Is acknowledging that there are conditions under the Covenant of Grace a denial of the Protestant doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone? R. Scott Clark says yes. In his article available on the WSC website, FOR THOSE JUST TUNING IN: WHAT IS THE FEDERAL VISION?, he states:
The FV affirms only one covenant: a gracious conditional covenant before the fall and a conditional gracious covenant after the fall. The FV generally rejects the pre-temporal covenant. This version of covenant theology has also had support among certain Dutch Reformed theologians in the 20th century (which served a a [sic] background to the current controversy). This re-construction of covenant theology served the FV movement well as it allows them to emphasize grace — who can criticize grace? — and it allowed them to insinuate conditions into the covenant of grace which supported their doctrine of justification through faithfulness (trust, Spirit-wrought sanctity, and cooperation with it in good works).
So according to Clark, “insinuat[ing] conditions into the covenant of grace” constitutes a different “doctrine of justification”. The only problem with this is, Michael Horton, a colleague of Clark’s and fellow FV critic, has himself affirmed that the Covenant of Grace and even justification is conditional. In a Modern Reformation article back in 2004 responding to Rich Lusk, Horton affirms:
Further, all of these challenges ignore the careful way in which Reformed theology has dealt with the obvious conditionality in Scripture, including Paul. We have never said that there are no conditions in the covenant-or even in justification. Rather, we have argued that the condition of justification is faith and the conditions of salvation as a whole process are many: life-long repentance and faith, sanctification, and glorification. But we have emphasized that these conditions are fulfilled by the gifts that come to us through union with Christ. – Michael Horton, Deja vu All Over Again
The FV would certainly agree with Horton here, that these conditions are fulfilled by the gifts that come to us through union in Christ. So if we both acknowledge covenantal conditions under the Covenant of Grace (such acknowledgements constituting a different doctrine of justification according to Clark) and we both acknowledge that God by His grace meets these conditions in us, why is Horton’s view within the realm of orthodoxy, while the FV has to be chased out of the church?
Sola Fidelity 