzerainty Treaty formula. A suggested comparison of the treaty structure with the book of Deuteronomy is as follows: • Preamble (
cf. Deuteronomy 1:1–4) • Historical prologue (
cf. Deuteronomy 1:5–3:29) • Stipulations (
cf. Deuteronomy 4–26) • Document clause (
cf. Deuteronomy 27) • List of gods as witnesses (notably lacking in Deuteronomy) • Sanctions: curses and blessings (
cf. Deuteronomy 28; 31–34). Kline has argued that comparisons between the suzerain-vassal treaties and royal grants of the Ancient Near East provide insight in highlighting certain distinctive features of the Mosaic covenant as a law covenant, in contrast with the other historic post-Fall covenants. Many who have embraced Kline's insights have still insisted, however, in accordance with the
Westminster Confession of Faith, that the Mosaic covenant was fundamentally an administration of the Covenant of Grace.
Contemporary revisions and controversy A number of major 20th-century covenant theologians including
Karl Barth,
Klaas Schilder, and
John Murray have departed from the traditional recognition of a covenant of works in classical covenant theology to develop a monocovenantal scheme subsuming everything under one Covenant of Grace. The focus of all biblical covenants is then on
grace and
faith. This has not been developed consistently between the various theologians. For example, Barth, influential in the
mainline churches and in certain
evangelical circles, conceived of grace as the fundamental reality underlying all of creation. Influential among more conservative
Calvinist churches, Murray acknowledged the traditional concept of a works principle as a condition for life with Adam in the Garden of Eden, comparing Adam's works to the works of Christ. He disputed its label as a covenant, however, preferring to call this arrangement the Adamic administration.
Shepherd controversy At
Westminster Theological Seminary in the late 1970s,
Norman Shepherd, a professor of
systematic theology was dismissed due to controversy over his teaching on
justification. His views involved a reconfiguration of covenant theology that went beyond those of Murray, his predecessor. Shepherd denied any notion of a works or merit principle, leading to a denial of the imputation of Christ's
active obedience to the believer. He argued that Jesus' own justification was due to His faith and obedience. In the same way then, the believer must be justified before God by faith and obedience. Shepherd's followers claim that the Covenant of Works between
Adam and
God in the
Garden of Eden was not originally part of covenant theology, following John Murray's observation that a covenant of works at creation does not receive explicit mention in early confessions such as the
French Confession (1559), the
Scots Confession (1560), the
Belgic Confession (1561), the
Thirty-Nine Articles (1562), the
Heidelberg Catechism (1563), and the
Second Helvetic Confession (1566). Some of Shepherd's critics contend that the concept of a works principle distinct from a Covenant of Grace is evident in the
commentaries and
dogmatic works of the earliest covenant theologians, particularly in the distinction made between
Law and Gospel (for instance,
Zacharias Ursinus,
Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism). There is also explicit articulation of a Covenant of Works in the writings of those such as
Olevianus and
Rollock. Additionally, defenders of the merit-based view argue that the concept of this works principle operating in the pre-Fall state in the
Garden of Eden as a covenant is present in the early confessions even if the Covenant of Works is not explicitly named. Examples include Belgic Confession, article 14, which speaks of Adam having received and transgressed the "commandment of life"; or Heidelberg Catechism, Question and Answer 6 affirming the goodness of man in creation. The later
Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) explicitly names the Covenant of Works which Adam transgressed (7.2; 19.1), and which "continues to be a perfect rule of righteousness" in the form of the moral law (19.2, 3).
Kline In opposition to the modern revisers,
Meredith Kline reemphasized the idea of a covenant of works as expressed in the Westminster Confession of Faith 7.2 as a means to protect a gospel of grace. Kline wrote: Kline,
Michael Horton, and others have sought to uphold the distinction of two sorts of covenant traditions: one based on merit, earned by obedience to law (works), and the other on promise (grace). While the consensus in Calvinist theology is that works are antithetical to grace as the means of
justification, differences emerge in attempts to describe this antithesis. On the one hand, Calvinist theologians were more in line with Kline tend to say that works are ultimately the basis for grace, since God requires perfect upholding of the
law for
heavenly reward. Since this is understood to be an impossible task for the
corrupted sinner, it is Christ who perfectly obeyed the law in fulfillment of the covenant of works.
Jesus, earning the reward, graciously bestows it to His people (
cf. Luke 22:29). For example,
R. C. Sproul writes, "Man's relationship to God in creation was based
on works. What Adam failed to achieve, Christ, the second Adam, succeeded in achieving.
Ultimately the only way one can be justified is by works." The sinner is thus saved by Christ's works and not his own. Right standing before God is then due to an alien or
imputed righteousness received by faith, not by personal faithfulness which is the fruition of salvation and not its ground. On the other hand, Calvinist theologians more in line with Murray tend to say that works were never meant to be the basis for grace, but that grace precedes the call for obedience. Consequently, works are the necessary response to grace and not the precondition for it. For example, Michael Williams writes, "The function of law within Scripture is the maintenance of relationship, not the creation of relationship. Legal obligation is not the precondition for life and relationship. Rather, life and relationship form the necessary environment for obligation." While this view still affirms the necessity of the merit of Christ, it departs from Kline's construal of merit as a fundamental principle of the covenant of works.
