the reformational blogger

The Antithesis

2012-01-28T10:06:00.000-08:00

After twenty years, I finally watched the Grand Canyon, and I'm glad I did. I didn't really know much about it other than it dealt with the intersection of Angelenos from different class and racial backgrounds.

What the film dealt with that I found so interesting, however, was the exploration of good and evil. Neal Plantinga actually uses a line from the film in the title of his book "Not the Way It's Supposed to Be." The film explored this from several different levels, exploring both structural evil and personal sin. But it maintained a degree of tension throughout--bad things continue to happen, but where the film repeatedly hinted that worse things could happen, those often didn't come to pass (and thus also pointing to common grace).

Lynn and I kept looking at each other thinking "wow, this filmmaker gets the antithesis." In fact, one of the characters puts it eloquently near the end of the film. I can't find a clip of this scene, but part of her words serve as a voice over in the trailer at 2:11.

After waking suddenly in the night, Claire says to her husband, Mac,

Everything seems so close together.

Hm?
All the good and bad things in the world. Everything.

I feel it in myself even.

And in us. Our marriage.

This film beautifully captures how God's good creation and his image bearers struggle day and and day out both with their personal short comings, the short comings of others, and the corrupting influence of evil throughout society. On the other hand, it also points to God's gracious hand to restrain sin and bring about good in the world (it never explicitly identifies this force, but there is a helicopter that hovers around a lot).

Officially reformational

2012-01-10T13:51:00.000-08:00

It's official. I'm reformational.

Kuyperianism for today

2011-12-02T13:51:00.000-08:00

Capital Commentary just published a very fine summary and recommendation of Abraham Kuyper's views by William Edgar of Westminster Seminary.

Political Ideologies and Public Justice

2011-12-02T10:47:00.000-08:00

See my current piece in Capital Commentary.

In essense I say that "the problem [with current American governing] lies with the inability [oth both parties] to rationally consider the challenges facing our nation because of unwavering commitment to ideological principles that stand at odds to one another"

Are Christian Groups and Organizations Churches?

2011-11-25T10:54:00.000-08:00

In the current issue of catapult, the online journal of *cino, editor Kirstin Vander Giessen-Reitsma offers a thoughtful commentary on the relationship of *cino to the church. To her comments, I would like to add my own:

I think part of the difficulty in understanding what church is and what it isn’t and what it does and what it doesn’t do comes from the tendency of Christians to confuse two things. I don’t think *cino is doing that, but I think it's helpful to make some clear distinctions.

First, believers often don’t distinguish on the one hand between the church as a whole (ie the organic church or the Body of Christ) and on the other hand the institutional church. I presume most readers of catapult are Christians. As such they are members of the Body of Christ or the church universal. In that sense, *cino and catapult are part of the church because they are expressions of the work of the Body of Christ and serve His people. However, many of these same Christians attend “church.” Used in this way, this term refers to the institutional church, the structure in which local congregations exist and provide a place where Christians gather to worship and be fed through the preaching of the Word and the celebratio of the sacraments. So Christians working together (and separately) are always doing the work of the church while they also form local, regional, and national organizations that constitute the institutional church

The second difficulty comes because when Christians gather in these various ‘non-church” institutions but run by Christians and for Christians, those institutions begin to serve church (institutional)-like functions, where folks gather for Bible study, prayer time, etc. In parallel to that, many institutional churches or congregations become passionate about certain Kingdom needs and develop ministries such as schools, day care, meeting the needs of the hungry, and so forth. In both cases they blur the lines between these different institutions and confuse the work of each.

I would argue that the church universal would be well served if the institutional church would stay focused on the immediate task of providing a place for public worship and equipping Christians to serve the Kingdom through the preaching of the Word and the faithful celebration of the sacraments and, perhaps, Sunday-school-like training for children and adults alike. At the same time, those in a local church body who see a need such as developing a Christian political organization, creating a shelter for battered women, and so forth, should establish separate Christian institutions with the sole purpose of meeting those needs.

