I'd like to respond here to Taylor Marshall's perspective on the FV, since my response is directed chiefly toward the Reformed community. First, did anyone notice the warm glow of hopeful optimism that suffused Taylor's "analysis" of the FV? Some of their great minds will become Catholic...Many will discover that the Catholic Church is their true home, and many will discover her in a great moment of joy. This Federal Vision is really only a peek into the keyhole of the Catholic Church. The Federal Visionist has a vision of the beautiful things inside, but they have not yet appreciated the warmth of a true home. Marshall very sincerely wants this to be the case--he wants everyone to come home to Rome. While that by itself does not make a case against his perspective, it should at least make us read him more critically. If we do so, we find some problems. Second, please notice closely what he has to do to make the FV sound similar to the RCC. The most glaring example is the following: [According the the FV] A person is Christian if they are baptized – they are either a “good Christian” or an “apostate Christian.” This somewhat approximates the way Catholics understand being in a state of grace or mortal sin. (emphasis added) So, if we use language that none of the FV writers uses, we find that an important element in the FV "somewhat approximates" RCC teaching. That means that the FV idea here is "not entirely close to" the RCC--this really sounds like stretching terms to make them fit. It is also necessary not only to stretch terms, but to redefine them or ignore them. Federal Visionists believe that justification is best understood as “union with Christ” and not as the imputation of righteousness in a strict merit/demerit transaction. Very biblical and very Catholic. How on earth is the rejection of merit in accordance with the RCC? Marshall himself, in another place, draws attention to the RCC teaching: The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches this about the Treasury of Merit: 1476 We also call these spiritual goods of the communion of saints the Church's treasury, which is "not the sum total of the material goods which have accumulated during the course of the centuries. On the contrary the 'treasury of the Church' is the infinite value, which can never be exhausted, which Christ's merits have before God. They were offered so that the whole of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. In Christ, the Redeemer himself, the satisfactions and merits of his Redemption exist and find their efficacy." 1477 "This treasury includes as well the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary. They are truly immense, unfathomable, and even pristine in their value before God. In the treasury, too, are the prayers and good works of all the saints, all those who have followed in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by his grace have made their lives holy and carried out the mission in the unity of the Mystical Body." After I made plans to be received into the Church, I was reading in the New Testament and crossed these words that I had read and heard hundreds of times: Matthew 6:19-20 Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. The word "treasures" jumped off the page. Christ is teaching that we can indeed store up "treasure in heaven." Everytime we do something good for God, we "lay up treasure in Heaven." And thus there is truly a treasury of good deeds in Heaven. This is a principle reason why the FV is so uncomfortable with merit (e.g., Wilson's repeated emphasis on rejecting a medieval view of merit)! For Marshall to say that rejecting a merit/demerit system is "very Catholic" seems absurdly inaccurate. So, on a couple of key points, FV is similar to RC theology--if you stretch the meaning of your terms and/or describe theology in a totally inaccurate manner. This really looks like a case of wishful thinking.