As far as Wilson's stance on the Covenant of Works...I was right with many up until a few months ago. I then argued with a man about it (a man who is not FV, btw) and he made a case I couldn't refute...not Biblically, and not logically.
If man was to "merit" anything in the Covenant of Works, then autonomy would have been man's standing before God.
No one is denying that God wasn't condescending in creating man nor that man's dependence upon God for life was none existent. The Covenant that was between Adam and God was binding in and of itself. Do this and Live. Do this and die.
I believe the Covenant of Works is somewhat separate from the Creation even though creation suffered from Adam's breaking of the law. I might be mistaken here. Do this and live is merit based, just like Do this and die is merited also. Just because you couldn't argue a position adequately doesn't mean that it isn't to be understood as truth. I think you would be one of the first ones to acknowledge that.
If you are basing your conclusion on autonomy, I believe you are starting at the wrong place in understanding that the Covenant is based upon man's dependence upon God. I don't think anyone ever denied that that wasn't a true stance. Adam's very breath was given to him by God. In my discussions concerning this topic it matters what one thinks of the prelapsarian understanding of Law and Grace. Most FV and mono-covenantalist advocate a trust and obey scheme and that Adam fell from Grace when he sinned. I don't believe he fell from grace though. He broke the law of the Covenant and merited death. Had he not broken the law he would have merited life.
(Rom 4:4) Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
There is a confusion of grace and law in the mono-covenant scheme. And that renders a false view of the Work of Christ in the Gospel.