Dour on the New Calvinism

The Curmudgeon household has a subscription to Time magazine, a fringe benefit to taking The Denver Post (motto: "Denver's newspaper of record, like it or not."). Last week the editors favored us with their list of "Ten Ideas Changing the World Right Now." Number three was "The New Calvinism" (http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1884779_1884782_1884760,00.html).

One might think that, as a Calvinist, I would be pleased to be getting a little recognition in the national media. But then, one would do well to remember I am a curmudgeon, not an evangelical. Presbyterians don't need to be validated by the media; the media needs to be validated by Presbyterians.

But of course, the article in question didn't mention presbyterians, other than a single reference to the Presbyterian Church U.S.A (motto: "For those who like synods, but not confessions."). In fact, there was no hint whatsoever that Calvinism might be anything other than five soteriological points; certainly, there was no indication Calvin's Institutes set forth an extremely robust ecclesiology.

Which is why I'm not sure why this "Calvinism" is "new." Southern Baptist Al Mohler is quoted as observing Calvinism is a natural consequence of thinking about God Biblically; the inevitable consequence is that those who take their Bibles seriously will end up thinking Calvinistically. True enough, and that's why back when I was in college and majorly immersed in evangelicalism, I discovered pretty much everyone (other than the committed Anabaptists) leaned toward the five points of Calvinism. Missing, however, was any kind of ecclesiology: after all, I was an evangelical by virtue of participation in parachurch ministries, not membership in the Church. I soon learned that theology without the ordinary means of grace (Word, sacrament, prayer, mediated through and in corporate worship) makes for pretty thin spiritual sustenance. Disembodied predestinarian doctrine isn't really Calvinism; it's a gnosticism which can kill the soul.

One way of reading recent American conservative presbyterian history (which just happens to be my way) is to see it as the story of "New Calvinists" coming into confessional presbyterian Churches, often as ministers, without any grounding in confessional presbyterianism itself. Not surprisingly, the result has been detrimental for presbyterianism: a diet of doctrine proves unsatisfying, and hungry congregants start devouring one another. Thus, try as I might, I just can't get excited about Time magazine getting excited about this so-called "New Calvinism."

Of course, if John Piper becomes a presbyterian, I just might renew my subscription.