Compositians of Covenant Theology (part 3)

In this post these abbreviations are used:
RT = Reformed Theologian or Theolgy
CT = Covenant Thelogian or Theology

An Overview
Thus far we have noted that there was an eternal decree. The Godhead made a plan that included the covenant of works. The first composition then, is the covenant of works, extended to Adam (the federal head), eternal life for complete obedience to the law, and death upon himself and all mankind for disobedience to the law, because all mankind were represented by Adam. Adam failed this test.

The second composition is the covenant of redemption. In eternity past the Godhead pledged (made a covenant) to save the elect through the vicarious death and victorious resurrection of the Son of God. Jesus Christ became the federal head and was given the same test as Adam and He would be rewarded eternal life for Himself and the elect for obedience to the law ... and death for disobedience. Christ did not fail.

The Parties
With this in mind the third composition in the general scheme of Covenant Theology for our consideration is the covenant of grace. This involves the application of the covenant of redemption to the elect. All CTs and RTs are generally agreed that God is the initiator and therefore the first party in the covenant of grace. There is some disparity, however, about the second party. Is it Abraham and his seed, or the elect? I think it is safe to say that most CTs and RTs take it to be with the elect or the elect sinner in Christ.

The Unchanging Nature
In his Systematic Theology, Charles Hodge uses the following heading in his discourse, "Identity of the Covenant under all Dispensations" 1 p. 366. This is crucial in CT: This is the mantra, the repeated theme, the ebb and flow, the warp and woof, the mast and sail, the canvas and the brush, of CT.

All of the covenants of the Bible are aspects of this one eternal covenant of grace.
Since the eternal covenant of Grace is soteriological in its very essence, the biblical covenants are soteriological also. Therefore, the Abrahamic covenant was not merely made with a national entity as it appears in the Bible, but with a continuing “covenant community” which was called Israel in the OT and the church in the NT. The covenants of the OT were not made with physical seed, but spiritual seed. Since this a “continued” covenant community it is therefore proper to speak of the church as Israel and vice versa.

The natural growth rising from the conception of this child is the aversion (and/or hatred) of CTs toward futuristic premillennial systems. There is simply no room under the covenant of grace for covenants with a literal, physical Israel as found in futuristic premillennialism. Can this be doubted? Read the words of Hodge…

The covenant of grace, or plan of salvation, being the same in all its elements from the beginning, it follows, first, in opposition to the Anabaptists, that the people of God before Christ constituted a Church, and that the Church has been one and the same under all dispensations. (Ibid, p. 373)*

This is at the heart of why, for the most part, futuristic premillennialism is rejected by CTs.

The Conditions of the Covenant
The word “condition” makes most RTs a little nervous, so allow me to restate the heading above:
“the means” by which (according to CT) one enters into the covenant relationship
Here it begins to emerge that there is a difference between adults and infants, “The condition of the covenant of grace, so far as adults are concerned, is faith in Christ.” (Ibid. p. 364). A voluntary, open confession of faith, therefore, is the means or requirement for adults to enter this covenant of grace. The issue of children is another matter. We will address children and infants in relationship to this covenant of grace on the next post.

* Hodge here is not speaking of dispensations in the same way dispensationalist do.