*Cino does this well, I think, in creating a structure, as Vander Giessen-Reitsma puts it, “to feed the hunger for robust, intellectual, artistic faith practice.” What the church universal needs, then, are more congregations who have a broad Kingdom vision to train, support, and encourage the faithful in Kingdom service without undertaking too much work that is not immediately the task of the institutional church but without, on the other side, becoming narrowly pietistic in their outlook just because these congregations don’t take direct responsibility for the various activities local church members are involved in. Meanwhile, Christians should actively participate in institutions established to advance the God's Kingdom in all areas of life and human experience.

Why Christian Higher Education is Necessary

2011-11-11T14:06:00.000-08:00

Portland State University Philosophy professor Dr. Peter Boghossian will present a free public lecture “Faith, Belief and Hope: From Cognitive Sickness to Moral Virtue and Back Again," November 17 at 7:30 P.M. at Portland State University, Science Research and Teaching Center, Room 155, according to a recent press release.

Boghossian encourages educators and members of the academic community to directly confront faith-based beliefs in the classroom. He will challenge six common obstacles to educators failing to engage student beliefs.

Boghossian argues that faith-based beliefs are a cognitive sickness that have been turned into a moral virtue. To counter this phenomenon, he argues that faith-based beliefs should be treated like racist beliefs, given no countenance and stigmatized. An extensive questions and answer period will follow Boghossian’s presentation, and dissenting opinions are especially welcome.

Some might believe that we need Christian colleges and universities to protect Christian students from the attacks they will undoubtedly suffer at state and secular schools from professors who hold such opinions. Others might say we need to send our students to Christian institutions to indoctrinate them against such ideas. Others might say that Christian universities teach Truth whereas Boghassian's example demonstrates the lies perpetuated elsewhere.

I demur from all such positions. In fact, if that were the basis for Christian higher education, such rationale would feed the suspicions of Boghassian and his ilk who believe that faith, Christian or otherwise, is "cognitive sickness." Instead, Christian universities are places of intellectual inquiry and exploration where junior scholars (students) and senior scholars (professors) seek together to understand the world around them, their place in it, and the implications of their faith for understanding the world. Far from protecting, defending, or indoctrinating, the role of the Christian university is to invite open Christian inquiry and scholarship. This kind of openness is freeing and liberating (in keeping with the liberal arts) and is a true antidote to those who would shut down free inquiry by attacking people's faith as though it were akin to "racist beliefs [which should be] given no countenance and stigmatized."

Tea Partiers and Occupiers of Wall Street

2011-11-05T18:38:00.000-07:00

Over the years I've had occasion to observe that the essential difference between Republicans and Democrats (not disregarding a variety of other factors) is their respective distrust of the public sector and the private sector.

What's striking to me, then, is how the two current populist protest movements seem to align so fundamentally with these two parties (even though one of them hasn't yet made an explicit connection to one of the parties). The Tea Partiers seem deeply distrustful of the government (the public sector), while the Wall Street Occupiers are deeply distrustful of corporations and the super rich (the private sector).

For myself, I don't think either assumption is a sufficient basis for a political movement since I operate with the assumption that governments were instituted by God and that free markets are generally effective economic systems. Like my difficulty in aligning with either political party, I also find it difficult to sympathize with either of these protest groups.

I will say this, however: insofar as the Wall Street Occupiers are concerned with the enormous concentration of economic and political power in the hands of a very small number of people and institutions, I think they highlight an important dynamic in modern, post-industrial, western society. Free market theories did not emerge to justify this kind of powerful elite and 18th-century proponents of capitalism would have been alarmed to see such enormous power in the hands of a few and decreasing opportunity for the many.

What is the Kingdom of God?

2011-11-03T17:02:00.000-07:00

According to Google image search, it has something to do with the someplace other than earth or where we now stand (images of heaven, the sky, ladders to heaven, bridges to somewhere else) or potential harvests or yields (fields with ripe grain, fishermen casting nets). Virtually no pictures come up in the top hits protraying earthly acts of mercy or the exercise of cultural formative power.

Plowing in Hope or Probing for Land Mines?

2011-10-31T13:51:00.000-07:00

How do Christians understand their place in the world? How deep does the antithesis run? How far does grace extend?

