The Call of Grace: How the Covenant Illuminates Salvation and Evangelism

Norman Shepherd's book The Call of Grace has aided to the current controversies within the Reformed faith regarding justification. It is provocative to many Reformed, in my opinion, not because it is unbiblical but because it ceases to be a part of any one particular camp. It really is a book that seeks to be both orthodox and ecumenical. It teaches covenant theology from a more rational and corporate perspective, rather than the individualistic and rhetorical perspectives that many teach through today. Norman Shepherd, in the beginning of the book mentions how "there have been long standing differences between adherents of the historic Lutheran and Reformed confessions." He goes on to say that there are significant difference in the doctrine of the law. No problem there, right? Reformed pastors teach the moral law to be valid after conversion, but Lutheran believe in a more "spiritual" law, or a law that is not still mandated by the Old Testament. These types of disagreements have caused many to teach a law-gospel dichotomy; that the law is a type of detour sign that shows us the gospel. The law is said to be part of a "covenant of works" that no man could tackle and then so the detour aspect comes in to play to show "grace" to the recipient. Then, after conversion, depending on your denomination, a type of new law comes in to help guide the Christian. But Norman Shepherd proposes something different. He says that the Abrahamic covenant was a covenant of grace (with conditions of obedience) and the Mosaic covenant was also a covenant of grace (with conditions of obedience). Many Reformed teach that there was a covenant of works with Adam (Westminster Confession mentions this term but does not say it is a "meritorious" covenant). And yet some Reformed even teach, as the dispensationals do, that the Mosaic covenant was yet another covenant of works. This then leads to that law-gospel dichotomy, that the law was completely separate from grace, and that only the new covenant was a covenant of grace. If the covenants of old were covenants of works then, at best, they were covenants of grace disguised as covenants of works. In other words, God would have had to be deceiving the people since, according to Paul, even the OT saints were saved the same way we were (Romans 4). Why would God lie? Or, why would Moses propose a false promise? So Shepherd goes on to say that the OT covenants were full of promise and grace. This then leads to the proposition that Christ did not come to morally earn a covenant of works, as many men teach (what is known as "active obedience"). Shepherd moves on through this little book to teach us that we should view election through covenant rather than viewing covenant through election. He says that when we view covenant through election we attempt to become "as God."(p.83) Please allow me to comment a bit more: Ever since I became a pastor I have believed that we should teach election through covenant. To me it

The Call of Grace is like a cold glass of water on a hot day, oh so refreshing. Norman Shepherd takes his reader to God's word and shows how important the Biblical doctrine of God's covenant is to the proper understanding of many other important Christian teachings. If the doctrines of election and predestination in their relationship to evangelism, personal holiness, and other practical Christian doctrines have left you with more questions then answers then you need to read this book. By it God has breathed a breath of fresh air into the Reformed community.

In this easy to read work, Shepherd explicates the view of the covenant which all Reformed Christians should hold. Shepherd sets forth a clear explanation on why Christians should look at election in terms of covenant rather than the popular belief that one should understand the covenant in terms of election. This book, written on an introductory level, is a useful springboard for discussion on an essential doctrine of the Christian faith--the covenant.

If you are a Christian layman in the Reformed tradition, say, a member of a PCA,OPC,ARP congregation or some other evangelical calvinist denomination, then you know that the word "covenant" is kicked around an awful lot, yet all the books aimed at persuading laymen of Reformed distinctives are either about predestination or infant baptism. Only these latter actually bother to mention the covenant and then only as a means to an end. This is one of the most important books that could be written because Shepherd has given us an easily accessible introduction to the covenant. It is about time! And this is a really good book for those outside the Reformed tradition as well. Anyone interested in the controversy over recent attempts by Evangelicals and Roman Catholics to come to a concensus will want to read this book. Anyone struggling for the first time with questions about God's predestination and human resonsibility will also want this. Also anyone wanting to get past the way Reformed people typically downplay the importance of the church, the sacraments, and God's offer of mercy to all who hear the gospel (because of an unbiblical obsession with predestination, regeneration, and conversion) will find this book a gem. Finally, a note on various naysayers: I don't mind people disagreeing with Shepherd, but the shrillness and extreme language is simply unjustified. Anyone can go buy Bullinger's "On the One and Eternal Covenant of God" translated in _Fountainhead of Federalism: Heinrich Bullinger and the Covenantal Tradition_ by Charles S. McCoy, J. Wayne Baker, Heinrich Bullinger, and see plenty of Reformation precedent for what Shepherd is saying. Indeed, Shepherd appears quite tame in comparison. One can read _The Binding of God_ by Peter Lillback and see how Calvin and Bullinger were offering one consistent covenantal theology. One can read Zacharias Ursinus or Francis Turretin on the Covenant or on salvation and see obvious precedent. Perhaps Shepherd is wrong, but if so, then the entire Reformed Faith was a huge mistake. There is nothing of significant novelty in this book. One can disagree with details of this book, but it is what it claims to be, a helpful introduction to Reformed Covenantal Theology.