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
Moral Certitude and the Iran War
The current military engagement with Iran calls renewed attention to just war theory in the Catholic tradition.…
The Slow Death of England: New and Notable Books
The fate of England is much in the news as popular resistance to mass immigration grows, limits…
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…
