Five Years Later

After 5 years, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) has finally announced a denominational position on the “New Perspective on Paul” (NPP) and its subsidiary, the "Federal Vision/Auburn Avenue Theology " (FV). I commend the church for taking a definite stand on this, and I believe that the OPC’s decision to side with the Westminster Standards and the traditional Protestant reading of Paul, rather than with the latest theological trend, is a judicious one. I wonder just how ecclesially helpful this stance will be, though, coming as it does some years after the outbreak of a fairly serious controversy in conservative Presbyterian circles. It appears to me that most people affected in any way by the FV dispute made up their minds years ago as to what they thought of it. This new effort would seem rather to open old wounds than to heal them.

Furthermore, although I am encouraged by the denomination’s stand, which was announced by a series of articles on justification in the current issue of the official OPC organ, New Horizons (NH), I must admit that I am cringing at the poor quality of the various responses. Let’s remember, folks, that the NPP/FV theology, as equivocal and incoherent as it may be (especially in its FV manifestations), is being advanced by some of the brightest minds in conservative Presbyterianism--which, these days, isn’t saying much, but the fact remains. The several essays, all of which I have at least cursorily perused, seem more to represent a well-intentioned showcase of disputational no-nos than anything else. This would be a great resource for a high school logic teacher: “Alright, class, please identify the formal and informal fallacies present in each essay (there are at least two). Bonus points if you can make any one argument formally valid.” Sadly, this is true even though the essays focus on justification and (apparently) on these two main criticisms: 1. The NPP/FV position is not confessional, and 2. The NPP/FV position is not truly Pauline. One would think that such a narrow purview would facilitate honed, biting essays. One would think.

Reading the NH essays this morning, my mind kept wandering to the prospective carnage that will be wreaked on these poor professors, pastors, and elders. Don’t these guys read Credenda/Agenda, or at least remember the “Morecraft-a-roni and Cheese” spoof from Round 1 of this same debacle? And, to my shame, I determined to immediately re-subscribe to Credenda. Wrong or not, the FV boys just had an effortless slaughter hand-delivered to them, postage paid by the OPC.. Entertainment value aside, I sincerely hope that the denominational report, which comes out next month, will be more substantive. But I suppose you know where my money is.