Many years ago CtC posted the following article, claiming that the Reformed understanding of the Adamic arrangement was Pelagian: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/06/pelagian-westminister/. They rightly note that the Pelagian controversy was about more than just the relation of nature and grace post-lapsum, but also concerned the same relation ante-lapsum. My question is how do we skirt the charge of being pelagian without falling into, say, the federal vision error of turning the CoW into a CoG? In what sense can we say that Adam required grace in the garden? In one sense the voluntary act of God's condescension was an act of grace on God's part, but I do not think that goes far enough. It still makes grace, as it were, external to Adam-- a relation or disposition toward man. The pelagians themselves always made grace as something purely external to man. Could we say that Adam in the garden had a kind of grace, i.e., the activity of the Holy Spirit within him, to as it were, elevate his human nature? If the second Adam had the Spirit without measure (Jn. 3:34), is it not fair to infer that Adam himself was a temple of the Holy Spirit and had the Spirit to assist in his task of subduing the world, keeping God's law, and fulfilling the Covenant of Works? I am getting at some of what Ruben was inquiring about in this post: http://www.puritanboard.com/showthread.php/12549-Covenant-of-Works-amp-Ontology.