A New Calvinist becomes a Regular Calvinist

Published on by D. G. Hart

Danny Hide Hyde may not detect sufficient earnestness, but Todd Pruitt makes clear the limitations of New Calvinist awakenings among the Babdists (which is a big world but for every Southern Baptist Seminary there are three Furmans, four Baylors and six Wake Forests):

As I reflect on the past year as a Presbyterian several things emerge for me as sources of regular gratitude.

1. The Westminster Confession of Faith
The Westminster Confession of Faith is one of the most helpful and beautiful theological documents outside of Scripture. As a friend of mine once said regarding confessions of faith: “They need to have a lot of words.” Indeed. Many churches have built a sort of unity around a common set of “core values” or a mission statement. And while those things can be helpful, they are no substitute for a comprehensive and clear confession of faith. For the body of Christ, unity based on shared values, while good, is no substitute for unity based upon doctrinal convictions.

Likewise a unity based on the merest sort of Christian confession is not robust enough to navigate the confusing waters of contemporary evangelicalism. In the 1960’s and 70’s there was perhaps an evangelical center. That center was anchored to men like John Stott and Francis Schaeffer. This has changed of course. Once men like Brian McLaren and Rob Bell were tolerated within evangelicalism’s big tent the foundations of the once unified center could no longer bear the weight of its own contradictions.

Certainly there are many contributing factors, but the idea of a mere Christianity in today’s evangelicalism is, I believe, not possible. We need, and beyond that, ought to desire, a confession that carefully guards the church from being carried off by every wind of doctrine. For the denomination to which I belong the Westminster Confession of Faith is that confession. If you are a Baptist then perhaps you ought to investigate the London Baptist Confession.

2. The Book of Church Order
The Book of Church Order (BCO) is used by the PCA as a guide for governance and polity. It is a thick three ring blue binder. Some of my friends who attended a Presbyterian seminary refer to it as the “big blue sleeping pill.” It is true that the BCO does not always offer the most compelling reading experience. However, for this man raised in an autonomous church tradition, the BCO has been a welcome source of clarity and security. No more entering elder meetings with fear and trembling not know what will be done or said. No more making things up on the fly. No more trying to navigate issues of discipline without properly constituted church courts. No more ordaining nice but manifestly unqualified men for church office.

Also, the BCO makes things blessedly less efficient than a CEO model of church leadership. And while that will frustrate the entrepreneurial pastor, it is a source of protection for the church (and the pastor!). It means that there are clearly defined ways of running meetings, exercising discipline, administering the sacraments, ordaining and calling pastors, installing elders, running meetings of the session and congregation, ordering congregational worship, etc.

Does the BCO protect against every conceivable contingency? Is it a guarantee that nothing will go wrong? Of course not. Do things go wrong in Presbyterian churches? Of course! But I am convinced that the Book of Church order is the best game in town for properly, wisely, and biblically ordering the church.

This is of course what they said — they being the Old Side and Old School Presbyterians who always had to try to convince the enthusiasts (Gilbert Tennent) and moralizers (Lyman Beecher) that just because they thought they had the Holy Ghost (feathers and all) or the Decalogue, the rules of being a Reformed church were still in place. Maybe after two years, that penny will drop for Pastor Pruitt.

19 thoughts on “A New Calvinist becomes a Regular Calvinist”

  5. A quick note for Mr. Pruitt: the directory for worship in the PCA is not binding except for the three chapters on the sacraments. Otherwise the info on worship is suggested. It may not be the guard he thinks it is.

    Like

  7. Chris, great point, and I can tell you first-hand from my own Presbytery that sadly the BCO is not the guard it should be. Thankfully it is followed in my church.

    Like

  11. Hyde on why “gratitude” is not the “sola” motive—

    In preparing sermons in my ongoing “Studies in First Peter” I found the Scottish Presbyterian Alexander Nisbet’s (1623–1669) commentary (1658) on 1 Peter 1:13–25 to be helpful and relevant to the current debate. With verse 13, Peter turns from indicative to imperative, from praise to God to exhortation to Christians. And in his comments on these verses, Nisbet lists twelve—not merely one—motivations to holiness. At a minimum this shows us that the Reformed tradition is much broader than some want to make it out to be.

    I’ll just list the motivations below (some are simple, some more complex), but if you’d like to follow along and read the entire section, pull up a chair and grab your Banner of Truth reprint off the shelf. The relevant pages are 34–55.

