Evangelical Calvinism: Volume 2: Dogmatics and Devotion

Evangelical Calvinism

Volume 2: Dogmatics and Devotion

edited by

Myk Habets and Bobby Grow

foreword by

Oliver D. Crisp

EVANGELICAL CALVINISM

Volume 2: Dogmatics and Devotion

Copyright © 2017 Wipf and Stock Publishers. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.

Unless otherwise noted Scripture quotations taken from the New American Standard Bible® (NASB), Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission. www.Lockman.org

Pickwick Publications

An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers

199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3

Eugene, OR 97401

www.wipfandstock.com

paperback isbn: 978-1

-

4982-0907

-

6

hardcover isbn: 978-1

-

4982-0909

-

0

ebook isbn: 978-1

-

4982-0908

-

3

Cataloging-in-Publication data:

Names: Habets, Myk, editor. | Grow, Bobby, editor.

Title: Evangelical Calvinism : volume 2 : dogmatics and devotion / edited by Myk Habets and Bobby Grow.

Description: Eugene, OR : Pickwick, 2017 | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: ISBN 978-1-4982-0907-6 (paperback) | ISBN 978-1-4982-0909-0 (hardcover) | ISBN 978-1-4982-0908-3 (ebook)

Subjects: LCSH: Evangelicalism. | Calvinism.

Classification: LCC BR1640 E854 2017 (print) | LCC BR1640 (ebook)

Manufactured in the U.S.A. 02/18/09

Table of Contents

Title Page

Contributors

Foreword

Acknowledgments

Chapter 1: Introduction

Part One: Dogmatics

Chapter 2: Crossing the Epistemological Impasse

Chapter 3: Assurance is of the Essence of Saving Faith

Chapter 4: The Word Became Flesh

Chapter 5: Perichoretic Salvation

Part Two: Dogmatic Devotion

Chapter 6: The Advent of Ministry

Chapter 7: The Principal Point on Which Our Whole Salvation Turns

Chapter 8: The Problem with Preferential Love

Chapter 9: The Vicarious Humanity of Christ as the Basis of Christian Spirituality

Chapter 10: The Vicarious Humanity of Christ and Sanctification

Part Three: Devotion

Chapter 11: Christ and Culture

Chapter 12: The Pastoral Function of Calvin’s Doctrine of Election

Chapter 13: Calvin’s Awful Health and God’s Awesome Providence

Chapter 14: John Calvin and the Weekly Prayer Meeting

Chapter 15: What Kind of Ministry?

Chapter 16: Preaching Christ

Chapter 17: The Form of Formation

Chapter 18: On Prayer and the Criticism of the Political and Cultural Positioning of Religion

Chapter 19: Script(ur)ing the Performance of Neighborly Personhood

To my loving parents, Ron and Bev, who early on pointed me to a life with Jesus Christ. It is your probing questions about God’s faithfulness and love that has motivated me to delve deep into the triune life of God. This volume is an expression of that pursuit to know the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Bobby

To my colleagues at Carey Baptist College and Graduate School.

Myk

Contributors

John C. Clark

Associate Professor of Theology at Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois. John earned his PhD from St. Michael’s College, University of Toronto. He has published several contributions in theological journals and books, and most recently co-authored, with Marcus P. Johnson, The Incarnation of God: The Mystery of the Gospel as the Foundation of Evangelical Theology (Crossway, 2015). John and his wife, Kate, live in Chicago with their two children, William and Gwyneth, and are members of Church of the Resurrection, Anglican Church in North America (ACNA).

Oliver D. Crisp

Professor of systematic theology, Fuller Theological Seminary, California, USA. He is also a professorial fellow at the Institute for Analytic and Exegetical Theology, University of St Andrews, Scotland. He has published many articles in professional journals including the Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Journal of Theological Studies, Religious Studies, Scottish Journal of Theology, and International Journal for Systematic Theology, among others. He has edited or coedited ten books and is the author of ten monographs, including Deviant Calvinism: Broadening Reformed Theology (2014), Jonathan Edwards among the Theologians (2015), and The Word Enfleshed: Exploring the Person and Work of Christ (2016). 

Eric G. Flett

Chair, Department of Theology, Professor of Theology and Culture, Eastern University, Philadelphia, USA. His interests in the intersection of theology and culture arise out of a deep commitment to Trinitarian theology and interdisciplinary work, and from cross-cultural experiences in Germany, Canada, India, Tunisia, England, Brazil, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago. His book, Persons, Powers, and Pluralities: Toward a Trinitarian Theology of Culture (Pickwick, 2011), is the result of doctoral work conducted at the University of London. His interests in interdisciplinary theological reflection, contextual theology, and Caribbean theology can be found in articles in Current Anthropology (2014), A Kairos Moment for Caribbean Theology (Pickwick, 2013), and On Knowing Humanity: Insights from Theology for Anthropology (Routledge, forthcoming). He delivered the Zenas Gerig Memorial Lecture at Jamaica Theological Seminary (2015), and is presently working on Son of the Father, Image of God, Messiah of the Jews, Sender of the Spirit: A Christology for Social Engagement, based upon a recent travel seminar to Brasil with the Nagel Institute for the Study of World Christianity. Eric thinks jazz is a superior art form and that all good theology is rooted in improvisation. He lives in Newtown Square with his wife, JoAnn (who directs Eastern’s MBA in Economic Development, and prefers calypso over jazz), and his two sons, Miles and Elliot. They are members of Broad Street Ministry on the Avenue of the Arts in Philadelphia.

James D. Gifford Jr.

