Reformed Theology

Doing Theology

by R. Michael Allen

This book introduces Reformed theology by surveying the doctrinal concerns that have shaped its historical development. The book sketches the diversity of the Reformed tradition through the past five centuries even as it highlights the continuity with regard to certain theological emphases. In so doing, it accentuates that Reformed theology is marked by both formal ('the always reforming church') and material ('the Reformed church') interests. Furthermore, it attends to both revisionary and conservative trends within the Reformed tradition.



The book covers eight major theological Word of God, covenant, God and Christ, sin and grace, faith, worship, confessions and authority, and culture and eschatology. It engages a variety of Reformed confessional writings, as well as a number of individual theologians (including Zwingli, Calvin, Bullinger, Bucer, Beza, Owen, Turretin, Edwards, Schleiermacher, Hodge, Shedd, Heppe, Bavinck, Barth, and Niebuhr).

Genres: Theology, Christian

232 pages, Paperback

First published July 1, 2010

About the author

R. Michael Allen (PhD, Wheaton College) is Kennedy Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Knox Theological Seminary in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. He is ordained in the Evangelical Presbyterian Church and is the author of several books.

Reviews

[Alexandru Croitor · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Law and the human failure to fulfill it is not the final or primary note of Christian teaching, but is merely anticipatory to the sound of divine grace shown in the works and words of the triune God."
---
I, for one, thoroughly enjoyed it. He presents central themes in the thought of the reformers taking in consideration (and keeping it up to the ecclesia semper reformanda est) the evolution of these themes in the writings of modern Reformed theologians. Also, another thing I appreciated was the focus on the catholicity of the Reformers and their descendants; his writing is very "irenic", not trying to "convert" anyone, nor "defend" Reformed theology (he plainly states that out and follows Barth on the fact that "good dogmatics is the best apologetic") - it keeps in line with the whole idea of "surveying the thought of a particular theology". It's a clear presentation and a valuable read.

The book starts with a preliminary chapter, clarifying out some terms: being aware of the common association between Calvinist and Reformed (often seen as synonyms), he 'rejects' the former on some historical basis (Calvin, especially on matters of soteriology - where the term is most often used -, exhibited a great interest in the "Augustinian" view of predestination; but he didn't "start a movement", nor was he the first to 'rearticulate' it) and also pointing out that, affirming it (i.e "doctrines of grace"), doesn't make one Reformed.
>"While such use of the term “Reformed” may be very handy in certain settings (e.g., differentiating predestinarian Baptists from other Baptists), it cannot be allowed to serve as the primary meaning." (pg. 5)

He then proceeds to the question of "how we know God" and deals with it in the first chapter.
God can truly be known, in as much as He reveals Himself in the divine Word, 'His speaking being His deed'(G. C. Berkouwer); or as John Webster very well put it: "revelation is the self-presentation of the triune God, the free work of sovereign mercy in which God wills, establishes and perfects saving fellowship with himself in which humankind comes to know, love and fear him above all things."

Next is one of the central tenets of Reformed theology - covenants; as John Hesselink puts it “Reformed theology is covenant theology” and this is a central truth to be grasped in understanding the relation between God and His people.

The third chapter focuses on the Trinity (where he makes the case for 'catholicity':"Reformed theology must see its way to being a catholic theology, never taking its Trinitarian basis for granted"), God's attributes, the Person of Jesus Christ and, especially, the threefold office (munus triplex) of the Incarnate Son (Prophet, Priest and King - this understanding of Christ's work rose out of the Reformers emphasis on the unity of the covenant of grace.)

Being part of the Protestant "family", Reformed theology has been the religion of 'sola fide'. This statement from the First Helvetic Confession describes the reformers take on the topic of salvation: “in all evangelical teaching the most sublime and the principal article and the one which should be expressly set forth in every sermon and impressed upon the hearts of men should be that we are preserved and saved solely by the one mercy of God and by the merit of Christ”. The dogmatic account (of sola fide and justification) is shown to "ground" the work of sanctification, clearly pointing to the effects of this knowledge, not only on a vertical axis, but also on a horizontal one. The historical discussion of 'revivalism' and the Awakenings in the States was very helpful, especially the bibliographical material suggested. In the midst of that (now quite prominent) pietism, his particular observation on the nature of faith is very welcomed:
>That holiness is by faith alone demonstrates that human identity is not made (by works) but given (received by faith). Faith merely indicates, points to its object. (...)[F]aith is not an immanent religious phenomenon with its own substance or value. Rather, faith testifies to human definition from without—and, therefore, to God’s gracious gift of human being and activity. (pg. 79)