In my experience it seems that Christians often fall into two camps in their approach to the Christian life and their place in the world. On the one hand, there are those who are deeply concerned about brokenness in the world, and particularly their own personal failings or shortcomings. As they apply grace in their lives, they seek to avoid sin, to engage in constant self-reflection in an effort to become more Christ-like. In practice, I see their efforts as akin to probing for land mines. They see the world fraught with moral dangers and their calling in the world is to avoid those dangers.

On the other hand, there are those who see the application of grace in a broader way. It equips individuals to conquer sin in their lives, but also fuels the redemption of God's world. Christians working with this perspective see their calling as more than avoiding sin, but fulfilling their pre-fall calling to work as God's image bearers, to develop his creation, and, in this broken world, to act redemptively in all areas of life (not just their personal lives). Such individuals typically have more confidence about their place in the world and I would characterize their outlook as plowing in hope. Instead of seeing the world as a field that is full of dangerous land mines that must be carefully picked through, they see the world as full of hope and promise, they accept the invitation by our Lord to plow it, not forgetting what every good farmer knows about the potential dangers to themselves and their plowing equipment in the form of stumps, rocks, gopher holes, and so forth.

Literature on the Christian life often falls into these two catagories. For example, Dallas Willard's Divine Conspiracy does a fine job of helping Christians probe for land mines whereas books such as Bradshaw Frey(et al)'s At Work and Play: Biblical Insight for Daily Obedience encourage the faithful to plow in hope.

The Blogging Poet

2011-10-23T16:51:00.000-07:00

I'm quite pleased to share with you my wife's website and blog. She began writing poetry several years ago and has recently begun an MFA program in poetry. I'm quite proud of her and feel that my own stature has been raised now that I share a home with a poet. I don't even mind so much that I sometimes serve as the subject of her poetry.

New book on Herman Dooyeweerd

2011-10-18T21:24:00.000-07:00

This past year, University of Notre Dame Press published Jonathan Chaplin's new book, Herman Dooyeweerd, Christian Philosopher of State and Civil Society. I'm eager to see this book, and find time to read it. In the meantime, I've contented myself with a review of it by Keith Sewell in the latest edition of Pro Rege.

I was also interested to see that the University of Washington, Portland State University, University of Oregon, and Whitman College libraries all have a copy of the book. I'm not sure who's deciding that such staunchly reformational books should be added to their collections, but I'm not complaining.

The Duch-Munsee Encounter at a Fire Sale Price!

2010-11-30T17:24:00.000-08:00

Time to buy my book, The Dutch-Munsee Encounter--the only reformational treatment of European-Native American interaction. It may be one of the few reformationally influenced historical monographs period. And it's now only $22 at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1571816720/ref=asc_df_15718167201337631/?tag=nextagus0054817-20&creative=394997&creativeASIN=1571816720&linkCode=asn

Farewell to the "father" of Christian rock

2008-02-25T18:14:00.000-08:00

Yesterday morning, Sunday, February 24, Larry Norman passed away at his home in Salem, Oregon. He has been rightly called the father of Christian rock.

The music of Larry Norman, his ideas, his principles all helped me see that Christianity was and should be a vital force in our world. And despite his other-worldly theology, his commitment to excellence in music and to Christian creativity is what largely sensitized me to Reformational thinking. I doubt Larry Norman had read or heard of Abraham Kuyper and Herman Dooyeweerd, but his musicianship and his call to the church to be relevant in the world clearly reflected their principles.

In this way, Larry Norman's life and music prepared me to attend Dordt College and made me receptive to the philosophy being taught there.

http://www.larrynorman.com/

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/februaryweb-only/109-22.0.html

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_8365594

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Norman

"All I wanna know is why should the Devil have all the good music?"

The Church Digging Its Own Grave

2007-03-21T05:50:00.000-07:00

I've recently been re-reading The Gravedigger Files by Os Guinness. This Screwtape Letters-esque book argues that the church of the West is being duped on several levels by diabolical schemes in which the church digs its own grave. Long out of print (I first read it in the 80s), this volume offers detailed and trenchant analysis of the problems the church in North America faces today. Unlike books such as The Late Great Planet Earth, The Gravedigger Files' prophetic vision is, unfortunately, being fulfilled before our very eyes. It is striking to read it more than 20 years after its initial publication, look back, and see how accurate Guinness was (and is).

Next post: How James Dobson's actions with regard to global warning fits the "Fossils and Fanatics" syndrome described by Guinness.

