“The New Calvinism Considered” by Jeremy Walker

Posted by deangonzales on May 27, 2010
13 Comments

Over the past decade or so, it seems that Christian leaders and church ministries which openly associate themselves with the solas of the Reformation and Calvinistic theology have multiplied. While most of these leaders and churches share a great deal in common with the older Reformed tradition, they are also different in some ways. Accordingly, they’ve been called (and many of them accept the label) “the new Calvinists.” For a summary of the personalities and ministries associated with this growing movement, see Collin Hansen’s Young, Restless, Reformed: A Journalist’s Journey with the New Calvinists (Crossway, 2008). My friends and readers know that I’m fundamentally appreciative of what God is doing through this “movement” (see my review, “Young, Restless, Reformed: ‘Hip, Hip, Hurrah!’ or ‘Bah, Humbug!’?”)¹ and believe that we who are associated with more traditional forms of Reformed theology and practice can learn some helpful lessons from the new Calvinists. Indeed, I’m persuaded that in some ways the “old Calvinism” needs to be updated,² and in these respects we shouldn’t hesitate to imitate our “new Calvinist” brothers, where they imitate Paul and Christ. After all, don’t we “older Calvinists” also affirm the principle of semper reformanda (“always reforming”)?

The fact that I have deep appreciation for the new Calvinists and want to learn from them doesn’t mean I agree with them in all points of theology and practice. For instance, many of the new Calvinists have adopted a charismatic (or continuationist) view of the revelatory gifts in contrast with the older Calvinists, most of whom were generally cessationists. While I welcome the renewed emphasis on the importance of the Holy Spirit’s ministry and the vital place of the affections in true Christianity (which charismatic theology has often underscored), I remain unpersuaded that the revelatory gifts of tongues and prophecy are still extant today.³ There are a few other areas of theology and methodology where I might differ with some of the leaders and ministries associated with this movement. Consequently, I don’t think we should simply parrot everything the new Calvinists say or do.⁴ We should praise God for the good he’s accomplishing through these leaders and their ministries. We can and should seek to learn from them how to communicate more effectively the truths we hold dear to a 21st century generation (as opposed to a 16th and 17th century generation).⁵ But our chief allegiance must be neither to the new Calvinism nor to the old Calvinism but to sola Scriptura (“the Scriptures alone”). As a result, our assessments of the new Calvinism as well as the old Calvinism should strive for biblical balance, giving proper due both to commendation and also to caution or criticism where appropriate.

Such balanced assessments of the new Calvinism can be hard to find. On the one hand, those who identify more with the older Calvinism can tend toward a hyper-criticism, which minimizes the strengths and magnifies the weaknesses of the new Calvinism.⁶ The old Calvinists can also convey an unteachable attitude and bristle when self-criticism is offered by one of their own.⁷ On the other hand, those who identify more with the newer Calvinism can likewise manifest an undue resistance toward criticism (whether from without or from within).⁸. Moreover, in their occasional criticisms of the old Calvinists, some of the new Calvinists have, at times, unfairly stereotyped the older Calvinism and reflected an imbalanced criticism.⁹ A lack of charity and even-handedness, which can be found on both sides, is probably due, in part, to the remaining pride that still resides within us all and that shows we all need to work harder at cultivating a humbler orthodoxy.

Happily, there are those on both sides who are endeavoring to be discerning, fair, teachable and charitable in their assessments of the older and the newer versions of Calvinism. I recently became aware of a helpful post entitled “The New Calvinism Considered” by Pastor Jeremy Walker.¹⁰ Jeremy is one of the pastors of Maidenbower Baptist Church of Crawley, England. While Jeremy and his church probably identify more with the older Calvinism, he finds much to commend in the new Calvinism. Overall, I think his evaluation of the new Calvinism is mature, humble, and charitable. I generally agree with his perception and assessment of the movement though, in a few places, I might have been a little less critical,¹¹ made a few more efforts to find some good even among the “bad,”¹² and offered fuller qualifications to my remarks.¹³ In one place, I question the appropriateness of his characterization.¹⁴

Because I found Jeremy’s “The New Calvinism Considered” an overall helpful critique of the movement, I’ve listed below the 21 characteristics of the new Calvinism he highlights in his post. To read his fuller explanation of each of these points as well as the discussion generated by his post, let me encourage you to visit his blog “The Wanderer.” You’re also welcome to comment below and share whether you think Jeremy’s assessment was fair, accurate, and helpful.

So here’s a summary of the main points of Pastor Jeremy Walker’s “The New Calvinism Considered” (emphasis his):

1.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by a desire for the glory of God.

