In what Respects the Covenant of Grace is Conditional

Subsections

Faith: a Condition of Justification
Relation of Repentance to Faith & Justification
Gospel-Covenant Threatenings
Antinomianism

Order of Contents

Articles 5+
Books 2
Quotes 16+
Consequent Conditions 8+
Conditions of Covenanted-Ones 3
Baptist 1

Articles

1600’s

Rutherford, Samuel

pp. 471-78, Assertion 6 in Christ Dying & Drawing Sinners to Himself… (London, 1647)

‘The Gospel is Conditional’ being pt. 2, ch. 38, pp. 39-40 of A Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist (1648)

pp. 471-478 of Christ Dying & Drawing Sinners to Himself, or, A Survey of our Saviour in his Soul-suffering, his lovelinesse in his death, and the efficacy thereof… (London, 1647) This especially on how faith is a condition of the Covenant of Grace.

Flavel, John – ‘Of the Conditionality of the New Covenant’ in “Vindiciarum Vindex: or a Refutation of the Weak & Impertinent Rejoinder of Mr. Philip Cary” in Planelogia, a Succinct & Seasonable Discourse of the Occasions, causes, nature, rise, growth and remedies of mental errors… (London: Roberts, 1691), pp. 242-80

For a presbyterian overview of the debate that started with Philip Cary and Richard Burthogge, and then also involved John Flavel and Benjamin Keach, see Joel R. Beeke & Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (RHB, 2012), pp. 729–41. HT: Tony Byrne

Turretin, Francis – ‘Is the covenant of grace conditional and what are its conditions?’ in Institutes of Elenctic Theology (P&R, 1994), vol. 2, 12th Topic, ‘The Covenant of Grace…’, Question 3, pp. 184-89

“Unless it [the Covenant of Grace] was conditional, there would be no place for threatenings in the gospel (which could not be denounced except against those who had neglected the prescribed condition)–for the neglect of faith and obedience cannot be culpable, if not required.” – p. 185

van Mastricht, Peter – Theoretical Practical Theology (2nd ed. 1698; RHB), vol. 4, pt. 1, bk. 5, ch. 1, ‘The Covenant of Grace’

XIX. The agreement of God 22
XX. The covenant of grace is conditioned 23
XXI. Because it is accomplished by a mutual promise 24
XXII. What the condition of the covenant of grace is 24
XXIII. The covenant of grace is not offered and conferred upon
each and every person 25

“The papists prefer good works as meritorious causes, as do the Socinians, but as good works required by grace. There are those who prefer faith and repentance taken jointly, and there are several who are pleased with repentance, faith, and obedience. Most of the orthodox, with the Scriptures, most accurately admit here faith alone…

Most broadly understood it [a condition] includes anything that is required in any way for the covenant of grace, whether:

(1) antecedently, and as it were in a preparatory fashion, in which sense the hearing of the promulgated covenant, a general assent given to the divine Word, a conviction of the necessity of the covenant of grace, an effectual call to faith (prior to faith, if not in time, at least in nature), an acknowledgement and sense of one’s misery, a godly desperation about oneself and all things outside the Mediator, and so forth, can be called a condition. Or,

(2) concomitantly, in which manner self-denial (Lk. 9:23; Phil. 3:4–12), the exercise of repentance (Mk. 1:15; Acts 2:38–39), and so forth, can be taken as a condition. Or,

(3) consequently, as covenantal duties, in which sense evangelical obedience (cf. Gen. 12:1–3; 15:18; 17:1–2; 9:1–15) and renewal of repentance (Dt. 30:1–9 with 29:24 to the end) can be admitted as a condition.

More strictly and most properly understood, a condition denotes that by which, when it is given in man, from the divine promise, the covenant of grace is entered into. In this sense faith alone supplies the condition of the covenant of grace, for by this: (1) it is distinguished from the covenant of works (Rom. 3:27; 10:5–14); (2) it is denominated the law of faith (Rom. 3:27); and (3) its righteousness, the righteousness of faith (Rom. 10:6; Phil. 3:9; Heb. 11:7); (4) its covenanted parties are called οἱ ἐκ πίστεως, those who are of faith (Gal. 3:9).” – pp. 24-25

Books

1600’s

Graile, John – A Modest Vindication of the Doctrine of Conditions in the Covenant of Grace & the Defenders thereof, from the Aspersions of Arminianism & Popery, which Mr. William Eyre Cast on them (London, 1654) 125 pp.

John Flavel: “And as for those ancient and modern divines whom the Antinomians have corrupted and misrepresented, the reader may see them all vindicated, and their concurrence with those I have named evidenced by that learned and pious Mr. John Graile, in his Modest Vindication of the Doctrine of Conditions in the Covenant of Grace, from p. 58 onward;

a man whose name and memory is precious with me, not only upon the account of that excellent sermon he preached, and those fervent prayers he poured out many years since at my ordination; but for that learned and judicious treatise of his against Mr. Eyre [above], wherein he hath cast great light upon this controversy, as excellent Mr. Baxter and Mr. Woodbridge have also done. But alas! what evidence is sufficient to satisfy ignorant and obstinate men!” – Works, vol. 3, Appendix, Vindicarum Vindex, pp. 530-31

Eyre (c.1612-1670), in his book Vindiciæ justificationis gratuitæ [A Vindication of the Freeness of Justification] = Justification without conditions… (London: R.I., 1654), affirmed the instrumental nature of faith in Justification, but as passive only, not active (pp. 30-31).

Flavel, John – Vindiciæ legis & fœderis: or a Reply to Mr. Philip Cary’s Solemn Call, wherein he pretends to answer all the arguments of Mr. Allen, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Sydenham, Mr. Sedgwick, Mr. Roberts and Dr. Burthogge for the right of believers’ infants to baptism, by proving the Law at Sinai, and the Covenant of Circumcision with Abraham, were the very same with Adam’s Covenant of Works, and that because the Gospel-Covenant is Absolute (London: Wolton, 1690) 140 pp. ToC

See especially pt. 3, ‘Of the Conditionality of the New Covenant’.

Quotes

Order of

Calvin
Ainsworth
Wotton
Rivet
Cameron
Alsted
Ball
Gataker
Wendelin
Voet
Vincent
Turretin
Flavel (& Davenant & Downame)
Witsius
Vitringa
Dabney
Berkhof

1500’s

John Calvin

Institutes of the Christian Religion trans. Henry Beveridge (1559; Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1845)

vol. 1, bk. 2, ch. 10, sect. 1, p. 501

“1. From what has been said above, it must now be clear, that all whom, from the beginning of the world, God adopted as his peculiar people, were taken into covenant with him on the same conditions, and under the same bond of doctrine, as ourselves; but as it is of no small importance to establish this point, I will here add it by way of appendix, and show, since the Fathers were partakers with us in the same inheritance, and hoped for a common salvation through the grace of the same Mediator…”

vol. 2, bk. 3, ch. 21, sect. 6, p. 537

“At first Ishmael had obtained the same rank with his brother Isaac, because the spiritual covenant was equally sealed in him by the symbol of circumcision. He is first cut off, then Esau, at last an innumerable multitude, almost the whole of Israel. In Isaac was the seed called.

The same calling held good in the case of Jacob. God gave a similar example in the rejection of Saul. This is also celebrated in the psalm, “Moreover, he refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim: but chose the tribe of Judah,” (Ps. 78:67-68) This the sacred history sometimes repeats, that the secret grace of God may be more admirably displayed in that change.

I admit that it was by their own fault Ishmael, Esau, and others, fell from their adoption; for the condition annexed was that they should faithfully keep the covenant of God, whereas they perfidiously violated it.”

vol. 3, bk. 4

ch. 15, sect. 17, p. 341

“Wherefore, when the Lord invites the Jewish people to repentance, He gives no injunction concerning another circumcision, though (as we have said) they were circumcised by a wicked and sacrilegious hand, and had long lived in the same impiety. All He urges is conversion of heart.

