Over the years I’ve received a few posts from people with experience in the CRE. Some have just left or some have just joined. Not long ago I got a post from a parent who had moved to Moscow (ID) to enroll a child in school only to find out that there was a “federal vision controversy.”
I’m less concerned about the people currently in the CRE, though I’m not indifferent. In this post I’m trying to alert the naive, the uninformed, and the curious who may not be aware of what the CRE is or what it teaches or about the nature of life in at least some of CRE congregations. Do the posts I get represent everyone’s experience in the CRE? No, I’m sure they don’t. I guess that there are probably CRE congregations that are relatively indistinguishable from a run-in-the-mill confessional Reformed congregation.
If you’re thinking about moving to Moscow, ID however, or if you’re thinking about joining a CRE because you’ve just discovered classical education and you’re excited about it (the classical model is exciting), you should be aware that the CRE isn’t just another conservative, evangelical, predestinarian denomination. It’s not a sister to the PCA, URCs, or the OPC or your local conservative bible church. They disagree fundamentally with the NAPARC denominations on things such as covenant theology, justification, and the sacraments. They have identified themselves closely with the Federal Vision theology. If you are just tuning in to this discussion or if you are unaware of it altogether, don’t do anything until you investigate the FV and the situation in Moscow.
Theology isn’t just theory. It always has practical consequences. The FV theology essentially says, “You’re in the covenant by grace (baptism), but it’s up to you to do your part to keep what you’ve been given.” This aberrant covenant theology works itself out in unhappy ways.
Recently I received a post from another refugee from the CRE and with it corroborating testimony. It resonates with other posts that I’ve received about the CRE and FV-influenced congregations generally. Here’s the substance of the letter:
1. Covenant as Savior. Get baptized then stay faithful to the covenant until the end. But who defines the standards of the covenant? I was really confused by this. At one point an elder in a CRE church told me over the phone, during a time where I was full of doubt about my standing in the covenant, that the curses of the covenant were being held out to me. (because of my unbelief) It was comfort like that led me back to the pub.2. Covenant Elitism. Certain people (home-schooled children) are received as more faithful covenantally than those who were converted from unbelieving backgrounds. Many occasions made me feel like God operates on a two tier system in saving us. CRE teaching seems to distort the concept of covenant faithfulness so it’s no longer a result of regeneration but that which earns it, and that ulitamately we are saved by how we were raised.3. Drinking and Christian liberty. I was made to feel like a pietist whenever I didn’t drink. One congregation even had a pub night. It was quite a strange mix of antinomianism and legalism.4. I observed a weird combination of Anglo Catholicism and Puritanism or Reformed and Roman theology. What? Several people involved with the CRE were deep into the writings of Catholic apologists Hellaire Belloc and Ronald Knox. They mix deadly with a dose of Federal Vision.5. Being so broken down through addiction and Federal Vision sophistry I eventually, out of confusion and my own sin, went to Rome! I started attending a Roman Catholic Church three years ago. Federal Vision, followed consistently, always will lead to Rome. (But the Lord saved me and brought me out). Please Pray for me as I turn my back on this folly.
I’ve been told that there are still NAPARC congregations that distribute literature written by Douglas Wilson and other leaders in the CRE. I see Reformed-leaning evangelical blogs quoting Mr Wilson as if he were just another conservative evangelical. These sorts of things give the impression that the FV doctrine is not that important or that cultural concerns trump theological concerns.
If you are a latitudinarian about things like salvation because you think that our cultural condition is so dire that it is impossible to think about things such as justification by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, then this post probably won’t persuade you. If, however, you think the Reformation is still something worth preserving, and if you were under the impression that the CRE is just another branch of the Reformation churches, think again.
Filed under: Covenant, Justification, Pastoral Ministry | Tagged: CRE, doug wilson, federal vision
Well said, Scott. Pastoral and to the point.
Yes, keep up the good work, Scott. Legalism and antinomianism are bed-fellows. It’s nothing to do with Law and Gospel but their standards and their ideas of what the Covenant is. The CRE is an apostate denomination masquerading as orthodox Reformed. Woe unto those who continue hardened in their self-righteousness holding on to the deadly heresy of the Federal Vision …….
Why be wiser than the forefathers? Why not follow in their footsteps? Why not be confessional? At the end of the day, all the mixing and mismash leaves one with the net result of neither here nor there, neither Reformed nor Roman. Reminds me of the crowd over at reformedcatholicism.com ……
Well Said RSC. While I was first told to look towards Doug Wilson when it came to thinking through the issues in the education of my children I could not bring myself to read his work based on his heterodoxy. (As an aside I wonder how long until someone brings up the theonomy canard?)