2.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by deep-rooted spiritual joy.

3.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by missonal zeal.

4.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by an emphasis on the gospel of grace and the grace of the gospel.

5.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by complementarianism.

6.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by a return to a more Biblical masculinity.

7.  Again related to complementarianism, it seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by the promotion of the family as a basic unit of church and social life.

8.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by charismatic convictions with regard to spiritual gifts.

9.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by Calvinist soteriology, with some departures and aberrations.

10.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by a generally thoughtful ecumenism.

11.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by an often pragmatic ecclesiology.

12.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by a neo-Kuyperian view of culture.

13.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by doctrinal if not practical antinomianism.

14.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by contemporary worship.

15.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by the driving force of several key personalities.

16.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by the ready embrace and employment of new technologies and media and the platforms that they provide.

17.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by a concentration on a younger, more urban demographic.

18.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by the desire to be big and to have a seat at culture’s table.

19.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by an ambivalent relationship to church history.

20.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by sensitivity to the judicial and social aspects of the gospel at work in society.

21.  It seems to me that the broad stream of new Calvinism tends to be characterised by Americocentrism.

Bob Gonzales, Dean
Reformed Baptist Seminary

1. See also Brian Borgman’s “Brothers, There Is No Need to Circle the Wagons!” [↩]
2. See my series “The Danger of Reformed Traditionalism” Part 1 and Part 2. [↩]
3. See my series, “The Cessation of Special Revelation: A Humble Argument for the Cessation of NT Prophecy and Tongues”. [↩]
4. I’m doubtful they would want us to follow them as if they were infallible guides. [↩]
5. As Richard Pratt puts it, “To represent Reformed theology, we must re-present it. Simply repeating Reformed theology doesn’t represent it at all.” “John Frame and the Future of the Church,” in Speaking the Truth in Love: The Theology of John Frame, ed. John J. Hughes (Presbyterian & Reformed, 2009), 952. Pratt’s article seeks to address some of the challenges for Reformed theology in the 21st century, and he offers some helpful advice (following in the line of John Frame’s theological insights) on how Reformed Christians can and should more effectively communicate biblical truth in the shifting cultural contexts of the future. I found much helpful food for thought throughout Pratt’s entire article. [↩]
6. One example that comes to mind is Dan Borvan’s “Old, Grumpy, and (Actually) Reformed,” which I accessed some time ago but can not longer do so because it’s password protected. [↩]
7. As someone who’s associated with the older Calvinism and has offered self-criticism, I’ve learned this through personal experience. [↩]
8. Note, for instance, some of the backlash Bill Streger, an Acts 29 pastor, received when he offered what I considered to be a healthy exhortation in his “Uncool People Need Jesus Too” [↩]
9. See, for example, Mark Driscoll’s “New Calvinism versus Old Calvinism,” which oversimplifies some of the differences and tends to caricature the older Calvinism. Of course, the old Calvinists have also been guilty of caricaturing the new Calvinists. [↩]
10. Jeremy provided me with this brief biographical sketch: Pastor Jeremy Walker was born in 1975 to godly parents in Crawley, England.  Although he kicked hard against the goads, the Lord God was pleased to deal graciously and patiently with him during his teenage years, slowly drawing him to Jesus Christ. He studied English Language and Literature at the University of Leicester before working for five years for the Ministry of Defence in London, at which time he also returned to the church in Crawley. During these periods, God was again pleased to work in his heart, forming a desire for the ministry of his Word. After a time of study and service with this in view, in January 2004 he was recognised as a pastor of Maidenbower Baptist Church, Crawley, where he continues to serve. He is married to Alissa, and God has blessed them with two sons, Caleb and William. He is a co-author of A Portrait of Paul: Identifying a True Minister of Christ (due October 2010). [↩]
11. I’m not sure I agree with Walker’s characterization of the new Calvinists under the heading “an ambivalent relationship to church history” (#19), suggesting, it seems to me, the new Calvinists fail to appreciate that many of the great truths they’ve “discovered” have been around for a while. It appears to me, however, that most of the new Calvinists are well aware they stand on the shoulders of many who’ve gone before. See, for example, John Piper’s biographical series The Swans Are Not Silent in which he traces many of the doctrines and values of his “new Calvinism” to men like Athanasius, Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Bunyan, John Owen, William Cooper, John Newton, Charles Simeon, etc. Piper has also labored to show that his “Christian Hedonism” is not something entirely new but finds its roots in Jonathan Edwards and the Puritans. Yes, he does give some credit to the Anglican philosopher C. S. Lewis, but I think he finds the greatest continuity with Edwards’ theology. [↩]