Be a Friend of Kuyper

2006-09-28T06:14:00.000-07:00

Can Kuyperianism work in and with the Emergent church? Perhaps the answer is here.

In asking the question, I don't mean to imply a necessary or even likely chasm between the two. In fact, I am troubled by the connection which is often made between "conservative" and "reformed." Reformed, at its best, has always expressed itself as obedience to the Word of God. Conservative Reformed thinkers often reflect that obedience to God's Word, but are also often led by their conservative commitments (which are not necessarily the same thing).

Fundamentalist Hermeneutic Proves Evolution!

2006-09-24T12:38:00.000-07:00

I've heard it argued that Psalm 139 demonstrates DNA: "you knit me together in my mother's womb" (v. 13). But by the same fundamentalist interpretive logic, the psalm also proves evolution: "When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body" (vv. 15-16).

"The Academy"

2006-08-31T15:01:00.000-07:00

Does the antithesis cut through "the academy," or to one side of it? To hear many conservative theologians talk, I must be tainted or think certain things because I'm part of the academy. Just a few weeks ago a visiting minister in our church launched into an adult Sunday school class aligning ideas of multi-authorship of the Pentateuch with liberal thinking and the academy. To me this is a classic case of confusing structure with direction.

The Church

2006-08-30T13:11:00.000-07:00

In the midst of what I consider very compelling definitions of the Bible, Seerveld comments on the church:

That scholarly discovery in the Bible sparked a new-old idea of "church." Church is not the clergy, the administrative clerics, or the popes in charge because they are the only one single, true apostolic authority succeeding from Simon Peter. The "church" is the communion of ordinary, sinful saints who have repented! It is faithful people (ho laos, the laity) of God, the believers sealed in the baptism of Jesus Christ and stamped, anointed by the Holy Spirit, ordained to live out and mediate the gospel to others.

What is the Bible? (IV)

2006-08-29T09:11:00.000-07:00

And finally Seerveld writes,

"The Bible [is] God-speaking literature with its true story of the Lord creating the whole world, of our historical fall into sin, and of Jesus Christ's making redemption graciously available for those who respond by faith to discipleship as they live in love, sorrow, and hope for the completion of Christ's kingdom Rule a-coming."

Tomorrow, the church . . .

What is the Bible? (III)

2006-08-28T11:13:00.000-07:00

And then Seerveld writes

The Bible is a Holy Spirit-packed script to be spoken which works faith in people's hearts and generates human life in community, a coumminity of people who thankfully congregate to search the Scriptures together for wisdom to be obedient to God in whatever they are gifted to do on earth (II Timothy 3:16-17, Proverbs 1:1-7, Romans 12:3-9, I Corinthians 12, Acts 17:10-12)."

What is the Bible? (II)

2006-08-26T14:59:00.000-07:00

Next Seerveld writes:

"The Bible is God's Word booked telling us the magnalia Dei with a Holy Spirited power that can convict us as hearers to repent of our sin, drive us to plead for adoption by the sovereign Lord into Jesus Christ's body, and teach us to carry steadfastly our neighbors' burdens (Romans 8:14-17 and 10:14-17, Galatians 6:1-3)."

What is the Bible? (I)

2006-08-25T09:55:00.000-07:00

I recently reread Cal Seerveld's "Reformational Christian Philosophy and Christian College Education" (Pro Rege, March 2002, 1-16). One section is title "What is the Bible?" And and elsewhere in the essay he offers us what I consider exquisite descriptions of the Bible. I plan to offer one a day for awhile.

Today's: "The holy Scriptures are God-speaking literature given to us historically for our learning by faith the one true story of the Lord's Rule a-coming and the contours of what our obedient response should be."

Structure the same, direction different

2006-08-22T21:42:00.000-07:00

Well, I started this blog as a vehicle to disseminate reformational thinking and resources, and to generate discussion on things reformational. I never really intended to blog as a matter of regular practice. However, I've made a change. Steve Bishop (An Accidental Blog and All of Life Redeemed) does all I had hoped to do in such dissemination work. There is no need for me to replicate his work. So now the blog is dedicated to my occasional thoughts. Now isn't that special. We'll see how occasional they are and how thoughtful as well.

