There is an increasing amount of agitation and confusion in the church, in presbyteries and in licensure and ordination exams, about whether or not the Mosaic covenant is in some sense a covenant of works, including the doctrinal and theological issues related to this discussion.

Three Ministerial members of Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) Presbytery of the Northwest, which covers the states of Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington, are asking the Presbytery to overture the OPC General Assembly requesting the appointment of a study committee to examine the issue of the Republication of the Covenant of Works in the Mosaic Covenant.

The overture has been drafted by OPC Ministers Rob Van Kooten, pastor of Grace OPC in Oak Harbor, WA; Andrew Elam, pastor of Redeeming Grace OPC in Port Angeles, WA; and Randy Bergquist, pastor of Emmanuel OPC in Kent, WA. Adoption of the overture is scheduled for a vote at the April 2012 meeting of the Presbytery.

Text of the proposed overture:

That the Presbytery of the Northwest overture the 79th General Assembly to establish a study committee to examine certain teachings which assert that the Mosaic covenant is in some sense a republication of the covenant of works. Specifically, we ask the Assembly to examine such viewpoints and formulations which affirm that it is possible for sinners or groups of sinners (even redeemed sinners), after the fall, to perform meritorious works of obedience which may serve as the ground or basis upon which God bestows rewards (even temporal rewards). Further, we ask the General Assembly to study these viewpoints and formulations of the Mosaic Covenant and their related teachings, including their conformity to the system of doctrine taught in the Westminster Standards, and to present a clear statement on these matters for the benefit of the presbyteries and churches of our denomination.

Grounds:
There is an increasing amount of agitation and confusion in the church, in presbyteries and in licensure and ordination exams, about whether or not the Mosaic covenant is in some sense a covenant of works, including the doctrinal and theological issues related to this discussion. Some of the relevant issues which warrant further study and clarification are identified and set forth in the following grounds.

1. COVENANT OF WORKS: Our Standards refer to the covenant of works as the covenant made with Adam upon the condition of perfect, personal, entire, and exact obedience (WCF VII. 2, XIX.1). Certain viewpoints and formulations refer to the Mosaic Covenant as in some sense a republication of the covenant of works which requires something less than perfect, personal, entire and exact obedience. To call the Mosaic covenant a republication of the covenant of works and then say it only demands a less-than-perfect obedience is confusing, and appears to alter the customary meaning and historic definition of the covenant of works.

2. MERIT: The Confession implicitly teaches the biblical truth that only two men, Adam and Jesus Christ, the second Adam, are able in any sense to merit or earn the reward of life, based upon their perfect obedience to God’s law (Gen. 2:17; Rom. 5:12-21; WCF VII.2; VIII.4, 5; XIX. 1). Certain viewpoints and formulations which affirm that the Mosaic covenant is in some sense a republication of the covenant of works seem to redefine the traditional Augustinian and Reformed confessional concept of “merit.” They do this by allowing believers under the Mosaic covenant (as well as other Old Testament figures) the ability to earn the reward of temporal blessing (or life in the promised land), based upon their imperfect obedience to God’s law. Further, these formulations seem to redefine the attribute of divine justice, in extending to God the freedom to reward imperfect, sinful good works on a principle of merit rather than grace. Thus to speak of any type of merit at work within a biblical covenant after the covenant of works with Adam, seems to be contrary to the way that historic Augustinian and Reformed orthodoxy has formulated the concept of merit.

3. GOOD WORKS: Our Standards teach that even the best works of fallen man (even those of true believers) are so defiled, and mixed with so much weakness and imperfection, that they cannot endure the severity of God’s judgment (WCF XVI.5). It is apparent from the teaching of our Confession that the very definition of a good work after the fall entails the need for God’s grace to the exclusion of merit (WCF XVI.3,4). Further, our Larger Catechism explicitly denies that our good works can merit temporal blessings: In the fourth petition, (which is, Give us this day our daily bread,)[we acknowledge], that in Adam, and by our own sin, we have forfeited our right to all the outward blessings of this life, and deserve to be wholly deprived of them by God, and to have them cursed to us in the use of them; and that neither they of themselves are able to sustain us, nor we to merit, or by our own industry to procure them… (WLC 193). Thus the catechism’s exclusion of merit from the temporal arena for sinners seems to be comprehensive of all epochs of redemptive history: all sinners in Adam have forfeited their right to all the outward blessings of this life. Certain viewpoints and formulations of the Mosaic covenant do affirm that Israelites under the covenant at Sinai are able to merit, not heavenly or eternal blessings, but earthly temporal rewards within the promised land, on the basis of their obedience to God’s law. Such teaching appears to redefine the Reformed understanding of what constitutes a good work. It seems to do this by affirming that God is pleased to accept and reward the imperfect works of his people on the principle of merit, which stands in tension with the purely gracious mediation of the Son of God on their behalf (WCF XVI.6).

4. NATURE OR SUBSTANCE OF THE MOSAIC COVENANT: The Westminster Standards teach that the Old Testament era, including the Mosaic covenant, is in substance a Covenant of Grace (WCF VII.4, 5, 6, WLC 101). Certain views and formulations of the Mosaic covenant, while affirming that the Mosaic covenant is connected to or part of the Covenant of Grace, distinguish the Mosaic covenant from the Abrahamic covenant. The former is referred to as a “law covenant”, a “republication of the covenant of works”, or a covenant with a “works principle”; the latter is described as a “promise covenant.” The use of this language is confusing, since it seems to imply that to some degree the nature or substance of the Mosaic covenant differs from the other administrations of the Covenant of Grace (e.g., the Abrahamic covenant).

The authors of the overture have provided additional reading material on the topic, including

The Law is Not of Faith: Essays on Works and Grace in the Mosaic Covenant by Bryan D. Estelle, J. V. Fesko and David Van Drunen, is readily available at Amazon.com as well as other retail outlets online.

REVIEW ARTICLES:

In What Sense? A Review Article by Mark Jones

Reconciling the Two Covenants in the Old Testament: A Review Article by Brian J. Lee

The Mosaic Covenant: a “Republication” of the covenant of Works? A Review Article: The Law Is Not of Faith: Essays on Works and Grace in The Mosaic Covenant by Cornelis P. Venema

Merit or ‘Entitlement’ in Reformed Covenant Theology: A Review by James T. Dennison, Jr., Scott F. Sanborn, Benjamin W. Swinburnson

RELATED ARTICLES:

In Defense of Moses: A Confessional Critique of Kline and Karlberg by D. Patrick Ramsey

Cross-examining Moses’ Defense: An Answer to Ramsey’s Critique of Kline and Karlberg by Brenton C. Ferry

Source