I know I will get smacked for this, but I can’t help but see another tributary running through all this: the Reformed legalism of certain forms of education. The genius of this legalism is that it is a very common project for all human beings. But if there are plenty of ways to order society in general without any direct draw from the gospel (read: it’s a project in law), there are variety of ways to educate (even covenant) children.
That’s so true Zrim. After all, the Trivium was a product of the Middle Ages, not something handed down from the Bible. Who knows some of the great ways to teach children that may have not even been developed yet!
I agree with Zrim, but I’m a lot more skeptical than Pat about the future of education. The last century has been a disaster. We could and have done a lot worse than teaching the 7 liberal arts.
FWIW, I’m a big fan of classical education. This post should not be taken as a slam at classical education. That said, I have seen a certain zealotry for home-schooling in some quarters that borders on the cultic—and home-schooling is generally a terrific way to go. If the local Christian school is actually committed to education, that’s a great way to go too and, in some cases, public schooling may be appropriate. The point is not to bash this educational method or that but to point out the confusion between cult and culture evident in the way folks relate to educational methods.
“Like a talk-show host, I can’t verify if everything the correspondent claims is true.”
For a minister of the Word to pass along information that cannot be verified as being true does seem to me to be passing on unsubstantiated slanderous gossip and therefore a violation of the ninth commandment.
Rev. Jim Witteveen
Prince George, B.C.
http://www.pgchurch.ca
The dirty (and simple) little secret about education is that all one needs to know is how well is it being done—not who is doing it.
Since I begin with Christian liberty, I don’t begrudge any particular choice anyone makes. But, being at ground zero for CSI here in Little Geneva, I do honestly wonder what most parents actually think they’re getting as they cut those checks. Indeed, one of the unintended advantages to the transformationalist notion that heaven implies earth is that it can make for good education, which is why, in spite of my own skepticism about what everyone thinks is going on (and not going on) in Xian schools, I could cut that check for the sake of getting my kids a good education. But from what I have ever seen, what comes out of any given Catholic, Protestant, private, Montessori, public, home, or charter school really isn’t any appreciably different one from another. I’ll keep my chips for now, thanks.
Rev Witteveen,
I guessed that someone would make this charge. I considered whether posting this fellow’s comments would be a violation of the 9th commandment and decided that it is not. It’s first-hand testimony. This is what this guy says happened to him.
There are a lot of things I cannot personally verify that I believe reasonably to be true. I mentioned the other posts I had like this one (two or three witnesses) and provided other corroborating evidence. Indeed, I’ve had posts about FV influenced congregations outside the CRE. I’ve seen the damage done by the FV in my own federation.
The point of the post is that this email (and others like it) should serve as a warning to the naive and uninitiated about the CRE and FV related congregations. If there are congregations in the CRE who reject the FV, they should leave the CRE and unite with a denomination/federation of true churches.
FWIW, here’s the HC on the ninth commandment:
What is required in the ninth commandment?
Answer: That I bear false witness against no man, nor falsify any man’s words; that I be no backbiter, nor slanderer; that I do not judge, nor join in condemning any man rashly, or unheard; but that I avoid all sorts of lies and deceit, as the proper works of the devil, unless I would bring down upon me the heavy wrath of God; likewise, that in judgment and all other dealings I love the truth, speak it uprightly and confess it; also that I defend and promote, as much as I am able, the honor and good character of my neighbor.
I’m getting spoofs and angry combox posts from CRE/FV types, which I’ve deleted. I’m not sure how profanity and abuse is supposed to change my mind or make me think differently about the CRE.
Once again, I come to a website where I find several posts that share opinions based on what they have heard that a group believes (or a person) from other posts or written opinion pieces instead of asking those they accuse directly and personally what their beliefs or positions are.
Of course you all are getting your information from disgruntled former members of congregations, those who have personal problems or disputes with certain people or those who are so insecure in their own positions that they will attack anyone who does not appear to agree with their positions.
All of those I have spoken to that are familiar with FV or somewhat hold to it (whatever FV really is because it has been defined in so many different ways – usually according to what attack angle is taken) clearly affirm the solas of Scripture and deny works salvation. They would say that the faithful Christian will persevere in good works until the end, but it is God through the work of the Spirit that keeps the true believer faithful. How does this differ from apostolic teaching or the historic confessions? How many times do people have to affirm this without coming under some sort of suspicion?