Here's a reformational question for you: Does the title of today's post accurately describe the change I've just announced? (Hint: What are structures, really?)

I've been tagged . . .

2006-08-19T15:11:00.000-07:00

Steve Bishop tagged me. I didn’t even know I was playing!

Before I answer the questions (see below), I’ll offer the disclaimer that the Bible fits almost every category (and I’m not a pietist!): it changed my life; I’ve read it more than once (or I’m trying to); I’d want it on a dessert island (but I like to pose the question, what five books of the Bible would you pick if you had to?); it makes me laugh; it makes me cry; while I can’t wish it had been written, I often wish it included more; sometimes I wish it hadn’t been written because of the demands it places on me (ignorance is bliss, they say); I’m currently reading it (currently in the Psalms); and, yes, I’ve read and am reading the Bible, but I so often find myself ignorant of much of the wisdom, mystery, and knowledge of the Scriptures that I share the sentiment that we sometimes have about books we’ve been meaning to read.

One more disclaimer: I may call this site the Reformational Blogger, but if you expect a litany of “reformational” books, you’ll be disappointed. (I believe that that fact makes me particularly representative of how a reformational thinker should think!)

1. One book that changed your life: American Slavery, American Freedom by Edmund Morgan—reading it was my epiphany in becoming a historian.

2. One book that you’ve read more than once: My own, The Dutch-Munsee Encounter, but I don’t suppose that’s the intention of the question and I can’t say I enjoyed it much the second, third, fourth . . . ad nauseam . . . time through.

I’m currently rereading Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion.

3. One book you’d want on a desert island: My favorite book, East of Eden by John Steinbeck (hope it doesn’t wear thin—I’d hate to hate it!).

4. One book that made you laugh: A Prayer for Owen Meany, but a close second might be Straight Man: A Novel by Richard Russo. This is a great cathartic for those dealing with the nonsense of academia.

5. One book that made you cry: I generally cry at movies, not when I read books, but I probably cried when I read Jane Eyre as a teenager. Slave narratives tend to get to me (or anything else that reveals injustice).

6. One book that you wish had been written: Calvinism and the American Founding (a detailed, careful, and nuanced study by a professional historian which exams the relative influence of Calvinism on the founding of the United States).

7. One book that you wish had never been written: The Light and the Glory by Peter Marshall or any book which simplistically and blithely connects the American founding with Calvinism or makes the United States out to be God’s chosen nation as though God is still in the business of choosing nations the same way he chose Israel.

8. One book you’re currently reading: The History and Character of Calvinism by John T. McNeill (in preparing to teach a course on the “History and Doctrine of Calvinism”).

9. One book you’ve been meaning to read: There are many--in history, philosophy, theology, as well as literature--but this past year my thoughts keep turning to Bavink’s Reformed Dogmatics.

10. Now tag five people: Nathan Otto and Dave Hegeman. That’s only two, but Steve tagged one too many, and I’m not sure who else to tag at this moment.

-------

I'll tag legion if I can contact him . . .

-------
And, Arnold Sikkema!

Calvinist and Quaker

2006-03-10T08:42:00.000-08:00

I've been a little busy . . . but I'm back, at least for today.

Some have thought it odd that I left a reformed, indeed, reformational, college to teach at a Quaker school. Truth be told, from a practical standpoint, there's lots of overlap. For that reason, my reformational perspective is welcome on campus as evidenced by the following articles:

http://www.georgefox.edu/journalonline/inside.html

http://www.georgefox.edu/journalonline/point_view.html

My experience in general at GFU and in this particular instance reinforces my conviction that reformed and reformational believers spend too much time talking to (and arguing with) each other and not enought time engaging other believers. The trick, I think, isn't to try to lay out all the reformational groundwork before getting on to other matters, but to start with scripture, the common source of wisdom and knowledge for all believers (no matter how different they may read and interpret that scripture).

