We understand that the Committee recognizes the corporate election of Israel. However, by the very terms of the Committee’s Report, the Committee is making the point that the national election of Israel does not work the same way as the FV “covenantal election.” This is critical. The properties of an individual within a group are not the same as the properties of the group. To say that they are the same is to commit the fallacy of composition. It would be the same as saying that since sodium is a poison, and chlorine is also a poison, that therefore sodium chloride (table salt) should be twice as poisonous. God’s choosing of Israel does not in any way imply automatic saving benefits for every individual within Israel. Not all Israel are of Israel.
The incompatibility of the FV with the fundamentals of the system of doctrine contained in the Standards becomes clear once we recognize that FV writers attribute saving benefits, not just to decretal election, but to covenantal election, even though (as they themselves would be the first to acknowledge), some of the covenantally elect are not decretally elect. Wilkins is very clear on this (see Federal Vision, pp. 58ff; or the Knox Colloquium volume, p. 269, where Wilkins teaches that all the covenantally elect are given “all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places”).
The committee gives a nod to “the corporate election of Israel” citing Question and Answer 101 of the Wesminster Larger Catechism. But that is a false portrayal of what the answer says:
Q. 101. What is the preface to the Ten Commandments?
A. The preface to the Ten Commandments is contained in these words, I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Wherein God manifesteth his sovereignty, as being JEHOVAH, the eternal, immutable, and almighty God; having his being in and of himself, and giving being to all his words and works: and that he is a God in covenant, as with Israel of old, so with all his people; who, as he brought them out of their bondage in Egypt, so he delivereth us from our spiritual thraldom; and that therefore we are bound to take him for our God alone, and to keep all his commandments.
So it isn’t just Israel. It is “us.” The person being catechized is trained by the catechism to identify himself as the company that has been rescued from spiritual slavery. The parallel text in the Shorter Catechism is also interesting.
Q. 44. What doth the preface to the ten commandments teach us?
A. The preface to the ten commandments teacheth us that because God is the Lord, and our God, and redeemer, therefore we are bound to keep all his commandments.
The title of redeemer is only used in three other questions and answers in the catechism. Here they are:
Q. 20. Did God leave all mankind to perish in the estate of sin and misery?
A. God having, out of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace, to deliver them out of the estate of sin and misery, and to bring them into an estate of salvation by a redeemer.Q. 21. Who is the redeemer of God’s elect?
A. The only redeemer of God’s elect is the Lord Jesus Christ, who, being the eternal Son of God, became man, and so was, and continueth to be, God and man in two distinct natures, and one person, forever.Q. 22. How did Christ, being the Son of God, become man?
A. Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to himself a true body and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost in the womb of the virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin.Q. 23. What offices doth Christ execute as our redeemer?
A. Christ, as our redeemer, executeth the offices of a prophet, of a priest, and of a king, both in his estate of humiliation and exaltation.
So there you have it. The Westminster Assembly members “attribute saving benefits, not just to decretal election, but to covenantal election, even though (as they themselves would be the first to acknowledge), some of the covenantally elect are not decretally elect.” They teach all the catechized members to view themselves as the elect having God in Christ as a redeemer. Both in Q&A #23 and in #44 the member of the visible Church is told that he is among God’s chosen people. And the reason for this, elaborated in the Larger Catechism, is found precisely in God’s covenant.
How is naming God as one’s redeemer any less problematic than saying one has “all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places”?
Of course, this is all just wrong. The point is that we are to view election from the point of view of the covenant just like the catechisms teach us. No one is saying that all members of the visible church have saving benefits. That is just absurd. “Saving” I take to mean “bringing to eternal glory.” By definition, those who get saving benefits are brought to final salvation. That is not true of everyone in the visible church. If someone was so unclear, the best that could be said for Humbe Answers is that they are misconstruing intentions. But I don’t believe anyone has been so unclear. I have no idea where these guys get these accusations from. The very fact they are trying to answer questions means I am not the only one who finds their accusations to be incredible.
“God’s choosing of Israel does not in any way imply automatic saving benefits for every individual within Israel.”
First, the fallacy they are after is actually the fallacy of division–saying that what is true of the whole (the nation of Israel) is automatically true of all the parts (every individual)–not composition (that would look like this: every member of Israel is chosen, therefore the whole nation is chosen). That’s kind of a basic mistake.
Second, is depends on what you mean by “saving benefits.” Every individual did in fact receive saving benefits: i.e., each individual was saved from slavery in Egypt and subsequently baptized and in communion with Christ. But not all of them received the fulfillment or completion of those blessings: they fell short of final goal, the promised land (a new Eden). This is all in 1 Cor. 10, and Paul says the same thing applies to us (much as Heb. 6). So, there are two levels of “saving benefits” in both administrations: initial release and covenant union with God (every individual in the covenant community) andinheritance of the New Creation (only the decretally elect, who are the ones who persevere in faithfulness only because of that decretal election). There could also be a third, which would be maintaining possession of the inheritance, but that muddies the waters right now. The basic point is that the Biblical parallel between Israel and the Church supports your point from the catechisms: every individual member of Israel did receive some form of “saving benefits” and Paul makes very clear that the members of the church are in the same position.