Covenant Political Theology: Its Early History and Development

POLITICS REFORMED: THE ANGLO-AMERICAN LEGACY OF COVENANT THEOLOGY. By Glenn A. Moots. First Paperback Edition. Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri Press, 2022. Pp. 240. N. p. For clarification, this book was first published in a hardback edition in 2010 and is only now available in paperback as of 2022. Roughly, the last thirty to forty years have seen a noticeable rise in interest and research in covenant political thought. As far as I can tell, this interest grew out of a related interest in resistance theory in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and, second, a desire to explain the widespread use of covenants and covenant-like documents in the American political environment in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Two things, however, need to be noted. First, covenant theory began in theology as the idea and application of covenant was applied by individual reformers such as Heinrich Bullinger during the mid-1500s. This use of covenant employed the biblical idea of covenant to provide a framework for the doctrines of predestination and salvation more generally. God's dealings with believers throughout biblical history could be explained by examining the various covenants made with His people (Noah, Abraham, etc.). The framework itself might look like a contract, either unilateral or bilateral. Second, covenant political theory, though related to and an ancestor of social contract theory, possesses some distinctive characteristics, particularly its close and enduring connection to religion. Glenn Moots' book, Politics Reformed, is a detailed examination of the idea, structure, and uses of covenant political theory in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, addressing this powerful concept on the Continent, in England and in early colonial America. Other works have addressed political covenant. J. Wayne Baker and Charles McCoy, in Fountainhead of Federalism: Heinrich Bullinger and the Covenantal Tradition (1991), briefly traced the covenant idea to the American Founding Fathers. A recent contribution by William Henreckson, The Immortal Commonwealth, has explored resistance theory's origins, rise, and influence in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and its relation to political covenanting (2019). J. Wayne Baker also has written a work on the origins of the theological covenant idea in Bullinger, with an appendix translating Bullinger's work on the covenant. The premiere scholar of covenantalism in the West, Daniel J. Elazar, published an impressive work of four volumes, entitled collectively The Covenant Tradition in Politics (1996), with each volume covering a part of the historical development and application of the political covenant idea (1980). These and other works addressing political covenanting or the covenant idea, in general, have almost all been published in the last forty to fifty years. Certainly, then, interest has grown in this aspect of political thought. However, mainstream scholarship has still tended to dismiss it as irrelevant or treat political covenenantalism with suspicion. In some cases, the latter attitude is driven by its association with resistance theory, fearing that if this idea were reinvigorated, it might lead to revolutionary ideas—and actions—despite the irony that John Locke himself is seen as a towering figure in the American founding. Glenn Moots has added to the scholarship on covenantalism. His work delves deeply into the origins, historical development, and train of influences, especially political covenantalism (but also ecclesial covenanting), from the Reformation through Great Britain to America. The period covered runs roughly from the careers of John Calvin and Heinrich Bullinger in the mid-sixteenth century to the New England of the later seventeenth century. Moots also uses the first three chapters to establish the important context for the covenanting idea. He discusses the concept of political theology to show that not all political thought is independent of religion, covenanting being the prominent example and that religion continues to exert an important influence on political thinking. The main point of Chapter One is to defend the place of political theology in the face of efforts to marginalize religion. Specifically, Moots emphasizes the historical importance of Reformed theology in political thought. This focus is hardly surprising, given the centrality of covenant theology in the Reformed tradition. But it nevertheless needed to be reiterated as the most fruitful theological tradition in politics. It was something of a mild surprise that some unexpected political thinkers have credited the influence of Reformed political thought, including, for example, Leo Strauss (5). Chapter Two continues and expands on Chapter One. The title is "Defending Political Theology," Moots criticizes the "effort to purge all political thought of theological content" in the modern era and further asserts the impossibility of disentangling the theological elements of political thought from the secular elements (9). Historically, Moots writes—correctly, I think—that "Revealed theology was the only thing that could resurrect an existential God, but because of developments in philosophy beginning in the seventeenth century, it was rejected in educated circles (19). The trend