This concern inspired my response to Al Wolters' "What is to be done" piece published in the print version of Comment this past December:

Throughout Al Wolters’ essay, we find an emphasis upon Scripture and upon the Creation Order. Here, I think, we find the foundation upon which Neo-Calvinists can pursue an ecumenical embrace of their philosophy. I have long been troubled by the unwillingness or inability (or both) of many Reformational thinkers to share their vision with, well, those who aren’t Dutch or Christian Reformed or both. But I acknowledge the great difficulties in doing so. Speaking of modal aspects, sphere sovereignty, law and subject side, meaning-nucleus, and so forth, usually leaves the uninitiated Christian confused.

“True ecumenicity,” writes Wolters, “will always depend on biblical . . . rootedness.” And indeed, it is Scripture which opens up to us the Creation Order. The authority of Scripture is also a point which Neo-Calvinists share, at least on the surface, with many of their Christian brethren. I was recently asked by a group of students on my campus to share with them “the Biblical basis for justice.” This group had just formed, calling themselves Quaere Verum (seek the truth). Mostly of Evangelical background or persuasion, they nevertheless recognized that their faith meant more than “worship and evangelism,” as one of them put it. So I joined their meeting and opened the Scriptures for them saying that Christians too often read their Bible from the perspective of the Fall and not from (the Biblically revealed) perspective of the Creation Order. From there I was able to highlight Scripture’s emphasis on our creational calling as human beings, God’s ongoing concern for His creation, the Creation’s own corruption by evil, and the responsibility of God’s people to fulfill their task as God’s image bearers and empowered through Christ’s redemptive work. This was certainly new to them, but it was clear that they began to see the world through new eyes. One student said she found it “refreshing, inspiring, and encouraging . . . because it addressed so much of what I have been struggling to understand on my own.” I can’t say that during my short presentation I turned them into Neo-Calvinists, but I can say that by turning to Scripture, I helped them begin to see the importance of the Creation Order and the radical implications for Christian living.

Origins of the term "Reformational"

2005-11-11T10:19:00.000-08:00

In response to an earlier post, Steve Bishop shared definitions from the OED of the terms Neo-Calvinism and Reformational.

Later he posted a query on Thinknet to which Danie Strauss replied identifying Dooyeweerd's use of the term as early as 1926 in his Inaugural Address (page 108, note 7):

“Vgl. hier ook de summiere analyse van het wijsgeerig verschil tusschen de Thomistische en de Calvinistische wetsidee. De leer der substantieele vormen kan het Calvinisme nimmer vernieuwen. Want zij hangt samen met een natuurbeschouwing, die tegen de reformatorische rechtdraads ingaat en heeft tot grondslag gediend aan de Roomsche “Vermittlung” tusschen natuur en genade. Zij strijdt ook ten eenen male met de Calvinistische grensgedachte der wet” / “Compare here also my succinct analysis of the philosophical difference between the Thomistic and the Calvinistic cosmonomic idea. The theory of substantial forms can never be renewed by Calvinism for it coheres with a view of nature that directly contradicts the reformational and it formed the basis of the Roman mediation between nature and grace. It is also once and for all in conflict with the Calvinistic understanding of the law as boundary.”).

Further defining "Reformational"

2005-11-05T14:12:00.000-08:00

In retrospect, I think my last entry, "Defining 'Reformational'," should have been titled "Describing 'Reformational.'" I'll make a modest attempt at defining Reformational in this entry and do so "experientially."

At an accidental blog, Steve Bishop took some inspiration from me and began exploring the essential aspects of Neo-Calvinism and its relationship to branches of/movements within Christianity.

In response to his initial list of Neo-Calvinist particulars, I added "the centrality of the Word," not in the Biblistic way of Fundamentalist teaching, but in the broader and traditional Reformed sense which recognizes that God's Word is expressed in his Creation, in Jesus Christ, and in the Written Word.

This is, and has long been important to me as a Christian--the centrality of the Word and the need for us to conform ourselves to it. But as important as this is, I realize a central key to my own thinking (insofar as I understand myself to think Reformationally) is something other than this. I talk to many Christians who are Reformed, conservative, evangelical, or some combination of the three and frequently find those who would agree with me on the importance of the centrality of Word, but after that, our agreement usually quickly breaks down.

What is the essential point of disagreement? More often than not, it boils down to an understanding, or lack of understanding, of the Creation Order. This, I think, is what characterizes my own thinking as a Christian and is the key element in Reformational thinking.

