Federal Theology and the ‘National Covenant’: An Elizabethan Presbyterian Case Study

Abstract

Inquiry into puritan “federal” doctrine established decades ago the now standard distinction between the covenant of grace and the national covenant. Perry Miller provided the first extensive analysis of the gracious covenant, and apparently it was he, too, who first found—or emphasized—in puritan sources the idea that “a nation as well as an individual can be in covenant with God.” His basic proposal, that ”the ‘covenant of grace’ … refer[red] to individuals and personal salvation in the life to come, [whereas the national covenant] applied to nations and governed their temporal success in this world,” has become a virtual article of faith in puritanist scholarship, although few recent historians have shared his profound interest in the latter covenant. Indeed, relegation of communal and this-worldly themes to a separate and inevitably secondary category has narrowed dramatically the focus of inquiry. It suffices to note that the three most recent monographs on the subject in English virtually equate “federal theology” with a gracious individualized contract exclusive to the elect (and its antithesis, the “covenant of works”).

Reading a Bible in the Canon: Receptions of Chronicles Through the Ages

“…The conception of England as the true Israel presupposed "a strong, organic connection between self and society. "437 One notable Puritan, Thomas Cartwright (c. 1535-1603), even refused to distinguish between the elect and nonelect, calling the English "a people blessed of the Lord, and beloved of the Lord" and the Church of England an "Israell [sic] of God. "438 The phenomenon of Fast Sermons highlighted the role of national repentance and brought 2 Chr 7.14 to the fore as an important text for the redemption of England.…”