Vice-President of Academic Affairs at Charlotte Christian College and Theological Seminary in Charlotte, North Carolina. Jim is also an Instructional Mentor for Liberty University Online School of divinity and an adjunct lecturer at West Virginia University. He is married to Karen and has three children, Seth, Joshua, and Shelby.

Bobby Grow

Has an MA in Biblical Studies and Theology from Multnomah Biblical Seminary, Portland, Oregon. He is a theologian at large, authors the Evangelical Calvinist blog, and lives with his wife and two kids in Vancouver, Washington.

Myk Habets

Dean of Faculty, Lecturer in Systematic Theology, and Head of Carey Graduate School, Carey Baptist College, Auckland, New Zealand. Myk is registered as a Minister of the Baptist Churches of New Zealand, is married and has two children. His publications include: Theosis in the Theology of Thomas Torrance (Ashgate, 2009), The Anointed Son (Pickwick, 2010), Theology in Transposition (Fortress, 2013), and he has edited numerous works such as Trinitarian Theology after Barth, with Phillip Tolliday (Pickwick, 2011), Third Article Theology (Fortress, 2016), and he has published numerous journal articles. Myk is Co-Vice President of the Thomas F. Torrance Theological Fellowship and is Associate Editor for Paticipatio.

W. Allen Hogge

Professor and Chair, Emeritus, Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh Schools of the Health Sciences. He received his medical degree from the University of Virginia, following which he completed a residency in Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Virginia Hospitals, and a fellowship in Medical Genetics at the University of California, San Francisco. He received a MA from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary with a focus in science and theology. His academic interests are in the areas of the prenatal diagnosis and treatment of genetic disorders, the genetic etiologies of recurrent pregnancy loss, and the ethical and theological implications of human embryonic stem cell research. Currently, he is semi-retired and serves as a Clinical Professor at Virginia Commonwealth University.

Marcus P. Johnson

Associate Professor of Theology at Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois. Marcus earned his PhD in Systematic Theology from the University of St. Michaels College (University of Toronto). He is the author of One with Christ: An Evangelical Theology of Salvation and the co-author (with John C. Clark) of The Incarnation of God: The Mystery of the Gospel as the Foundation of Evangelical Theology. He and his wife, Stacie, live in Saint Charles, Illinois with their sons, Peter and Abel, and attend St. Mark’s Church.

Douglas F. Kelly

Formally Richard Jordan Professor of Theology, Reformed Theological Seminary, Doug has been named Professor Emeritus. He received his PhD from the University of Edinburgh and is the author of many written works including, If God Already Knows, Why Pray?, Preachers with Power: Four Stalwarts of the South, New Life in the Wasteland, Creation and Change, and The Emergence of Liberty in the Modern World, Systematic Theology, vol. 1: The Holy Trinity (2008), and Systematic Theology, vol. 2: The Beauty of Christ (2014); both published by Mentor (Christian Focus - Scotland). He has translated such works as Sermons by John Calvin on II Samuel. In his retirement Doug will start a site in Charleston, SC, with the needs of African-American Pastors in mind, where he will continue to teach Systematic Theology, as an aid in preaching through all parts of the Bible (in conjunction with Alpha and Omega Bible College).

Christian Kettler

Professor of Theology and Religion at Friends University, Wichita, Kansas. His PhD is from Fuller Theological Seminary, under Ray S. Anderson and Geoffrey Bromiley. He is an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church (USA) and serves on the preaching team at the Church of the Savior in Wichita. His publications include, The Vicarious Humanity of Christ and the Reality of Salvation (1991, University Press of America, reprinted 2010, Wipf and Stock), The God Who Believes: Faith, Doubt, and the Vicarious Humanity of Christ (Cascade, 2005), The God Who Rejoices: Joy, Despair, and the Vicarious Humanity of Christ (Cascade, 2010), and Reading Ray S. Anderson: Theology as Ministry, Ministry as Theology (Pickwick, 2010). Chris is on the executive board and a past president of the Thomas F. Torrance Theological Fellowship.

Scott Kirkland

Honorary postdoctoral research associate at Trinity College, University of Divinity, Melbourne. He is the author of Into the Far Country: Karl Barth and the Modern Subject (Fortress, 2016), and editor, with John C. McDowell and Ashley John Moyse, of Correlating Sobornost: Karl Barth and the Russian Orthodox Tradition (Fortress, 2016). His work can also be found in New Blackfriars, Irish Theological Quarterly, and Heythrop Journal.

John C. McDowell

Since 2015 John has been the Director of Research at the University of Divinity, and is based in Melbourne. Between 2009 and 2014 he was the Professor of the Morpeth Chair of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Newcastle, Australia, having moved from his post as the Meldrum Senior Lecturer in Systematic Theology at the University of Edinburgh. John has been involved in congregations in the Uniting Church of Australia, the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, the Church of Scotland, the Scottish Baptists, and the Church of England. He is married with five children. Among his publications are Hope in Barth’s Eschatology (Ashgate, 2000), The Gospel according to Star Wars: Faith, Hope and the Force (Westminster John Knox, 2007), The Politics of Big Fantasy: Studies in Cultural Suspicion (McFarland, 2014), and The Ideology of Identity Politics in George Lucas (McFarland, 2016); the edited collection Philosophy and the Burden of Theological Honesty: A Donald MacKinnon Reader (Continuum, 2011); and the co-edited Conversing with Barth (Ashgate, 2004), and Correlating Sobernost: Conversations between Karl Barth and the Russian Orthodox Tradition, edited by John C. McDowell, Ashley Moyse, and Scott Kirkland (Fortress, 2016).

