Wedding vows, the Sacraments, and shacking up...

(Tim) If you'll overlook his mention of your scribbler, here is a foundational post by Doug Wilson that opens up the relationship between the Sacraments, marriage vows, and submission. Note the parallel between a man and a woman shacking up and professed believers who reject the Church's authority by neglecting vows of submission to any particular congregation. And of course, Doug's final point must be noted by those who accuse all F-V men of being sacramentalists. Here's one of them--and a rather large one at that--who is no such thing. No such thing at all.

Comments

It isn't very nice to call him "large".

Joseph,

But he looms large in the imagination, doesn't he?

Tim,

I eagerly await your response!

Kamilla

Tim,

This is indeed the issue of our time - much more insidious, damaging and so very much more real than any perceived distortions within the Federal Vision. Just last night I had an hour-and-a-half-long discussion with my 15 year old daughter regarding a recent tangle she had with a fellow student who was a rabid complementarian. My daughter, no theologian but smart as a whip, was distraught that the plain meaning of Scripture had been so outrageously distorted.

Consider this comment my goading to you as well. My daughters (all 5) will someday be looking for men whom they can respect and to whom they will submit; of course my two sons will be looking for Godly women to love and protect. I need more churches (and blogs) broadcasting the truth; as it is the dearth of faithfulness on this issue appears to be making the search for spouses more difficult than ever.

God bless.

I find the analogy itself to be unbiblical and commonly typical of the lack of understanding of what the faith is and what a gathering of Christians is about. Jesus has things to say about family (anybody remember that?), and regarding physical marriage (I'll put it that way) Jesus wasn't.

Fallen man always turns everything into a microcosm of the world, and fallen man has done this with the ideas of church. Churches have become 'family centers' and Christians in these churches have become 'righteous and holy' based on the fact they have families. This is what leads directly to all the man-fearing and respecting of persons one finds in churches.

A Christian *is a stranger* in this world. In this world not of this world. When a church is allowed to become a family center guess how a stranger is received? That's right, Christians are received with suspicion and silently accused of being abnormal and perhaps criminal. Hide the children.

Wilson's analogy is actually repulsive. Read the New Testaments. Read the Gospels. Try to find warrant for this analogy with Jesus' actual Words.

>Churches have become 'family centers' and Christians in these churches have become 'righteous and holy' based on the fact they have families.

I've never witnessed such a remarkable thing. I suspect neither have you.

>When a church is allowed to become a family center guess how a stranger is received? That's right, Christians are received with suspicion and silently accused of being abnormal and perhaps criminal. Hide the children.

This is based on a utterly flawed presupposition but even if it were not why would Christians be received as you indicate?

>Wilson's analogy is actually repulsive.

That's what folks thought when Stephen told them the truth as well.

THe CREC is crawling with sacerdotalists. Doug Wilson is simply not consistent in what he's talking about. Leithart, Horne, Lusk, Meyers, Jordan, Garver and the rest are all avowedly sacerdotal. Read the core text on FV worship by Meyers and you'll see this is the case. Figure out why "covenant renewal worship" is so central to their theology.

>Leithart, Horne, Lusk, Meyers, Jordan, Garver and the rest are all avowedly sacerdotal.

Please point me to the site where these fellows state they have a sacerdotal understanding of the sacraments.

This doesn't mean there aren't problems but the whole sacerdotal thing strikes me as over the top. Unless of course you actually are telling the truth, which seems unlikely, and you can produce quotes in which these fellows avow sacerdotalism.

>I've never witnessed such a remarkable thing. I suspect neither have you.

I doubt fish generally notice water either. I'm not a fish, by the way. I got fished out of the water.

>I doubt fish generally notice water either. I'm not a fish, by the way. I got fished out of the water.

Really? I was single till I was 40 so by your reckoning I must have been a fish out of water.

>Really? I was single till I was 40 so by your reckoning I must have been a fish out of water.

I don't believe you're as shallow as to think the subject is 'being single' or not. If you are, fine, then you just have some developing of understanding to do.

>I don't believe you're as shallow as to think the subject is 'being single' or not.

Given your lack of specificity it could be about sour cream and onion potato chips as long as you have a family.

What is it about man-fearing and being a respecter of persons and making a gathering of Christian into a more worldly gathering than one finds in the world itself that you don't grasp? Everything, apparently. The fish doesn't know it's in water.

I recall you're an FVist. You can't stop responding to me. I don't play games and waste time and effort with FV fools. Go recruit innocents into your Romanist-training-wheels cult.

>What is it about man-fearing and being a respecter of persons and making a gathering of Christian into a more worldly gathering than one finds in the world itself that you don't grasp?

Again you manage to evade actually connecting your bitterness to the reality of the church.

>I recall you're an FVist. You can't stop responding to me. I don't play games and waste time and effort with FV fools. Go recruit innocents into your Romanist-training-wheels cult.

You apparently don't recall things all that well either.

BTW "Christian Trace" we can't recall anything about you as you are unwilling to attach your name to your opinions.

The breakdown of the family, and the natural patterns God has established for His creation are important issues for our time.

The confusion of, at best, and denial of, at worst, the gospel (justification by faith in Christ's righteousness alone) by 'federal vision' is an important issue for our time.

We ought not countenance either in the household of faith, nor overlook one for the other. Both are important.

>We ought not countenance either in the household of faith, nor overlook one for the other. Both are important.

And yet the PCA goes hammer and tongs over the more obscure of the two as the rebellion against God's sexual order is overt and FV problems are considerably less clear cut.

Add new comment