For how much soever the covenant might have been violated by them, the symbol of the covenant always remained, according to the appointment of the Lord, firm and inviolable. Solely, therefore, on the condition of repentance, were they restored to the covenant which God had once made with them in circumcision, though this which they had received at the hand of a covenant-breaking priest, they had themselves as much as in them lay polluted and extinguished.”

ch. 16, pp. 373-74

“24. Thus the Lord, when he chose Abraham for himself, did not commence with circumcision, in the meanwhile concealing what he meant by that sign, but first announced that He intended to make a covenant with him, and, after his faith in the promise, made him partaker of the sacrament. Why does the sacrament come after faith in Abraham, and precede all intelligence in his son Isaac?

It is right that he who, in adult age, is admitted to the fellowship of a covenant by one from whom he had hitherto been alienated, should previously learn its conditions; but it is not so with the infant born to him. He, according to the terms of the promise, is included in the promise by hereditary right from his mother’s womb. Or, to state the matter more briefly and more clearly. If the children of believers, without the help of understanding, are partakers of the covenant, there is no reason why they should be denied the sign, because they are unable to swear to its stipulations.

This undoubtedly is the reason why the Lord sometimes declares that the children born to the Israelites are begotten and born to Him (Eze. 16:20; 23:37) For He undoubtedly gives the place of sons to the children of those to whose seed He has promised that He will be a Father. But the child descended from unbelieving parents is deemed an alien to the covenant until he is united to God by faith. Hence, it is not strange that the sign is withheld when the thing signified would be vain and fallacious. In that view, Paul says that the gentiles, so long as they were plunged in idolatry, were strangers to the covenant (Eph. 2:11).

The whole matter may, if I mistake not, be thus briefly and clearly expounded: Those who, in adult age, embrace the faith of Christ, having hitherto been aliens from the covenant, are not to receive the sign of baptism without previous faith and repentance. These alone can give them access to the fellowship of the covenant, whereas children, deriving their origin from Christians, as they are immediately on their birth received by God as heirs of the covenant, are also to be admitted to baptism. To this we must refer the narrative of the evangelist, that those who were baptized by John confessed their sins (Mt. 3:6). This example, we hold, ought to be observed in the present day. Were a Turk to offer himself for baptism, we would not at once perform the rite without receiving a confession which was satisfactory to the Church.”

1600’s

Henry Ainsworth

ed. Samuel White, The Orthodox Foundation of Religion long since collected by that judicious and elegant man, Mr. Henry Ainsworth (London: Sparke, 1641), pt. 2, Mystery of Piety, p. 75

“And the covenants of God with men are of two sorts:

1. Legal, when upon condition of present and continued obedience to all his precepts, He promises life eternal.

2. Evangelical, when upon condition of repentance, faith and newness of life, He promises forgiveness of sins, and eternal life through Christ.”

Anthony Wotton

On the Reconciliation of a Sinner… in which the Doctrine of the Anglican Church on the Justification of the Ungodly is explicated and defended (Basil, 1624), bk. 1, ch. 6, p. 138

“Faith in Christ crucified is not commanded in the Law. For the apostle in Rom. 4:4–5 and 10:5–6, 11 sets faith in opposition to the Law; and in Gal. 3:12 he says that ‘The Law is not of faith,’ because the Law promises life to those who do the things contained in it. Therefore, faith is not comprehended under the Law. Nor indeed can there be any commerce between the Law and Christ as Mediator: “You are severed from Christ, you who are justified by the Law; you have fallen from grace” (Gal. 5:4).

Faith in Christ crucified is a certain kind of righteousness: for it is obedience, and as it were a conformity to the command of God, as in 1 Jn. 3:23, “This is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son,” and Jn. 3:36, “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

Therefore there is a kind of righteousness which is not commanded in the Law; and consequently it is to be understood that there is also a kind of unrighteousness, or sin, which does not depend upon the Law as contained in the Decalogue. The same might be said of repentance and of the use or abuse of the evangelical sacraments, concerning which it is clear that nothing is commanded in the Decalogue.”

Andrew Rivet

ed. te Velde, Dolf – Synopsis of a Purer Theology (1625; Brill, 2015), vol. 1, Disputation 23, §29, p. 597 “New obedience” is likely being referred to as a condition, not of justification, but of final salvation.

“29. Furthermore, we do not say that the Gospel and the New Testament demand no condition at all, for the condition of faith and new obedience (which is everywhere impressed on us) is demanded. But God provides these conditions freely, and their imperfect quality forms no hinderance to salvation (which flows from another source), so long as they are genuine.”

John Cameron

Works… (d. 1625; Geneva: Chovet, 1658), as trans. in Richard Baxter, Richard Baxter’s Confession of his Faith… (London: 1655), ch. 10, sect. 3, pp. 379-80

Questions on Hebrews

on Heb. 6:1-2, p. 404, lt col bot

“We must observe that there is a certain Gospel righteousness in God; and that is God’s truth in keeping promises of the Gospel, when the condition of the promises is performed.”

on Heb. 8:9, p. 413

“Does it not seem that the condition of the Gospel Covenant is violated of many as truly as of the Legal Covenant?

It is as truly violated by many; but it is not violated by as many. For the condition of the Legal Covenant is violated of all; Yea it is impossible to be kept, even to the penitent; But the condition of the Gospel Covenant is otherwise, etc. There was therefore need of a New Covenant, unless mankind should perish, etc. Certainly no man is saved but by a Covenant kept; therefore the Covenant by which men are saved, is not the same with that by which no man is saved, it being kept by no man.”

Distinctions & Responses to Some Objections, p. 498

“To Thesis 9.

…
Response: Faith only is not therefore made the condition of the Covenant of Grace, as if life might be obtained by the Covenant of Grace without repentance and good works but because the promise of God in the Covenant of Grace is apprehended by faith only.”

Johann H. Alsted

Distinctions of Theology, ch. 17, p. 73 trans. Richard Baxter, Richard Baxter’s Confession of his Faith… (London: 1655), ch. 10, sect. 3, p. 409

“The condition of the Covenant of Grace is partly faith, partly evangelical obedience or holiness of life proceeding from faith in Christ.”

John Ball

A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace… (London: 1645), ch. 3, ‘Of the Covenant of Grace in General’, pp. 17-24

“The form of this Covenant stands in gracious and free promises of all good to be repaired, restored, augmented, and a restipulation of such duties as will stand with free grace and mercy. For the Covenant of Grace does not exclude all conditions, but such as will not stand with grace. The Covenant which was made of free love, when we lay wallowing in our blood, and which calls for nothing at our hands but what comes from, and shall be rewarded of mere grace, is a Covenant of grace, though it be conditional. So the pardon of sin is given of grace, and not for works, though pardon be granted only to the penitent, and faith on our part, a lively, unfained and working faith be required to receive the promise.

…The obligation of man to God is of double right and debt: but it is of rich grace and abundant love, that God does bind himself unto man. God does promise in this Covenant to be God and Father by right of redemption, and Christ to be Savior of them that believe in God by Him, and in faith do yield sincere, uniform, willing, upright and constant obedience unto his Commandments. Jer. 31:31-33; Dt. 31:6; Eze. 36:25-26; Gen. 15:1, 4-5; Jer. 32:40 & 33:9; Heb. 8:10-12; Isa. 54:7; Hos. 2:19.

The stipulation required is that we take God to be our God, that is, that we repent of our iniquities, believe the promises of mercy and embrace them with the whole heart, and yield love, fear, reverence, worship, and obedience unto Him, according to the prescript rule of his Word. Repentance is called for in this Covenant, as it sets forth the subject capable of salvation by faith, but is itself only an acknowledgement of sin, no healing of our wound, or cause of our acquittance.

The feeling of pain and sickness causes a man to desire and seek remedy, but it is no remedy itself. (Lk. 13:5; Acts 11:18; 2 Cor. 7, 10; Eze. 18:27) Hunger and thirst make a man to desire and seek for food, but a man is not fed by being hungry. By repentance we know ourselves, we feel our sickness, we hunger and thirst after grace, but the hand which we stretch forth to receive it, is faith alone, without which repentance is nothing but darkness and despair. Repentance is the condition of faith and the qualification of a person capable of salvation: but faith alone is the cause of justification and salvation, on our part required. It is a penitent and petitioning faith, whereby we receive the promises of mercy, but we are not justified partly by prayer, partly by repentance, and partly by faith, but by that faith which stirs up godly sorrow for sin, and enforces us to pray for pardon and salvation.