Charles Partee

(Retired) P. C. Rossin Professor of Church History, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Most of his scholarly writing concerns the theology of John Calvin with works such as Calvin and Classical Philosophy (Brill, 1977), and his recent work The Theology of John Calvin (WJK, 2008). Partee has also written a book dealing with the pioneer missionary career of his father-in-law, a 1934 graduate of Pittsburgh Seminary, entitled Adventure in Africa: The Story of Don McClure (University of America, 2000), and with Andrew Purves Encountering God: Christian Faith in Turbulent Times (WJK, 2000).

Andrew Picard

Lectures at Carey Baptist College in Applied Theology, Ecclesiology, and Theology of Culture. He is Associate Editor of Pacific Journal of Baptist Research, and Co-President of New Zealand Baptist Research and Historical Society. He has published articles on Baptist theology and history, the theology of Paul Fiddes, the theology of Colin Gunton (the subject of his PhD), and co-published with Myk Habets, Theology and the Experience of Disability: Interdisciplinary Perspectives from Voices Down Under (Routledge, 2016). Andrew is married and has two daughters, and they worship at Titirangi Baptist Church.

Andrew Purves

Jean and Nancy Davis Professor Emeritus of Historical Theology, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Ordained to Ministry of Word and Sacraments, PCUSA. Andrew is married and has three children. His many books include The Search for Compassion, A Passion for the Gospel (with P. Mark Achtemeier), Encountering God: Christian Faith in Turbulent Times (with Charles Partee), Pastoral Theology in the Classical Tradition, Reconstructing Pastoral Theology: A Christological Foundation, The Crucifixion of Ministry, The Resurrection of Ministry, and recently Exploring Christology and Atonement: Conversations with John McLeod Campbell, Hugh Ross Mackintosh and Thomas F. Torrance. Andrew retired at the end of November, 2015, after 33 years of teaching at PTS. With his wife, Cathy, he moved to Leland, NC, across the bridge from historic downtown Wilmington, NC, where he reads, writes, and walks on the beach.

Alexandra S. Radcliff

Assistant Editor of Participatio; mother to Nicholas and wife to Jason (fellow contributor to this volume). Alexandra earned her PhD in theology as the Donald M. Baillie Scholar at the University of St Andrews. She has contributed to various journals and is the author of The Claim of Humanity in Christ (Pickwick, 2016).

Jason R. Radcliff

School for Ministry Faculty, The George Mercer, Jr. Memorial School of Theology, Garden City, New York; Humanities Teacher, The Stony Brook School, Stony Brook, New York; Assistant Editor, Participatio. Jason earned his PhD in theology at The University of Edinburgh. He is the author of T. F. Torrance and the Church Fathers (Pickwick, 2014), contributor to various books including T. F. Torrance and Orthodoxy, The Doctrine of the Holy Trinity Revisited, and Studia Patristica, and has published in journals such as Evangelical Quarterly, Theology in Scotland, and The Expository Times. He and his wife Alexandra (also contributor to this volume) live on Long Island, New York with their son, Nicholas, and are members of Christ Church, Episcopal in Port Jefferson (TEC).

Victor Shepherd

Professor of Theology, Tyndale University College and Seminary, Toronto, Canada. He has taught at Memorial University of Newfoundland, the Toronto School of Theology, and McMaster University. He has also been Adjunct Professor at Trinity College and Wycliffe College, University of Toronto where he supervised doctoral students. In 2005 he was made Professor Ordinarius of The University of Oxford, UK. Author of twelve books including The Nature and Function of Faith in the Theology of John Calvin, Interpreting Martin Luther: An Introduction to His Life and Thought, Mercy Immense and Free: Essays on Wesley and Wesleyan Theology, and The Committed Self: An Introduction to Existentialism for Christians, and numerous audio-sets of lectures, as well as over three hundred articles, he has addressed learned societies both in Canada and abroad, including the North American Calvin Studies Society and the Oxford Institute of Methodist Theological Studies. Twice he has been invited to the International Calvin Studies Colloquium, those deemed to be the world’s best one hundred Calvin scholars. He is a minister of the Presbyterian Church in Canada.

David W. Torrance

Retired Church of Scotland Minister after serving for thirty-six years in parish ministry; is the brother of theologians Thomas F. and James B. Torrance, and he helped edit the English edition of Calvin’s New Testament commentaries. David is the author of Israel, God’s Servant, The Reluctant Minister, Memoirs by David W Torrance, editor of The Witness of the Jews to God, God, Family and Sexuality, and is co-author of Embracing Truth and A Passion for Christ: Vision That Ignites Ministry. David has published numerous essays in journals and books.

Geordie W. Zeigler

Associate Pastor of Adult Discipleship and Formation, Columbia Presbyterian Church, Vancouver, WA, USA. Geordie earned his PhD from the University of Aberdeen and is the author of Trinitarian Grace and Participation: An Entry into the Theology of T. F. Torrance (Fortress, 2017). Geordie and his wife, Sharon, live in Camas, WA with their children Andrew, Brennan, and KaiLi.

