| Federal Vision |
Article Index for Federal |
Website Links For Federal |
Information AboutFederal Vision |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT FEDERAL VISION | |
| calvinism | |
| religious controversies | |
|
The Federal Vision (also called '''Auburn Avenue Theology''') is a Reformed Evangelical theological position that focuses on Covenant Theology , trinitarian thinking, the Sacraments of Baptism and Communion , Biblical Theology and typology, justification, and Postmillennialism . The teaching of a group of Federal Vision proponents sparked a controversy in Calvinist , Reformed , and Presbyterian circles in 2002. The ongoing controversy involves several Reformed denominations including the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), the Presbyterian Church In America (PCA), the United Reformed Churches In North America (URCNA), and the Reformed Presbyterian Church In The United States (RPCUS). ORIGINS The Federal Visionists see themselves as heirs to the . They argue that the emphasis on subjective, personal experience popularized by the First and Second Great Awakenings caused a shift in thinking about Conversion and Covenant Theology . While they believe personal conversion is important, in their eyes, the ''emphasis'' on "personal conversion" over covenant membership was a deviation from what the Bible , the Church Fathers , and the Reformers taught, and they seek to return to pre-Awakening theology. Most Federal Visionist leaders still consider themselves to be broadly Evangelical . Their theology is not limited to the work of pre-Awakening writers. There is precedent for their beliefs through the Awakenings and up to the present dayOn baptism, see Rich Lusk, "[http://www.hornes.org/theologia/content/rich_lusk/baptismal_efficacy_the_reformed_tradition_past_present_future.htm Baptismal Efficacy and the Reformed Tradition: Past, Present, and Future]"; on Communion, see Michael J. Pahls, " The Contemplative Shape of Calvin's Eucharistic Thought "; on the impact of the Great Awakenings, see Tommy Lee, " Presbyterians and Revivalism ". The original Reformed concepts of covenant, justification, and conversion were preserved, Federal Visionists argue, through the Dutch Reformed and Old Princeton tradtions. While differing in some areas with the men of Old Princeton, the Federal Visionists' views of the covenant are similar to those of Charles Hodge , A. A. Hodge , B. B. Warfield , and Lyman H. Atwater. More support for their position is claimed to be found in the Dutch Reformed tradition, which preserved much of the thought of the original reformers, and can be found, among others, in the works of Y.E.P. De Jong, Abraham Kuyper , Herman Bavinck , and Klaas Schilder . Kuyper and Bavinck influenced Christian philosopher Cornelius Van Til , who was also raised in the Dutch Reformed tradition. Van Til was an influential Christian thinker of the 20th century, who has influenced contemporary evangelical views on such things as apologetics, political theory and social theory. Van Til particularly influenced R. J. Rushdoony and Greg Bahnsen , who started the Christian Reconstructionist movement. Many of those who are involved in Federal Vision theology began in the Christian Reconstructionist movement until differences in methods and interpretations led to their exodus. Peter Leithart and James B. Jordan are two notable examples. HISTORY AND CONTROVERSY In January and child-rearing from a covenantal perspective. Views expressed at this and subsequent Auburn Avenue conferences would come to be known as Auburn Avenue Theology. In June 2002, a small Presbyterian denomination (the RPCUS) issued a public call for repentance by the four speakers, charging them with "...introducing false Hermeneutic principles; the infusion of Sacerdotalism ; and the redefinition of doctrines...." RPCUS "[http://rpcus.com/content/Resolutions.pdf A Call to Repentance ," June 22, 2002 Theologians identified with the Federal Vision movement include, in addition to the original four conference speakers, James B. Jordan , Peter Leithart , Randy Booth, Mark Horne, Jeffery J. Meyers, Gregg Strawbridge, Rich Lusk, Tim Gallant, and Ralph A. Smith. Among those somewhat sympathetic to the movement is Norman Shepherd . John Frame and Andrew Sandlin are somewhat critical but cautiously supportive of some aspects of the movement. Theologians who oppose Federal Vision theology include Ligon Duncan , Robert Godfrey, David Van Drunen, J.V. Fesko, Joseph