This paper demonstrates that the covenant of redemption, or pactum salutis, is consistent with classical Trinitarianism. In order to do so, the paper presents four contemporary evangelical theological challenges to the covenant of redemption with respect to what has been called classical trinitarianism. Whereas some, such as Paul Williamson, have challenged the exegetical foundation, and others, such as Jesse Johnson, have defended its exegetical foundations, the theological challenge remains. First, Robert Letham rejects the covenant of redemption in his recent Systematic Theology and The Holy Trinity due to what he perceives as a threat the doctrine poses to classical trinitarianism. The three others considered in this paper may serve as vindication for Letham’s claim. First, some proponents of Eternal Submission (ERAS/ESS/EFS), which Letham would challenge as being a departure from classical trinitarianism, have sometimes incorporated the covenant of redemption as evidence for their position. Second, John C. Peckham has incorporated the pactum salutis in his proposal for multiple wills in the Trinity, which is another point at which Letham would say there is a departure from classical trinitarianism. Third, and finally, David Engelsma wrote a thesis during the advent of social trinitarianism in which he argued that the covenant of redemption is a means of contributing to the growth of the theory. After presenting these positions, this paper will provide a case that, understood within Thomistic and Reformed Orthodox categories, the covenant of redemption is carefully situated so as to account for theological (e.g., decree, theologia-oikonomia, processions-missions) and biblical (e.g., submission texts) concepts without thereby falling into the various social trinitarian positions that concern Letham.