I was recently reading some things on the net discussing the Federal Vision. For those not familiar with this term, in January of 2002, the Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Monroe, Louisiana hosted a conference titled "The FV: An Examination of Reformed Covenantalism" speakers at this conference (John Barach, Steve Schlissel, Steve Wilkins, and Douglas Wilson) highlighted the benefits of a covenantal perspective for issues such as the assurance of salvation and child training. Diagnosing a lack of these emphases in contemporary Reformed theology, the speakers presented their lectures as a healthy theological and pastoral corrective drawn from the wells of Reformed covenant theology.
Recognizing the serious need of the body of Christ and all the ways that the church falls short of properly ministering to the body should not be a surprise to anyone. As the Fair Minstrel eluded to in his last post, which has been a while now.....there is a cultural shift on the horizon and some of Modernity's answers to some of the issues we face need correction. That said, I do not believe that the F.V. folks have it right. Obviously this is a huge subject, but I'd like to comment on one statement, actually two, made by Doug Wilson from "The Auburn Avenue Theology"
"Are we asserting no distinction' between the apostate and the faithful son in the decrees? Absolutely not. But we are saying that when it comes to the covenant, the man who stands and the man who falls are distinguished in the standing and falling." Page 5...
"When a man falls away from the faith, there is clearly a sense in which he was never truly in the faith. But when a man falls away from the faith, in some sense he has to have been in the faith in order to fall away from it." Page 231...
I disagree. This boils down to what you mean by "in covenant" the distinguishment is either you are in the covenant or you are not. The falling away is an evidence that you are not. Not the other way around. Just as works are evidence of true faith in the heart, they are not what justifies, but rather evidence of a justfied person.
I do understand what these folks are reacting against, all the ways the Chruch has failed to properly minister to the people. The over emphasis on "personal salvation" at the expense of the covenant community of believers, but you don't have to redefine orthodox covenant theology to accomplish the task. You don't need to convince people that they are in convenant with God to love them and take care of them. We need to just love and take care of people and in the midst of doing that, share the good news of the gospel with them.
Obviously this is a complicated subject and one that requires much more depth than this contenxt allows. With the rise of the "Post-Modern" culture, the church must address a wide spectrum of issues, but what allows the church to effectively operate is not a constant re-definition of our Systematic Theology, but our unselfish application of the love of Christ working in us, doing the work of the kingdom. Correct theology is very important, but it is a means to and end, not the end itself.
We can treat people with dignity, love, and kindness, much better than we do now and accomplish the task without the convenant confusion that seems to be growing.