The chapter on "Sin and Grace" deals with the more "controversial" themes of Reformed thought. The imputation of Adam's sin and the reality of this original sin is affirmed by the reformed theologians and, dealing with grace, the polemic with the Remonstrants (aka Dordt, aka TULIP) couldn't at all be missed. Two things, he argues, are improper to the acronym (of which, I assent). "Limited atonement" is better coined "definite atonement" and grace is neither resistible, nor irresistible: >[G]race is neither resistible nor irresistible, since we are never in a position to resist or want to resist, successfully or unsuccessfully. The one who pours out on us the liberating Spirit, does so from his heavenly throne hidden within us. The Spirit indeed opens the gate of our hearts, to the Father and to one another—from inside. (Robert Jenson). In other words, grace is "effective".
The "U" is the 'boogey', but he shows how that should not be the case. That is, God’s causation of an event is entirely compatible with human causality of that same event; in other words, divine providence and predestination undergird rather than negate human freedom and agency. Thus, with a proper view of God's transcendence and immanence (the reformed doctrine of God, following Aquinas, posits a qualitative doctrine of divine transcendence, wherein God is of a different kind than humans), it follows that we can "uncontroversially" affirm that: (...) God causes everything that comes to pass, yet this does not negate the causality of other agents (e.g., humans, cosmic factors). In this vein, a theocentric doctrine of predestination (held by the Reformed and all Augustinians) has gone hand in hand with compatibilist or concursus theories of divine and human agency. (pg. 109)

I loved the way he began the chapter on "Worship", by raising the first question of the WSC ("What is the chief end of man?") and also the way he argued further, by responding in a proper manner. ("Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever."). He also discussed the role of sacraments as "means of grace" and of images and the aesthetic in worship.

About "Confessions and Authority": his introduction is helpful in clearing some misunderstandings (especially in this very "charismatic" age, due to the fast growing of Pentecostalism and its charismatics offshoots) about the work of the Holy Spirit. ("the Spirit guides the church into knowing and proclaiming truth. As with justification, so with Christian community: all is of grace."); this aspect of community is hugely important in understanding not only the role of theology as an endeavour that unites Christians of all ages in reflecting together on those merciful acts of redemption that God had wrought in Christ, but also the role of creeds and confession as a "guide" in understanding the Gospel (he engages with Kevin Vanhoozer's illustration that the relation between Scripture and tradition is that of a script and its performance history - "So it is with the ongoing practice of discipleship and formation; the church is being reared by her ancestors. (pg. 138); also echoes Calvin's idea that the world is God's theatrum gloriae.)
>"Whereas many pietists would point to personal acts of devotion (the so-called quiet time) and many modern liberals would point to societal progress (activism and the spirit of the age), Reformed believers see the churchly means of grace as participation in the proclamation of the Word and the practice of the sacraments.".
Thus, as John Webster (a major figure from which Allen consistently drew upon) puts it: “a creed is not a program, a platform, a manifesto to mobilize our forces. It is an amazed cry of witness: ‘Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!’ (Jn 1.29 NASB). Confession is attestation, not self-assertion." - “Truth is a miracle; truth is the creation of the Holy Spirit. The notion of heresy and the practice of Reformed Theology anathematizing are ways of following or being caught up in the miracle of truth. They are spiritual practices, aspects of the transformation of human knowledge and government by the coming of the Word of God.”

Last on the list is the topic of cultural engagement and eschatology: the blessed mandate, in Gen. 1, to be fruitful and multiply, to spread out and have dominion, to extend God’s glory over the whole globe (Gen. 1.28–30); the pervasive effects of sin; the 'common' grace of God that is being shown in restricting the evilness of the human depravity; these are some of the topic he touches on and develops. Also, an important concept is that of "grace perfecting nature" ('Salvation does reshape cultural practices, then, because God’s redemptive works give newness to every facet of human life. For example, whereas Babel represents the undoing of human society, with difference becoming an occasion and expression of pain and divergence, the gift of the Spirit at Pentecost involves the harmonizing work of making difference work.')

It was a very profitable read, one I will definitely recommend from now on.

[Andrew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tremendous amounts of insight for an introductory overview.

[Nathaniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

“First, the term ‘Calvinist’ ought to be dropped entirely. A name which attaches certain beliefs or practices to a particular figurehead (in this case, John Calvin) requires strong footing lest it seem historically and logically idiosyncratic. Thus, such a term should be employed for those who (1) found a movement or initiate some belief or institute some practice, or (2) definitively shape the development of some movement, belief, or practice. With regard to the doctrine of predestination, John Calvin fails to fit the bill in either regard. In fact, he affirms the doctrine in the same fashion as Augustine of Hippo, a millennium earlier. In Calvin’s own day, Martin Luther exhibited a greater interest and deeper argument for the sake of clarifying the ‘Augustinian’ view of predestination. With regard to predestination and the ‘doctrines of grace,’ Calvin is both unoriginal and not all that definitive. That is not to demean Calvin, who will be cited many times in the pages to follow, but rather to locate him within a broader theological movement. Most importantly, Calvin is one of several luminaries within the Reformed universe. His brilliant, faithful witness is accompanied by that of John Owen, Jonathan Edwards, Francis Turretin, Peter Van Mastricht, Johannes Cocceius, Peter Martyr Vermigli, and others. In fact, Calvin was a second-generation reformer, following in the footsteps of, not only Luther, but especially Ulrich Zwingli and Martin Bucer. Thus, we must learn to think of Calvin as an incredibly influential thinker best viewed alongside Bucer, Zwingli, Heinrich Bullinger, and others, rather than the founder of some new church. Thus, as Calvin is neither the founder of these doctrines or these churches nor one who definitely shapes them, ‘Calvinism’ is less than accurate" (3-4).

“So then, while most laypersons (and many professional theologians in certain circles) use the terms ‘Calvinist’ and ‘Reformed’ to label someone as opposing Arminian views of soteriology and predestination, this lacks the historical and theological specificity needed for a study of this sort. While such use of the term ‘Reformed’ may be very handy in certain settings (e.g., differentiating predestinarian Baptists from other Baptists), it cannot be allowed to serve as the primary meaning. As the term will be used in this book, then, one cannot be both baptist and identified as ‘Reformed’ in as much as baptistic ecclesiology depends on a sharp distinction between Israel and the church, thereby disagreeing with the Reformed way of affirming the unity of the covenant of grace. Issues like the constitution of a church and the nature of biblical worship are integral to Reformed identity, alongside soteriological emphases more widely known. Again this is not meant to suggest that in intramural discussions of predestination amongst baptist churches the term would never be helpful. In such situations, though, it is best to say with regard to what doctrines one is laying claim to identifying with the Reformed or with Calvin" (5).

“Contrary to the more hackneyed versions of Enlightenment optimism (and well before the so-called linguistic turn of the latter twentieth century), Reformed theologians insisted that human knowledge of God was always perspectival and limited (see, for example, Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 1, pp 298-300). A scholastic distinction was crafted to highlight this quality of theology: whereas God enjoyed archetypal knowledge of God and creation, humans receive only ectypal knowledge of these subjects. The principal characteristic of ectypal knowledge is its mediated nature, always derivative and limited by context (however narrow or wide). Thus, Reformed theology that remains aware of its historical distinction between archetypal and ectypal theology need not require the contextualist deconstruction of late modern or postmodern theologies. Having never endorsed modern notions of universal or a-contextual intellectualism, perspectivalism is neither an external ideal nor a threat” (21).

“The revelation of God takes a number of forms, each traditionally referred to as the divine word. While Karl Barth made famous the phrase ‘threefold Word of God’ only in the last century, the pluriform nature of God’s Word was recognized in the era of Protestant orthodoxy. According to Richard Muller, the Reformed dogmatics of this earlier era spoke of a fourfold nature to the Word of God, linking all divine presence with the second person of the Trinity in some manner and, at the same time, really employing persons as auxiliaries or instruments of this divine speech (Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 2, p. 194). The deep concern of Barth and the orthodox dogmatics of earlier centuries was to guard the Reformational beliefs sola gratia and solus Christus. Knowledge of God must always be wholly of grace and, furthermore, owing solely to Christ’s mediation.
Barth’s emphasis was upon the divine person, the eternal Word, who proceeds from the Father and from whom (with the Father) the Spirit proceeds. Again, his concern is to highlight God’s grace shone forth in Jesus, noting the way in which noetic activity (and, by derivation, our theory about such knowing, called epistemology) is rooted in the ministry of Jesus. ‘As ministers we ought to speak of God. We are human, however, and so cannot speak of God. We ought therefore to recognize both our obligation and our inability and by that very recognition give God the glory’ (The Word of God and the Word of Man, p. 186). The very mission of the divine Son provides for human speech about and toward God, our creator, sustainer, redeemer, and perfector. In fact, speech from God in Jesus is related to speech for God also in Jesus (for he is our high priest and advocate, praying on our behalf). All this is to say that covenantal relationship or friendly fellowship between the fully alive God and heinously dying humans is only realized in the Messiah from Nazareth. He communicates the truth about God to us, and he offers perfect prayer and praise to the Father for us" (22-23).