    The consideration of our spiritual privileges by Jesus Christ. (v. 13)
    The sweet privilege of adoption. (v. 14)
    Since the Lord has called us from an estate of sin and wrath to a state of holiness and happiness we should walk answerably to our calling. (vv. 15–16)
    There should be a conformity between the Lord and all his children. (vv. 15–16)
    God our Father is also an exact and impartial Judge of us and our actions. (v. 17)
    We are strangers and sojourners in the midst of many hazards and temptations. (v. 17)
    The great privilege of our redemption—its price and its effect. (vv. 18–19)
    Since Christ was appointed Mediator from eternity and was manifested for our good we are bound to live to his honor. (v. 20)
    Since the Father has glorified our Guarantor in our nature to bring us confidently into his presence as reconciled to us, we should live to his honor. (v. 21)
    The Spirit’s power enabling to believe the gospel has so purged out heart corruption that we have attained a sincere love for the Lord’s people, therefore we ought to grow in this love. (v. 22)
    The excellency of or new life and nature in regeneration. (v. 23)
    The higher excellency of our spiritual state above even the glory of man naturally considered. (vv. 24–25)

    http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2014/09/09/nisbet-on-motivations-for-holiness/

    Like

  12. Mark,

    I’m not sure I can keep that list of motivations going in my head. I wonder, can I just live out of simple gratitude for all that Christ has done in saving me?

    Like

  13. Brad, the entire third section of the HC, which emphasizes gratitude as a motivation for good works, says yes. Has Hyde forgotten the Reformed thumbnail of guilt, grace, gratitude?

    Like

  14. Zrim,

    It seems that perhaps he has forgotten G3. I remember in my eeevangelical days taking lots of notes and by Monday or Tuesday how much I began to forget. Guilt, Grace, Gratitude is so much easier to remember and the categories are so helpful. But then again, if I find gratitude as sufficient for living out sanctity, my piety must be on the downward spiral.

    Like

  15. “In particular, one issue is that of what motivates a Christian to pursue holiness. Oftentimes people cite the Heidelberg Catechism’s threefold ‘guilt, grace, gratitude’ structure as the proof that gratitude is the motivation for holiness—as if the Heidelberg Catechism were an exhaustive systematic theology and not instead written to educate children and newly ‘Reformed’ people whose prince declared them ‘Reformed’ in a simple way.”

    Brad, sounds like you’re hanging too much on the HC–grow up and get busy. But if Hyde is right here then the older tradition of preaching through the HC is a culprit in keeping Reformed believers immature. Perhaps better to preach through the Banner writers.

    Like

  16. I do wonder what the purpose is of the scare quotes around ‘Reformed’. Are these folks that find the ‘guilt, grace, gratitude’ structure to be enough perhaps not truly ‘Reformed’?

    Like

  17. Brad, can’t speak for Zrim (wouldn’t try, would be inconthievable), but there’s various flavors of reformed, and we joke about it, right?

    Various Levels of Reformedness
    (not in order according to degree)

    AR – Almost Reformed (has only heard of R. C. Sproul)
    BR – Barely Reformed (has heard of R. C. Sproul and thought about buying some of his tapes)
    CR – Critically Reformed (more negative than John MacArthur on the Charasmatic movement)
    DR – Doubtfully Reformed (only attends this church for the music)
    ER – Errantly Reformed (a Four Point Calvinist)
    FR – Fantastically Reformed (owns a set of Calvin’s Commentaries)
    GR – Grossly Reformed (the kid you would want your daughter to date but not marry)
    HR – Hopefully Reformed (the kid you would want your daughter to marry for his money but you would keep his name on your prayer list)
    IR – Incredibly Reformed (even the Session doesn’t believe half of what this guy believes)
    LR – Loudly Reformed (maybe right, maybe wrong, but never in doubt)
    MR – Mostly Reformed (watches football on Sunday afternoons with the family and reviews the Shorter Catechism during halftime)
    NR – Newly Reformed (has recently begun attending a Reformed church and has had to buy a new bookshelf for all the additional reading material)
    PR – Possibly Reformed (spoke up once at Bible Church and told to try the PCA)
    SR – Staunchly Reformed (can quote limited sections of the Shorter Catechism and the Confession of Faith)
    TR – Truly Reformed (has memorized the entire Shorter Catechism and can quote the Confession of Faith by chapter and section)

    Nice to see you at oldlife, brother. Keep the books today, and I’ll do the same (emoticon).

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.