New Calvinists are simply more interdenominational than their predecessors (Not a bad thing!). But there seems to be a limit. Well, this is the observation of blogger Common Loon:
If I were capable of passing through the narrow doctrinal checkpoint affirming both TULIP and complementarian gender roles, I would find a community of New Calvinists refreshingly open to a range of positions on baptism, miraculous gifts, the Lord’s Supper and eschatology. This explains why a charismatic like C.J. Mahaney can partner with a cessasionist like John MacArthur at the distinctly Reformed Together for the Gospel (T4G) conference, not to mention fellow conveners Ligon Duncan, a paedo-baptist (one who practices infant baptism), and Mark Dever, a credo-baptist (believer’s baptism). As someone who welcomes evangelical collaboration across denominational lines, I am encouraged by these expressions of unity amid theological diversity.
In light of such ecumenism, it’s perplexing to consider why egalitarians are not also welcomed to the New Calvinist table. Complementarianism may not be at the forefront of New Calvinist identity, but it nonetheless serves as a distinct theological boundary not to be crossed. From what I gather, egalitarianism is categorically rejected by the full spectrum of interdenominational networks, ministries and conferences home to New Calvinists (including Tim Keller and Don Carson’s Gospel Coalition, Piper’s Desiring God Ministries, Driscoll’s Acts 29 Network, Mahaney’s Sovereign Grace Ministries, Dever’s 9 Marks, R.C. Sproul’s Ligonier Ministries, Duncan’s Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals and MacArthur’s Shepherd’s Conference among others). I hope I’m mistaken, but the young, restless, Reformed subculture seems to have built an impenetrable wall to keep out those who are not both Calvinists and complementarians. One out of two is not enough, and thus I have failed to qualify. (Read more…)
But then he cites New Calvinists who are also egalitarians:
If the existence of “egalitarian Calvinist” denominations such as the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) and the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC) are any indication, the answer the last question must be yes. At the scholarly level, there are numerous examples of well-respected evangelical Reformed theologians who are also egalitarians: Roger Nicole (Gordon Conwell, emeritus), Nicholas Wolterstorff (Yale), John Webster (Aberdeen), Bruce McCormack (Princeton Seminary), Donald Bloesch (Dubuque Seminary, emeritus), Todd Billings (Western Seminary), Jamie Smith (Calvin College), Bill Dyrness (Fuller Seminary), Mark Husbands (Hope College) and Laura Miguelez (Wheaton College) just to name a few. My personal favorite is Fuller President Richard Mouw, whose book, Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport, is a must-read for skeptics who have erroneously dismissed TULIP as dried out determinism for the “frozen chosen.” Mouw’s work on Christian ethics, common grace, cultural engagement and public justice embodies the convergence of rigorous Reformed thought and passionate social activism in the tradition of Abraham Kuyper.
But it’s going to be difficult for both to be represented at the same conferences. I think it would be up to the next generation of New Calvinists and so on…
I could have sworn I was a Calvinist egalitarian…
Mike, you’re not alone.
But the trend is unfortunate and disturbing to me *as a Calvinist egalitarian*…
But at the same time, I am encouraged by bloggers like Bryan at http://www.katagraphais.com/, who being both a Calvinist and complementarian recognizes that the issue is not so black and white as some what have us believe. I like to think that Carson recognizes this too (as it seems in some of his books), but its often hard to tell.
It’s the same way I feel about fellow believers who are Arminians.
And it’s the same way I feel about fellow believers who are Charismatics, but that is slowly changing, thanks to Piper and CJ.
I have to say any serious discussion I have had with a Calvinist has been a exercise in frustration and bewilderment. The confidence they have had that they are correct about, well just about everything, is a tremendous hindrance to finding at least a bit of common ground. I know not all are like this at least I hope this to be the case but I find their understanding of soteriology a lens that turns things black and white rather quickly.
This seems to be especially true when it comes to women in ministry. At some point you’re going back to Genesis and there is where the role of women was laid in stone for all eternity never to change ever, never, ever. It just boggles the mind that a new understanding of God can weave it’s way through scripture, yet women somehow have to stay barefoot, pregnant and of course quite.
Jerry B, some Calvinists are like that. But this attitude is also displayed among non-Calvinists.
I believe to say complementarianism is a natural outworking of Calvinism is a serious matter. I don’t know how best to express my frustration at the whole thing.
I would agree that there’s generation of new Calvinists. I am finding that even I’m become a little more Calvinist in my theology due to Piper and books I’m reading. Calvinism is making sense to Evangelical Lutheran-Charismatic and former-Arminian types like myself. I have to admit that I also dismissed TULIP but it’s making more sense these days.
Kevin, it doesn’t matter what subject matter it is, it must be given a fair hearing in the court of ideas – such I’ve found with Calvinism and Charismatics.
I think to represent the complimentarian position as women being “barefoot, pregnant, and quiet” is very misleading if not inflamatory. I have recently changed in my theology (from the free-will of man controlling things to The Soveriegn God controlling things). This has led me to be exposed to other teachings/controversies such as complementarianism “vs.” egalitarianism. It is my understanding Scripture that leads me to believe God intends for men to lead. Not to overbear or abuse but to lead. This leading is first and foremost sacrificial…husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church (um…he was brutally murdered for her). That my wife or women in the church are to be led by Christ-like lovers of women is not a problem. That men abuse their leadership is an abomination. I know one thing…my change to complemantarianism has transformed my marriage for the better. When I lead sacrificially my wife is strengthened, peaceful and joyous. This then leads me to hear her more clearly when she speaks into our marriage because she is not bitter and angry but content and loving. Male leadership means more responsibility not more power.
God bless you all.
Wow! This is a wonderful post. Well-argued.
When I lead sacrificially my wife is strengthened, peaceful and joyous. This then leads me to hear her more clearly when she speaks into our marriage because she is not bitter and angry but content and loving. Male leadership means more responsibility not more power.
God bless you all.
Matt B, thanks for sharing on a most difficult matter.