The recent death of Steve Schlissel (1952-2025) has rekindled some of the discussions regarding Federal Vision - something I also touched on in a recent piece.
I'm sure many in the Reformed community will tremble at the news of Schlissel's death because not a few of them would believe him to be unregenerate due to his positions regarding Federal Vision or what is sometimes termed the Auburn Avenue Theology. This school of thought has a more robust view of salvation in general and the sacraments which put it at odds with contemporary Confessionalism and Evangelicalism. Additionally, they hold to the possibility of apostasy and as such they have a different understanding of the covenant which on a practical level includes elements such as paedocommunion.
The debates exploded in the early 2000's leading to several of the men involved to leave denominations such as the PCA. There were also trials but nothing came of it. There were many men who didn't sympathize with Federal Vision theology but were broad-minded enough in their thinking that they couldn't condemn it as heretical. As a result of this non-action, others would leave some denominations - viewing them as too compromising. It was a mess that stirred a lot of passions and revealed that there was (and is) more of a spectrum to Reformed and Confessional thought than many were previously willing to grant.
Many (maybe even most) of the people associated with the movement eventually drifted into the Confederation (now Communion) of Reformed and Evangelical Churches (CREC) founded by Doug Wilson among others. Others of like mind are able to function within the Reformed Episcopal Church (REC) which itself played a key role in the founding of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). In fact Ray Sutton, the presiding bishop of the REC was once affiliated with many of the same Theonomists and Reconstructionists that would become the core of Federal Vision. He's not technically one of them but his name certainly belongs within their orbit.
Wilson would later moderate his views and has now been once more accepted - in some circles. Schlissel who was a fairly well-known name in Reconstructionist circles would remain associated with Federal Vision and many simply wrote him off as misguided at best and a false teacher and false Christian at worst.
Those
same people would most certainly categorize me as the same, but the
opinions of the Reformed (especially the contemporary Reformed)
matter little to me. They don't know their own history nor how much
they've streamlined and romanticized it - let alone some of the
larger questions of Scripture, Church History, and Historical
Theology when it comes to these issues. In other cases the real
debate was over the nature of Confessional Subscription and control
of denominations. The whole thing became unfruitful to say the
least.
For my part, I tremble regarding Schlissel not because of
his soteriology but because of his otherwise massive misreading of
Scripture (resulting in Theonomic Reconstructionism). That's what
causes me to wonder about him. But of course that concern would not
be limited to him but would certainly include the likes of RJ
Rushdoony (1916-2001) and Gary North (1942-2022) as well as some of
the other Theonomic voices that opposed Federal Vision - men like Joe
Morecraft.
In addition to reading Rushdoony's wretched and Judaizing Institutes of Biblical Law, I have listened to not a few of his talks and my intuitive response is the same as when I listen to someone like James Jordan - there's something really wrong here. There's a fundamental misunderstanding of what it's all about - the focus is all wrong, it's like they don't get the message. And I don't believe they have.
But in terms of soteriology, covenant, and how they tie-in with ecclesiology, Schlissel was closer to the mark. I never met him personally but we spoke on the phone (in '96 or '97) and he was kind enough to mail me lots of cassette tapes while I was in Italy along with newsletters etc., which I still have. Well do I remember driving around listening to him and men like Greg Bahnsen and I always had some of his newsletters on hand along with other literature from those circles - the writings of Chilton, Gentry, and others. I'm sure Schlissel would be glad to know his materials provoked me to deeper study but he would be disappointed to learn that they also played a role in convincing me of the errors of Theonomy, Reconstructionism, and Postmillennialism.
Interestingly a close friend and I came to the soteriological equivalence of Federal Vision on our own via a different road and several years before I might add. We still chuckle about my old roommate who marveled over the fact that we spent so much time searching out issues like Justification and soteriology in general. As I just recently recounted, he made a point of tracking me down in 2003 after Federal Vision became a huge controversy. He wasn't entirely clued in on the nuances but he did remember the things I had said and made the connection realizing that the men associated with Federal Vision were saying a lot of the same things we were and so he called me to warn/rebuke me about it. It was well meant if misguided. His father was (and maybe is still) a PCA elder, but they were big fans of Joe Morecraft (based near Atlanta) who came out swinging against Federal Vision. I know they were also keen on John Robbins (1948-2008) - the insufferable and obtuse disciple of Gordon Clark who not only reprobated Federal Vision but most of the Reformed community and certainly anyone in the vein of Vos or Van Til.
So while most in the Reformed community might express mild or even strong disagreement with Schlissel's Theonomic Reconstructionism and Postmillennialism - these are not major concerns. For them the pressing issue was his gospel compromise (as they would see it).
For me, the Judaized understanding of Scripture remains a major concern - this of course has nothing to do with Schlissel's Jewish heritage. By Judaizing I refer to the tendency to read the New Covenant in light of the Old and to subordinate it. As such there are fundamental shortcomings and failures with regard to New Testament doctrine, particularly when it comes to the Kingdom and in a rather glaring fashion in the realm of ethics. It is these latter points that I'm afraid the disciples of Rushdoony seem members of a different religion, one not only alien to that of Christ and the apostles, but all too often opposed to it.
It must be admitted that broadly speaking they have carried the day - their views at this point in time have permeated the Confessional and Evangelical communities as is seen with the substitution of New Testament Christianity and ethics with Right-wing political values - and increasingly fascistic ones in some quarters.
I must say though that when I picked up The Auburn Avenue Theology: Pros & Cons edited by E. Calvin Beisner, I enjoyed Schlissel's contributions the most. I'm not a fan of the tongue-in-cheek style so often associated with Wilson and the Federal Vision, but Schlissel scored many points and rightly called out his fellow Reformed as being little more than Baptists in the end. His comments were as astute as much as Beisner, Richard Phillips, Morton Smith, Joe Pipa, and the others were lacking.
As stated, I never met Steve Schlissel personally but I know others who did and his name always takes me back - now thirty years to my early Christian days. We didn't walk the same path but he influenced me and I did learn quite a few things from him along the way. I may even get out those old Messiah's Congregation newsletters I have tucked away in a file cabinet drawer and revisit those days.
Postscript (added 25 January):
A final positive note regarding Schlissel - as a man of Jewish heritage based in Brooklyn, he never fell in with the Neo-Confederate ethos which is quite popular among Theonomists. Compared to most of them, he was a virtual cosmopolitan and quite friendly to the immigrant community and the multi-cultural flavour of New York and the Eastern seaboard. This aspect of his character was something I always found refreshing and it set him apart.