The Federal Vision: Modern Day Tractarianism

From time to time in the history of the church, movements have sprung up which have attempted to shift the theology of a denomination in a direction that appears to be at odds with the historic confessional positions of that church. One such example was the mid-nineteenth century Tractarian Movement, which attempted to move the Anglican Church in an explicitly liturgical or "high church" direction and which advocated a view of the sacraments which accorded them the kind of ex opere operato efficacy that generally only Roman Catholics felt comfortable with. This movement got its name from the fact that its advocates promulgated their views through ninety or so widely circulated and read tracts. While many individual churches and ministers became followers of the movement, it ultimately failed in its aims due to fierce resistance from within the church to what many regarded as the movement's "Romanizing" tendencies. A charge that was given added credibility by the fact that the Tractarian Movement's most famous theologian, John Newman, did eventually leave the Anglican Church to become a Roman Catholic Cardinal.

Those familiar with the theological discussions in the Reformed World will no doubt be aware that lately another attempt at a theological paradigm shift, the so-called "New Perspectives on Paul," have been creating quite a stir in Reformed circles. Many Reformed ministers and layman have already become strong advocates of this new system of theology, which is spread via conferences, a few influential authors, and the rapidly growing "blogosphere." Indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to say that Web logs, or "blogs" as they are more commonly called, have become the tracts of the 21^st century.

It would be impossible to discuss in detail all the facets of the New Perspectives on Paul and the other related and equally controversial movements sometimes called Federal Vision or Auburn Avenue theology (after the Auburn Avenue Pastors conference where this theology has been strongly advocated) and Shepherdism (after Norman Shepherd, who was dismissed from his position as a Professor at Westminster Theological Seminary in the 1980s in a storm of controversy over his teachings on Justification.) But all of them do have certain common features.

For instance all of these theological systems redefine Justification in a way that is markedly different from the classic Reformation doctrine of Sola Fide, or Justification by Faith Alone, which advocates of the New Perspectives dismiss as a “Lutheran misunderstanding” of the teaching of Paul. All of them have a strong emphasis on the efficacy of the Sacraments, with many of the advocates of these systems openly embracing paedocommunion and a view of baptism that makes it a regenerating ordinance. Additionally, all of these systems have a strong emphasis on the Covenant, often asserting that final salvation has more to do with continuing membership in the covenant community than a personal salvation experience (which experience is frequently dismissed as a result of the supposedly harmful influence of revivalism.) The emphasis in all of these new paradigms is thus shifted from the classic evangelical question "Are You Saved?" to "Are you in the Covenant?" which all of these systems maintain is initially the result of baptism and which most assert is maintained by obedience or faithfulness. Southern Presbyterian theologians in particular have come in for the most negative criticism by these systems, with men like Thornwell and Dabney often being labeled as "anti-sacramentarian" or even "baptistic."

Predictably, despite their claim to be a more authentic and broad vision of the Reformed faith, resistance to these new systems has been growing in the PCA and the OPC. This has come after many concerted efforts to dialogue with proponents of these new theological paradigms. For instance, the 2003 Auburn Avenue Pastors conference included opponents of the Federal Vision theology who explained at length why they felt that this new paradigm was not compatible with Westminster Calvinism. Also in 2003, PCA News (which has since become ByFaith) sponsored a discussion of the New Perspective that featured strongly negative reviews of the movement by RTS Professors Douglas Kelly and Ligon Duncan. This was followed up by a Colloquium in 2004 at Knox Seminary in which the pros and cons of Federal Vision theology were debated at length. Also in 2004 Westminster Theological Seminary in California held a conference in which her faculty strongly condemned these new paradigms and affirmed the absolute commitment of WTS-West to the historic doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone. Even the 2004 Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology (PCRT) sponsored by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals featured seminars by Sinclair Ferguson and Rick Phillips that were extremely critical of these New Perspectives. Also of note in this dialogue was PCA minister Dr. Guy Waters' recent book, Justification and the New Perspectives on Paul (P&R, 2004) which offered an in-depth analysis and critique of these systems and concluded that the trajectory of these systems is definitely towards Roman Catholicism and away from the Protestant Reformation. Waters' soon to be released follow-up to that work: “The Federal Vision and Covenant Theology: A Comparative Analysis” (P&R 2006) will provide further evidence that historic Reformed theology and the theology of the Federal Vision are fundamentally incompatible. Dr. Waters also delivered an excellent lecture on the Federal Vision in April of last year, the audio of which is available via the link above.

Despite these efforts, the active promulgation of the New Perspective on Paul and Federal Vision within the PCA has continued, with the 2005 Auburn Avenue Pastor's Conference in Monroe, LA featuring perhaps the New Perspective on Paul's most widely known and popular proponent, Anglican Bishop N.T. Wright. Auburn Avenue PCA has also published The Federal Vision, a multi-author work defending Federal Vision theology.

Since private efforts by friends and associates to persuade advocates of the Federal Vision and New Perspectives on Paul to recant or resign from the PCA seem to have been largely fruitless, public efforts are being made to halt the promulgation of these theologies via the courts of the church. In February of 2005, Mississippi Valley Presbytery (MVP) completed its "New Perspectives" study committee report which was unanimously received by the Presbytery

http://tinyurl.com/d2zhk

The report, which condemned these theologies, stated the position of MVP on these theologies in no uncertain terms:

"We do believe that many of the positions being advocated by proponents of the NPP, NTW, NS, and AAT/FV are confused and confusing, are unbiblical, are contra-confessional, and are (as Edwards put it) "of a pernicious and fatal tendency." As such, we are ready to declare some of these distinctive teachings to be outside the bounds of acceptable diversity in this presbytery, and we trust also, in the PCA. Among these are their specific departures from our Confession's presentation of the Bible's teaching on election, covenant membership, individual regeneration, sola fide, justification, imputation, and perseverance. We believe our Confession to be more faithful to the Scriptures than are these new formulations."

It was also clear from the MVP report that candidates for ordination in, or transfer into, MVP who held to these new theological paradigms would not be approved.

Additionally, an OPC Committee set up two years ago to study the doctrine of Justification and these new theologies has brought a report sharply critical of both the NPP and the FV, citing both as “out of accord with Scripture and our doctrinal standards.” This report will be before the OPC general assembly this month, godwilling it will be adopted.