Foreword

Oliver D. Crisp

Am I an Evangelical Calvinist? I hope I am. In the first volume of essays that was published under the title Evangelical Calvinism: Resourcing the Continuing Reformation of the Church , editors Myk Habets and Bobby Grow closed the book with fifteen theses that represented what they thought of as the core theological commitments of Evangelical Calvinism. It might be helpful at the beginning of the follow-up volume to be reminded of what these were:

1. The Holy Trinity is the absolute ground and grammar of all epistemology, theology, and worship.

2. The primacy of God’s triune life is grounded in love, for God is love.

3. There is one covenant of grace.

4. God is primarily covenantal and not contractual in his dealings with humanity.

5. Election is christologically conditioned.

6. Grace precedes law.

7. Assurance is of the essence of faith.

8. Evangelical Calvinism endorses a supralapsarian Christology which emphasizes the doctrine of the primacy of Christ.

9. Evangelical Calvinism is a form of dialogical/dialectical theology.

10. Evangelical Calvinism places an emphasis upon the doctrine of union with/in Christ whereby all the benefits of Christ are ours.

11. Christ lived, died, and rose again for all humanity, thus Evangelical Calvinism affirms a doctrine of universal atonement.

12. Universalism is not a corollary of universal redemption and is not constitutive for Evangelical Calvinism.

13. There is no legitimate theological concept of double predestination as construed in the tradition of Reformed Scholasticism.

14. The atonement is multifaceted and must not be reduced to one culturally conditioned atonement theory but, rather, to a theologically unified but multi-faceted atonement model.

15. Evangelical Calvinism is in continuity with the Reformed confessional tradition.

There is much here that I would wholeheartedly approve—even applaud—including the Christological focus of election (even to the extent of endorsing supralapsarianism), the primacy of the Trinity in matters theological, the emphasis on divine grace and love, the centrality of Christ’s redemptive work and of union with Christ in salvation, and the need for continuity with the tradition of Reformed confessions. A number of these commitments are not exclusively the preserve of Calvinism, of course. But taken together, I think these 15 theses do represent a distinctively Reformed approach to theology, one shaped in important respects by the Scottish theology of Thomas F. Torrance. As one schooled in this tradition of theology, I am very sympathetic to its goals.

And yet: there are areas with which I find myself in disagreement. Is the atonement universal in its scope? How can this be squared with a kind of particularism about the atonement that characterizes the majority voice in the Reformed tradition? How can we avoid double predestination if Evangelical Calvinism is not universalist in its teachings? Must Evangelical theology be dialogical/dialectical in nature? Is assurance the essence of faith? These are just some of the most obvious questions that occur to me. I am not a dialectical theologian. I am not clear that assurance is the essence of faith. I think the atonement is for an elect in keeping with the Reformed confessional tradition; and so on. So perhaps I’m not an Evangelical Calvinist as far as Habets and Grow are concerned. (They may wish to call me something different: a deviant Calvinist, perhaps, or an analytic theologian.)

Such theological distinctions may seem like making a fuss about things that are merely academic, in the pejorative sense of that term. In the end, do they really matter? Well, yes; yes they do. They matter a great deal because what is at stake in such discussions has to do with what is true, not just someone’s opinion. For theology is a truth-apt, and truth-aimed discipline. Or at least, so the Evangelical Calvinists seem to think, and I am entirely in agreement with them. However, our grip on the theological truth of the matter on any particular theological topic may be less sure than we sometimes think. Theological realism is certainly consistent with a healthy dose of intellectual humility, as well as skepticism towards any particular theological formulation that claims to have a monopoly on the truth of the matter. Our theological formulations are fragile things, human attempts to grasp something of the wondrous truth of the gospel, and of the divine nature, which is forever beyond our ken.

Well, then, are the theses of Evangelical Calvinism on target? In many respects, yes. But in some particulars, no—or at least, so I think. Does that mean there is nothing to be learnt from discussion with, and reflection upon the work of the Evangelical Calvinists? No, of course not. There is much to be learnt from their careful articulation of an irenic and expansive view of the Reformed faith in an age where we are too quick to criticize, and too slow to ponder the views of those other than our own. When I read the first volume of essays, I learnt much, was edified, and came away the better for having interacted with the essays it contained. Here, in this sequel, there is every reason to expect the same result. Essays on the application of the Torrancean notion of Christ’s vicarious humanity to the Christian life, on faith and assurance, on John Williamson Nevin’s Mercersburg account of the Incarnation, on perichoretic salvation, on Torrance’s account of eschatology, ministry, and the church, and on Calvin’s doctrine of the vicarious priesthood of Christ are a veritable feast of theology that anyone sympathetic to Reformed sensibilities will find deeply absorbing.

Because of the way in which theology has become assimilated to the requirements of professional guilds in the Western world, it is often divorced from the life of the Church. One can be a theology professor in many contexts with little or no commitment to the Church. One of the salient features of this volume is the way in which the authors seek to present a joined-up theology, which brings together theological reflection for ecclesiastical praxis. That is a most welcome development, one that was already signaled in the first volume of essays.

Perhaps I am not an Evangelical Calvinist—at least, not if adherence to all 15 of the theses of Habets and Grow are a requirement. But even if that is the case, I am happy to hold out the hand of fellowship to other Christians, especially, other Reformed Christians, whose work has already done much to stimulate renewed discussion of some of the distinctive doctrinal commitments of Reformed theology. I hope that this continues with the publication of this second volume, ad maiorem dei gloriam!

Oliver D. Crisp, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, July 2016

Acknowledgments

Another book calls for another set of people to be thanked.

Angela, thank you for your support and incredible love for me as you stood with me through the effort required to compose this book; you are the love of my life. Madeline and Jacob, my children, you are the joys of my life. (Bobby)

Odele, Sydney, and Liam, once again you have provided the perfect foil for editing a book, filling the house with laughter, activity, and love. Thank you. I would also like to thank Bobby for being a fantastic partner-in-crime, working with me now on two volumes (and thinking about working with me on another two!). (Myk)

Sarah Snell formatted the text and sub-edited the manuscript, and as always, did a splendid and efficient job. Thank you. Wipf and Stock continue to be easy allies in academic publishing, making the process smooth and well-organized. It is a pleasure to have another book in your stable.