Wesleyan covenant theology Methodism maintains the superstructure of classical covenant theology, but being
Arminian in
soteriology, it discards the "predestinarian template of Reformed theology that was part and parcel of its historical development." The main difference between Wesleyan covenant theology and classical covenant theology is as follows: As such, in the
Wesleyan-Arminian view, only
Adam and
Eve were under the covenant of works, while on the other hand, all of their progeny are under the covenant of grace. With Mosaic Law belonging to the covenant of grace, all of humanity is brought "within the reach of the provisions of that covenant." This belief is reflected in
John Wesley's sermon
Righteousness of Faith: "The Apostle does not here oppose the covenant given by Moses, to the covenant given by Christ. …But it is the covenant of grace, which God, through Christ, hath established with men in all ages". The covenant of grace was therefore administered through "promises, prophecies, sacrifices, and at last by circumcision" during the patriarchal ages and through "the paschal lamb, the scape goat, [and] the priesthood of Aaron" under
Mosaic Law. The Methodist theologian
Richard Watson, with regard to the Eucharist, stated: Wesleyan covenant theology is also seen in the Methodist theology of baptism, e.g. when introducing this sacrament,
United Methodist Book of Worship teaches: "The Baptismal Covenant is God's word to us, proclaiming our adoption by grace, and our word to God, promising our response of faith and love. Those within the covenant constitute the community we call the Church". Watson explicates Wesleyan-Arminian theology regarding baptism: As with the Reformed view, the founder of the movement, John Wesley held that the moral law, which is contained in the
Ten Commandments, continues to stand today: Wesleyan covenant theology, unlike Reformed classical covenant theology, emphasizes that though
God initiates a covenant with
humanity, humans are given the
free will to follow Him, and "God is always the innocent party in cases where salvation is lost". When persons become professing members of a Methodist
connexion, they personally bind themselves to a
covenant with God and the Church through the making of vows. On New Year's Eve, congregations belonging to various Methodist connexions, such as the United Methodist Church, Free Methodist Church and Pilgrim Holiness Church, conduct a
watchnight service in the form of the
Covenant Renewal Service, so that Methodist believers can personally renew their covenant with the Creator every year; this liturgy is traditionally preceded by prayer and
fasting.
Baptist covenant theology The most well-known form of Covenant theology is associated with
Presbyterians (paedobaptists) and comes from the
Westminster Confession of Faith. However, another form of covenant theology is held to by some baptists; it is called
Baptist covenant theology or 1689 Federalism, to distinguish it from Westminster Federalism. It is usually associated with the
Particular Baptist strand of Baptists, and comes from the
Second London Baptist Confession of Faith, published in 1689. The principal difference between these two variants of covenant theology is their understanding of the Covenant of Grace. Standard Westminster covenant theology sees the Covenant of Grace beginning with
the Fall in
Genesis 3, and continuing through the
Old Covenant and the
New Covenant, under the same "substance" but different "administrations". The Covenant of Grace, the Old Covenant, and the New Covenant, all have the same substance and only differ in the fact that the Old Covenant and the New Covenant constitute two separate administrations of that single substance. In contrast, 1689 Federalism does not see the Covenant of Grace as beginning with the Fall in Genesis 3. Instead, the Covenant of Grace begins with the establishing of the New Covenant at the Cross; 1689 Federalism sees the New Covenant and the Covenant of Grace as the same thing. The Old Covenant is seen as the foreshadowing and anticipation for the Covenant of Grace, not an administration of the Covenant of Grace; the Old Covenant is a series of promises that point towards the New Covenant, and will not be realized until that point. However, Covenantal Baptists are careful to still specify that, "''this New Covenant of Grace was extant and effectual under the Old Testament ... How can we affirm this while at the same time holding that the New Covenant of Grace was not established until the death of Christ? In the same way that we can affirm that Abraham and other OT saints were covered by the blood of Christ prior to Christ's actual death on the cross (2LBCF 8.6).''" The Westminster Confession of Faith outlines this "one substance, two administrations" understanding by specifying that under the Old Covenant, the covenant was "administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances", while under the New Covenant, the covenant is administered by "the preaching of the Word, and the administration of the sacraments" so that "there are not, therefore, two covenants of grace differing in substance, but one and the same under various dispensations". In contrast, 1689 Federalism condenses this all down to say that the Covenant of Grace was revealed progressively over Old Testament history after Genesis 3 "by further steps, until the full discovery thereof was completed in the New Testament." Since the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace are the only redemptive covenants, stemming from the Covenant of Redemption, salvation is only possible through the Covenant of Grace, as in the covenant theology of standard Westminster pedobaptist federalism. Between The Fall in Genesis 3 and the New Covenant are several other covenants, in particular the covenant of Abraham, the covenant of Moses, and the covenant of David. But these covenants are "works and law" covenants and not "redemptive" covenants, since they exist only for specific earthly purposes in space and time, such as to allow Israel to live in the promised land under the conditions given in the covenant. Though their substance is different from the Covenant of Grace, and they are therefore not part of that covenant, they do point to the promises in that covenant. They do this by drawing on
typology, and as such consist of "types" and "antitypes", where the "type" is the explicit purpose of that covenant, but the "antitype" is the way in which that covenant points towards the promises of the Covenant of Grace through the New Covenant. Salvation was therefore possible for people under the Old Covenant through the Covenant of Grace if they had saving faith in these promises. Covenant theology under Westminster Federalism allows paedobaptism since it sees a greater continuity between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. Covenant theology under Baptist Federalism, in contrast, supports credobaptism because it sees a greater discontunity between the Old and New covenants. Because the Old Covenant was not an administration of the same Covenant of Grace as the New Covenant, its "sacrament" of circumcision cannot be made the equivalent of the sacrament of baptism. Baptism is seen as a part of the Covenant of Grace in the New Covenant; circumcision is seen as a part of the Old Covenant, which was only a shadow of the Covenant of Grace and not its actual substance. ==See also==