“What can we say of Barth’s criticisms of the ‘federal theology?’ Ryan Glomsrud has suggested that the historical study of the Reformed tradition available to Barth in his day was, sadly, misleading at best. While Barth shows familiarity with the best historiography of his day, one gets the sense that the ‘federal theology’ has not really been understood on its own terms. For example, in those genuine terms the ‘covenant of works’ is not somehow dislocated from Christ but fulfilled by Jesus. Furthermore, Barth’s revolutionary doctrine of election is eerily similar to the ‘covenant of redemption’ put forward by the ‘federal theology.’ In both cases, the concern is to affirm heartily that God’s works really manifest the divine character from eternity past. With regard to the ‘covenant of redemption,’ Barth worries about mythology and tri-theism, to be sure, but this timidity must be contextualized. His real worry was that the God of the covenant might be identified apart from the gospel or, better put, might be identified by rationalizing, secular thought about what such a god should be. He worried about human-based and human-judged concepts of divinity somehow shaping what a divine act in eternity past might be. But, as two recent defenders of the ‘covenant of redemption’ say: ‘the claim that the pactum salutis is eternal is not so much a claim about ‘eternity past’ as about eternal persons, persons whose fellowship remains unbroken throughout the course of redemption and thus guarantees that redemption’ (Andreas J. Köstenberger and R. Scott Swain, Father, Son and Spirit: The Trinity and John’s Gospel, pp. 170-171). Perhaps a way forward in Reformed theology will be found by combining Barth’s knack for lovingly describing the epistemic priority of God’s self-revelation, with the variegated narrative described in the ‘federal theology.’
Such a proposal, however, goes against the grain of much ‘Barthian’ theological work done in mainline Reformed denominations in these past few decades. With the ‘Confession of 1967,’ the theology of Barmen was exported across the Atlantic and gained wide influence across the spectrum of Reformed churches. As this theology has been delineated, ‘christocentrism’ has become something of a catch phrase, which excludes natural theology rooted in any biblical bi-covenantalism (a la ‘federal theology’) yet tends to load a great deal of contemporary cultural baggage into the name ‘Christ.’ Many followers of Barth have vehemently insisted that theology must begin, organizationally as well as materially, with the person of Jesus. Doing so, many traditional doctrines have fallen by the wayside or been radically reconfigured (e.g., divine eternity, impassibility, aseity) in as much as the Old Testament witness to the self-revelation of YHWH has been minimized or delayed until later in theology”( 50-51).

“Reformed theologians have been committed to the fact that theology, the very knowledge of God, is by grace alone. That is, humans do not have innate capacities for knowing God that have been created apart from God’s kindness. The question then becomes: how and where does God typically give such knowledge? Whereas many pietists would point to personal acts of devotion (the so-called quiet time) and may modern liberals would point to societal progress (activism and the spirit of the age), Reformed believers see the churchly means of grace as participation in the proclamation of the Word and the practice of the sacraments. Through these acts, the church grows in knowing God. We must go to find God where God has deigned to be known. Most important for our present purposes, these means of grace are communal and not merely individual. The church communes with Christ Jesus at the table, just as the whole people of God are addressed by the preached Word. Indeed, the communion of saints confesses the Creed together" (137).

“To summarize basic Reformed beliefs about churchly authority, we can look to the nineteenth-century Scottish historian, William Cunningham, as he describes the ecclesiology of John Calvin. Five principles are found in Calvin’s teaching about the way that the church is run:
1. That it is unwarrantable and unlawful to introduce into the government and worship of the church anything which has not the positive sanction of Scripture.
2. That the church, though it consists properly and primarily only of the elect or of believers, and though, therefore, visibility and organization are not essential, as papists allege they are, to its existence, is under a positive obligation to be organized, if possible, as a visible society, and to be organized in all things, so far as possible–its office-bearers, ordinances, worship, and general administration and arrangements–in accordance with what is prescribed or indicated upon these points in the New Testament.
3. That the fundamental principles, or leading features, of what is usually called Presbyterian church government, are indicated with sufficient clearness in the New Testament, as permanently binding upon the church.
4. That the church should be altogether free and independent of civil control, and should conduct its own distinct and independent government by presbyteries and synods, while the civil power is called upon to afford it protection and support.
5. That human laws, whether about civil or ecclesiastical things, and whether proceeding from civil or ecclesiastical authorities, do not, per se–that is, irrespective of their being sanctioned by the authority of God–impose an obligation upon the conscience" (143)

