Why is it important that Reformed Churches
Deal with the Federal Vision?
Many today are of the opinion that too much time and labor is being spent in dealing with the problem of the rise of Federal Vision (FV) theology in Reformed Churches, they point out that the far more popular “Emergent Church” movement is a greater threat and that this should occupy more of our attention.
It is true that the Emergent Church is a problem as well, but in some ways the two problems intersect. Both the FV and the Emergent church assert that they are answers to the crises of the modern day evangelical church, but in both cases the cure will prove to be more fatal than the disease. The FV in particular, as I believe several critics who have interacted with it directly have noted, has no real gospel to offer the lost. Look to your baptism, embrace the objectivity of the covenant, think in terms of Christendom and so on, resonates with certain groups who are already part of the church - and in particular those uncomfortable with what they view as "revivalism," "pietism," "mysticism," and "subjectivism." And it is admittedly much simpler to apply the objective and external "covenant boundary markers" and then tell people to remain faithful to king Jesus, than it is to ask someone if they have ever truly closed with Christ. But the FV message practically assumes that everyone hearing it is in the Covenant already, and seems to have more in common with the kind of message that Jesus confronted during his earthly ministry, rather than the one he commanded be preached in his name.
Admittedly, you might see some FV churches "growing" but I would argue that the vast majority of such growth is due to transfers, particularly from Christian families looking for a "strong family message." In some cases, Christian families will move all the way across the country in order to join with an FV church specifically because that is the message they want to hear.
Ultimately, the practical effect of embracing the FV is to turn the focus of the church inwards (who would seriously argue this is a "reaching the lost" movement?) circle the wagons, and then create increasing nominalism in the church: "Of course, I'm "saved" as you put it; I'm baptized, I'm obedient to the commands of King Jesus, I go to the table along with all the members of my family. If I continue to do so, I have no reason to doubt that I and my kin will stand in the host of the vindicated at the last day." I would argue that subscription to such a formula will inevitably kill any church it takes hold in and is not a faithful rendition of the gospel. Just as an aside, since when is it a good thing to have a theology that keeps us in our comfort zones and never leads us to question our salvation as long as we have our tick boxes appropriately filled? Was Christ ever about the business of lulling the comfortable to sleep in His church? Read WCF 28.2-3, or WLC questions 171-175 if you believe that Presbyterians in good standing are never supposed to examine themselves to determine whether or not they are truly in Christ.
Now I'm sure FV advocates would be happy to hear me say that I see nothing even remotely resembling their theological emphases in the preaching of men like Davies, Whitefield, the Erskines, Rowland, Spurgeon, Lloyd-Jones, and their ilk, but lest we forget, those men were used in the conversion of thousands and perhaps hundreds of thousands of souls and we aren't talking about from Assemblies of God to Presbyterian, we are talking about from lost to saved. In a large measure, the continued existence of orthodox Reformed churches into the 21st century is due to the efforts of men who preached the gospel to the lost. Had they spent the last three centuries preaching "Covenant Nomism" to the saved, we'd have a church every bit as vibrant and outreach oriented as the modern day UCC.
So is this straining at a gnat? I don't think so. It may seem like small beans to many of us, but the impact of dealing with the FV now could have huge dividends for the church in the future and in particular in deciding whether many Reformed denominations will continue to be truly evangelical in years to come.
Older
Top
