# FV really Arminian & works salvation?



## MamaArcher (Jul 31, 2007)

We are looking at changing denominations and have really been drawn to the CREC. However we are finding out a bit more about this Federal Vision thing and it is really a heart wrenching thing for me to deal with because I think it will pull us away from the CREC prospect. We may lean more to the PCA now, I dunno, long story, anyway.

If FV is teaching baptismal regeneration and the ability to leave the faith. Being saved then apostating verses being with in the covenant protection/umbrella and rejecting but not actually being of the elect. (sorry if my words are not the best terms to use I am new to this). How is this not armenian rather than Calvinistic and not according to the solas? Baptismal regeneration would replace grace by faith, faith alone and grace alone. Being saved and apostating (actually being saved and then leaving) would that not negate the perseverance of the saints? So does FV actually teach a works type of salvation?


----------



## toddpedlar (Jul 31, 2007)

MamaArcher said:


> We are looking at changing denominations and have really been drawn to the CREC. However we are finding out a bit more about this Federal Vision thing and it is really a heart wrenching thing for me to deal with because I think it will pull us away from the CREC prospect. We may lean more to the PCA now, I dunno, long story, anyway.
> 
> If FV is teaching baptismal regeneration and the ability to leave the faith. Being saved then apostating verses being with in the covenant protection/umbrella and rejecting but not actually being of the elect. (sorry if my words are not the best terms to use I am new to this). How is this not armenian rather than Calvinistic and not according to the solas? Baptismal regeneration would replace grace by faith, faith alone and grace alone. Being saved and apostating (actually being saved and then leaving) would that not negate the perseverance of the saints? So does FV actually teach a works type of salvation?



I'd avoid the CREC like the plague (perhaps that phrase slipped out because I watched The Seventh Seal last night). The FV actually does teach a works-based component to salvation, indeed. I'm sure that Andrew can point us to several threads related to this question - and you should check out Dr. Clark's website for helpful materials on the FV. 

In the FV, typically it is said that in order to be "finally justified" (regarded by God as righteous) on the Last Day, you must have been "covenantally faithful" in your life - that is, obedient. Your obedience, throughout your life, is taken as ground for your being "finally justified". The righteousness on the basis of which you are justified in that day is your own, in their view, and not the perfect, spotless righteousness of Christ. This view they hold together with the view that the baptized are truly united to Christ - then they can conveniently hold to a "real apostasy", wherein people who were truly united to Christ and partakers of salvation can lose it. Yes, in a real sense it is both legalistic AND Arminian. 

Again, I'd STRONGLY caution you to avoid the CREC like the plague. I think it is safe to say that there is NO CREC church that is not thoroughly FV and hence an exceedingly dangerous place to associate yourself with. Where are you located, so that we can perhaps give you some alternative suggestions for sound Reformed churches?

Todd


----------



## BobVigneault (Jul 31, 2007)

Kristine, I wouldn't bother trying to make the FV an Arminian issue because even the term arminian is pretty tough to define these days. What we call arminian is many times just 'semi-pelagian' and an arminian would be offended to be relegated to that group.

The biggest problem with isolating the heterodoxy of the FV proponents that they use the same terms as everyone else but they introduce well placed nuances that change the meaning.

Work through the THE NINE POINTS OF (URCNA) SYNOD found here on Dr. Clark's site. It's written in the conventional historical language and in layman's terms (for the most part).

Blessings


----------



## Romans922 (Jul 31, 2007)

PuritanSailor knows a lot of good chuches in the Washington State area, I'd ask him what Church to look into while you are there.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jul 31, 2007)

Apart from any FV issues, the CREC has serious ecclesiastical problems (just ask fellow FV author Andrew Sandlin - fuller article here). It has no sound confessional basis, allowing both baptist and paedobaptist confessions (which cannot help but sow disunity in the local church).

It is also a haven for paedocommunionists.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jul 31, 2007)

Romans922 said:


> PuritanSailor knows a lot of good chuches in the Washington State area, I'd ask him what Church to look into while you are there.



