The Covenant of Redemption (Part 2)

I am picking up that topic of the Covenant of Redemption after a long hiatus. See the first post to get caught up on the flow of the topic thus far.

Even though Robertson would not hold to what has been historically now called the covenant of redemption, it has become the nomenclature of covenantal theology. So then we must define what exactly the reformed see the covenant of redemption to be and the Scriptural proofs that are used to support such a covenant.
It is expressly noted that the understanding of the covenant of redemption, whether or not we give it covenantal language, is to be considered part of the covenant of grace. What do I mean? Charles Hodge states: “There are in fact two covenants that relate to the salvation of fallen man, the one between God and Christ, the other between God and his people.”[1] The covenant of grace incorporates all of God’s redemptive actions decrees through consummation to redeem His elect. Though Hodge would argue that the covenant of grace and the covenant of redemption should not be confounded, he does state that they are inseparably linked. The covenant of grace is founded on the covenant of redemption. Of the one, Christ is the surety and mediator; of the other He is one of the contracting parties.
Louis Berkhof notes, “Though the covenant of redemption is the eternal basis of the covenant of grace, and as far as sinners are concerned, also its eternal prototype, it was for Christ a covenant of works rather than a covenant of grace.”[2] Notice how Berkhof closely links the covenant of redemption and the covenant of grace.
The Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechisms also seem to imply that the covenant of redemption and the covenant of grace are closely connected as the Shorter Catechism states as an answer to the twentieth question: “God having out his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out the estate of sin and misery, and to bring them into an estate of salvation by a Redeemer.” This most closely intimates what we know as the covenant of grace. And we see here that it is God entering into covenant with His people.
The Larger Catechism, on the other hand, asks in question 31, “With whom was the covenant of grace made?” The answer to this question is “The covenant of grace was made with Christ as the second Adam, and in Him with all the elect as his seed.” This would seem to have in view the covenant of redemption. The covenant is entered into with Christ. This would seem also to disprove what Robertson had stated that the 16th and 17th century confessions did not have in view an inner-Trinitarian covenant, but more will be stated on this objection shortly. I will agree it is not explicit, but it must be implied, especially in light of the answer to the Larger Catechism.
Using the questions and answers for the Larger and Shorter Catechisms as stated above, I lead to the historicity of the teaching of the covenant of redemption. This in answer to Robertson’s objection that the covenant of redemption finds no ground in creeds or confessions as well as any others who would assault the historicity of this teaching.
The Canons of the Synod of Dordt give a clear statement that this understanding of an inner-Trinitarian covenant was something that was taught in the Reformed church creeds and statements. Notice the language that a certain number were appointed to redemption in Christ and Christ was appointed both Mediator and Head
Election is the unchangeable purpose of God, whereby, before the foundation of the world, He has out of mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of His own will, chosen from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault from the primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction, a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ, whom He from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect and the foundation of salvation. This elect number…God has decreed to give to Christ to be saved by Him. (First Head: Article 7).
John Owen speaks in no uncertain terms in the Greater Catechism. Question: By what means did Jesus Christ undertake the office of an eternal priest? Answer: By the decree, ordination, and will of God his Father, whereunto he yielded voluntary obedience; so that concerning this there was a compact and a covenant between them.
[1] Hodge, Systematic Theology Vol. 4, p. 358-9
[2] Berkhof, Systematic Theology. p. 268.