Most of the attacks regarding the “so called” FV issue were originated by those opposing the practice of weekly and/or paedo-communion and the rest was perpetuated as a smoke screen. Also lumped in with the FV folks is the NT Wright-NPP issue, which is a totally separate debate. Most FV folks I know of have strong disagreement with NPP.
I emplore you brothers to get honest, real and act with clarity and charity, if that were possible (nothing is impossible with God!). Stop throwing out charges of heresy and unfaithfulness unless you actually know what you’re talking about lest God should charge you for being slanderous to your brothers in Christ.
RSC, it is easy to say that you are getting a lot of angry and profane posts
without any proof just for effect in order to keep stirring the pot, so to speak. I certainly hope this is not the case. Therefore, I will be charitable and take you at your word. I suppose that if my rant does not get posted, then I will know what you consider to be angry and/or profane.
Brothers, are we truly, really abiding by Scripture according to the answer given in HC as to the requirements of the ninth commandment? Are we condemning people rashly, not according to what they have professed, but according to what others are professing about them or speculating about their beliefs and motives? Are we rightly and truly upholding our creed “that in judgment and all other dealings I love the truth, speak it uprightly and confess it; also that I defend and promote, as much as I am able, the honor and good character of my neighbor.”
I have not seen this and it grieves me. May God forgive me and us all.
RSC, I know that this was just a spelling error in your post, but when you posted the answer to the requirements of the ninth commandment, your text said the “horror” and good character of my neighbor. I hope this wasn’t a Freudian slip on your part :).
M Allen
CREC Elder
Sir,
You wrote:
“The FV theology essentially says, “You’re in the covenant by grace (baptism), but it’s up to you to do your part to keep what you’ve been given.” This aberrant covenant theology works itself out in unhappy ways.”
Do you distinguish between “election” as the secret things of God, and “Covenant” as the things revealed to us and to our children?
I don’t necessarily separate the two, but distinguishing them does help with the tension of scriptural language. Those whom God elected, Christ died for, and they will be in glory, case closed.
But this is held in tension with the kind of language that is plentiful in the book of Hebrews; “Do not harden your heart” Do not depart from the living God; “be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall ” (like the Jews did);
“He (Christ) became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him”
(Aha! Salvation by works IS in the Bible. I’m kidding) Not to mention Heb 6 & 10. We can’t see the roll of election or the Lamb’s book of life. But we do see works [James 2:14-18] and fruit (Mt 7:19 etc); covenant in other words.
I love the doctrine of election, and I am not offended by your summary of abberant covenant theology above. I love the Spirit inspired tension of covenant and election, and so I press on to retain what was given me; and then thank Him each night for persevering grace which I worked out.
Loving grace,
Mike Ferguson
Rev Witteveen,
Thank you for the charges that I have born false witness against members of the C R E in my five point letter to Dr Clark. To call the painful experiences of how I was abused by a legalistic Church system “as
slanderous gossip” is quite insulting. Who did I personally slander in my five points?
Did I name the elder who cursed me the covenant? Did I name the men that pushed drinking on me? Did I mention the name of the card carrying C R E type who is studying with Gray friars that converted me to a time to the the writings of Belloc and Knox. This man was my best friend and my best man at my wedding. Many of those in the C R E who hurt my understanding of the gospel were very close personally. One was even a close relative. I have no desire to hurt any of them in a private or public manner. I am against the system not the people.
I even did not attack Doug Wilson in my five points. Are all the endless articles and many books that critique Doug Wilson and the Federal Vision
guilty of slander?You must be a busy man bringing charges against much of the reformed world.
As for Dr Clark qualification about about not knowing if all I said was true,Dr Clark was just showing what a gracious man he is.
I was so bothered by your comments and the concept that I would personally fabricate these painful confessions that I personally invite you
e mail me. I have a wealth of reformed Pastors and professional Counsellors who can verify my claims not to mention my own Mother who left the denomiantion with me over similar abuses.
All I was trying to say in my e mail to Dr Clark was that all the Federal Vision actually lived out can look like. I did not even ask or expect this to be posted at first.All I was looking for was yet another Reformed pastor to verify that the abuse that FV ideology lead to great pain and that I was right to leave.
lcorri00@mylangara.bc.ca
MA,
Re-read the post. The five points come from a fellow with experience in the CRE. It’s his experience. It’s what happened to him. It’s what’s happening to others in FV-influenced churches.
Michael,
You seem to have missed the last 8 years. You can catch up here.