Faith is a necessary and lively instrument of justification, which is amongst the number of true causes, not being a cause without which the thing is not done, but a cause whereby it is done. The cause without which a thing is not done, is only present in the action, and does nothing therein: But as the eye is an active instrument for seeing, and the care for hearing, so is faith also for justifying. If it be demanded whose instrument it is? It is the instrument of the soul, wrought therein by the Holy Ghost, and is the free gift of God.

In the Covenant of works, works were required as the cause of life and happiness: but in the Covenant of grace, though repentance be necessary and must accompany faith, yet not repentance, but faith only is the cause of life. The cause not efficient, as works should have been, if man had stood in the former Covenant, but instrumental only: for it is impossible that Christ, the death and blood of Christ, and our faith should be together the efficient or procuring causes of justification or salvation.

Obedience to all God’s commandments is covenanted (Dt. 7:1• & 10, 12; Jer. 7:23; Lev. 19:17-18; Lk. 10:27; Mk. 12:30), not as the cause of life, but as the qualification and effect of faith, and as the way to life. Faith that embraces life is obedient and fruitful in all good works; but in one sort faith is the cause of obedience and good works, and in another of justification and eternal life. These it seeks in the promises of the covenant; those it works and produces, as the cause does the effect.

Faith was the efficient cause of that precious oblation in Abel (Heb. 11:4, 7, etc.), of reverence and preparing the ark in Noah, of obedience in Abraham; but it was the instrument only of their justification. For it does not justify as it produces good works, but as it receives Christ, though it cannot receive Christ unless it brings forth good works.

A disposition to good works is necessary to justification, being the qualification of an active and lively faith. Good works of all sorts are necessary to our continuance in the state of justification, and so to our final absolution, if God give opportunity; but they are not the cause of, but only a preceding qualification or condition to final forgiveness and eternal bliss.

If then, when we speak of the conditions of the covenant of grace, by “condition” we understand whatsoever is required on our part, as precedent, concomitant, or subsequent to justification, repentance, faith, and obedience are all conditions; but if by “condition” we understand what is required on our part as the cause of the good promised, though only instrumental, faith or belief in the promises of free mercy is the only condition.

Faith and works are opposed in the matter of justification and salvation in the covenant, not that they cannot stand together in the same subject—for they are inseparably united—but because they cannot concur or meet together in one and the same court to the justification or absolution of man. For in the court of justice, according to the first covenant, either being just he is acquitted, or unjust he is condemned; but in the court of mercy, if you receive the promise of pardon, which is done by a lively faith, you are acquitted and set free, and accepted as just and righteous; but if you do not believe, you are sent over to the court of justice.

Obedience is twofold:

[1] Perfect in measure and degree—this is so far required that, if it be not performed, we must acknowledge our sin in coming short. And this God is pleased to exact at our hands, that we might walk in humility before him, strive after perfection, and freely acknowledge his rich grace and mercy in accepting and rewarding the best service we can render to his Highness, when in the court of justice it deserves to be rejected.

[2] Sincere, uniform, and constant, though imperfect in measure and degree; and this is so necessary that without it there is no salvation to be expected.

The covenant of grace calls for perfection, yet accepts sincerity, God in mercy pardoning the imperfections of our best performances. If perfection were rigidly exacted, no flesh could be saved; if it were not at all commanded, imperfection would not be sin, nor would perfection be something to be labored after.

The faith that is lively to embrace mercy is ever joined with an unfeigned purpose to walk in all well-pleasing, and the sincere performance of all holy obedience, as opportunity is offered, ever attends that faith by which we continually lay hold upon the promises once embraced.

Actual good works of all sorts (though not perfect in degree) are necessary to the continuance of actual justification, because faith can no longer lay faithful claim to the promises of life than it does virtually or actually lead us forward in the way to heaven. For if we say we have fellowship with God and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth; but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another (1 John 1:6–7). This walking in the light, as He is in the light, is that qualification whereby we become immediately capable of Christ’s righteousness, or actual participants of his propitiation, which is the sole immediate cause of our justification, taken for remission of sins or actual approbation with God. The truth of this doctrine St. John likewise ratifies in terms equivalent in the words immediately following: “And the blood of Christ cleanses us (walking in the light as God is in the light) from all sin.” (1 Jn. 1:7) But of these things more fully in their several degrees, as this covenant has been revealed.

In this covenant man promises to repent of his sins, and, repenting, to cleave to the promise of mercy made in Jesus Christ, and in faith to yield willing, cheerful, and continual obedience. In contracts among men, one may ask more and another bid less, and yet they may come to agreement; but it is altogether fruitless for men to think of entering into covenant with God if they are not resolved to obey in all things. The practice of all God’s people who have ever made covenant with Him expressly declares as much when they solemnly entered into or renewed their covenant.

For thus they promise: “Whatever the Lord says, that we will do” (Exod. 24:3, 7).

The people said to Joshua, “The Lord our God we will serve, and his voice we will obey” (Josh. 24:23).

And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul, so that whoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman (2 Chron. 15:12–13).

And the king stood by the pillar and made a covenant before the Lord to walk after the Lord, and to keep his commandments, his testimonies, and his statutes with all his heart and all his soul, to perform the words of this covenant that were written in this book; and all the people stood to the covenant (2 Chron. 34:31; 2 Kings 23:3).

They entered into a curse and into an oath to walk in God’s law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the Lord our God, and his judgments and his statutes (Neh. 10:29).

And thus runs the exhortation of Joshua to the two tribes and a half when he sent them home: “Take diligent heed to do the commandments of the law, which Moses the servant of the Lord charged you, to love the Lord your God, and to walk in all his ways, and to keep his commandments, and to cleave to him, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul” (Josh. 22:5).

This must not be understood as if one who, through frailty and infirmity, offends in any one jot or tittle should be counted a covenant-breaker; for then no man would be innocent. Rather, the promise must be interpreted according to the rule of obedience given, which calls for perfection but accepts sincerity. In the covenant of mercy we bind ourselves to believe and rest upon God with the whole heart, so that doubting or distrust arising from weakness and infirmity must indeed be acknowledged as sin, yet every such frailty does not prove the person to be a transgressor of the covenant. The same holds true of obedience. But of this more fully when treating the particular manner in which God has been pleased to administer this covenant.

Man, then, promises to serve the Lord and to cleave to him alone, which is both a duty owed and a special prerogative; and he also restipulates, or humbly entreats, that God would be mindful of his holy covenant or testimony—that he would be his God, his portion, his protector, and his rich reward. These things are so linked together in the covenant that we must conceive the promise of God, in order of nature, to go before the promise and obedience of man, and to be the ground of faith by which the promised mercy is received. The offer of mercy is made to man as an unbeliever, that he might return; and the promise must be conceived before we can believe, otherwise we would believe we know not what, and faith would hang in the air without any foundation. But the mercy offered is embraced by faith and granted to him who believes.

Moreover, the duty which God requires and man promises is indeed man’s duty, yet given by God. By grace man is enabled and effectually drawn to do what God commands. The covenant could not be of grace, nor the good things covenanted, if man by his own strength did or could perform what God requires.

This Covenant was first published and made known by lively voice: afterwards it was committed to writing, the tables thereof being the holy Scripture. It was made both by word and oath (Ps. 85:4, 35; Dt. 29:12, 14; Isa. 54:9; Heb. 6:17-18; Gen. 22:16; Lk. 1:72), to demonstrate the certainty and constancy thereof: and sealed by the sacraments, which on God’s part do confirm the promise made by Him: and on man’s part are bills obligatory or hand-writings, whereby they testify and bind themselves to the performance of their duty.
…

Externally this covenant is made with every member of the Church, even with the parents and their children, so many as hear and embrace the promises of salvation, and give and dedicate their children unto God according to his direction; for the sacraments—what are they but seals of the covenant?

But savingly, effectually, and in a special manner it is made only with them who are partakers of the benefits promised. And as the covenant is made outwardly or effectually, so some are the people of God externally, others internally and in truth. For they are the people of God with whom God has contracted a covenant, and who in like manner have sworn to the words of the covenant, God stipulating and the people receiving the condition; which is done two ways:

[1] for either the covenant is made extrinsically, God by some sensible token gathering the people, and the people embracing the condition in the same manner, and so an external consociation of God and the people is made;

[2] or the covenant is entered after an invisible manner, by the intervention of the Spirit, and that with so great efficacy that the condition of the covenant is received after an invisible manner, and so an internal consociation of God and the people is made up.”

