Bavinck on the Pactum Salutis

Here’s my proposal for my essay on Herman Bavinck.  Note that the centrality of the pactum salutis is not peculiar only to the 17thC, but finds expression in the thought of Bavinck in the 19thC (it’s basically present in the 16thC onward! Warfield essentially takes the same view of Bavinck concerning the relationship of the pactum salutis to Christology.

If anyone comes across some secondary literature on Bavinck and his Christology or Covenant theology, please let me know. I’ve removed some of the content footnotes because they get tedious.

Introduction

One of the most fascinating developments in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Reformed Dogmatics is the development of the pactum salutis, also known as the eternal covenant of redemption.[1] This pretemporal intratrinitarian covenant provided the soteriological ground for the temporal covenant of grace (foedus gratiae), the context for Christology (i.e. the person and work of Christ as Mediator).

The Covenantal Context

For Herman Bavinck (1854-1921) ‘the doctrine of the covenant is of the greatest importance.’[2] The basis of all temporal covenants (e.g. the covenants of works and grace) is founded on the eternal counsel of the Triune God, and thus the theological term pactum salutis. Soteriology is therefore thoroughly Trinitarian. Bavinck writes,

The work of salvation is an undertaking of the one God in three persons in which all cooperate and each one performs a special task. It is the triune God – Father, Son, and Spirit – who together conceive, determine, carry out, and complete the entire work of salvation. The benefit to the believer is in knowing that the covenant of grace executed and revealed in time and history nevertheless rests on an eternal, unchanging foundation, the counsel of the triune God. The Father is the eternal Father, the Son the eternal Mediator, the Holy Spirit the eternal Paraclete.[3]

Bavinck is aware that the pactum salutis is present in both the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and cites Olevianus, Junius, Gomarus, Witsius, Vitringa, Turretin,[4] Mastricht, and Brakel as those who developed the doctrine either ‘briefly’ or ‘materially.’[5] The locus classicus for the pactum salutis is Zechariah 6:13 (~Alêv’ tc;ä[]w: is translated by the Latin Vulgate as consilium pacis – ‘counsel of peace’). In contrast, Bavinck argues that Zech. 6:13 proves nothing with respect to the pactum salutis, hence Zech. 6:13 is an example of the tendency to ‘scholastic subtlety’ among (some of) the Reformed Orthodox.[6] Even so, Bavinck argues that the pactum salutis is ‘rooted in a scriptural idea.’[7]

The Christological Context

The pactum salutis provides the context for understanding the person and work of Christ in his Mediatorial role. For example, the pactum salutis explains how the eternal Son can as be described as ‘subordinate’ to the Father. Bavinck writes: ‘For as Mediator, the Son is subordinate to the Father, calls him God (Ps. 22:2; Jn. 20:17), is his servant (Isa. 49f.) who has been assigned a task (Isa. 53:10) and who receives a reward (Ps. 2:8) for the obedience accomplished (Matt. 26:42)’. [8] Moreover, the Son’s relation to the Father in the economy of redemption (foedus gratiae) ‘was not first initiated at the time of the incarnation … but occurs in eternity …’[9] Bavinck’s Christology must therefore be understood in the larger context of the pactum salutis, the pretemporal intratrinitarian covenant.

The Trinitarian Context

Soteriology, stemming from the pactum salutis, is a Trinitarian work. As in the creation of humanity, the re-creation of the new humanity, in the context of redemption, represents the work of the Triune God whereby ‘each of the three persons … acts in his own distinct character …. It is the triune God alone, Father, Son, and Spirit, who together conceive, determine, carry out, and complete the entire work of salvation.’[10] God’s re-creating act in time (i.e. the salvation of man) rests upon an ‘eternal, unchanging, foundation;’ namely, the pactum salutis.[11] Therefore, the pactum salutis is used as an argument for the ad intra trinitarian grounding of the ad extra work of salvation.

Trajectory

• Some aspect of Bavinck’s doctrinal system in the Reformed Dogmatics
• Historical context and/or comparison with other theologians

The proposed essay on Bavinck will focus on these two points. Using Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics, and locating him in the broader Reformed interpretive tradition, I will seek to show the dogmatic relationship between the pactum salutis and Christology. Furthermore, both areas of enquiry must be understood within the context of Bavinck’s robust trinitarianism, especially with regards to the soteric role of each Person in the Godhead. Since Christ is ‘the central point of the whole of dogmatics,’ both in his person and work, and since the context in which Christ executes his role as Mediator is founded upon the pactum salutis, the relationship between the two cannot be understated.[12] Richard Muller has suggested that more work needs to be done on the pactum salutis. He also notes that this doctrine has specific reference to the person of Christ. With that in mind, I hope that this essay on Bavinck will help contribute to our understanding of this somewhat neglected, yet important, Reformed Orthodox doctrine.

---

[1] The doctrine is present during the periods of early orthodoxy and high orthodoxy ….

[2] Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. III, 212.

[3] Ibid, 194.

[4] Turretin does not, however, distinguish between the ‘pretemporal covenant of redemption’ and the ‘temporal covenant of grace’ like Bavinck. Rather, Turretin posits the covenant of grace as having both an eternal and temporal administration.

[5] Ibid, 213. Jacob Arminius, who was examined on the pactum salutis at his doctoral defense at Leiden, has been credited with first using the noun pactum. However ….

[6] Bavinck, 213.

[7] Ibid, 214.

[8] Ibid, 214.

[9] Ibid, 214.

[10] Ibid, 215.

[11] Ibid, 215.

[12] Ibid, 235.