Yes.

Kristine, there are a surprising number of good, orthodox, confessional, reformed churches throughout Western Washington: Reformed Baptist, Presbyterian, Dutch Reformed. No need to mess with the CREC. Perhaps you could tell us where you live (even just a general idea) and many on the board can offer suggestions.


----------



## MamaArcher (Jul 31, 2007)

actually we have just moved to the San Antonio area but will only be here for a year. One thing we love about the CREC churches is their commitment to Classical Christian education and the role of the father in the family, men leading in worship, family Sunday School verses age divisions, and their stand against birth control as well. To be completely honest I like the fact that they allow for both types of baptism since that is more of an issue for my hubby (a southern baptist minister). he is very leary of the whole process of being reordained and switching ecclesiastical endorsement, because the PCA and OPC are so rigorous.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jul 31, 2007)

Kristine, wouldn't a Reformed Baptist church take him? Also, yes, any change might require him stepping down for a time till they got to know him.


----------



## BobVigneault (Jul 31, 2007)

MamaArcher said:


> because the PCA and OPC are so rigorous.




That's true, if he hasn't finished memorizing the works of John Owen and he's not in his third year of ugaritic by now then he won't have time to qualify. 


On the other hand becoming an SBC pastor is a matter of passing this test:

1. Baptism is performed by totally immersing a professing believer in water.
True or You Bet.

2. Drinking alcohol is a sin. True or For Sure.

3. The pastors pulpit attire must include a
A. white shirt, B. white shirt or C. Both A and B.


----------



## wsw201 (Jul 31, 2007)

Bob,

I sense some sarcasm in your post?? (Maybe just a little!)


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jul 31, 2007)

Be nice, Bob! It's difficult when you are already a pastor to go through or want to go through a whole process, though different, again.

Kristine, there are reasons though.


----------



## BobVigneault (Jul 31, 2007)

wsw201 said:


> Bob,
> 
> I sense some sarcasm in your post?? (Maybe just a little!)



Hey, a few years ago I was candidating at a half Presbyterian, half reformed baptist church in Tennessee. I came _this_ close to getting the call. Half the church, most likely the Presbyterian's, wanted an ordained man, the other half didn't mind licensing me and ordaining me later. It went on for a month and then they decided to look for an ordained man.

After is was over, I was telling an SBC pastor about it. He said, 'hey, become a southern baptist, they'd ordain a monkey.' Now THAT was sarcasm. I'm sure he meant a trained monkey.

I'm having fun, but of course, my prayers go out for you, Pastor and Mrs. Anderson. It is not an easy thing to change like that. I have several pastor friends who have changed, some had to hold their nose and choose the lesser of two stinkers (for the sake of the Gospel), some unfortunately went independant and others are going through the re-ordination. God bless you and guide you in the call He has given you.


----------



## MamaArcher (Jul 31, 2007)

it is a very sticky process for us, considering he is not just a pastor. He is a military chaplain and so there are certain things to consider. It has to be done in a certain order and fashion or else he is out of the military. We cannot just "take a break" and then get back in like you could with pastoring. He already has a masters of divinity degree and is ordained and yes it was pretty easy. We also cannot go to just any other denomination (a Reformed Baptist church hubby has mentioned this and we would just stay SBC then) it has to be one with a military endorsing agency (which at the moment the CREC does NOT have). I would prefer to go PCA but he is just not sure yet. He is concerned because of the language requirements and due to his position he does not have alot of time. We are just kind of in limbo not sure what to do. Pray would be much appreciated if you feel so led to do so.


----------



## MW (Jul 31, 2007)

BobVigneault said:


> After is was over, I was telling an SBC pastor about it. He said, 'hey, become a southern baptist, they'd ordain a monkey.' Now THAT was sarcasm. I'm sure he meant a trained monkey.