Each of the contributors deserves a special thank you, especially to those who have signed up to this volume after offering essays to the first volume as well. Thank you for your ongoing commitment to thinking theologically and being theologians of the church. To the new-comers in this volume, thank you for your penetrating essays and your insightful observations. Welcome. Finally, to Oliver for the Foreword, it was very gracious of you and we deeply appreciate it.

A final word of acknowledgment goes to the wider Christian community that interacted with volume one in critically aware ways. Thank you. That you took an interest in this project and thought it worthy enough to respond to is an honor. It is our hope and prayer that with this second volume, we have given you even more to talk about!

Bobby Grow

soli Deo gloria

Washington

Myk Habets

Doctor Serviens Ecclesiae

Auckland, New Zealand

1

Introduction

On Dogmatics and Devotion in the Christian Life

Myk Habets and Bobby Grow

Evangelical Calvinism is not a movement or a partisan enterprise. Rather, it is an orientation, a commitment to a series of theological convictions that position one more or less toward other like-minded thinkers. The collection of essays in this book follows on from our 2012 volume Evangelical Calvinism: Essays Resourcing the Continuing Reformation of the Church. ¹ In this earlier volume eleven scholars were brought together to offer a comprehensive theological vision of what Calvinism in an evangelical key could look like. Two-thirds of that volume concerned academic theology, with one third being devoted to applied matters. The goal of this first volume was to establish a dialogue within Reformed theology, and wider, over the rudimentary outline of theology in a Calvinian key. Included in this earlier volume was a final chapter by Habets and Grow in which fifteen theses were offered as a dogmatic prospect for the future of Evangelical Calvinism. This first volume was critically received and stimulated considerable dialogue. The editors deemed this a success.

The earlier volume was not without its critics, however. This was both anticipated and welcomed. Those not committed to the contours of an Evangelical Calvinism took exception to certain claims made in the book, particularly in regards to the Reformed provenance of an Evangelical Calvinism, the reliability of its reading of the Reformed tradition, and also in terms of its dogmatic relation to Arminianism. A number of essays were published in which ideas for and against the claims made in the first volume were worked out, and, as is now typical of our digital age, a large number of blogs and social media posts were uploaded in which the contents of the first volume were discussed. Throughout these academic exchanges a lot was learnt from all sides of the debate, dogmatic issues were brought into greater relief, and lacunae in the discussions were identified. While not intended as a direct or point-for-point response and refutation of these debates, it was thought that a second volume of essays could further clarify what is meant by an Evangelical Calvinism, and also offer more of a constructive contribution to contemporary Reformed thought and theology. For these and other reasons volume two of Evangelical Calvinism was commissioned, with the focus being on dogmatics and devotion.

The emphasis of this volume is twofold. First, to further elucidate the contours of an Evangelical Calvinism, and second, to illustrate and address more of the applied nature of the theological enterprise. In terms of dogmatics, several key emphases of the Evangelical Calvinist approach needed to be explored further, and that is why Part One contains essays on epistemology, assurance of salvation, some further historical antecedents, and an essay on holistic salvation. Each of these themes required further thought and articulation. In Part Two, the difficult doctrine of the vicarious humanity of Christ is addressed. So crucial is this doctrine to a faithful account of biblical theology, and so central is it to Evangelical Calvinism, that five chapters cover the doctrine from various perspectives, including the advent of ministry, Christ’s High Priestly activity, vicarious love, spirituality, sanctification, and suffering. This section has been labelled Dogmatic Devotion, as dogmatic theology is brought to bear upon issues of life and love. Part Three examines a range of applied topics with dogmatic clarity. Issues such as culture, pastoral care, prayer, ministry, preaching, and hospitality are examined as dogmatics is applied to life. A burden of this volume is to exhibit the real-life practicality of theology and as such, make good on an evangelical aspect of so called Evangelical Calvinism.

While this volume is a work of Christian dogmatics, we have attempted to make it more accessible to the ministerial/pastoral leader. Evangelical Calvinism offers the kinds of contours of thought that people are so thirsty for in the evangelical church today: an emphasis on God’s love, God’s faith for us in Christ, and a solid foundation from which to live our daily lives as Christians. In a world of change and flux, violence and persecution, and exploitation and abuse, people need to hear the Good News again in order to have faith, love one another, and cultivate hope. Good theology, thinking faithful to God’s word and ways, will result in good living. By bringing together academic and pastoral essays in this volume, we aim to further resource Christ’s Church for ministry in the twenty-first century.

In a recent article on the New Calvinism, or the Young, Restless, and Reformed (YRR) Movement, Paul Owen says:

Calvinism today seems to appeal mostly to a certain sort of personality, and that personality is not always healthy. I have discovered that the person who really spends a lot of time talking about the doctrines of grace, tends to fit a typical profile. They tend to be male (rarely do you find women sitting around arguing about the details of TULIP), intellectually arrogant, argumentative, insecure (and therefore intolerant), and prone to constructing straw-man arguments. In order for the typical Calvinist’s faith to remain secure, he seems to feel the need to imagine all others outside his theological box as evil, uninformed, or just plain stupid. I have seen this in men of all ages, some Baptist, some Presbyterian, some laymen, some ordained ministers.²

Evangelical Calvinism shares these concerns over the YRR movement, and any other such tradition which sets itself over other legitimate forms of Christianity. Evangelical Calvinism has no intention of setting itself up as one point along some dialectical see-saw in which heavyweights battle it out to see who gets control. Instead of see-saws we tend to think of tables and chairs and eating a good meal in the company of good friends with differing points of view. With a place set for us at the theological table we rub shoulders with our Reformed family—Federal Calvinists to our right and Arminians to our left. Across the table sit other family members—Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans, and others. We could extend the metaphor and extend the table to include others still—Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and still more. Around such a table one can be appreciated and listened to, but respectfully disagreed with. Then comes the theological discussion intended to move us all closer to the truth of God in Christ. This form of receptive ecumenism is a vision of Evangelical Calvinism.

