Back to the future...

I don't know about the other guys, but Bill Shoemaker is the furthest to the right, for what it's worth. I used to attend Annapolis EP with him.

I am thankful for you both, David and Tim. Your post reminds me of one of our avowed "Preliminary Principles" (#5): "...there are truths and forms with respect to which men of good character [here I speak of the two of you; others are free to determine whether the phrase describes me] may differ." Based on the public record, I simply differ with your assessment, but in the meantime will certainly endeavor "to exercise mutual forbearance" towards you brothers in this matter.

Grace and Peace to you both.

My dear brothers Tim and David,

I can't go along with your sentiments here. I, as so many others, have in the past profited from Doug Wilson's various ministries. There was a time when I would greatly look forward to each new issue of Agenda/Credenda. It tickled me and edified me to no end. And even now I am going through Reforming Marriage with my fiance, and will continue to recommend it (along w/ the rest of his Family Series) to others regularly.

I even attended Trinity Fest two summers ago with a friend of mine. They sure know how to have good, old-fashioned fun there in Moscow. Great times. And with the community and culture they have cultivated there in Moscow, I can fully understand why people would move there just to be a part of it (as at least a few of Christ Church's parishoners have done). I only spoke to Wilson briefly - just some casual banter, and there is no doubt that he is a gentlemanly, gracious, and fun guy. I didn't speak to him, but Steve Wilkins, one of the more doctrinally disturbing of the Federal Visionaries, seemed the epitome of a southern gentleman to all those he interacted with (and gave some great lectures, too).

After leaving Moscow with such happy memories of banquets, square-dancing, excellent music, friendly Christ Church parishoners, and Bucer's coffee, I am saddened to say that I can no longer support or recommend any of the Wilson/Moscow ministries. This doesn't mean a whole lot coming from a 28 year old aerospace engineer attending a URC in California, but consider that others of more import (and of greater learning and years), such as Pastor Gary L. Johnson, have ended up in the same boat after more than admiring - but partnering - with Wilson's ministry in times past.

This is not because I believe Wilson is not orthodox (that is, relative to the Reformed confessions). He perhaps flubs only a few areas, but could probably be perfectly orthodox if pushed hard enough. His real problem is that he is an enabler and apologist for his friends in the FV camp that are flat-out heterodox in their teachings. So while Wilson isn't charging the hill himself, he is certainly laying down some cover fire for his buddies while they charge the hill. But anyway, most sober FV critics realize that the most problematic and heretical elements of FV come from other leaders in the FV camp.

I couldn't tell you whether or not the average Christ Church member could even tell you what the Federal Vision is. I also couldn't tell you how much FV doctrine and distinctives the average parishoner has absorbed from Wilson's week-to-week preaching. But my guess would be "not very much." (Leithart, I think, would be a different story.) The point is that I wouldn't expect Moscow to have already become a burned-over district just in the past few years because of Wilson's (rather complicated) association with FV. That is, Wilson's ministries and the church may very well thrive in spite of FV, simply because there are a lot of Gospel-believing Calvinists there.

It will probably take FV doctrine a few years yet to "trickle down." If church history tells us anything, doctrinal errors are sort of incremental things, and maybe the horrible dividends will even take a generation or two to surface visibly. Burned-over districts, obviously, don't pop up overnight. And these "revivals" of sorts often do produce inspiring, warm, exhilarating feelings that visitors to Moscow (such as myself) understandably experience (and which this article describes).

As for the children of the Federal Vision, it is surely too early to tell. FV has only been around for 5 years now - and also recall that Wilson was not even Reformed for about half of his ministry to put this in perspective. But if the disproportionate amount of Christ Church members and FV disciples who end up converting to Rome is any indication, it may not portend so well for FV. Dismissing this as merely incidental is sheer foolishness.

And, as an outsider, I cannot comment on the veracity of the various allegations regarding various pastoral abuses that have been swirling around Moscow for some years. I am prepared to believe that they are 100% false, but if even 10% of them happen to be true, then the 2nd to last paragraph of this article ought to fall flat to the readers.