 Even funnier than the ugaritic. Although I expect you were serious about memorising Owen.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jul 31, 2007)

MamaArcher said:


> it is a very sticky process for us, considering he is not just a pastor. He is a military chaplain and so there are certain things to consider. It has to be done in a certain order and fashion or else he is out of the military. We cannot just "take a break" and then get back in like you could with pastoring. He already has a masters of divinity degree and is ordained and yes it was pretty easy. We also cannot go to just any other denomination (a Reformed Baptist church hubby has mentioned this and we would just stay SBC then) it has to be one with a military endorsing agency (which at the moment the CREC does NOT have). I would prefer to go PCA but he is just not sure yet. He is concerned because of the language requirements and due to his position he does not have alot of time. We are just kind of in limbo not sure what to do. Pray would be much appreciated if you feel so led to do so.



Kristine,

If he already has an MDiv and is ordained, it should not be that difficult to _transfer _his ordination to the PCA. That is the key: he will not need to be re-ordained, but simply to have his ordination transferred. That eases up the requirements.

If you would like, I can provide further assistance off-board.


----------



## MamaArcher (Jul 31, 2007)

hmm.. we were under the impression that he would not be able to transfer his credentials and need to be re-ordained as a Presbyterian. miniter, go throught the whole questioning process and more. Is this not the case?


----------



## fredtgreco (Jul 31, 2007)

MamaArcher said:


> hmm.. we were under the impression that he would not be able to transfer his credentials and need to be re-ordained as a Presbyterian. miniter, go throught the whole questioning process and more. Is this not the case?



It is a little complex. I would be happy to speak to your husband (I am a former Chairman of a Candidates Committee in the Midwest, where we had several non-PCA transfers), and I am relatively near (Houston). The Presbytery would be South Texas. He might also want to speak to the pastor of Faith PCA in San Antonio, or the pastor of Redeemer PCA in Austin. I also have a very good friend who is a PCA chaplain formerly serving in Savannah. But here is the outline:

1. The PCA recognizes SBC ordination. So there would be no re-ordination.
2. The PCA BCO (Book of Church Order), requires certain things of a man transferring from a different PCA Presbytery. It also requires slightly different things of a non-PCA minister (including even OPC ministers). Here is the relevant section:



> 13-6. Ministers seeking admission to a Presbytery from other Presbyteries in the Presbyterian Church in America shall be examined on Christian experience, and also touching their views in theology, the Sacraments, and church government. *If applicants come from other denominations, the Presbytery shall examine them thoroughly in knowledge and views as required by BCO 21-4 and require them to answer in the affirmative the questions put to candidates at their ordination*. Ordained ministers from other denominations being considered by Presbyteries for reception may come under the extraordinary provisions set forth in BCO 21-4. (emphasis added)



3. The section about questions is 21-4:



> Additionally, the intern shall be examined on any parts required
> for ordination which were not covered in his examination for licensure. In all
> cases, he should be asked to indicate whether he has changed his previous
> views concerning any points in the Confession of Faith, Catechisms, and Book
> ...



So at least in theory, a Presbytery could require the same _type_ of exam for a transfer as an ordination. But rarely is that the case. More likely, it will be a shorter exam, with the paperwork requriements (papers, language exams, etc) waived. But you can get firm answers to this from South Texas Presbytery.

I have an old webpage that describes the entire candidating process in some detail. It might provide some additional insight:

http://www.tulipfaith.com/GLP/


Does that help?


----------



## tewilder (Aug 1, 2007)

fredtgreco said:


> Apart from any FV issues, the CREC has serious ecclesiastical problems (just ask fellow FV author Andrew Sandlin - fuller article here). It has no sound confessional basis, allowing both baptist and paedobaptist confessions (which cannot help but sow disunity in the local church).
> 
> It is also a haven for paedocommunionists.



Sandlin says that he is not and never was Federal Vision. He is a critic of their institutionalism, clericism and ritualism. What Sandlin is is a Shepherd supporter, much like John Frame, professor at the (FV?) Reformed Theological Seminary.


----------