There is no question what the FV is. The question is how much damage we’re going to let it do or whether the NAPARC denominations are going to continue to prosecute it in the courts of the church. As I said, my big concern is that we don’t forget what we’ve (the OPC, the URCs, the PCA, the RPCNA, the RCUS, the OCRC—wow, none of these denominations understands the FV?) said about it in our haste to return to the regularly scheduled programming of prosecuting the culture war in the foyers, naves, and narthexes of our churches.
RSC
We both know that NAPARC would never “prosecute it in the courts”, at least not in the light of day. There are many men associated with covenant theology (FV) who would love the opportunity to discuss these issues before unbiased, thinking churchmen in a truly open court setting. As for those who have truly been hurt in some CREC church, it is a sad occurrence indeed. Obviously, we could all name many PCA, OPC, RPCNA, URC, IBS, GERD churches which also had people who were hurt by other people and leadership. Yet, I still wonder if your main concern isn’t really with some of the acceptable minority positions held by the FV, but rather with pride and your view of certain individuals; as you once wrote and warned me of “the Wilson cult. Yes, I said cult. God help your soul.” Deal with the issues, man, not the names or locations.
Dear Abused,
Yes, I do think the CRE is a personality cult. It’s a cult of clever people who’ve discovered (or think they have discovered) some interesting ideas and some quite false ones and have patched them together in a classically American entrepreneurial way to create a new church/school etc.
Yes, there are NAPARC churches who have and continue to abuse people. The CRE gets an occasional post on the HB. NAPARC gets a whole book—coming in October to a bookstore near you. The difference is this: the abuse that happens in the NAPARC churches doesn’t flow from the theology of the NAPARC churches but from the corruption of that theology by fundamentalism, rationalism, or moralism. In the case of FV-influenced churches there is an organic and necessary relation between abuse and the theology of the congregation/federation.
NAPARC won’t prosecute the FV in the light of day? Those are pretty bold words. I wouldn’t presume to know the providence of God ahead of time. We’ll see. There are a couple or three fellows in the PCA who should find themselves in the ecclesiastical dock. I don’t know of anyone currently in the URCs, but if there are any they should face a complaint and action at classis and/or Synod.
There is a process under way in at least one PCA presbytery and I think perhaps in one more than may result in actual discipline. The statements and reports are a good first step but discipline is the real churchly thing to do. I hope it will be done. I expect it will be done if we expect our churches to remain Reformed.
Dr. Clark,
Your above post is absolutely spot-on.
The conversations that I have had with some of the local CRE folk up here in the Pacific NW in which they mix together Doug Wilson, the NRA, covenant faithfulness, and facile Trinitarian theology all-in-one-breath and with a wild look in their eyes, has struck me as really nothing less than a personality cult.
When Doug and his crew decide to step up and do the hard work of earning an actual seminary level education on any number of issues, then maybe I’ll give them a hearing. Until then he’s on the same level for me as Brian McLaren – someone to keep and eye on due to his influence within the church, but not one whose theology or reconstructions of history should be attended to with much seriousness.
–Although, I suppose that even getting a seminary degree won’t be able to keep one out of hot water when one’s name comes up as the subject of a study committee…–
M Allen
I was intimate with FV sympathies for almost ten years. I read lots of Wilson and Leithart and much Credenda. I have been richly blessed by much of their, shall I say, brilliant conclusions about Christendom.
I tried honestly to live by FV principles. Doug Wilson shaped much of my worldview as a Christian and his keen cultural analysis rescued me from a narrow pietism. The colorful and whimsical nature of Mr Wilson himself alone made it hard to leave the movement. I am layman nobody who doesn’t like calling others, especially a great man like Wilson, a heretic. I have met many excellent Christian Gentlemen in the C R E C. My point is FV misled me. I tried to be faithful to the FV covenant, a covenant that has yet to be defined in a clear universal way(at least to me).
Like I said in my earlier post I am not a disgrunted former member who is out to slander and malign the FV movement or its men. My pragmatic motives are so myself and others can gain clarity over what salvation means. My best freind, a Gray friars student, who attends a C R E C church has a love affair with Belloc and R.Knox and says he finds little in FV theology to contradict the writings of men like Belloc who viewed historical Protestantism as heretical. Read enough of these guys and Evanjellyfish as a whole seems misled. It did to me so I went to Rome. I just assume that the reason I didn’t see the difference between FV and Rome is that I am not covenatally enlightened.
Bummer.