Thomas Gataker

A Mistake or Misconstruction Removed (Whereby little difference is pretended to have been acknowledged between the Antinomians & us)… (London: Clifton, 1646), p. 25

“Yea if the Covenant of the Gospel, that is, of life and salvation by Christ, be as absolute, without any condition on man’s part, as that with Noah concerning the not drowning of the whole world again (Gen. 9:9-10), then it is all one whether men receive it, and believe it, or no: the promise of life and salvation, and the covenant made with Christ concerning it, shall be made good unto them, as well as that made with Noah, shall be made good unto men, whether they know it and heare it, and believe it or not.”

Francis Wendelin

Christian Theology, bk. 1, ch. 19, pp. 395-96 in Richard Baxter, Richard Baxter’s Confession of his Faith… (London: 1655), ch. 10, sect. 3, p. 402

“The Gospel, however taken, has conditional promises. The Papists here assent to us, but not without calumny. For they feign that we make the Gospel promises to be absolute.

Proposition 2: The Gospel most largely taken has the promise of eternal life, on condition either of faith only [for justification], or faith and new obedience together [for final salvation], or of fulfilling the perfect Law by our own strength (as rehearsing the Law of works): and so it makes mention not only of the evangelical condition and righteousness, but of the legal too.

Proposition 3: The Gospel largely taken, has the promise of eternal life on condition of faith and new obedience [for final salvation]. Of the condition of faith there is no doubt: nor of the condition of new obedience conjunct with faith, Rom. 8:13; Heb. 12:14.”

Gisbert Voet

Disputation 30, ‘On Regeneration’, pt. 2 (1639) tr. AI by Roman Prestarri in Select Theological Disputations (1655), vol. 2, pp. 447ff. Latin at Confessionally Reformed Theology

“Effects arisen and dependent from faith considered organically are:

I. Real and passive, or received, union with Christ, and ingrafting into the new covenant, and thus communion of all goods in Christ.

II. Passive reconciliation and justification (as they call it), or rather internal, in us—from which is distinguished external or active justification, which is concerning us.”

Thomas Vincent

An Explicatory Catechism: or an Explanation of the [Westminster] Assembly’s Shorter Catechism… (London: Mortlock, 1675), pp. 71-74 This section was edited out of the Banner of Truth reprint.

“Q. But why do you call it [Christ’s satisfaction] our legal righteousness?

A. Because thereby the Law of God owns itself fully paid, and acquiesces 〈◊〉 it, as in full reparations, and amends made unto it for the injury and dishonour received by the sin of man.

Q. And may we plead this against 〈◊〉 the challenges and accusations of the law.

A. Yes. (Rom. 8:33-34)

Q. And is this our legal righteousness required in the first Covenant, that of Works, which is thus imputed upon our account, wholly without us, in our Redeemer?

A. Yes.

Q. But is our evangelical righteousness required in the second Covenant without us, as our legal righteousness required in the Old is?

A. No, for though Christ performed the conditions of the Law, and satisfied for our non-performance, yet it is ourselves that must perform the conditions of the Gospel. It is not Christ but we that must repent and believe. (Acts 20:21)

Q. But there are some that tell us that Christ has also performed for us the conditions of the Gospel; that He has believed perfectly, and repented perfectly, and that all is ours: what ought we to think of this opinion?

A. If we judge of it in its clear consequence, it is both absurd and blasphemous; as if Christ had a Saviour to believe in for pardon and life, or sin to repent of, and sorrow for, and mortify.

Q. How is this opinion absurd?

A. As it supposes a perfect Savior to stand in need of a Savior. (Heb. 7:26-27)

Q. How is it blasphemous?

A. As it makes Christ the Son of God a sinner, who is God and man. (Jn. 9:24-25; Phil. 2:6-7)

Q. How does the Gospel justify?

A. As it is the Law of Faith that publishes and declares to us upon what terms we shall be justified. (Rom. 3:27)

Q. And is the Gospel our great charter, and God’s warrant under his broad seal, that he that believes shall not be condemned?

A. Yes. (Jn. 3:18)

Q. How does faith justify?

A. By virtue of the Law promulgated and published as it is our evangelical righteousness, or our keeping the Gospel-Law, which suspends justification upon believing.

Q. Does faith pretend to no merit or virtue of its own?

A. No, but professedly avows its dependance upon the merit of Christ’s satisfaction, and lays hold on it as our legal righteousness.

Q. Nor can it show any other title to be itself our evangelical righteousness, but only God’s sanction [Law, or Decree establishing it] who chose this act of believing to the honour of being the justifying act, because it so highly honours Christ?

A. No.

Q. May this be illustrated to us by some apt resemblance?

A. Yes, the act of believing is as the silver; but God’s authority in the Gospel-sanction is the king’s coin, or image stamped upon it, which gives it all its value as to justification.

Q. Without this stamp, could it never have been current?

A. No.

Q. And if God had set this stamp on any other grace, as love: would that then have been current, and have justified us as faith does now?

A. Yes.

Q. How does God justify?

A. God justifies in a proper sense two ways: First, as a Legislator. Secondly, as a Judge.

Q. How does God justify as a Legislator?

A. He justifies as a Legislator, enacting by his sovereign authority that sweet and gracious Law of the New Covenant, by virtue of whose tenor every sinner that believes is justified from the guilt of sin, from which he could not be justified by the Law of Moses, Acts 13:39.

Q. How does God justify as a Judge?

A. 2. As a Judge, He may in three respects…”

Francis Turretin

Institutes, 2.189

“…in the latter sense [‘strictly and properly’], faith is the sole condition of the covenant because… there is no other which could perform that office because there is no other which is receptive of Christ and capable of applying his righteousness.”

John Flavel (& Davenant & Downame)

The Whole Works of the Reverend John Flavel, 6 vols. (London: Baynes & Son; 1820), vol. 3, “A Reply to Mr. Philip Cary’s Solem Call”, pp. 528–31

“That learned, humble, and painful minister of Christ, Mr. John Ball (Of the Covenant of Grace, ch. 1, ‘Of the New Covenant’, p. 198), stating the difference betwixt the two covenants, shows that in the covenant at Sinai, in the covenant with Abraham, and that with David, that in all these covenant-expressures, there are for substance the same evangelical conditions of faith and sincerity.

Dr. [John] Davenant thus:

‘In the covenant of the gospel it is otherwise; for in this covenant, to the obtainment of reconciliation, justification, and life eternal, there is no other condition required than of true and lively faith, John 3:16. Therefore justification, and the right to eternal life does depend on the condition of faith alone.’ (Of Actual Righteousness, ch. 30)

Dr. Downame harmonizes with the rest in these words:

‘That which is the only condition of the covenant of grace, by that alone we are justified: But faith is the condition of the covenant of grace, which is therefore called lex fidei [the law of faith]. Our writers, says he, distinguishing the two covenants of God, that is, the law and the gospel, whereof one is the covenant of works, the other the covenant of grace, do teach that the law of works is that which to justification requires works as the condition thereof: the law of faith that which to justification requires faith as the condition thereof. The former says this, ‘Do this, and thou shalt live’; the latter, ‘Believe in Christ, and thou shalt be saved.’’ (Tract 1, Of Justification, bk. 6, ch. 8, sect. 10 and bk. 7, ch. 2, sect. 6)”

Herman Witsius

The Economy of the Covenants between God & Man: Comprehending a Complete Body of Divinity, trans. William Crookshank, 2 vols. (London: Tegg & Son, 1837), vol. 1, pp. 252–58; italics original. See also Herman Witsius, The Economy of the Covenants Between God & Man, 2 vols. (1822; RHB, 2017), vol. 1, pp. 284–91 HT: Tony Byrne

“VIII. Divines explain themselves differently as to the conditions of the covenant of grace. We, for our part, agree with those who think that the covenant of grace, to speak accurately, with respect to us has no conditions, properly so called; which sentiment we shall explain and establish in the following manner.

IX. A condition of a covenant, properly so called, is that action which, being performed, gives a man a right to the reward. But that such a condition cannot be required of us in the covenant of grace, is self-evident: because a right to life neither is nor indeed can be founded on any action of ours, but on the righteousness of our Lord alone; who having perfectly fulfilled the righteousness of the law for us, nothing can, in justice, be required of us to perform, in order to acquire a right already fully purchased for us. And, indeed, in this all the orthodox readily agree.