But let's think about the present - FV, in digging its heels into the ground in the face of rebuke from their Reformed brethren, will only continue to ostracize themselves and isolate themselves from the NAPARC churches. Moscow will eventually become a cripplingly insular place to be. FVers will probably leave PCAs, OPCs, and URCs to become concentrated in the safe haven that is the CREC (where most FV leaders have already jumped ship to), which will in so doing marginalize itself from the broader Reformed world. Is this the price that Wilson and other FVers are willing to pay for choosing to relentlessly ride such an idiosyncratic doctrinal hobby horse?

It would be a pity if, some years down the road, the talk about Moscow within the Reformed world would routinely go like this: "Moscow? Oh yeah, great place to go for their fun banquets, dances, and a great classical education. Not so great if you want sound theology. Too bad about all that messy FV business they got themselves into years ago."

Dear David,

"Fiancee?!?" We rejoice with you.

As for Moscow and the F-V, David and I spent time expressing our concerns to men at the conference, and even found some sympathy for those concerns among a couple of the older men. Too, we have always seen a significant degree of wisdom in Doug Wilson's approach to these matters--a wisdom that seems to be lacking among some of the men around him. On this we're agreed.

A few years back in a phone conversation, I expressed to Doug my concern about the dangers of sacramentalism and crossing the Tiber this movement seemed to me to pose. On that count, David and I found our conversation with Doug this past week to be reassuring--at least about Doug, personally. Whether we would have been similarly reassured about other F-V leaders is another matter.

But having said this, I would also add that there was nothing in any of our conversations together, or during the hours of talks Doug gave at the conference, that caused our concerns to grow, while there was much that caused our affection and respect to grow.

Still, you're wise to say that time will tell. For myself, I hope that Doug Wilson will be a wise father, disciplining errors within the F-V movement as he has disciplined so many other errors.

A couple of points.

I think that if all critics of the Federal Vision proceeded in the manner that the Pastors Bayly do that it would be better for all concerned. Pastor D. Bayly is entirely correct that it isn't merely that the right thing be done but that it be done in the right way. God does not need (or want I suspect) His truth defended by Tammany style politics or juvenile baiting. Sober discussion of the points at hand will carry more long term weight.

And to that aspect I would point to the recent discussion at De Regno Christi. While it wasn't perfect it was actually a serious discussion and those who questioned aspects of the FV there (such as D.G. Hart) actually interacted with FV arguments. And I will say that I came away from that discussion with more sympathy for FV critics than I've had to date, not least because of such an approach which allowed more telling points to be made. It also cast more light on positions of certain FV advocates with whom I'd little familiarity to that point but whose approach left room, in my opinion, for very serious questions. An R. Scott Clark approach would have generated much more heat and much less light.

Baylys,

First - yes, Tim, I do have a fiance. You think it could never happen to you, but then it happens, and you don't believe it is actually happening to you. And it is even better than you imagined it would be.

I am overcome by a wave of feeling so undeserving, I can only feel gratitude for God's goodness and, yes, rejoice! And then I can only pray for God's good sanctification in my life.

David B - thank you for your kind and sober words. I certainly don't accuse you of being soft in your stand for orthodoxy. I've been reading Baylyblog long enough to know where you guys are on the issues, and also your zeal for guarding biblical truth - including on these issues. Nor did it cross my mind that you (or anyone else) ought to read my own writings in order to set them straight or get up to speed on these issues (when people would be better served by reading Turretin, Hodge, Berkhof, or Warfield in any case).

But even after considering the points in your comment/response above, I still am not persuaded and cannot share your view of Wilson's ministry. But you are right - it is a matter of trust. Absolutely. I'll leave it at that unless you want to press me for specifics in response to your post.

David G.,

I came over to this thread from a post on Doug Wilson's blog and was glad to see your posts and to hear of your engagement--congratulations and praise God! I enjoyed talking with you at Trinity Fest last year and have carefully followed your input since then on a couple of blogs I read.

It seems to me that debates/discussions on public blogs like this are often not very useful, because people aren't about to change their minds in public. Would you be interested in a private discussion, perhaps by e-mail, about the allegations of heresy (or at least un-orthodoxy) that are being thrown around about Doug Wilson and/or his ecclesiastical buddies?

In case you don't happen to have it any more, my e-mail address is lion_of_God@hotmail.com . Even if you're not interested in any kind of formal e-mail discussion, I'd enjoy hearing from you again just to see how things are going in general.

In Christ,

Jeff