I speak as one who is far away from the geographical centre of the debate, but I have been trying to get to grips with what the Federal Vision is all about. A recent development has been production of a document and a (pretty cool) website calling for charitable theological discourse in the matter. It is noticeable that much of the debate amongst bloggers has since shifted away from the central theological issues and on to the value of the document itself.
I find this annoying, but predictable. Asking for people to sign up for charitable theological discourse is like asking everyone to sign up for feeding the world. As soon as you do that, instead of getting on with feeding the world, everyone is concerned about who is really concerned to feed the world. In the end all it amounts to is some naff posturing and accusatory finger pointing.
Come on guys! Take the hint, be charitable, avoid ad hominems and conspiracy theories, scrap the silly (though cool) website and lets get back to the main point, eh?
Doggie's Breakfast 
Bravo, Stephen, bravo!
Errorists normally do not begin by saying “you must all believe our error”. First, they only want you to _allow_ it.
The recent document that people seem to have been commending seems to have one basic intended implication: The FV may or may not be incorrect, *but whatever you do, you must not condemn it as heretical*. And that is all the errorists are asking for.
David
The website is interesting, but I’ve never understood why everyone in a group needs to get on a big “signing” list–seems to smack of the ecumenical things that have come about recently.
But, as you said, let’s have it out, have a talk and see what’s biblical, and what isn’t. That’s the real question with anything put forward.
We’ve been studying Wilson’s “Federal Husband” book in our men’s group, but aside from that, I’m not aware of the entire scope of the federal vision (once I get settled in, maybe I’ll take a closer look).
Hi Donna,
You’re back online! I thought you had given up. I trust all is well.
David,
Yes, I agree that’s what it looks like. However, I’m trying not to impute motives! To me the whole document reads like one of these awful liberal ‘position papers’ that I used to come across when I was an office-bearer in the URC (British version). I developed an almost allergic reaction to them.
Dan,
I have only read what Wilson has written on the FV debate and some of what is on his blog. I understand from some others that what he writes on practical areas of Christian living is very helpful.
Congrats on landing the job. Hope the move goes OK.