Owen continues his observations of the new Calvinists when he writes of a certain ecclesial paucity developed by current Evangelical life:

I don’t think there is any necessary connection between Calvinism and such traits, so why does it seem to be so prevalent today? Part of the reason, which I do not have time or space to develop here, is that the evangelical church has no robust ecclesiology, and thus no structured spirituality to put into practice as the body of Christ. And given the absence of a structured spiritual life, Reformed Christianity tends to be reduced to a set of doctrines to contemplate, which attracts mainly certain kinds of people, and encourages certain kinds of attitudes among believers. Thus, when you remove Reformed theology from its proper historical place in the structured life of Reformed religion and ecclesiology, and plant it in the foreign soil of modern evangelical gnostic spirituality, it takes a grotesque shape that is contrary to its origins.³

Given these observations, the current volume seeks to move beyond doctrine to devotion, from theory to practice, and as such, exhibit the vibrancy of an Evangelical Calvinism, one that is not restricted to highly nuanced discussions over doctrine (not that these are not also important), but concerns all of life. This is not to suggest that theology is impractical, or that dogmatics is opposed to practice. These are false dualisms perpetuated by modern Evangelicals and as such, Owen is correct. But when dogmatics and devotion are seen as being of one piece, then the rather absurd dualism of head knowledge versus heart knowledge is exposed for the fallacy it is, and we can get back to an orthodox and practical Christianity.

Finally, Owen speaks of the TULIP Cult which is in existence.

People are sometimes surprised to hear me speak of the TULIP cult. What do I mean when I speak this way? By a cult, I mean a sect within the broad landscape of Christianity which takes as its operating center some principle other than Christ crucified. This is certainly the case for the Young, Restless and Reformed. It is obvious that the operating center which holds this movement together is TULIP, not the gospel of the cross. One gets the impression that their sense of identity is inseparable from their sense of superiority, and thus it is tied to their adherence to and promotion of the doctrines of grace.

It is not the name of the Lamb that is constantly on the lips of these men, but the names of Calvin (though I have found most of the YRR have actually read very little of him) and the personalities featured at Calvinist conferences, gatherings and websites. What seems to be of paramount importance to these people is the demonstration of the superiority of the arguments for TULIP and its consequences for thinking out the logic of the Christian faith. The Christian faith, in other words, finds its coherence in the doctrines of grace, rather than in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ. Rather than glory in Christ, and see in Christ’s face the focus of divine revelation, Calvinists these days glory in the doctrines of grace, and see the focus of God’s revelation in today’s preachers of TULIP religion. And just as reflecting on Christ makes us more like Christ (

2

Cor.

3

:

18

), reflecting on these Calvinist personalities seems to shape many Christians into a far less pleasing image.⁴

To our way of thinking, Owen displays all the attributes of an Evangelical Calvinist. His analysis of the YRR Movement is broad sweeping and paints with large brushstrokes, that is clear, but he is largely correct as far as the editors’ experience is concerned, both in America and as far afield as Australasia. Whenever the Gospel of Christ eclipses the Christ of the Gospel, the church is in trouble.

Beyond the more popular YRR Movement that Owen helpfully details there are also academics within the classically Reformed, and/or the Post-Reformation Reformed orthodox tradition, like Richard Muller, who believe that Evangelical Calvinism is not critically attuned to the actual history of the Reformers; particularly that of John Calvin. Muller believes that any attempt to offer an alternative voice to the multi-valent reality of the Reformed faith, that is, by critiquing Post-Reformation Reformed orthodoxy and Federal Calvinism, assumes the form of an argument that in the literature has been labelled Calvin against the Calvinists.⁵ Essentially this is the idea that Calvin’s own theological emphases were discordant from what later developed into Post-Reformation Reformed orthodoxy and/or what we often refer to as classical Calvinism. Muller is right that some over-zealous thinkers in the past have reconstructed history in such a way that Calvin appears to be severely out of step with the predestinarian Calvinism that developed later. However, that notwithstanding, we maintain that it is still possible to critique the theological conclusions produced by the classical Calvinists, even sounding like, and agreeing with, some of the critiques of the so called Calvin against the Calvinists thinkers, and yet not be guilty by association with that particular argument.

A persistent and central claim of Muller’s is that critics of classical Calvinism, the editors of this work included, continue to misunderstand and misconstrue the definition of, and relation of scholasticism to Reformed dogmatics.⁶ Muller writes:

The point is simple enough—indeed, it ought to have been self-evident and in need of no comment had it not been for the major confusion caused by older definitions of Protestant scholasticism, definitions that still remain in vogue in particular among the proponents of the Calvin against the Calivinists methodology. Several recent works, including one embodying this defective methodology, have further confused the point by misrepresenting the distinction, as if it were a denial that method has any effect on content. It therefore bears further attention here, particularly in view of the confusion of scholasticism with predestinarianism and determinism and of scholasticism with Aristotelianism, so evident in the Calvin against the Calvinists literature.

