✠ God & Decree · Covenant of Redemption

Explicit-Developed

A distinct eternal covenant between the Father and the Son, fully developed as a third covenant alongside works and grace — the Cocceian-Witsian elaboration.

This is a contested or rejected alternative.

The Westminster baseline on Covenant of Redemption is Implicit-Affirmed. Personas and schools listed below hold this alternative position instead — either because they argued for it at the Assembly (like the Erastians on polity) or because they represent a receiving tradition that departed from the Standards on this point.

Who holds this position

Schools (3)
Scottish Commissioners The Supralapsarians The Marrow Men (1717–1722)
Personas (9)
Alexander Henderson 1583–1646 Samuel Rutherford c. 1600–1661 George Gillespie 1613–1648 Robert Baillie 1602–1662 John Maitland, 2nd Earl of Lauderdale 1616–1682 John Campbell, 1st Earl of Loudoun 1598–1662 John Kennedy, 6th Earl of Cassillis c. 1595–1668 Archibald Johnston of Wariston 1611–1663 Thomas Goodwin 1600–1680

Cruxes on this attribute

The Assembly navigated 1 crux that bear directly on Covenant of Redemption.

The Covenant of Redemption 1645–1647 Is there an eternal covenant between the Father and the Son for the elect?

Other positions on Covenant of Redemption

Implicit-Affirmed WCF The Standards affirm the substance of the pactum salutis — God's choosing of Christ as Mediator (WCF VIII.1) and the covenant of grace made with Christ as the second Adam (LC Q. 31) — without the developed apparatus of Cocceius or Witsius. Rejected Treats the pactum salutis as speculative and not warranted by Scripture — a minority Reformed view.
Cite this position

Study Reformed, “Explicit-Developed” (Position), Westminster Standards Atlas, version 79a5f9880ac1, https://studyreformed.com/atlas/cite/position/god_decree/covenant_of_redemption/explicit_developed/.

Permalink · BibTeX · RIS

Ontology version 79a5f9880ac1 — the state of the Atlas you are reading, so a citation stays checkable when the ontology is revised.