A main example in my first letter was that a C R E C elder, who is still in good standing with his Church, told me that the curses of the covenant were being held out to me. I had phoned this elder out of doubt about my salvation and struggled with on going addiction issues. He didn’t say “the curses of the covenant are being held out so I had to repent of my sins and believe in Jesus and all the curses of the covenant that I had broken would fall on him” no he said flatly, without qualification, that I was close to becoming an apostate because of my sin and unbelief. Yet I phoned the elder out of ernest desire to seek the Lord’s favor. Do you not think that those words added to the condemantion I was already feeling? What comfort and assurance were in those words? I am in no way blaming this elder, who otherwise is a kind and generous friend, for my ongoing sinfulness. I am blamimg him for the confusion. I went away from that conversation with years of anguish on how to be Covenantally faithful.
M Allen, As a C R E C elder how would you have given me different Counsel?
Would you have held up the curses of the covenant to a young man despairing that there was no hope for himslef being saved or would you tell him about Sola Fide? Would you tell me that no matter how great my sin and guilt was that through Christ I have the Righteousness that justifies before a Holy God. I pray you would. If I wrongly judged the C R E C by the legalistic folly of one of its elders I am sorry yet being on the inside, I heard alot about Auburn and FV. Wilson clearly said many times that the New Testament, like the OT, had curses on Covenantal disobedience. My understanding now is that Christ has taken those curses on himself and we are cursed only for not believing on his perfect sacrifice on the cross where we recieve the imputation of Christ’s righteousness and he recieves the imputation of our sin. Many in the C R E C may believe this but it wasn’t my experience.
(Thank you Dr Clark for the support and helping me get clarity over the FV)
Dr. Clark, please remember that the standard you use to judge will be used on you. If anonymous works now, it will also work sometime in the future when someone takes aim at you. Bummer, dude.
Gene,
If I had done what FV-influenced congregations/pastors had done to their congregants, I should be disciplined. The scandal is that no one has stood up to say anything about what’s been going on.
I’m not the issue.
The issue is what cults/sects are doing to Christ’s little ones.
ps. It’s been tried.
Excuse me for putting it this directly, but I hope that all of your evidence doesn’t come from anonymous sources. If you’ve found someone willing to sign their name to the charges, I would be greatly relieved. You seem to have been active in the church for some time and I would be surprised if you did not recognize the anonymous attack for what it is. If you do and are willing to forge ahead anyway, then the Law of God is pretty clear. If you don’t know the signs, the perhaps you would consider backing up a step or two before God applies your own standards to you.
PS, there’s nothing worse than being part of someone else’s marketing plan!
Dr. Clark, just for the record, have you ever actaully spoken with Pastors Wilson or Wilkins? Have you asked them any questions about their teaching or actions in their churches? Would you feel that they would be justified in applying your standard to you when the circumstances were reversed?
Sorry about the multiple posts! My daughter is going away to college tomorow morning and I keep getting distracted.
Hi Gene. If you want my name, my shoe size and the color of my eyes then please mail me at lcorr00@mylangara.bc.ca. I will tell all. The reason I wish my name not to be made public is I wish no further humiliation from your wonderful leaders.
If I had honestly thought my lay observations would matter so much and had to be verified I would of sent you each a copy of the many counselling bills I recieved from trying to break free of all the abuse that your lovely system has had. I was not bringing charges against anyone. I was telling my story. I thought you guys like stories.
Maybe If I had given my name and Dr Clark had posted my several witnesses of what I claim you would actually deal with the issues but probably not. You would surely find some other technicality on which to attack Dr Clark.
What has been so frustrating is that because of Dr Clark’s original disclaimer everything I have wrote has been discredited or made to seem irrelevant. That is why my last comment may seem a bit biting. Don’t mean to offend.
I think I better log out for good. If any of you want to if I really exist and what my real history is and that I am not trying to be part of a slander
the FV campaign than mail me. I have some very solid verification of what I have claimed.
God Bless You all,
Luke James Corrigan, Vancouver, Canada
Note: re: the 9th commandment. This commandment says we should not bear FALSE witness. It does not say we should not bear witness.
Vern Crisler
Gilbert, AZ
Luke, I am sorry to hear of your difficult times in the CREC. I will pray that God continues to have mercy on you.
My experiences in the CREC are exactly the opposite of yours and I simply cannot imagine anyone I know in the CREC doing things terribly different than we do here in Houston. I have been around some but have never encountered anything like what you have recounted for us. I am not saying you didn’t experience it, just that I have not.
So, which of our experiences is the real and natural result of FV theology?
God Bless,
Gene
Hi Gene. I am glad to hear that it is all going well for you. Honestly. I do not doubt it. Like I said earlier there is much that Wilson and Co helped me in.
