Does anybody else think that Douglas Wilson is a little more balanced than a lot of the other FV proponents (sheperd, leithart)? I don't agree with some of what Wilson teaches in regard to things like presumptive regeneration, paedocommunion, and his limp wristedness in regard to the RCC, but I don't see him advocating a denial of the imputation of Christs active obedience, or ex opera operato baptismal waters, or neonomianism...