X. Further, the apostle more than once sets forth the covenant of grace under the appellation of a testament, which is God’s immutable purpose, not suspended on any one condition: and as it is founded on the unchangeable counsel of God, and ratified by the death of the testator, so it is not possible it should be made void by any unbelief of the elect, nor acquire its stability from any faith of man; for in this very testament God has immutably determined concerning faith, as salvation. Thus, Gal. 3:15, we see the covenant of God with Abraham is called a testament; the ratification of which must also be the same with that of a testament. And the covenant to be made with Israel, Jer. 31 has the same appellation, Heb. 8:10; as also that covenant with Israel mentioned by Moses, Exod. 24 and the declaration of the manner of enjoying the love of God through faith in Christ, Heb. 9:15, 20. And likewise, the compact of the Father with the Son, Luke 22:39, “In which passage, first, the will of God is published, by which he decreed, that the Son should, by the divine power of the Father, obtain the inheritance of the world, and a kingdom: secondly, the will of Christ, that the apostles and others given him should, through faith, become heirs of righteousness, and of the heavenly kingdom and of that of the world.” Compare Gal. 3:8. “But why should the apostle call the covenant of Abraham, and that mentioned, Heb. 8:10, a testament, and whether it ought not to be so taken, Matt. 26:18, and in other places, shall be considered in its place.”—Cocceius de Fœder. §. 4. And, in a word, I know not whether Paul, when speaking of the covenant of grace, did at any time or in any passage give it any other name than that of a testament. “But at that time,” at least if we give in to Cocceius’s opinion, “that word signified, neither to Greeks, nor Hellenist Jews, nor to the Hebrews, any other thing but a testament.” Cocceius ad Gal. 3 §. 134. I do not assert these things, as if I wanted to confound the notions of a covenant and a testament; but to show that the covenant of grace is testamentary, and to be distinguished from a covenant founded on a compact agreement, or law. Nor do I conceal that I found this in Cocceius de Fœd. §. 87; which made me wonder that a certain learned person, who is a great admirer of Cocceius, should find fault with these things.

XI. The famous Cloppenburg, formerly the ornament of the university of Friesland, has accurately observed the same thing, whose words I shall subjoin from Disputat. 3, de Fœderibus, Thes. 29: “The other disposition of the covenant [which regards us] is testamentary, whereby the grace by which we are saved comes to us from the most perfect merit of Christ the surety. For we are reckoned to be in covenant with God by the new covenant of grace, without having superadded to the covenant confirmed with Christ, the surety, by the renewal of the old agreement, any condition by which God should transact with us, but giving a gratuitous call to the inheritance of the promises whose testament Christ ratified by his death, and whose mediator he now is in heaven; namely, of full reconciliation with God and of eternal life.” Junius, in like manner, in his Theses, Disputat. 25, §. 29, “The conditions being fulfilled by the Angel of the Covenant, the catholic church was, through and for him, constituted heir of eternal life, without any condition.”

XII. Besides, when God proposes the form of the covenant of grace, his words to this purpose are mere promises, as we have lately seen, Jer. 31 and 32. Our divines, therefore, who, in consequence of the quirks of the Socinians and Remonstrants, have learned to speak with the greatest caution, justly maintain, that the Gospel, strictly taken, consists of pure promises of grace and glory.

XIII. And indeed, if we were to take the promises of the covenant of grace altogether without exception, we could not, so much as in thought, devise any thing in us as the condition of these promises. For whatever can be conceived as a condition, is all included in the universality of the promises. Should God only promise eternal life, there might be some pretence for saying that repentance, faith, and the like, were the conditions of this covenant. But seeing God does in the same breath, as it were, ratify both the beginning, progress, uninterrupted continuance, and in a word, the consummation of the new life; nothing remains in this universality of the promises, which can be looked upon as a condition of the whole covenant. For we here treat of the condition of the covenant, and not concerning any thing in man, which must go before the actual enjoyment of consummate happiness.

XIV. It is, however, certain that God has, in a very wise and holy manner, so ordered it, that none should come to salvation but in a way of faith and holiness; and so ranged his promises that none should attain to the more principal or more perfect happiness, but they who should first be made partakers of the preceding promises. Whence we gather, that none can take comfort in the infallible hope of happiness, who has not sincerely applied himself to the practice of faith and godliness. And the Scripture now and then assures us, that it is impossible for any to please God without faith, or see him without holiness. From this, many were induced to call faith and a new life the conditions of the covenant; whereas to speak accurately, and according to the nature of this covenant, they are, on the part of God, the execution of previous promises, and the earnest of future happiness, and on the part of man, the performance of those duties which cannot but precede the consummate perfection of a soul delighting in God. Or if we will insist upon it, to call these things conditions, they are not so much conditions of the covenant, as of the assurance that we shall continue in God’s covenant, and that he shall be our God. And I make no doubt but this was exactly the meaning of those very learned divines, though all of them have not so happily expressed themselves.

XV. Let us again hear our own Cloppenburg on this subject, to whose accuracy on this point I have nothing to add. Disputat. 4, de Fœder. Thes. 26, 27: nor do the conditions of the new covenant, enjoined by a law adapted thereto, as repentance, faith, and the practice of love to God and our neighbour, destroy this evangelical display of the grace of the new covenant, which the testamentary donation, made on account of death, demands. For these conditions of the new covenant are inserted in such a manner in the testament, as to exclude the impenitent, the unbelieving, and the ungodly from inheriting the promises; but not as if the dispensation and donation of salvation depended on these, or that by our works of obedience to the law-giver we obtain a right to the promise of the inheritance. What then? Conditions of new obedience are inserted into the testament of the new covenant, under a legal form, indeed, as the rule of our self-examination, and of becoming gratitude, lest, without having the undoubted characters of the sons of God, we should, without any ground, think ourselves sure of the inheritance. However, repentance itself, consisting in the mortification of sin and the practice of good works, is also promised under another form, to wit, as the gift of God, which he himself works in us, that by this sign or evidence we may, from the time of our truly repenting and believing, perfectly hope in that grace, which is brought to us, at the revelation of Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. 1:13; having eternal life already begun in ourselves, together with the new creation of the new spiritual life, by the Spirit of God. Thus far Cloppenburg, the accuracy of whose dissertation nothing can exceed.

XVI. We are not to think, that by this sentiment the nature of a covenant is destroyed, which consists in a stipulation, and restipulation. For there is no absurdity should we maintain, that that disposition of the new covenant which was made to the surety, retained the proper notion of a covenant, signifying a compact between two parties of mutual faith; but that the other disposition made to us, comes nearer to the form of a testament, and is rather unilateral, or appointed by one party. Nor is the word ברית any obstacle, which we have shown, book i. chap. i. sect. 3, is of various significations, and often denotes the same as חק, a constitution, or signifies a certain promise, though not mutual.

XVII. Moreover, God, by a certain wonderful act of condescension, publishes the promises of his grace to his covenant-people in this manner, to show that it was his will, that they seek for and expect from him what he promises, just as if it was a promise of reward, and proceeded from covenant and agreement, and was irrevocable on the account of the right of him who sues for the performance of it; which is, indeed, an astonishing degree of the Lord’s goodness: nevertheless, we are not to use it as an argument for conditions of the covenant of grace, properly so called.