12. Although I don’t agree with a charismatic view of the revelatory gifts, as do many of the new Calvinists, I’m sympathetic with a stress on the importance of the Holy Spirit’s ongoing ministry and the vital place of the emotions in the Christian life and worship. Sometimes, the old Calvinism sometimes tends to emphasize outward form over the inward disposition and the intellect over the emotions. In its polemic against a charismatic view of the gifts, the older Calvinism can fail to underscore the Christian’s and church’s need for the Spirit’s guidance and empowerment. [↩]
13. First, when Walker characterizes their ecclesiology as “pragmatic” (#11), I’d be quick to point out that the Bible itself commends what might be termed “principled pragmatism,” that is, the  pursuit of those methodologies that are most efficient within the parameters of biblical principles (e.g., Prov 22:29). And since the Bible and even the Puritan confessions call for principled pragmatism in the realm of church ministry, worship, and outreach with respect to what is circumstantial in nature (see, for instance, 2LBCF 1.6), we should strive to be more precise in our caveats and criticisms of others’ ecclesiastical methodologies. The question is not whether the new Calvinists are “pragmatic” in some aspects of their ecclesiology. They should be and so should we. The question, rather, is whether their pragmatism stays within the bounds of the light of nature, Christian prudence, and the general principles of God’s word. Actually, Walker would agree with my point here. If you read his explanation, you’ll learn that he’s really questioning some not all of their pragmatism and even suggests that we older Calvinists may need to be a little more pragmatic in the proper sense. I simply want to highlight the need to recognize the different nuances (bad and good) of the concept of “pragmatism.” It’s not always a bad word. Second, Walker’s characterization of the new Calvinists’ worship as contemporary (#14) should be qualified by the fact that a number of the men he mentions in his review actually advocate a blended worship in which both traditional and contemporary forms and genres are used. Third, the fact that the new Calvinism as a movement is driven largely by key personalities (#15) is nothing new. Does not the “old Calvinism” also have its heroes (Turretin, Owen, Edwards, Hodge, Warfield, Spurgeon, etc.) who are all often portrayed as revolving in orbit around the man himself, Jean Cauvin? Finally, while I agree with Walker that some of the new Calvinists do express a concern for their churches to grow large (#16), I think we (especially those of us who pastor small churches) should be careful in our critique of this desire. The apostle Paul wanted to see as many sinners saved as possible (1 Cor 9:19ff.), and he endeavored to accommodate his ministry in order to procure (with God’s blessing) that end. If, as Walker suggests in point #1, the new Calvinists are truly characterized by a desire for the glory of God, it would seem unlikely that they’re pursuing numbers merely for numbers sake. As a case in point, Mark Driscoll and the elders of Mars Hill Church recently decided to dissolve the membership of their church, have Mark teach a series on doctrine, and then reconstitute the membership on a more solid foundation. As a result, they lost about 1,000 members (see an interview with Driscoll here). While we might question the propriety of such a move (did the congregation approve it first?), we can at least applaud the fact that the elders of Mars Hill appear to value something more than mere numerical size. [↩]
14. Walker describes the 13th characteristic of neo-Calvinism as a tendency toward a “doctrinal if not practical antinomianism.” He seems to base this conclusion largely on the fact that many of the new Calvinists fail to affirm and practice a Puritan view of the Lord’s Day as the “Christian Sabbath.” While I don’t contest that many of the new Calvinists’ view of the Lord’s Day may not fully conform to Puritan or even biblical standards, I find the epithet “antinomianism” too strong. Literally, the term means “opposed to law,” and has been historically applied to sects that reject, minimize, or marginalize the abiding relevance of the Bible’s moral standards for Christian living under grace. But most new Calvinists I’m familiar with not only affirm the relevance of all the moral standards (i.e., commands or laws) in the NT but also those of the OT, which they perceive to be of a moral and abiding character. True, many of the new Calvinists question the abiding validity of the fourth commandment or at least its “sabbath” aspect. But even among the older Calvinists one may find some disagreement as to the precise way in which and extent to which the fourth commandment applies today. Accordingly, I wouldn’t characterize the new Calvinists as antinomians, which can give the impression that they fail to view the Scriptures not only as a revelation of the gospel but also as a revelation of God’s abiding moral expectations for humanity and the church. This label may also give the impression that the new Calvinists advocate moral laxity or a licentious lifestyle, which anyone familiar with their teaching would see is untrue. [↩]

Brothers, There Is No Need to Circle the Wagons!