As a preliminary issue, it needs to emphasized that the definitions of scholasticism as primarily a matter of method, specifically, of academic method, rather than a reference to content and particular conclusions whether philosophical or theological—very much like the definitions of humanism as a matter of method, specifically, of philological method, rather than a reference to content and particularly conclusions—were not definitions devised by a revisionist scholarship for the sake of refuting the Calvin against the Calvinists understanding of Protestant scholasticism. Rather, they are definitions held in common by several generations of medieval and Renaissance historians, definitions well in place prior to the dogmatic recasting of the notion of scholasticism by the Calvin against the Calvinists school of thought, definitions characteristically ignored by that school in its presentations of the thought of Calvin and later Reformed theologians. In other words, identification of scholasticism as primarily referencing method places the reappraisal of Protestant scholasticism and orthodoxy firmly in an established trajectory of intellectual history, while the content-laden definitions of the Calvin against the Calvinists school have been formulated in a historical vacuum filled with the doctrinal agendas of contemporary theologians. This problem is particularly evident in the more recent versions of the Calvin against the Calvinists claim, inasmuch as they cite the revisionist literature on the issue of Protestant scholasticism rather selectively and fail to engage the significant body of scholarship on the issue of nature scholasticism [sic], indeed, of the nature of humanism as well, as has been consistently referenced as an element in the formulation of a revised perspective on early modern Protestant thought, and in addition, fail to engage the sources that have been analyzed in the process of reappraising the scholasticism of early modern Protestantism.

In brief, the Calvin against the Calvinists definition assumed that the intrusion of scholasticism into Protestant theology brought with it forms of deductive racionation . . . invariably based upon Aristotelian philosophic commitment and implying a pronounced interest in metaphysical matters, in abstract speculative thought, particularly with reference to the doctrine of God, with the distinctive Protestant position being made to rest on a speculative formulation of the will of God. . . .⁷

As Evangelical Calvinists we do not disagree with Muller, insofar as he accurately appraises the so called Calvin against the Calvinists argument, but Muller’s critique begs a question: what in fact is scholasticism? Even though some of the Calvin against the Calvinists thinkers may have been too strident in their construction of some of the history, that does not also mean that their material theological critiques are totally awry simply because some of their more formal methodological parameters may have been out of calibration. Even so, what if we take Muller’s view of scholasticism to heart—and for the most part, as Evangelical Calvinists, we do—what if being scholastic in form ends up agreeing with many of the Calvin against the Calvinists theological critiques, while at the same time agreeing with Muller that some of the formal historical reconstruction of the Calvin against the Calvinists was aloof? We believe that Evangelical Calvinism has found the center-ground by affirming the need for sober appropriation of what it means to be scholastic in mode, but as a result we end up disagreeing with Muller and others in regard to what kind of theological conclusions are produced when following through with a truly scholastic project and mode. But again, what are the actual entailments of scholasticism?

In Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honor of Willem J. van Asselt, Martijn Bac and Theo Pleizier offer a chapter entitled Teaching Reformed Scholasticism in the Contemporary Classroom. Bac and Pleizer outline how scholasticism should be taught today in theological classrooms and they develop how scholastics of the past retrieved authoritative voices for their own material and theological purposes. More than simply reconstructing the history of ideas and theological development, proper scholastic method was concerned to engage the concepts of prior voices from the tradition by appropriating themes and motifs that fit broader theological concerns, and all in order to forward the cause of theological truth. In other words, the greater concern was to organically move within the trajectory and mood set out by the past in order to constructively engage the present and future by developing the ideas of these past voices by placing them within the burgeoning and developing movement of Reformed theology. What Bac and Pleizer highlight is that the scholastic mode of retrieval is very much like Evangelical Calvinism’s method; which ironically runs counter to the typical critique of Evangelical Calvinism as illustrated by Muller. Here is what Bac and Pleizer write in regard to the scholastic method, and what was called reverential exposition:

Reformed theologians did not read their sources of Scripture and tradition in a historical sense, i.e., as part of an ongoing tradition, but rather as ‘authorities’ of truth. Until the breakdown of scholasticism and the historical revolution, sources were not quoted in a historical way, be they the Bible, Aristotle, Augustine, or Thomas Aquinas. A quotation did not indicate a correct historical understanding of what its original author had meant, but was read systematically as bearer of truth. From this it follows that contradictions among authorities were solved logically rather than hermeneutically.⁸

We find it ironic that people like Muller and others would critique Evangelical Calvinism for imbibing the spirit of even the Post-Reformation Reformed orthodox faith (methodologically) more than their apparent heirs (Muller and others). If there are themes and motifs present in Calvin (such as his doctrine of unio Christi) then such themes and doctrines can legitimately be appropriated, critiqued, and developed from within a Reformed trajectory.

A final example of how Bac and Pleizier develop the idea of reverent exposition will suffice.

Therefore, these texts had to be explained with reverence (exponere reverenter), that is, not in historical conformity with a tradition or with the author’s expressed intention but in conformity with truth, i.e., reverently denoted in correspondence with established theological and philosophical truth. This method of reverent exposition involved a hermeneutical procedure that went back to the patristic period. To be sure, there was room for some exegesis but, as de Rijk has noted, the scholastics used the hermeneutical norm of objective truth (of the debated subjects: veritas rerum) in addition to a kind of philological exegesis employing semantic criteria for interpretation. This resulted in an incorporation of the authoritative text into one’s own conceptual framework.⁹¹⁰

Scholastic methodology was not about repristinating and absolutizing a period as the norming norm, but felt the freedom to fluidly engage with the past in a way that had relevance for the present; and in a way that organically built from the trajectory provided for in the past. Or, as Barth would argue in his book, The Theology of the Reformed Confessions,¹¹ to operate within the spirit of the Reformed faith (subordinate to Scripture and thus always reforming), and not the letter, which is to appeal to a sort of repristinated procrustean bed of perceived static truth that can simply be inherited but not developed in any kind of new or meaningful way.

