.JPG)
It seems to me (as a person knowledgable about Reformation times and its theology, both Lutheran and Reformed), and also somewhat knowledgable concerning the 19th century American Princetonian Theology (and its competing Mercersburg Theology), that mainstream "orthodox Reformed theology" as we know it in our place and time in the Reformed Church at large has fallen into reductionism and serious theological imbalance.
What has happened, as I think I see it, is that the mainstream American vision (the Princetonian Theology) has evolved from the original Reformation form into a system of thought which is simply "evangelical," in the 19th and early 20th century sense, to which is added the "Five Points of Calvinism."
The key theological concept which distinguishes this kind of "Reformed Theology" appears to me to be "Particularism." One can read B B Warfield's Plan of Salvation, for instance, and this is plain to see. He makes the virtual definition of Reformed Theology to be Particularism.
However, one seeks in vain for this "look and feel" in the Reformation versions of Reformed Theology. Particularism is there, but within Scriptural bounds. Predestination and election are taught, but this is by no means a monopoly of the Reformed theology! Observing that God does not preach the gospel to all nor does he save all those to whom the gospel is preached, and also having Scriptural doctrines about this is far from making the Reformed Theology simply a vehicle for preaching Particularism.
Therefore, I believe that our "modern" inheritance from the Princetonian legacy, as valuable as it is, is a serious distorting emphasis within the theological system which we profess to represent. True Reformed Theology is "catholic," offers the Gospel to all who hear it, and is not simply a vehicle for making a hobby-horse of Particularism.
Truth is, the evangelical+5point notion of Reformed Theology is seriously affected by the spirit of Revivalism, Americanism, and too much Rationalism. The Revivalism and Americanism are inimical to the true Reformational and Reformed idea of the institution of the Church. And, the Rationalism is the fruit of the proximity of the Enlightenment. If the mind of man can solve all mysteries (as the Enlightenment postulated), then it is tempting to think that the mind of man must be able to fight back using the same tools in the defense of Christianity, as 19th (and 18th) century Reformed Theology evidently thought. Perhaps no one ever thought that the human mind could thereby unwittingly be overextended into realms beyond its competence, and that to attempt to defend Christianity by using the same methods and tools as the world would be an error, and might even lead to spiritual and intellectual disaster.
One can see the visible affect of the pre-eminence of American Reformed "Particularism" from "outside the camp" by reading Francis Pieper's Christian Dogmatics. His main "enemy" in this work of American Confessional Lutheranism is the Particularism of the Reformed Church. To Pieper, Particularism as preached by the Reformed Church is the single greatest error of that church, and the one which most radically de-Christianizes and refutes it. Now, as surely as Mr. Pieper's complaints need to be taken seriously by the Reformed, this is surely a powerful 19th century style response to the 19th century over-emphasis on Particularism in the American Reformed Church. This "Particularist Reformed" spirit still lives on among the Reformed in the 21st century, especially in the more Baptistic circles. But to many Reformed thinkers nowadays this definition of the meaning of "Reformed," and the rationalistic tactics that go along with it, is beginning to be recognized as old-fashioned.
In this post-Enlightenment age when we have been freed not from the use of the mind but from rationalism, we need to rethink our theology in a manner which more meekly evaluates our rational capabilities, more highly evaluates the meaning of Scripture, and which avoids the "five-point trap" of thinking that only those points adequately characterize the whole of Reformed Theology.
There is a world of books out there about this.
One could profitably begin with D G Hart's biography:
John Williamson Nevin, High Church Calvinist.
Truth is, the evangelical+5point notion of Reformed Theology is seriously affected by the spirit of Revivalism, Americanism, and too much Rationalism. The Revivalism and Americanism are inimical to the true Reformational and Reformed idea of the institution of the Church. And, the Rationalism is the fruit of the proximity of the Enlightenment. If the mind of man can solve all mysteries (as the Enlightenment postulated), then it is tempting to think that the mind of man must be able to fight back using the same tools in the defense of Christianity, as 19th (and 18th) century Reformed Theology evidently thought. Perhaps no one ever thought that the human mind could thereby unwittingly be overextended into realms beyond its competence, and that to attempt to defend Christianity by using the same methods and tools as the world would be an error, and might even lead to spiritual and intellectual disaster.
One can see the visible affect of the pre-eminence of American Reformed "Particularism" from "outside the camp" by reading Francis Pieper's Christian Dogmatics. His main "enemy" in this work of American Confessional Lutheranism is the Particularism of the Reformed Church. To Pieper, Particularism as preached by the Reformed Church is the single greatest error of that church, and the one which most radically de-Christianizes and refutes it. Now, as surely as Mr. Pieper's complaints need to be taken seriously by the Reformed, this is surely a powerful 19th century style response to the 19th century over-emphasis on Particularism in the American Reformed Church. This "Particularist Reformed" spirit still lives on among the Reformed in the 21st century, especially in the more Baptistic circles. But to many Reformed thinkers nowadays this definition of the meaning of "Reformed," and the rationalistic tactics that go along with it, is beginning to be recognized as old-fashioned.
In this post-Enlightenment age when we have been freed not from the use of the mind but from rationalism, we need to rethink our theology in a manner which more meekly evaluates our rational capabilities, more highly evaluates the meaning of Scripture, and which avoids the "five-point trap" of thinking that only those points adequately characterize the whole of Reformed Theology.
There is a world of books out there about this.
One could profitably begin with D G Hart's biography:
John Williamson Nevin, High Church Calvinist.
