New Calvinists are mean but don’t know it.
Jonathan Merritt was an unlikely person to confirm a point made here before, namely, that when you define orthodoxy you also draw lines that to outsiders will look unloving and mean. (Think undergraduates at Oberlin seeking protection from disquieting perceptions.) For a while New Calvinists and their allies at the Gospel Coalition have portrayed Paleo Calvinists as mean. Now with Merritt what goes around comes around.
He observes that New Calvinists are full of criticism (and instructions on how to do it):
The website’s archives read like a how-to handbook for criticizing. TGC managing editor Matt Smethhurst tackles how to criticize fellow Christians. Blogger Jared Wilson lays out when you should criticize your pastor. Popular blogger Justin Taylor explains how to criticize your non-Christian friends and how to criticize another person’s theology and how to criticize the evangelical movement at-large.
Their rebukes are not always theoretical. TGC bloggers regularly express sharp disapproval of theologians, pastors, authors, and politicians using strong language. When writer Thabiti Anyabwile wanted to criticize homosexuality, for example, he encouraged readers to recover their “gag reflex” and focus on the “yuck factor.” Setting aside the many–and I mean many–problems with this way of thinking, Anyabwile’s approach is not exactly a silver-plated conversation starter in a non-Christian culture. You can’t transform a culture while you’re browbeating, rebuking, name-calling and gagging. That’s not a recipe for cultural engagement, but rather cultural enragement.
Then there is New Calvinists’ refusal to entertain criticisms themselves:
Most people who have been blocked by TGC say they were punished for questioning the coalition’s disastrous defense of Sovereign Grace Ministries, a prominent Calvinist ministry that was embroiled in a sexual abuse scandal. TGC personalities connected to SGM continued to express support and friendship for those involved with the scandal even as it became clear that Sovereign Grace leaders were complicit. Many who questioned TGC’s stance were blocked. Some who merely used Twitter handles such as #istandwithsurvivors were similarly punished by TGC.
TGC’s blocking spree has swept in countless pastors, seminary professors, bloggers, and others. One person told me they were blocked for challenging their comments about transgender people, while another said they were punished for questioning their stance on “biblical masculinity.” Several told me they were blocked for retweeting someone else’s critique, while others — like Northern Seminary professor Geoff Holsclaw — said they had no idea why TGC blocked them. . . .
A pattern of offering criticism while not being able to receive it, according to Dr. Leon Seltzer of Psychology Today, is a characteristic trait of narcissism. As Seltzer writes, “Deep down, clinging desperately not simply to a positive but grandiose sense of self, [narcissists are] compelled at all costs to block out any negative feedback about themselves.”
Finally, Merritt points out the problem of belonging to a club instead of a church:
TGC has established a system where in order to be a part of the network, one has to believe a set of doctrines that are more specific than some denominations. Basically, you have to be a conservative Calvinist protestant who holds particular views about gender roles, reads the Bible in a certain way, understands human sexuality like they do, etc. If you don’t agree to these positions, you’re out. And those who add their church to the directory of TGC-approved congregations are encouraged to police others. The site asks members to “report a church that doesn’t align with TGC’s Foundation Documents.”
The word “coalition” is defined as “a combination or alliance, especially a temporary one between persons, factions, states, etc.” But the structure of TGC allows for almost no diversity among its members–certainly none that would be noticeable to anyone who is not a Christian insider. So, technically-speaking, The Gospel Coalition is not a coalition at all; they are a club.
If the New Calvinists were more ecclesial and less parachurchian, they might not lose their critical side. And contrary to Merritt who thinks engaging culture is a positive, if New Calvinists were churchly they wouldn’t worry about the culture so much. Belonging to a church and working within its structures would not make them less critical, though Robert’s Rules supplies a structure for critique that takes away some of criticism’s sting. The best thing that might happen to New Calvinists if they looked to the church instead of the club, they would not be so doctrinaire about so many peripheral matters. The visible church has a way of focusing your outlook (not sure what happened to Pope Francis).
3 thoughts on “Another Difference between New and Paleo Calvinists”
Yeah, TGC is not a denomination but it has a church finder and asks web users to report churches which shouldn’t be in the directory. I would cordially request that all the baptist and indy TGCers report all the PCA churches on the TGC green list if the PCAGA goes soft on women’s ordination at this year’s meeting by adopting the proposed study committee on womenfolk. That’d show ’em. I mean, if complementarianism of a certain flavor is one of the defining TGC marks of the coalition.
Your talking about the intolerance of the tolerant is like a fundy talking about “slippery slopes”. If you keep talking that way, how are you going to “do ministry together”? https://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/trevinwax/2016/05/09/does-moving-away-from-calvinism-necessarily-lead-to-liberalism/
My experience with the TGC website is this. I am blocked from commenting on the websites main articles, but not blocked from commenting on their blog articles. Some of what was said above is true, but paleoCalvinists also have their problems. Henri Bouillard said that a theology that is not up is a false theology. To the extent that theology is not update to address new issues, that is true. For it forces us to wear the shoes of our ancestors. Yes, we both might like the same style, but our shoe sizes are often different.
At the same time, a theology thatis updated to the extent that it fails to keep the essentials of the faith or teaches us to misread the Scriptures is also a a false theology. So both standing still and not choosing wisely result in either an inadequate or inappropriate theology.