I am glad it is working for you. There is much I miss in the movement. I really hope the movement can modify FV because they have so much important to say on a cultural level. I also have met some really godly men and women in the movement, many have been very gracious.
My earlier post to M Allen is my real experience. I have much documentation to support much of what happened to me. I left out so much. An elder in your Church really told me that when I was in despair. I am glad that you have not run into that. I have also broken relations with the best friend mentioned because of his abrasive attitude about drinking amongst another things.
Take care and sorry for the earlier snarkiness.
In Christ,
Luke
Dear Dr Clark,
You have linked to Foedero Schism, a blog that gives a tremendous amount of false information about Moscow and what is going on here. I am disgusted that you point fellow Christians to a blog that is so full of lies and hate.
You follow in the steps of Pastor Lane Keister and Elder Bob Mattes who will not comply with the basics of Christian brotherhood concerning Mark T and his lies about me and Christ Church.
I provided both of them primary source documents proving that Mark T is lying on his blog about me yet they are unwilling to change their endorsements of that sinful blog. They are unwilling to comply with what is required in your answer concerning the ninth commandment. (22 Aug 0917 post)
Continuing to spread lies because they feed choice morsels to the inmost parts of the soul is not a Godly course of action. I realize that it is much easier to just spread gossip and lies than it is to track down the source and to prove one way or the other the truth of the matter. I realize that it is easy to say that you can’t personally verify things but you think they are true — especially if it helps your cause. I realize that correcting lies about a Christian brother who really is a nobody in church history doesn’t take a front seat in these hot topic debates. But it is still wrong to promote lies.
I tell you with first hand knowledge that the blog you pointed to is full of lies, slander and disinformation.
I recommend that you pull your endorsement of that blog and this thread until you actually find out what is happening. Please e-mail me if you want copies of the source documents I provided proving the lies about me.
Hi Gene. About your last comment “so, which of our experiences is the real and natural result of FV theology?” What is that suposed to mean dear Sir? I could give a lot of names of persons in the the Mormon and The Jehovah Witness Church who could claim very positive experiences with their movements and be shocked that others leave out of authoritarian abuse and false damning doctrine. Would you down play the danger of that Church teaching because many, if the majority in those movements, say they’re experience has been the opppsite? So you really understand FV and I don’t. Please tell me how I should of exerted more covenant faithfulness to overcome addictions and pacify guilt.
You cannot imagine it happening. Well you don’t have to. It did.
I know you are probably in bed, as I should be. I hope you and your family have a wonderful Lord’s day.
Take Care My Friend
I meant to “…say their experience has been the opposite” not they’re.
It’s really time for bed. Goodnight
Dave,
Please send the documentation. I linked to the FS blog because he has provided compelling photographic documentation (PDFs, JPGs, links to newspaper stories, copies of email discussion lists etc). If he has misrepresented something, I have no interest in supporting that. My interest here is the truth, not politics. I was particularly impressed with his documentation of plagiarism, of the slavery scandal, and his refutation of the FV claim that there was no internal FV discussion about forming a movement and attempting to influence the Reformed churches with the FV theology. His reflections on life in Moscow also interest me, especially the attempt by Christ Church to implement on a local level the transformationalist rhetoric/ethics and the reaction by the community. The documentary was also interesting in that regard. I linked to these things because there are a lot of naive evangelicals in our churches and in other congregations who think that the CRE is creating a sort of Nirvana on the Palouse when, it seems, things are little messier than that. Do I believe everything the newspaper tells me? No. I read it for information. I read it knowing that in the daily ebb and flow of information what I’m reading is tentative (or should be taken that way) not definitive.
I also find interesting the reaction I’ve been getting from Federal Visionists (much of which I’ve had to delete because it’s not fit to print in a family blog). People are outraged at me at Luke. If they had any sense they would take Luke’s testimony as an opportunity for self-reflection, repentance, and renewal in grace. I would hope that would the reaction of any sinner redeemed by grace.
Over the years, people have made valid complaints about things at OURC. Now, I’m not saying that we’re without sin and that we haven’t erred. Absolutely we’ve sinned. I’ve made serious mistakes as a member of consistory. I’ve had to confess my sins to people. We have, however, also those complaints seriously and we’ve changed things as a result. We didn’t lash out and attack the person who complained. Were we tempted to lash out? Sure! Like I said, we’re sinful and we’ll remain so until glorification. Because, however, we’re so confident in the powerful and free grace of God we’re at least occasionally given the grace to stop defending ourselves and to admit our sinfulness and repent.
Instead of lashing out at the messenger, this whole episode is another occasion to turn to grace, to say, “You know what, it’s true we are really rotten, self-righteous sinners and we have sinned. God forgive us and please won’t you forgive us too?”
