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 Possibility of Possibility
"Might could” is a Southern expression meaning “maybe I could” or “I might be able to,” conveying…
The False Promise of No Contact
Around the time nineteen-year-old Alice began cutting ties with her family, she announced on social media that…
Moral Certitude and the Iran War
The current military engagement with Iran calls renewed attention to just war theory in the Catholic tradition.…