XVIII. But, which is the principal thing, we imagine, the best way to conceive of this constitution of the covenant is as follows: since the covenant of grace, or the Gospel, strictly so called, which is the model of that covenant, consists in mere promises; it prescribes nothing properly as duty, requires nothing, commands nothing; not even this, believe, trust, hope in the Lord, and the like; but declares, sets forth, and signifies to us what God promises in Christ, what he would have done, and what he is about to do; all prescription of duty belongs to the law: as, after others, the venerable Voetius has very well inculcated, Disput. Tom. 4 p. 24, seq. And we are by all means to maintain this, if, with the whole body of the reformed, we should constantly defend the perfection of the law, which comprehends all virtues, and all the duties of holiness. But the law, adapted to the covenant of grace, and, according to it, inscribed on the heart of the elect, enjoins to receive all those things which are proposed in the Gospel with an unfeigned faith, and frame our lives suitably to that grace and glory which are promised. When God, therefore, in the covenant of grace, promises faith, repentance, and consequently eternal life to an elect sinner, then the law, whose obligation can never be dissolved, and which extends to every duty, binds the man to assent to that truth, highly prize, ardently desire, seek, and lay hold on those promised blessings. Moreover, since the admirable providence of God has ranged the promises in such order, as that faith and repentance go before, and salvation follows after: man is bound, by the same law, to approve of and be in love with this divine appointment, and assure himself of salvation only according to it. But when a man accepts the promises of the covenant in the order they are proposed, he does by that acceptance bind himself to the duties contained in the foregoing promises, before he can assure himself of the fulfilment of the latter. And in this manner the covenant becomes mutual. God proposes his promised in the Gospel in a certain order. The man, in consequence of the law, as subservient to the covenant of grace, is bound to receive the promises in that order. While faith does this, the believer, at the same time, binds himself to the exercise of a new life, before ever he can presume to entertain a hope of life eternal. And in this manner it becomes a mutual agreement.

XIX. But let none here object, that life is promised in the new covenant, to him that believes and repents, no less than it was in the old covenant to him that worketh; in order thence to conclude, that faith and repentance are now, in the same manner, conditions of the covenant of grace, that perfect obedience was the condition of the covenant of works. For when life is promised to him that doeth any thing, we are not directly to understand a condition, properly so called, as the cause of claiming the reward; God is pleased only to point out the way we are to take, not to the right, but to the possession of life. He proposes faith as the instrument by which we lay hold on the Lord Jesus, and on his grace and glory; good works, as the evidences of our faith and of our union with Christ, and as the way to the possession of life.

XX. But we must not forget to observe, that faith has quite a different relation with respect to the blessings of the covenant of grace, from what the other works of the new life have. In this, indeed, they agree, that both, conjointly, are the way to the promised bliss; but faith has something peculiar. For as faith is an astipulation, or assent given to the divine truth, it includes in it the acceptance of the benefit offered by the covenant, and makes the promise firm and irrevocable.” “Here is my Son,” says God, “and salvation in him.” I offer him to whoever desires him, and believes that he shall find his salvation in him. Who desires him? Who believes this?” “I do,” says the believer, “I greatly long for him. I believe my salvation to be laid up in him. I take him as thus offered to me.” “Be it so,” saith the Lord. And in this manner the promise is accepted, the truth of God sealed, the donation of Christ and of salvation in him becomes irrevocable. From all which it is evident, that faith has a quite different relation in the new covenant, from what works formerly had in the old. What the difference is between giving and receiving, such seems to be the difference between a condition of works and of faith: which the celebrated Hornbeck has not unhappily explained in Socin. Confut. Tom. 2 p 280.

XXI. Let us now lastly consider the threatenings, whether there be any such in this covenant. It cannot indeed be denied, but that, in the doctrine of Christ and the apostles, we frequently meet with very many comminations, which have their peculiar respect to the covenant of grace, and which could not have thus been set before us if there had been no such covenant. For instance,—whoever shall not believe in Christ—whoever shall despise the counsel of God against his own soul—whoever shall not obey the Gospel, shall be condemned. And these threatenings seem to be distinguished from those which are evidently legal; such as the following: “Cursed is he that continueth not in all things,” &c. Yet, if we would weigh the matter narrowly, the covenant of grace has no threatenings so peculiar to itself, but what may well be referred to the law, from which every curse proceeds.

XXII. Which I would explain thus: we no where hear of any threatenings which may and ought not to be deduced from that threatening, which doubtless is purely legal, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things,” &c. In this most general threatening are included the other more particular ones. Moreover, when salvation by Christ alone is proposed, in the covenant of grace, as the principal truth, the law, which enjoins man to embrace with a firm faith every truth made known to him by God, obliges him to receive this truth in particular, and be delighted with the glory of God shining forth in it, and that his own salvation is connected with the glory of God. Should we deny that the law lays us under this obligation, we should then affirm that the law does not enjoin us to acknowledge God as true, and that there is a holy love of God and of ourselves which the law does not command; all which are most absurd. I go further: When man, as the law prescribes, receives the truth of the Gospel with a lively faith, then not the law, but the Gospel, promises salvation to him. For the law knows of no other promise, than what depends on the condition of perfect obedience. But should man slight and obstinately reject that truth proposed to him, he sins against the law, and so incurs its curse, according to the general rule so often inculcated. And since we have supposed the Gospel declaring that salvation flows from the faith of Christ alone, the law enjoins that all who desire salvation should seek it by the faith of Christ alone; and consequently it cannot but thunder the curse against those who, rejecting the Gospel, believe not on Christ. As, therefore, unbelief, or the rejecting the Gospel, is a sin against the law, which is the only perfect rule of all virtue (it can be called a sin against the Gospel, only objectively), so every threatening of the curse and of wrath against unbelievers and the despisers of the Gospel, must come from and be reduced to the law; but then it is to the law as now subservient to the covenant of grace.

XXIII. In the discourses of the Prophets, Christ, and his apostles, there is a certain mixture of various doctrines, which, indeed, are closely connected, and mutually subservient; each of which ought to be reduced to their proper heads, so that the promises of grace be referred to the Gospel, all injunctions of duty and all threatenings against transgressors to the law.”

1700’s

Campegius Vitringa

The Fundamentals of Sacred Theology Pre (d. 1722; RHB, 2024), ch. 20, ‘Calling, Regeneration & Repentance’, p. 173

“712. It has also been said that God invites the sinner to the possession of these goods under the condition of faith which we described in chapter 14. This is the proposition of the covenant of grace.

713. But we have warned that God does not weigh this condition as being brought about by the sinner’s own power. Indeed, the sinner is a slave to sin, and inept to any spiritual good on his own.”

1800’s

Robert L. Dabney

Syllabus & Notes of the Course of Systematic & Polemic Theology, 2nd ed. (St. Louis: Presbyterian Publishing Company, 1878), pp. 438–39 HT: Tony Byrne

“May faith be properly called a condition

The question has been keenly agitated between Calvinists, whether faith itself should be spoken of as a condition of the covenant. One party has denied it, because they supposed that the language which represented man as performing a condition of his own salvation would make an inlet for human merit. But it is most manifest that there is a sense in which faith is the condition, in all such passages as Jn. 3:16; Acts 8:37; Jn. 11:26; Mk. 16:16.

No human wit can evade the fact, that here God proposes to man a something for him to do, which, if done, will secure redemption; if neglected, will ensure damnation—and that something is in one sense a condition. But of what kind? Paul everywhere contrasts the condition of works, and the condition of faith. This contrast will be sufficiently established, and all danger of human merits being intruded will be obviated, if it be observed that faith is only the appointed instrument for receiving free grace purchased by our Surety.

It owes its organic virtue as such, to God’s mere appointment, not to the virtue of its own nature. In the Covenant of Works, the fulfilment of the condition on man’s part earned the result, justification by its proper moral merit. In the Covenant of Grace, the condition has no moral merit to earn the promised grace, being merely an act of receptivity. In the Covenant of Works, man was required to fulfil the condition in his own strength. In the Covenant of Grace, strength is given to him to believe, from God.”

1900’s

Louis Berkhof

Systematic Theology (Eerdmans, 1938), pp. 280–81 HT: Tony Byrne

“f. It is both conditional and unconditional.

The question is repeatedly asked, whether the covenant is conditional or unconditional. This is a question that cannot be answered without careful discrimination, for the answer will depend on the point of view from which the covenant is considered.

On the one hand the covenant is unconditional. There is in the covenant of grace no condition that can be considered as meritorious. The sinner is exhorted to repent and believe, but his faith and repentance do not in any way merit the blessings of the covenant. This must be maintained in opposition to both the Roman Catholic and the Arminian position. Neither is it conditional in the sense that man is expected to perform in his own strength what the covenant requires of him. In placing him before the demands of the covenant, we must always remind him of the fact that he can obtain the necessary strength for the performance of his duty only from God. In a sense it may be said that God Himself fulfills the condition in the elect. That which may be regarded as a condition in the covenant, is for those who are chosen unto everlasting life also a promise, and therefore a gift of God. Finally, the covenant is not conditional in the sense that the reception of every separate blessing of the covenant is dependent on a condition. We may say that faith is the conditio sine qua non of justification, but the reception of faith itself in regeneration is not dependent on any condition, but only on the operation of the grace of God in Christ.

