Westminster Larger Catechism # 32
Commentary by Dr. Chuck Baynard
Q32. How is the grace of God manifested in the second covenant?
Answer: The grace of God is manifested in the second covenant, in that he freely
provideth and offerth to sinners a Mediator, and life and salvation by him, and requiring
faith as the condition to interest them in him, promiseth and giveth his HOLY Spirit to
all his elect, to work in them that faith, with all other saving graces, and to enable
them unto all holy obedience, as the evidence of the truth of their faith and thankfulness
to God, and as the way he hath appointed them to salvation.
References: Gal. 3:15; Isa. 42:6.1; John 6:27; 1 John 5:11-12; John 3:16; John 1:12;
Prov. 1:23; 2 Cor. 4:13; Gal. 5:22-23; Ezek. 36:27; James 2:18,22; 2 Cor. 5:14-15; Eph.
2:18.
This question and the particular wording of the statement is unique to the Larger
Catechism. The Shorter Catechism in questions 20-21 touch on the covenant of grace and
redemption by Christ and then move to the person and works of Christ. The Confession in
VII.3 has almost the exact wording of LC 32, and as should be is a fuller presentation of
the covenant of grace, yet we find certain words if not lines of thought in the Larger
that the rest of the standards do not bring further illumination to. For example the words
"saving graces" are not found in either of the other documents. Neither are they
to be found in many systematic theologies in this exact wording and context. They speak of
common and special grace, but not saving graces; efficacious calling and election, but do
not deal with it on this level and in these terms.
It is interesting to note the care the Divines took at this point to insure they
didn’t over step their bounds while dealing with grace and in all three took care to
use the word "elect" as those to whom these saving graces are applied. The
Larger being the first work may explain why it has these slight differences in wording,
not content; the Divines seeing the thin ice of universalism that can be slipped into so
easily when we deal with God’s grace, chose different and more precise wording in the
later documents. As noted earlier in several places, the doctrine of election is to be
handled with care, and taught with love, for few will understand and fewer still accept
the teaching. This in no way invalidates the doctrine, but again as Paul warned, proceed
with caution. So as the third petal once more raises its face to the light of God’s
word, remember also Paul’s other words, ". . . speaking the truth in love . .
." This is meat all are not ready to partake of, and not an essential to their
salvation, but rather to their growth in spirit and obedience to God.
One thought keeps rising to the surface as I try and reduce volumes of works written
over the ages into a concise statement in these pages. Again and again I come across
"graces" as a plural. I am not positive I know where the Divines and others are
coming from for I see "grace" alone as a singular with God, thus God’s
grace. While it is true there are manifold applications of this grace, I find grace in God
at its perfection and not a multiple grace, but the way the finite mind of man attempts to
deal with the infinite mind of God in whom all things exist in perfection and unity. Thus
I cannot have portions or parts of God separate from the whole which is perfection. That
is, where grace is present, so is judgment, where love so is hate, where revelation so
those things that belong only to God. While it is not a heresy as dividing the trinity has
been through the ages, I think we might wander into uncharted waters by not understanding
that the fullness of God and the Godhead for that matter exist in all places at all times.
As we develop this, do not forget that we must understand everything within its
relationship to the covenant. This by the way is what covenant theology means, that is
that God’s revelation of Himself has always been in relationship to this covenant
with Christ for the redemption of the elect. Not a separate and distinct theory about
covenants, but how that covenant flavors and is used as the hermeneutical tool for
understanding all of Scripture. It is within this concept then of a distinct covenant made
with a distinct person for a singular purpose we see the truth of the Reformed TULIP truly
blossom. When we can grasp that God from the beginning made a covenant with the Son to
redeem some of mankind, nothing other than the TULIP fits the Bible revelation of
God’s plan of redemption.
While most denominations pay lip service to the covenant, the development of the whole
of their theology around the covenant belongs to only two groups. The Jews of the OT made
much of their position within the covenant and wrongly took to themselves prerogatives of
God, to the point they denied their Messiah because He didn’t fit their world view
when He did come. The second is the Reformed (Presbyterian) church, which has been labeled
"frozen chosen" by some in a light hearted way because of this, " I am
chosen in the covenant theory," coupled with the God foreordained all things of
predestination, both hall marks of the Reformed faith. It is sad that over the ages many
have entered into the error of the Jews and allowed complacency to creep in because of the
great comfort and assurance that belong to the elect through right understanding of our
place within the covenant family of God.
The opposite should be the affect of right understanding. It is only with the sureness
of the understanding brought by this covenant, kept for us by the Son of God that allows
of mere mortals to begin to approach the "sacrifice of self as living sacrifices to
God" that being His child demands. Christ in more than one place explains that if we
love Him we will obey His commands. His commandment is not one of entering into our rest
yet, but of running the race set before us that we might be deserving of this rest when
our day to stand before Christ arrives. Careful I said nothing about salvation here, but
of rest which is part of that heavenly reward we lay up for ourselves, for we are judged
by the work we have done. Becoming complacent and resting on the covenant then, produces
no work to be judged or rewarded. The opposite of this apathy that has often beset the
Reformed church is an overly evangelical approach where the confines of the covenant are
tossed aside as the saving grace of God through Jesus Christ is offered, less sound
doctrine and to all comers with no thought for the truth of the TULIP, nor any other
consistent theology."Let us be about God’s work of redeeming the world becomes
the rallying cry." Between the two, lies a solid ground established by Scripture of
lovingly sharing God’s word of truth about salvation in Christ with all, knowing the
result is not of ourselves but the work of the Holy Spirit as He blows where He may, but I
submit to you never outside the boundary of the covenant God made with Christ before the
foundation of the earth.
We again could enter into a discussion of the supra/infra here, but that isn’t
required to understand that covenant theology is biblical theology and God’s chosen
way of revealing Himself. That is beyond the intent of this present work and I will let it
lie for sharper minds and other forums. Here once more I see the fullness of the TULIP so
clearly that also once more, I ask, how can there be any who claim to believe portions of
this doctrine, yet reject others? Such are not consistent in their theology and need to
return to the beginning and God’s opening words of His revealed will in Genesis. The
Reformed TULIP is thus "covenant theology" and I would go so far as to claim
that theology outside this view of the covenant is no theology at all.
Dr. Chuck Baynard -- December 1997
Observer Home Page
1st EPC Home Page