In summary, we suggest that Evangelical Calvinism is actually imbibing the spirit of the Reformed faith. Our mode is to primarily engage the past constructively with the goal of engaging the truth which transcends, but does not elide, the historical situadedness of particular people; but at the same time doing so in a way that seeks dialogical engagement with the past in order to provoke the present with themes that most magnify the name of Jesus. If Muller and company want to critique Evangelical Calvinism (and those of like mind), then they will need to be truly scholastic in form, and not just presume that being historians (which has its rightful place) is what this is all about. Instead it is about resourcing the past to magnify Jesus in Christianly dogmatic robust ways which we believe the mood of Evangelical Calvinism offers by elevating theological themes, from history, that do just that.

For these and other reasons this volume has at its center the doctrine of the vicarious humanity and ministry of Christ. This is perhaps the single most significant contribution an evangelical Calvinism can offer the contemporary church. Those familiar with the approach taken in Volume One, and those equally familiar with current trends in theology, will be aware that the ground and grammar of theology is a doctrine of the triune God. From the Trinity one then examines creation, and all the other external works of God—humanity, church, and world—included. Living within the overflow of God’s boundless love, united by the one Christ through the communion of the Holy Spirit, our lives then come into correct focus and what ministry, mission, and ethics looks like then unfold. Of course, ministry, mission, and ethics cannot exist in a vacuum, sealed off from these foundational doctrines of Trinity and Christology, and so even here, when thinking of our actual lives, we are still talking about God and Christ. All being must be thought of as caught up into the workings ad extra of the Holy Trinity, for in him we live and move and have our being (Acts 17.28).

What, then, is life for? It is for living, of course, but as Socrates said, what is the life worth living? A properly Christian reply has to be, A Christ-like life is the only life worth living. And so Christology becomes the controlling norm for anthropology, as the doctrine of God becomes the controlling norm for Christology. The God of triune life and love creates out of nothing for the sole purpose of ecstatic love. The creature exists to experience the love of God and to reflect this love back to him and all of creation. It is not that God needs creatures or their love, the triune God is replete within his own triunity. It is out of such infinite and boundless love that God creates in the first place. And it is within the life and love of God that creatures find their being, their purpose, and their ends.

Creaturely life has no end in itself then, but exists to bring glory to God. On its own, apart from intimate communion with God, creatures merely serve themselves or create idols of their own to worship. We are, as Luther said, in curvetus se, creatures turned in upon ourselves. Created to participate in the divine life and love, we have become miserable little gods, attempting to establish our own counter-kingdoms, and in such enterprise, find fulfilment. We know this doesn’t work, but due to the surd that sin is, we continue the pathetic attempt to live life without reference to God.

The antidote to such reckless living is not, however, what we might think if we listen to countless sermons preached from behind countless pulpits each Sunday. Every talk about morality, work ethic, or self-improvement is a false gospel if it is not first established in Christ. Only Christ is the Image of God, and only Christ is able to live a life well-pleasing to God. All others must find their life hid in his and from within his ministry, mission, and ethics, live a life worth living that glorifies God. This is why the doctrine of the vicarious humanity and vicarious ministry of Christ is vital. United by the Spirit to Christ, we are only then able to offer to the Father a life that would bring him glory. Theology Proper is here coordinated with Christology, which is then coordinated with anthropology, which is then coordinated with ecclesiology. We know who God is through knowledge of the incarnate Son, Christ shows us what it means to be human, and united by the Spirit to him and other believers we are the body of Christ on earth, the Church. Only then does ministry, mission, and ethics have a place. As a piece of theological summary, we might say that the imitatio Christi follows upon a participatio Christi.

The Christian life is one lived out of Christ and by the Spirit. This can suggest, and often has, a certain passivity on the part of the believer; a let go and let God attitude. But it is not at all clear that this is the natural corollary of such a view. Rather, this calls for some sort of clarity over divine and human agency. The Apostle Paul was clear that all we do in the Christian life is attributable to God when he wrote, "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live, yet not I but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith, the faithfulness of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me" (Gal 2.20). As Thomas Torrance reflected upon this passage, a favourite of his, he writes:

This is surely the insight that we must allow to inform all our human responses to God, whether they be in faith, conversion and personal decision, worship and prayer, the holy sacraments, or the proclamation of the Gospel: ‘I yet not I but Christ’. . .this applies to the whole of my life in Christ and to all my human responses to God, for in Jesus Christ they are laid hold of, sanctified and informed by his vicarious life of obedience and response to the Father. They are in fact so indissolubly united to the life of Jesus Christ which he lived out among us and which he has offered to the Father, as arising out of our human being and nature, that they are our responses toward the love of the Father poured out upon us through the mediation of the Son and in the unity of his Holy Spirit.¹²

Torrance developed a maxim for this sort of thinking: all of grace does not mean nothing of me. All of grace means all of me. By this he means to express that in the Christian life all we do is attributed, as St Paul wrote, to Christ, but at the same time we are free agents and so it is genuinely our acts we are speaking of. As Kathryn Tanner has reflected upon this same