One of the great points of the Reformation is that it freed us from the treadmill/ladder of justification by grace and cooperation with grace. We believe that Christ justified sinners, not the sanctified. We believe that justification is free; indeed, salvation is free! We don’t have to pretend that we “have it all together” any more, because we don’t. That’s why the Christian life is dying to self and living to Christ. Dying to self is about recognizing, admitting, and repenting of sin. If justification, salvation, and the Christian life is based upon our “having it all together” then we can never really admit our sins because that would jeopardize our justification and our salvation and that’s exactly opposite of what Paul taught us and it’s exactly opposite to what Luther rediscovered.
We need an outpouring of the spirit of Luther again. We need to be able to say with Luther, “Who am I, a filthy bag of maggots?” If you can’t or won’t say that, you don’t understand the law and your own sinfulness. If, when you read that, your first reaction is to say, “No I’m not, I’m united to Christ, I’m conformed to Christ, I’m sanctified” then you don’t understand the gospel and you’re still under the law. The gospel is for sinners, not for the righteous. If you’re so “righteous” that you can’t admit your sins any longer, then the gospel is not for you. It’s for those who know their sins and who know how much they need a Savior. That’s the beginning of the Christian life.
Dr Clark,
It is important to realize what nature of publication you are reading. It is more important to point out the writer’s view when recommending a particular media to other readers – especially for those naive Christians you mentioned.
The documentation on Foedero Schism is not compelling. To say otherwise is not being an honest reviewer. It is obvious to the most casual observer that the blog is full of sinful comments and that the documentation and reader comments are carefully placed for effect not for truth. Unfortunately only those who are most opposed to the Federal Vision feel that there is any socially redeeming quality to that ungodly blog.
I don’t care about the Federal Vision as it is debated online. I do care about the sinful repetition of lies that are then used by preachers, theologians and presbyteries as points of contention.
The Moscow community reaction as reported by Mark T is as reliable as the headlines in the National Enquirer. Mark T uses quotes by those who hate God to embellish his falsehoods.
Many of my colleagues read Playboy for the information that it presents each month. They only read it for the stories. Somehow when they talk about an issue, they are more concerned with anatomy than with the articles. And so it is with Foedero Schism. It is unholy and ungodly. It is disinformation. It is designed to destroy rather than to promote a better understanding of scripture and application in our lives.
Where do you want the documents e-mailed?
Dave
DaveGlasebrook@netscape.net
Luke, you are right, i was in bed! We did have a wonderful Lord’s Day and I just got up from my Sabbath Rest.
My point in asking which of us had experienced the real effect of the FVwas to point out that our personal ecxperiences most often do not have a single cause. You had abad experience that you believe to have been the natural result of the theology of those in leadership of your church. Me too. Our experiences are exactly opposite to one another. Furthermore, I can point to hundreds of people whose experience closely resembles mine. You and Dr. Clark can point to your counterexamples.
The simple truth is that life is more complex than this simple approach. While it would be nice if life could be that way it is not. Many of the sources that Dr. Clark is happy to rely upon have an agenda that informs their actions and attitudes that has nothing to do with the FV. He is willing to further their other causes, be it homosexual activism or personal ax-grinding, in order to make a theological point. There has been -as far as I know – no effort to dialog with FV types and learn their story as he did with you.
Should we be content to be part of someone else’s marketing plan? And should be willing to be judged in the same way that we have judged?
God Bless,
Gene
Dave,
there’s a link at http://www.wscal.edu/clark
Dave Glasebrook wrote:
“It is obvious to the most casual observer that the blog is full of sinful comments and that the documentation and reader comments are carefully placed for effect not for truth.”
Haven’t been to that blog myself, but this would differ from some of the stuff put out by Canon press how, exactly?
Hi Gene. Now were blogging on the sabbath. There is probably a group out there that would accuse of us heterodoxy for this.
I have no bone to pick with you. I am glad you can testify of the blessings in the C R E C. I am not aware of all the issues you accuse Dr Clark of. I wrote in originally not to take sides but to share my pain.
The one thing that frustrates me is that my original comments were written off because of Dr Clark’s dislaimer that he couldn’t verify everything I said. (The very nature of my original e mail in no way bore false witness against anyone because I was not naming idividuals and publically accusing them of sin nor was I bringing a public charge against anyone. I was sharing my pain, my sordid history, my confusion, at least I thought I was. Defemation of character was not my goal. That is why Dr Clark posted some of my comments) Then once I established my indentity and invited anyone to e mail me for what eveidence of my C R E C history I am kind of written off as an isolated incident, one among hundreds.