Of course, this is no brilliant insight on my part. I only mean to highlight that my experience as I interact with other believers (as well as non-believers) has demonstrated to me how fundamental the concept of the Creation Order is to Reformational thinking.

I like how Al Wolter's expresses it in his essay "What is to be done . . .":

To thus see every thing in our experience as being fundamentally shaped and constituted by God's workmanship in creation (and thus very good), and at the same time as being subject to the mis-shaping and re-shaping forces of man's sin and God's grace (and thus simultaneously evil and in principle redeemable), is to my mind to capture the basic intuition of the neocalvinist worldview . . .

He further states

This basic vision implies a fundamental affirmation of creation in all its pluriform variety, and at the same time a deep sense of the extensive damage done by sin, as well as the ultimate recoverability (by God's grace in Christ) of even the most desperately distorted ontological shapes in our fallen world.

Defining "Reformational"

2005-10-30T03:13:00.000-08:00

My answer to my question:

Reformational refers to the philosophical system of thought stemming from the Reformation (usually from within Reformed churches) and the teaching of Abraham Kuyper, and originally developed and expressed by Herman Dooyeweerd and D.H.Th. Vollenhoven. It is both Reformed and Neo-Calvinist, but to be Reformed and Neo-Calvinist does not necessarily mean to be Reformational (see the Venn diagrams here, here, and here.

Along with many other Reformed and Reformational entries, Wikipedia has an entry here. A very good expression of Reformational thinking was made by Roy Clouser at Dordt College in 2002: Is There a Christian View of Everything? Also helpful is Al Wolters's What is to be done . . . toward a neocalvinist agenda.

I see the terms Reformed and Reformational used interchangeably at times by Reformed-minded people who don't necessarily know or understand the philosophical movement referenced above. Also, when I taught at Dordt College, there was some debate about Reformed vs Reformational. Clearly Reformational thinking has deeply influenced Dordt College--its guiding documents reflect it and it's probably not easy to find another institution with a greater concentration of faculty with Reformational leanings. But some saw Dordt as Reformed and only inclusively Reformational.

As you can see, I also capitalize all these terms--nouns, adjectives, and adverbs alike. I follow the principle that if the term stems from a proper noun (which is capitalized) then all derivatives are capitalized. This is less common among continentals and this reluctance to capitalize apparently catches on among Reformational types themselves. In this regard, consider me a dissenter in the ranks.

What does "reformational" mean?

2005-10-25T10:26:00.000-07:00

As I promised in my last post, I'm conducting a survey. And considering the fact that I may only have about two readers so far, this won't be a terribly scientific survey. But then again, I have my disinclination towards some of the assumptions of the modern scientific method. Still, if you are reading this and know anyone who would be willing to weigh in on these questions, I ask you to invite them to respond; I'm eager to hear as much feedback as possible on this question.

I have my own answer to both questions, but I've certainly heard some differences of opinion and I'd like to see how widely such opinions range.

Here's my survey:
1) What does "reformational" mean or to what does it refer? (And I invite you to consider it with reference to the terms "reformed" and "neo-calvinist.")
2) Should it (and the other two terms) be capitalized or not?

Who I am and Why I'm here

2005-10-24T10:02:00.000-07:00

Paul Otto

I created this blog not with the primary intention of blogging (there are greater bloggers than I), but with the intention of providing a clearinghouse of information related to reformational thinking. At this point, the best sources for such information can be found at All of Life Redeemed which provides an overview of reformational thinking and links to many reformational sites and additional resources. For literature on reformational thought, reformational approaches to a variety of disciplines, and faith and learning resources more generally, see The Faith and Learning Network at the Institute for Christian Studies.

These are on the right track, but I would like to see an up-to-date online bibliography which includes all works which are influenced by or promote reformational thinking (and, why not, a list works critical of the reformational movement and reformational thinking), a list of all scholars who are influenced by or promote reformational thinking, and a list of all websites with the same criteria. And, while I am a strong supporter of the integration of faith and learning more generally, and strive to see that promoted as well, I would like to see such reformational resources exclusive of non-reformational thinking. This is necessary for those particularly interested in reformational thinking in order to help refine and promote the same.

This, by the way, begs an important question which I will ask in my next posting and await the response of all those lurking in the ether of the world wide web.