Morecraft III, John F. MacArthur , Andrew Webb, Michael Ericson, Matthew McMahon, Joseph Pipa , John Robbins, R. Scott Clark, Brian Schwertley, Morton H. Smith, Guy Waters, E. Calvin Beisner, Cornelis P. Venema, Michael Horton and James R. White . GENERAL BELIEFS The soteriological beliefs of the Federal Visionists are Calvinist , and usually Presbyterian , though there are some Anglicans (Ray Sutton). They believe that the " Five Points Of Calvinism " are true, but that Calvinism should not be limited to these points. The Reformed faith, to them, is much richer than the Five points defined by the Synod Of Dort . They also see themselves broadly evangelical, and say they accept the basic tenets of evangelical thought, though being highly critical of much of it, such as contemporary worship music, Revivalism , and the primacy of subjective conversion experience. Trinity Most Federal Visionists have a highly developed view of the Trinity . They believe the Trinity to be the foundation of all reality. For instance, Doug Jones writes, Attempting to talk about the Trinity is like standing too near Niagara Falls— fascinating but terrifying, clear but deep, life and death uncontained. The Christian Church through millennia has recognized the revelation of the Trinity as the Waterfall of Life, Life personalized by Beauty, Wildness, Loyalty, Nobility, Gift, and Love. The Christian God is not some set of rigid ideas or an impersonal force or a sentimental old man wanting to banish all pain. The Trinity is who we would all naturally long to be connected to, an intriguing, brilliant, playful, frightening, intoxicating God.Douglas Jones, " Spoiled by the Trinity ," ''Credenda/Agenda'', 15(4) Following ,R. J. Rushdoony, ''The One and the Many'' (Thoburn Press, 1968) they claim that the Trinity is the only acceptable solution to the philosophical " One And Many Problem ." Taking their cues from the likes of St. Augustine and St. Athanasius and other recent developments in Trinitarian work, their Trinitarian theology imapcts all areas of their theology, particularly their view of the covenant.Ralph Smith, ''The Eternal Covenant: How the Trinity Reshapes Covenant Theology'' (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2003) Douglas Jones again: Secularism not only lacks an ultimate reality friendly to the play, it can't guarantee the end of the story. In Trinitarian reality, the godhead mysteriously, freely, but certainly controls the paths to the end of history. The Trinity guarantees a comedy rather than a tragedy. Trinitarian history is always a play within a play, an ultimate unseriousness on stage. Like Job, we fight our battles, shape our communities, love our lovers, but the inner battles aren't the ultimate story. They are just the interior play. The broader frame sets the real goal— shaping a people to join the fellowship of the Trinity— but all the inner battles are ultimately unserious, though often heated. Those who take the inner play too seriously begin acting like secularists— legalistic, dominating, humorless. Those who don't take the inner play seriously enough are condemned to boredom.Douglas Jones, " Spoiled by the Trinity ," ''Credenda/Agenda'', 15(4) Biblical Law Most Federal Visionists believe in some form of law-code based upon Scripture, but not many (if any) advocate Biblical Law to the extent of the Christian Reconstructionists . Both Peter Leithart an James B. Jordan have publicly repudiated Theonomy as developed by R. J. Rushdoony , Greg Bahnsen , and Gary North . | ||
| <blockquote>Biblical Theology Is Really An Art Like Other Skills Of This Sort, It Is Not A Matter Of Following Rules (though There Are Certainly Guidelines And Techniques) Rather, It’s Matter Of “practice Makes Perfect” Peter Enns Describes It Well In A Thought-provoking Question: “What If Biblical Interpretation Is Not Guided So Much By Method But By An Intuitive, Spirit-led Engagement Of Scripture With The Anchor Being Not What The Author Intended But By How Christ Gives The OT Its Final Coherence” The Coming Of Christ Led The Apostles To Practice New Patterns Of Exegesis, Centered On Their Conviction That The Eschatological Age Had Been Inaugurated It Is Foolish To Think We Can Get Our Doctrine From The Apostles Without Also Employing Their HermeneuticRich Lusk, " | "http://wwwhornesorg/theologia/content/rich_lusk/the_art_of_biblical_theologyhtmThe" class="copylinks" target="_blank">Art of Biblical Theology "</blockquote> |
|
|