Posted by deangonzales on October 7, 2009
12 Comments

In the spirit of John Piper’s terrific book, Brothers, We Are Not Professionals, I would like to offer up a few thoughts for our comrades in ministry.

Collin Hansen has documented the revival of interest in reformed theology in his excellent little book, Young, Restless, Reformed (Crossway). This book is exciting because it gives us a journalist’s perspective on what is happening across our country and across denominational lines. A robust, God-centered theology is making an enormous impact on churches everywhere. Young adults are especially drawn to the God-saturated, Christ-exalting theology of the reformation. The Solas of the Reformation, the five points of Calvinism, a classic reformed theology proper and soteriology are being embraced with vigor. This theological perspective has been traditionally called “Reformed.”

Herein lays the rub. Some, who are Reformed, don’t like the fact that those who are propagating and embracing this theology are calling it “Reformed.” There is a polite criticism, which often goes like this, “We are really glad you believe in predestination and are no longer rank Arminians, but you aren’t really Reformed because being Reformed means holding to covenant theology, which means, by necessity, that you baptize your babies, hold to Calvin’s view of the Supper and use either the Three Forms of Unity or The Westminster Standards.” (Even the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith is sub-standard because of its credo-baptist position).

Those who want to protect the term “Reformed” appear to be circling the wagons. They smile and wave to the neo (or pseudo) reformed, and keep them out of their circle. Some may think this is a caricature, but listen to some of the sermons and read some of the blogs and books.¹

What I would like to say is, “Brothers, there is no need to circle the wagons! Brothers, rejoice that the glory of God and the sovereignty of grace are being rediscovered! Brothers, don’t be so territorial over a term! What else are we supposed to call ourselves? We know we are not Arminians. Many of us embrace covenant theology, disagreeing over the lines of continuity and discontinuity, but we are friends and brothers, belonging to the same family. Brothers, we read your books, we learn from you, and we bring something to the table too!”

It is this sentiment which compels me to love what T4G is all about. I love the fact that the glorious gospel of grace holds these men together and they live with and celebrate their differences. It is this sentiment which makes me love Ray Ortlund, Jr’s spirit conveyed in his essay, “Truly Reformed.”

Reformed brothers, there is no need to circle the wagons. We are not on the attack. We want to actually travel with you, reveling in the glory of God and the Gospel of Christ. We need to call ourselves something, and Reformed just seems to fit best. We are not revising history or hi-jacking a term, we are lovers of great doctrine that exalts our Triune God. If we have that in common, cannot we live together in the grace we all say is sovereign and free?

One of the ugly faces of “Calvinists” is an arrogant, divisiveness. Let’s surprise everyone and adorn the doctrines we hold in common with humility, love, forbearance and joy!

Brothers, there is no need to circle the wagons! Let’s press ahead for the glory of God and the good of a lost world and a limping church!²

Brian Borgman, Pastor
Grace Community Church, Minden, Nevada

1. Editor (Dr. Gonzales): In particular, the reader can find this line of reasoning being advanced by Reformed authors like Michael Horton and R. Scott Clark. For Horton’s concern about applying the term “Reformed” to the Neo-Calvinist movement, see Hansen’s interview with Horton in Young, Restless, Reformed (Crossway, 2008), 110-12. Clark has developed an extended argument for restricting the term “Reformed” in his book Recovering the Reformed Confession (P&R, 2008) and has argued for the same on his blog: “Who or What Gets to Define Reformed.” Interestingly, Clark doesn’t even believe congregations who embrace a Baptist ecclesiology can be viewed as genuine churches. See his comment here “How the CRC Looked to Machen in 1936″ and my response to his position in the comments section here “A Baptist Reads RRC and Benefits from It.” [↩]
2. Editor (Dr. Gonzales): For another overall positive assessment of the revival of Calvinism depicted in Hansen’s book, see my Young, Restless, Reformed: “Hip, Hip, Hurrah!” or “Bah, Humbug!”? [↩]

The Pastor-Scholar: John Piper’s Personal Story

Posted by deangonzales on May 17, 2009
1 Comment

On the last evening of the recent 2009 Gospel Coalition National Conference, John Piper and D.A. Carson gave a special seminar entitled,“The Pastor as Scholar, and the Scholar as Pastor: Reflections on Life and Ministry with John Piper and D. A. Carson.” In the video below, Dr. Piper offers reflections on his own experience and perspective on the relationship of biblical scholarship and pastoral ministry.

Bob Gonzales, Dean
Reformed Baptist Seminary