On the other hand the covenant may be called conditional. There is a sense in which the covenant is conditional. If we consider the basis of the covenant, it is clearly conditional on the suretyship of Jesus Christ. In order to introduce the covenant of grace, Christ had to, and actually did, meet the conditions originally laid down in the covenant of works, by His active and passive obedience. Again, it may be said that the covenant is conditional as far as the first conscious entrance into the covenant as a real communion of life is concerned. This entrance is contingent on faith, a faith, however, which is itself a gift of God. When we speak of faith as a condition here, we naturally refer to faith as a spiritual activity of the mind. It is only through faith that we can obtain a conscious enjoyment of the blessings of the covenant. Our experimental knowledge of the covenant life is entirely dependent on the exercise of faith. He who does not live a life of faith is, as far as his consciousness is concerned, practically outside of the covenant. If in our purview we include not only the beginning, but also the gradual unfolding and completion of the covenant life, we may regard sanctification as a condition in addition to faith. Both are conditions, however, within the covenant.

Reformed Churches have often objected to the use of the word “condition” in connection with the covenant of grace. This was largely due to a reaction against Arminianism, which employed the word “condition” in an un-Scriptural sense, and therefore to a failure to discriminate properly [Cf. Dick, Theol. Lect. XLVIII]. Bearing in mind what was said in the preceding, it would seem to be perfectly proper to speak of a condition in connection with the covenant of grace, for (1) the Bible clearly indicates that the entrance upon the covenant life is conditioned on faith, John 3:16, 36; Acts 8:37 (not found in some MSS.); Rom. 10:9; (2) Scripture often threatens covenant children, but these threatenings apply exactly to those who ignore the condition, that is, who refuse to walk in the way of the covenant; and (3) if there were no condition, God only would be bound by the covenant, and there would be no “bond of the covenant” for man (but cf. Ezek. 20:37); and thus the covenant of grace would lose its character as a covenant, for there are two parts in all covenants.”

Good Works as Consequent Conditions in the Covenant of Grace

Order of

Articles 2
Quotes 10+

Articles

1600’s

Younge, Richard – Section 20 in A Short and Sure Way to Grace and Salvation… (London, 1658), pp. 16-17

Younge (fl. 1640–1670) was an English puritan, practical tract writer.

Younge speaks of faith as ‘the condition’ of the covenant, and repentance being a fruit thereof. It appears when he speaks of conditions of keeping God’s commandments, he is speaking of them as consequent conditions of being in God’s Covenant.

2000’s

Fentiman, Travis – ‘Good Works as Required, Consequent Conditions in the Covenant of Grace’ in ‘Introduction’ at ‘The Necessity of Good Works’ (RBO)

Fentiman quotes G. Vos, Dickson, Ball, Chamier, Watson, Turretin, Rutherford and gives a further detailed bibliography on the topic.

Quotes

Order of

Calvin
Chamier
Placeus
Maccovius
Ball
Rutherford
Roberts
Sedgwick
Watson
Hopkins
Mastricht
Colquhoun

John Calvin

Institutes of the Christian Religion trans. Henry Beveridge (1559), bk. 3

ch. 6, sect. 3, p. 255

“…but after showing us that we have degenerated from our true origin, viz., the law of our Creator, adds, that Christ, through whom we have returned to favor with God, is set before us as a model, the image of which our lives should express. What do you require more effectual than this? Nay, what do you require beyond this?

If the Lord adopts us for his sons on the condition that our life be a representation of Christ, the bond of our adoption—then, unless we dedicate and devote ourselves to righteousness, we not only, with the utmost perfidy, revolt from our Creator, but also abjure the Savior Himself.”

ch. 7, sect. 5, p. 265

“But Scripture, to conduct us to this [seeking the good of our neighbor], reminds us, that whatever we obtain from the Lord is granted on the condition of our employing it for the common good of the Church, and that, therefore, the legitimate use of all our gifts is a kind and liberal communication of them with others. There cannot be a surer rule, nor a stronger exhortation to the observance of it, than when we are taught that all the endowments which we possess are divine deposits entrusted to us for the very purpose of being distributed for the good of our neighbour.”

ch. 10, sect. 5, p. 297

“Scripture, moreover, has a, third rule for modifying the use of earthly blessings. We have already adverted to it when considering the offices of charity. For it declares that they have all been given us by the kindness of God, and appointed for our use under the condition of being regarded as trusts, of which one day we must give an account. We must, therefore, administer them as if we constantly heard the words sounding in our ears, ‘Give an account of your stewardship.'”

1600’s

Daniel Chamier

Panstratiae Catholicae, or a Body of the Controversies of Religion Against the Papists (Frankfurt, 1627-1629), vol. 3, Of Faith, bk. 12, ch. 4, sect. 16 trans. by Richard Baxter, Richard Baxter’s Confession of his Faith… (London: 1655), ch. 10, sect. 3, pp. 390-91

“Conditions in contracts or covenant, we observe, are of two kinds, which I think good to distinguish by names, though perhaps less proper: some are precedent, others consequent.

[1] I call those precedent which cause the contract, ex formula, do ut des [‘according to the formula: I give that you may give’]; as when a man sells land for a certain sum of money. So in contracting matrimony, there is a mutual donation of bodies. Such conditions as these do not only, by the defect of them, destroy (or rescind) the contract, but also do constitute (or lay) the foundation of it, and, as I may say, the essence.

[2] But the consequent are added to the precedent as depending on them. They are truly mutual between both parties, but they oblige but one party only; so that because of them the other is bound to do no more (or is no further obliged). As if one, upon the giving or selling of land, do impose an annual pension of money to be distributed to the poor. So daily in contracting marriages, the condition of a dowry is added.

Now such kind of conditions as these are wont to make void the contract by their absence, but yet not to effect the contract; yea, unless the sale were already full and perfect, there would be no yearly pension (or payment) of money; and before this can be, it is requisite that the buyer have not only the right of propriety, but also that he have taken possession of the land; that is, that the seller have performed his part.

Thus the Law of Works exacts the fulfilling of the Law as the antecedent condition, without which not only cannot man have possession of life-eternal, but not so much as right to life-eternal. But in this sense of a condition, the Law of Faith admits not works, but only in the other, that is, that by virtue of the life already given because of faith, works should be necessary, so that he that performs (or exhibits) no works should lose (or fall from) all that right which he had, or seemed to have, by external vocation; though otherwise works are not the cause of giving life.”

Joshua Placeus

‘Theological Theses on the Justification of Man before God’ (1634), p. 9

“XL. Are good works therefore unnecessary for our justification? To become righteous from being guilty and liable to punishment—that is, to receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness—they are not necessary as antecedents. But they are absolutely necessary as consequences.

They are the fruits and ends of justification, from which justification ought not and cannot be separated. For in the New Covenant, God has first promised us the forgiveness of sins, and then sanctification. Christ has been made for us not only righteousness, but also sanctification. Faith embraces both promises, and draws both benefits from the fullness of Christ, into whom it inserts us. Thus, a faith that does not produce good works as its fruits reveals itself not to be true faith at all, but a rotten corpse of faith, which mimics the outward appearance of faith but has no power, movement, or activity. Therefore, in order that we may be declared righteous, and that it may be shown (whether in the court of our conscience or in the final judgment) that God has truly granted us forgiveness of sins, good works are necessary as posterior evidences, as they say. For faith is known by its works, just as a tree is known by its fruits. References: Heb. 10:16; 2 Cor. 1:30; James 1:11″

Maccovius, John

Scholastic Discourse: The Distinctions & Rules of Theology & Philosophy (1644), ch. 12, pp. 227-28

“7. The covenant is either a covenant of works or a covenant of faith.

This distinction coincides with that between the legal and the evangelical covenant. The first included a stipulation of works: ‘Do this and you will live.’ The second included a stipulation of faith: ‘Believe and you will be saved.’

Indeed, in this covenant too works are required, but not primarily, as if man is justified through them; but they are required as a consequence, as a sign of gratitude, as a proof of an unfeigned faith which in this way also edifies the neighbor.”

