Other "Thinking Drafts" and writing by Keith Drury -- http://www.indwes.edu/tuesday .

Where are the Calvinists when you need 'em?


Balanced Christian doctrine is often found in the tension between two poles. That is, neither one side nor the other is completely right, but truth is found somewhere in between. Is this true of Calvinist-Arminian differences? Could it be that both views are helpful in correcting two different kinds of error? Rather than seeing Calvinists and Arminians as opponents facing each other in some sort of theological football game, perhaps we should see them as the left and right flanks of Christendom. After all, the enemy is the Enemy, not each other.

Now, I'm not talking here about the traditional five issues we fuss about, (depravity, election, limited atonement, resistibility of grace and perseverance) but rather the general *approach* to religion, especially as it relates to God-centeredness vs. man-centeredness. Calvinists have tended to hold down the 'right side of the line', arguing for the powerful and exclusive role of God with the focus of religion being on God, not man. On the left side of the line, Arminians believe in a greater role for man/woman including a synergism with God in matters of religion.

Taking only that core issue (God-centeredness vs. Man-centeredness) and applying it to the current brand of American Christianity, you've got to admit that the Arminians are in the majority. Where have all the Calvinists gone? They've gone to be Arminians. Not that denominations or seminaries have actually changed their published doctrines. But, simply that while many Calvinists salute the Westminster confession and traditional Calvinist doctrines, they have slipped over to the Arminian side in practice. They are confessing Calvinists but 'practicing Arminians.' After all, how can you determine a person's (or denomination's) *real* theology? Your real theology is, 'that theology which best explains your values and behavior.' That is, if it walks like an Arminian, quacks like an Arminian, and holds seekers services like an Arminian, it probably really is an Arminian. At least practically.

Now, I'm not complaining about all these new converts to the left side of Christendom. After all, I'm a Arminian-Wesleyan myself, so welcome to the left side of the line... where we beef up man's role in religion, and give more attention to human reason, tradition and experience along with the Bible. We on the left end have been prolific in spawning movements: revivalism, camp meetings, Charismatics, seeker-centeredness, contemporary Christian music, and program-ism, huckstering all kinds of fantastic whizz-bang programming designed to make your church successful. In fact, over here on the left is where all the action's been for the last several decades.

But, I'm wondering who's holding down the right flank? The danger to American Christianity today is not becoming too God-focused, Bible-oriented, or truth-based. Rather, it is becoming a mushy, event-oriented, experienced-based, sentimental man-centered religion. We've always counted on the Calvinist-Reformed 'right end' of the line to beat this kind of excess back. But in the last 20 years, experience-based religion has been blitzing the right side of the line!

Now, I don't mean to sound like an unappreciative Arminian. But, to be quite frank, I think some of you Calvinists ought to go back over and hold down the right flank. If you don't hold down your side of the line we'll eventually be swept off our feet and washed out to new age humanism, and universalism. Thanks for keeping us Arminians company over here on the left these last ten years or so, but perhaps you ought to go back over to the right end for a while. Don't worry, we Arminians will hold down the left while you are gone, protecting the church from absolutism, determinism, cold-hearted formalism, and too much talk about the judgment side of God. We can handle these errors, if you'll defend the faith on the right. After all, we're both on the same team, aren't we?

Are Calvinism and Arminianism correctives to the excesses of each other?


So what do you think?

To contribute to the thinking on this issue e-mail your response to Tuesday@indwes.edu

By Keith Drury, 1996. You are free to transmit, duplicate or distribute this article for non-profit use without permission.