I may be one among hundreds, the only one ever (I know I am not) but still Christ himself, the good shepard leaves the 99 to find the one lost sheep showing that one lost is still one lost. The feeling I get from some of the
comments I have been reading from the FV side, is not a scrap of compassion for my situation, but a rant on injustice and fabrication. Maybe I should start accusing some of those guys of bearing false witness against me for falsely accusing me of falsehood(a mouthful). I do sometimes get a suspicion that SOME in that movement care more about their good name than the suffering of the little ones.
You have been an exception sir
Now go forget me and eat your sabbath dinner
If I am ever in Houston or you in Vancouver how about a Starbucks?
(my marketing plan is simple. Serve Christ and Stay Sober)
God Bless
Luke, thanks! The door is always open here.
You provide an unfortunate illustration of the point I am trying to make. You have a genuine issue, but genuine or not it will be used to club faithful men about the head and shoulders, and this will happen on both sides of this controversy. I am perhaps a bit simplistic, but I beleive those words about having the standard I use used on me. It scares the hell of me and I don’t understand why so many are willing to sidestep the plain words of Jesus.
It would be convenient if Jesus had exempted pagans, apostates and sinners from his standard of justice. Unfortunately that is not so. For you my friend that will apply to those who want to use you to further thier marketing plans. Even more painfully it will apply to those who frustrated you in the first place. In my house we pray every day that we will be forgiven in the same way we forgive. Talk about scary.
God Bless,
Gene
I think you have a fair point. I am not a fan of smear campaigns. This has all turned into to a fiasco. But have I sinned? GENE, I BELIEVE FEDERAL VISION LED ME TO ROME. I may be a big fat stupid moron who is a pawn
of marketing ploys from a sadly bitter dispute between professedly reformed men who are much more smarter than me but I had to get this out. It doesn’t matter how Dr Clark uses this it is not meant as slander.
If it shows up on Federo Schismo or whatever it’s called is not my intention.
My comments are quite tame compared to alot of the stuff out there aimed at these men.
Your issue is not with me. I wanted closure. Take it up with the guys who are marketing me. Your continual pursuit of me kind of insinuates that I am somehow in the wrong, once again deflecting from my pain.
God Bless
Luke Layman
Luke, I am reasonably sure that three responses in 48 hours would not equate to continual pursuit, and I am happy to drop the issue. If you ever get to Houston Starbucks has a double-machiatto-frappe with your name on it, dude!
God Bless,
Gene
AJM, your comments are similar to those posted by Christian brothers on other blogs. “I haven’t read this but . . .” I haven’t talked with or e-mailed Wilson directly, but I heard . . ”
I recommend that you avoid that particular blog. It is unholy and of no redeeming social benefit.
Please don’t just throw mud. For example, if you have a bone to pick with a Canon publication, be specific. Don’t just generalize that Canon puts out bad press. That is a disservice to our Christian calling.
You raised some good points sir, but I am tired also.
Houston sounds great. My wife and I were thinking Hawaii but who knows?
Ever in western Canada you have a downtown Van pad to sleep in. My wife can make us some steak sashimi (cooked).
God Bless,
Luke
[...] 5. Thinking About the Confederation of Reformed Evangelicals? [...]
[...] 5. Thinking About the Confederation of Reformed Evangelicals? [...]
[...] A second evidence that both the NPP and FV qualify as crafty: Has anyone ever read Tom Wright’s outrageous claims about how important his work is to understanding Paul? It’s breath-taking really. If we’re looking for a modern day “super Apostle” Tom’s hubris about the importance his own work in Paul seems a remarkable likeness to Paul’s opponents in Corinth. The FV movement breathes the same spirit of arrogance. The Reformed churches formed ecclesiastical study committees, came to conclusions, reached ecclesiastical decisions and rejected the FV. Did the proponents of the FV ever repent? I know of one former public FV proponent who has publicly repented of his advocacy of the FV (William Hill of covenant radio). As far as I know, the rest of them continue to defy the decisions of the assemblies of the RCUS, the OPC, the PCA, the RPCNA, and the URCs just to name a few. Some have fled the jurisdiction of some of those assemblies to the safe and warm embrace of Doug Wilson’s Confederation of Reformed Evangelical Churches. [...]
[...] pastor and church planter in the Mediterranean region, pointed me today to a troubling blog. The Confederation of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC) is planting congregations in Europe, exporting the FV to Europe, and attempting to recruit [...]