What Others are Writing
Federal Vision David Engelsma
Engelsma is, refreshingly, different. He writes, 'The federal vision is a heresy. It is a stubborn, persistent, deliberate departure from and denial of a cardinal truth of Scripture, as this truth is rightly and authoritatively summarized and systematized in the Reformed creeds. It is the enemy of the Reformation within the gates and therefore the most dangerous enemy of all.'
Not Reformed at All
The Trinity Foundation
Key Theological Points that are Not Reformed Federal Vision CREC Westminster
New Covenant not Salvific X X 0 New Covenant Conditional X X O Objectivity of the Covenant X X O Denies Covenant of Works X X O Baptism places an Infant into the New Covenant X X 0 Salvation Requires Covenant Faithfulness X X 0 Denies Imputed Righteousness of Christ X XO O Faith redefined as Faithfulness X X 0
We often hear proponents and sympathizers of the NPP and FV who are part of confessional Reformed communities say, that while they go beyond the Westminster Standards in what they affirm, they do not contradict the Westminster Standards. But it is evident that the version of covenant and election taught by the NPP and FV is incompatible with the views of the Westminster Standards. In fact, these two approaches to covenant and election are not complementary ways of looking at the biblical data, but irreconcilably contradictory alternative accounts of the biblical data. The 1646 chapter title “God’s eternal decree” emphasizes the unitary and comprehensive nature of God’s divine plan. Thus views which juxtapose “election from the standpoint of the covenant” with the Standard’s decretal view of election, offering this as an alternative and superior way of thinking about (e.g.) the visible church, the sacraments and assurance are not only forsaking the language of the Standards, but undermining its theology. Moreover, to affirm the Standards, and then redefine the terms used in the Standards, is not to affirm the Standards.
Justification by Faith:
Rejection of “Faith Alone”: Federal Vision has been criticized for undermining the traditional Reformed doctrine of justification by faith alone (sola fide). While it affirms the importance of faith, Federal Vision theology often stresses covenant faithfulness (including works) as playing a role in final justification or final salvation.
This conflates justification (a one-time forensic declaration by God) with sanctification (the lifelong process of being made holy), which can lead to a form of legalism.
Twenty errors that are held by one or more advocates of the Federal Vision are listed in the conclusion of the report of the OPC's Committee to Study the Doctrine of Justification:
Election as primarily corporate and eclipsed by covenant.
Seeing covenant as only conditional.
A denial of the covenant of works and of the fact that Adam was in a relationship with God that was legal as well as filial.
A denial of a covenant of grace distinct from the covenant of works.
Historic Reformed theology had affirmed three covenants:
a pre-temporal covenant between the Father and the Son (and implicitly the Holy Spirit) to accomplish the redemption of the elect and to apply it to them;
a covenant of works before the fall;
a covenant of grace after the fall.
In the Confessions, a clear distinction is drawn between faith, which is the alone instrument of justification, and the works that faith produces in the way of sanctification. Though the Confessions, echoing Scriptural teaching (Gal. 5:16), insist that true faith always and necessarily produces good works, they are careful to exclude the works that are the fruits of faith from the instrumentality of faith in justification.95 For example, in the Heidelberg Catechism, it is noted that “good works” are only those works that flow from true faith, are conformed to the standard of the law of God, and are performed in order to glorify God.96 In the Belgic Confession, it is clearly affirmed that faith justifies believers “before [they] do good works; otherwise they could not be good works, any more than the fruit of a tree can be good before the tree itself is good.
CREC, should not be considered Reformed, and certainly not confessional. The excellent reason they are not part of NAPARC (North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council) is that his teaching is not faithful to the gospel.