John Ball

A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace… (London: 1645), ch. 3, ‘Of the Covenant of Grace in General’, pp. 19-20

“Obedience to all God’s commandments is covenanted (Dt. 7:1• & 10, 12; Jer. 7:23; Lev. 19:17-18; Lk. 10:27; Mk. 12:30), not as the cause of life, but as the qualification and effect of faith, and as the way to life. Faith that embraces life is obedient and fruitful in all good works; but in one sort faith is the cause of obedience and good works, and in another of justification and eternal life. These it seeks in the promises of the covenant; those it works and produces, as the cause does the effect.

Samuel Rutherford

A Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist, opening the secrets of Familism & Antinomianism (London, 1648), pt. 2, ch. 37, ‘How Good Works are Necessary’, pp. 37-39

“’Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.’ And lest we should think the commands are all but one only precept of believing, he addeth ‘for without are dogs and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, etc.’ ‘He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me, and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.’

All these evidence to us, that holy walking is a way to heaven, as sowing is to harvest, and that Christ maketh a promise of life eternal to him that doth his commandments: only the question is, in what terms the promise is made to the doer of God’s will, as a doer, or as a believer, whose faith is fruitful, and with child of evangelic doing…
…

…it is true, they [good works] are not the meritorious, the efficient cause or way, nor the formal covenant-condition; but a way they are, as sowing is to harvest, running to the garland, wrestling to the victory.”

Francis Roberts

Mysterium & Medulla Bibliorum, the Mysterie and Marrow of the Bible (London, 1657), book 3, ch. 4, aphorism 2, p. 788

“3. The stream of the Sinai-Covenant runs much upon doing, and perfection of doing… partly to instruct them, that though God intended not their works and obedience as an antecedent condition requisite to their justification; yet He intended them as a consequent condition and qualification in justified persons, as fruits of true faith, and the way towards the attainment of the promises.”

Obadiah Sedgwick

The Bowels of Tender Mercy Sealed in the Everlasting Covenant... (London, 1660), pt. 2, ch. 1, p. 337

“Question: But why is God pleased to promise to give unto his people in Covenant spiritual blessings as well as temporal?

…
…Spiritual blessings are necessary for them in relation unto that eternal life… Heb. 12:13… Lo, here is a necessity of holiness and regeneration for salvation, and they are congruous, and fitting us for salvation, or eternal life… It is meet to enjoy grace before we come to enjoy glory; it is meet to have a conformity to Christ on his cross before we come to have a conformity to Christ in his crown, etc.”

Thomas Watson

Body of Divinity, Question 20, ‘Of the Covenant of Grace’, p. 106 in The Select Works of the Rev. Thomas Watson… (d. 1686; New York, 1855) See also Question 22, ‘Of the Covenant of Works’, p. 90

“But are not works required in the covenant of grace?

Yes. “This is a faithful saying, that those who believe in God, should be careful to maintain good works.” But the covenant of grace does not require works in the same manner as the covenant of works did.

In the first covenant, works were required as the condition of life; in the second covenant, they are required only as the signs of life. In the first covenant, works were required as grounds of salvation; in the new covenant, they are required as evidences of our love to God. In the first covenant, they were required to the justification of our persons; in the new covenant, to the manifestation of our grace.”

Ezekiel Hopkins

The Doctrine of the Two Covenants in Works (Philadelphia, 1863), vol. 2 (d. 1690), p. 209

“And, therefore, I take it for granted, that obedience is required under the Covenant of Grace as strictly as ever it was under the Covenant of Works; and required, not only to show our gratitude and thankfulness, but necessarily and indispensably in order to the obtaining of heaven and eternal life.”

Peter van Mastricht

Theoretical Practical Theology (2nd ed. 1698; RHB), vol. 4, pt. 1, bk. 5, ch. 1, ‘The Covenant of Grace’, sect. XXII, ‘What the condition of the covenant of grace is’, p. 24

“Most broadly understood it [a condition] includes anything that is required in any way for the covenant of grace, whether:

(2) concomitantly, in which manner self-denial (Lk. 9:23; Phil. 3:4–12), the exercise of repentance (Mk. 1:15; Acts 2:38–39), and so forth, can be taken as a condition. Or,

1800’s

John Colquhoun

A Treatise on the Law and the Gospel (Edinburgh, 1819), ch. 12, ‘Of the Nature, Necessity and Desert of Good Works’, section 2, ‘Of the Necessity of Good Works’, p. 327

“None is in the way to heaven but he who, by a life of faith and the practice of those good works which are the fruits of faith, is advancing toward perfection of holiness. It is the order immutably fixed in the everlasting covenant that a man be made holy in heart and in life before he is admitted to see and enjoy God in His holy place on high.

The love and practice of good works, then, in one who has an opportunity of performing them, are necessary as appointed means of disposing or preparing him for the holy enjoyments and employments of the heavenly sanctuary.”

On Good Works being Condtions of Covenanted-Ones in the Covenant of Grace

Quotes

Order of

Ball
Rutherford
Roberts

1600’s

John Ball

A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace (London, 1645), p. 26

“In the Covenant of Nature obedience and works were commanded as the cause of life and justification: in the Covenant of Grace, faith is required as the instrumental cause of remission and salvation, obedience as the qualification of the party justified, and the way leading to everlasting blessedness.”

Samuel Rutherford

A Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist, Opening the Secrets of Familism & Antinomianism (London, 1648), pt. 2, ch. 48, ‘Antinomians hold that the believer cannot sin against God…’, p. 63

“It follows not that they [good works] are con-causes, or joint-causes with Christ, but only conditions; just as a man’s journeying on foot or horse, to a city, or a kingdom to inherit it, is the way, condition, of his entering the city; But it is not his charter, or law-title, or right to enjoy the crown, as his inheritance; any effective influence to the title of the crown of Heaven, I dare not ascribe to any works in us, or to any but to Christ; but undeniably, good works are not so much as conditions of justification, they follow a man justified, but go not before justification; no more than the apple goes before the tree, or the cistern before the fountain; nor are they the conditions of the Covenant of Grace: they are the conditions of covenanted ones, not of the Covenant.” – pp. 62-63

Francis Roberts

Mysterium & Medulla Bibliorum, the Mysterie and Marrow of the Bible (London, 1657), book 3, ch. 4, aphorism 2, p. 788

In Baptist Theology

Historical

On the Late-1600’s English Particular Baptists

Article

ed. Byrne, Tony – ‘John Flavel’s (1630–1691) Reply to Baptist Hyper-Calvinism from Vindiciæ Legis et Fœderis and the Issue of Conditions’ (2008) at Theological Meditations

After the Flavel excerpt (who is for conditions, contra his baptist opponent) is an excerpt from Samuel Renihan, “‘Dolphins in The Woods’: A Critique of Mark Jones and Ted Van Raalte’s Presentation of Particular Baptist Covenant Theology,” Journal of the Institute of Reformed Baptist Studies 2 (2015), pp. 77–82, where Renihan gives many historical quotes of baptists affirming conditions in the Covenant of Grace in some respect.

“Cary now [after some initial interaction with Flavel] seems to move toward Flavel by at least speaking of conditions. He introduces a distinction between procuring pardon and receiving it. Faith is required as a condition for the latter but not the former. If it belonged to the former, the condition would be meritorious, but under the latter term, faith is only a means or instrument. Cary cites [William] Ames’s approval of conditions in the ‘Kingdom of Grace’ as ‘Concomitants or Effects.’”

This may evidence persons who were generally against conditions, yet allowing for that language, in accord with the confessions of that era; and hence even the language of the confessions could likely be acceded to by persons who were against conditions, properly speaking.

After that follows an extended excerpt from Jonathan W. Arnold, “The Reformed Theology of Benjamin Keach,” (PhD diss., Univesity of Oxford, 2009), pp. 163–66, which analyzes Benjamin Keach’s qualified teaching of faith as a condition.

Related Pages

Covenant of Redemption

The Covenant of Grace

The Necessity of Good Works

How Sanctification is Passive & Active

On the Means of Grace

On the Continuation of Justification

On the Justification of Believers at Judgment Day

On a Twofold Justification

Visible Church: Outwardly in the Covenant of Grace

Obstruct Not your Children’s Salvation

On Predestination & the Decrees of God