continued, Moots writes, in the nineteenth century and into the twentieth, largely driven by the rise of natural theology, which could metamorphose into atheism and what Eric Voegelin called 'gnosticism'" of a political variety. This quick historical survey of the fate of revealed religion lays the foundation for the heart of the book, whose goal is to show how covenant political theology developed and was transmitted historically and represents a viable alternative to secularized political theory. Chapters Three through Ten undertake this task of historical elucidation. I thought I knew quite a bit about the historical details of covenant political thought, but these chapters provide the most detailed picture of the historical development of covenantalism on the Continent, in England and Scotland, and in America, that I have yet seen. If one has an interest in this type of political theory, the precursor of social contract theory and constitutionalism, as I do, these chapters repay a serious reading. After introducing the obvious origins of the covenant idea in special revelation, Moots jumps forward to where we would expect the origins of covenant theology in the work of Heinrich Bullinger and John Calvin. He first addresses the theological covenant idea and then (Chapter Five) how it was used in the political context. Scholars have recently attempted to trace covenantal thought further back into the Middle Ages, and while the framework can be discerned, it still seems reasonable to begin in the sixteenth century, given its resurgence then and its much more explicit political function.1 Chapter Six carries the story to England and Scotland. Here, Moots traces the gradual split of the Zurich covenantal tradition (Bullinger) from the Genevan (Calvin and Beza) and how these represented the conformist and the Puritan elements, respectively. In turn, though both these views derived ultimately from political covenantalism and associated resistance theory, they disagreed on the extent of church–state relationships. Here, Moots introduces a major innovation in political covenantalism in late-sixteenth-century England. The first posited a covenant of works, beginning in the Garden before the Fall and continuing after the Fall. This covenant was relevant even for the unregenerate. It, therefore, contained implications for political theology. The covenant of works was also predicated on natural law, which governed its content. Though no person could keep it, the covenant foundation could enable a moral law for all, enabling a political order (see 79ff). The second innovation concerned conscience and its place in redemption through "preparation." Though less important for political theology, it nevertheless created space for continued church–state cooperation (81). Chapter Seven builds on the previous chapter and remains focused on Great Britain. The central element here is the justification for evolution based on covenant theology. Moots establishes the context of this seventeenth-century development in the events and ideas leading to and involvement in the English Civil War. One outgrowth of the expanded covenant thought was national covenanting, precipitated by Charles I's controversial Archbishop Laud and his attempted imposition of a new Book of Common Prayer in 1637 (86). The Scottish Solemn League and Covenant (1638) was a political rejection of Charles I's policies (though not yet himself) affirmed by a self-identified Presbyterian religious community. The National Covenant and other influential political works of this period founded a right to rebel, an idea of a limited government, a proto-constitutionalism, and a rejection of divine right rule on the grounds of a biblical idea of covenant that was not only between God and rulers (and people) but also between the people and a ruler with another between God and a ruler (see 86–87). Samuel Rutherford becomes a key figure through his Lex, Rex or the Law and the Prince (1644), which reiterates the "double" covenant idea. One of the issues not much discussed has been the role of covenant political theology in the English Civil War. Political disagreements and religious differences are, of course, extensively researched by scholars but not in the covenant context. However, in Chapter Seven, Moots brings out the underlying role of the covenant in that conflict. Connected to covenant political theology, Moots brings out the millenarian strain among those opposing the king in the Civil War. Presbyterians, based on covenant combined with eschatology, supported resistance and revolution, but not regicide, while the more radical Independent millenarians advocated the king's execution, again based on their understanding of the political covenant (94). Independents also rejected monarchy. In their respective covenant theologies, one sees a growing rift between the Independents and the Presbyterians. Chapter eight addresses the migration of the covenant idea to America in the seventeenth century. As Moots emphasizes, American colonists were covenanting people—church covenants and political covenants in villages, towns, cities, and colonies. It is not so much the differences between the political covenants in Great Britain and the Continent from America, but the prolific nature of covenanting, Moots seems to stress. This was mainly, he argues, because colonists tended to come predominantly from a Reformed tradition. Jonathan