One of the differences between those associated with “Federal Vision” theology and those opposed to it is a difference of theological imagination. The opponents operate with a theological imagination that distinguishes and clarifies; ontology is distinguished from relationality, nature from supernature, ecclesiology from soteriology.
On the other side are theologians and pastors who operate with what might be called a perichoretic imagination. Relationality is embedded in ontology, and vice versa; supernature infuses nature, and supernature always comes through nature; scratch ecclesiology, and we find soteriology dwelling within, and soteriology envelops ecclesiology even while it is enveloped by ecclesiology.
Frame would call this perspectival. I like the sound of perichoretic better. But we’re talking about the same kind of imagination.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…
