RickyReformed
Puritan Board Freshman
While reading an article denying that the Covenant of Works was gracious, I ran across this footnote:
"The Westminster Standards are a human document and from time to time contradict themselves. E.g. they suggest that the covenant of grace is with the elect in one place (WLC #31) and in another with the visible church (WLC #166)." footnote 2, http://www.upper-register.com/ct_gospel/several_quick.html#note2
Question #31 and answer:
Q31: With whom was the covenant of grace made?
A31: The covenant of grace was made with Christ as the second Adam, and in him with all the elect as his seed.
Question #166 and answer:
Q166: Unto whom is Baptism to be administered?
A166: Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him,[1] but infants descending from parents, either both, or but one of them, professing faith in Christ, and obedience to him, are in that respect within the covenant, and to be baptized.[2]
Did the divines err, or is there a plausible explanation for this apparent discrepancy?
"The Westminster Standards are a human document and from time to time contradict themselves. E.g. they suggest that the covenant of grace is with the elect in one place (WLC #31) and in another with the visible church (WLC #166)." footnote 2, http://www.upper-register.com/ct_gospel/several_quick.html#note2
Question #31 and answer:
Q31: With whom was the covenant of grace made?
A31: The covenant of grace was made with Christ as the second Adam, and in him with all the elect as his seed.
Question #166 and answer:
Q166: Unto whom is Baptism to be administered?
A166: Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him,[1] but infants descending from parents, either both, or but one of them, professing faith in Christ, and obedience to him, are in that respect within the covenant, and to be baptized.[2]
Did the divines err, or is there a plausible explanation for this apparent discrepancy?