Edwards is seen to be one prominent example of covenant political theology. In addition, Moots stresses the resurgence of the covenant idea in the Revolutionary War (111ff). Moots shifts in Chapter nine from a historical account to "situate the Reformed Protestants within the mainstream of political theory" (116) by examining their relationship to natural law and natural rights. Moots argues that natural law was seen as a form of general revelation, alongside but never inconsistent with special revelation. Reformed covenant thinkers, Moots asserts, used standard political theory expressed in natural law/rights theory—not merely special revelation—to argue for resistance to tyrants based on covenant political theology. Moots makes this interesting statement: "They Reformed political theologians may have had some hand in informing the 'Enlightenment' traditions that supposedly grew up entirely ex nihilo in the very countries where Reformed political theology dominated political thinking" (129). He seems to be seeking an alternative parallel source of political ideas about the legitimacy of the ruler, constitutionalism, rights, and rule of law. According to Moots in Chapter Ten, "If divine authority could be fit to conditional terms of rewards and punishments, the civil magistrate could have no better model. Liberty and order were thus complementary" (131). The author argues that covenant political theology resembled later social contract theory in its notions of an "original position" or state of nature, and the consent of the people, but through the will of God (132). Despite disagreements among covenantalists themselves, Moots writes, "It was under the leadership of Reformed Protestants that some of the best innovations of modern politics took root" (133). The legacy included the separation of church and state, "condemnation of tyranny as abuse of a popular trust," the doctrine of resistance, "bounded authority" (132–133, 135), and, according to others, contributions to rights theory, constitutionalism, and the rule of law.2 The covenant idea in politics has lived on. In Chapters Eleven and Twelve, Moots makes the case for the value of covenant political theology. I would add here that, in my estimation, at least some of the negative attitudes toward covenants have been associated with resistance theory. Many Christian political scholars (and most biblical scholars and theologians) hold there is no justification for resistance, relying frequently on Romans 13: 1–7 for support, the same text resistance theorists relied on. The exemplar of this rejection of resistance is the American Revolution. While I sympathize with that interpretation of rejecting revolution, I also do not see covenant as dependent on resistance theory. I believe Moots also holds that position. Covenant political theory can stand on its own. Whatever the reasons for opposition to political covenant, by either Christians or nonreligious people, it is worth a view of what some very prestigious modern political theorists have said. In Chapter Eleven, Moots examines the covenant thought of Eric Voegelin, Daniel Elazar, and David Novak, each of whom positively evaluates its value in modern politics. Finally, in Chapter Twelve, Moots expresses the "importance of preserving the covenant ethos" (See 160–161). This book makes several important contributions to political theory, the history of political thought in the Anglo-American tradition, and the historical origins and development of the covenant idea. In my experience, Moots' work represents the most detailed examination of covenant theology and covenant political theology in a brief period (1500s to 1700s) than any other. That in itself is an impressive effort. What is more, we see the integration and influence of theological and political covenant thought in the Reformation and post-Reformation periods. Covenant was not merely an afterthought but played a dominant role, especially in Reformed areas of Europe, Great Britain, and America. As Moots implies, covenant was an important way to counter divine right to absolute monarchy—no less than from a Christian perspective as well. However, it also proved valuable in addressing the church–state relationship problem, albeit not in as satisfactory ways as we might have wished up to the American Constitution. Most importantly, as I have said above, Moots details a genuinely biblically grounded approach to government that remains even today, at least in some form, in the American political tradition and, to a lesser extent, in the British political tradition. Moreover, I believe Moots is correct in arguing that covenant political theology should be re-examined as a viable approach by political theorists, particularly Christian political thinkers, while avoiding the pitfalls of the church–state problem inherent in the earlier theory. Moots' book solidly grounds the theory in a respectable history and points to a reliable future. This book should be read by historians and political theorists. Despite its exploration at times into fairly arcane historical events and issues, I believe that exploration is extremely valuable and that the book is still quite readable for the scholar and the amateur. To end, Moots' book is not a polemical defense of the "American Way" but is carefully researched and reasoned, with measured conclusions. The covenant political tradition deserves such a respectful re-examination.