“For contemporary reflection in New Testament and early Jewish studies on this dynamic of grace and human action, see the essays in John M. G. Barclay and Simon J. Gathercole, Divine and Human Agency in Paul and His Cultural Environment (LNTS 335; London: T&T Clark, 2006). The essay by Barclay supports the traditional Reformed approach in its consideration of 5 key texts (1 Cor. 15.10; Phil 2.12-14; Gal. 2.19-21; Rom. 15.15-19; 2 Cor. 9.8-10): ‘In all cases, the logical sequence (whatever its grammatical expression) places divine grace anterior to human action, and affirms the continuation of that grace in human ability. But in no case does that human actor become passive or inactive in the face of divine grace, but is rather energized by that grace to action’ (‘By the Grace of God I am What I am’: Grace and Agency in Philo and Paul,’ p. 153)" (189-90).

[FAD · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am a Catholic who converted from Protestantism. I made my way from Evangelicalism, to Anglicanism, to Catholic. All the while, I never felt any affinity for Calvinism or Reformed Theology. Upon being Catholic, I find it important to understand differing theologies moreso than ever. This book was a very good introductory overview of Reformed Theology. I can honestly say I intuited Calvinism correctly enough to know that it isn’t compatible with who I believe God is and what His Church is like. I did learn, most importantly, that Catholics and Reformed Christians both share a deep concern for continuity in the Church. Still, our definitions, emphases, and idea of Church are worlds apart. One major difference being that Catholics believe in the Christ mandate that The gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church Christ founds on St. Peter. This has an application of specific infallibility involved in the magisterium of the Church where Christ protects the teaching of the Church. Reformed Christians reject this type of thinking. The only infallibility we have on earth post-Christ is the Bible. Even confessions, creeds, and theological treatises cannot be without blemish. I appreciated this book as a good intro to Reformed Theology and appreciate the authors charitable tome throughout the work.

I read the kindle, and I must say I do think at this point it is annoying if you don’t have your footnotes hyperlinked onto the page. To have the footnotes not linked, it is incredibly difficult to navigate between works cited pages and footnotes in an ebook.

[Mitchell Traver · Rating 4 out of 5]

I gave Dr. Allen’s introduction to Reformed Theology four stars primarily for two reasons: first, because the book accomplishes its purpose better than any others I currently am familiar with; second, because this work displays the breadth of Reformed Theology in contrast to the tendency to limit the Tradition either to “TULIP” or conservative/liberal manifestations. Calvin is engaged as much as Barth, and careful distinctions are made between denominational lines without coming across polemically. My only gripe would be the final pages commentary regarding the general approach toward culture (Dr. Allen uses Niebuhr’s taxonomy as a helpful spring board). This work was published in 2010, and in the twelve years since, studies in Bavinckian/Kuyperian theology have exploded. An updated version would have to include these similar yet distinct approaches and their influence as the emerging “Neo-Calvinist” approach to faith/life continues to display considerable influence. (Disclaimer: I also prefer Bavinck to the Two-Kingdoms approach, in case that wasn’t apparent.)

Four stars. Great introduction.

[Parker · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very good summary of the broader Reformed tradition, both in its conservative and liberal wings. Allen interacts well with both historical and contemporary sources in their context. He does exclude baptists, so trigger warning for 1689 dudes.

Allen's prose is not particularly great. It's clear for the most part, but there are sentences every few pages that are difficult to parse. I also found the citation methods irritating. Sometimes sources would be cited in parenthesis, which I find to be a crude interruption of the text. But this was not consistent; many of the citations are put in endnotes, which are a sin. Aside from these two issues, however, the book is worth reading (though maybe not worth retail price).

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

A helpful and charitable introduction to Reformed Theology although it necessarily avoided deep engagement with some of the more challenging aspects of its doctrine. Having said that the author did a good job of describing Reformed Theology and some of its internal debates and discussions and he was not attempting a comprehensive survey or an apologetic advocacy.

[Peter Stonecipher · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good introduction to Reformed theology that takes into account a broader Reformed tradition than books of this sort typically do.

[Grant Carter]

Probably the best book I read for seminary this semester. Gives a good introduction to reformed theology.

[Bryan Counts · Rating 3 out of 5]

A great introduction to the history and beliefs of the reformed tradition. Written more for an academic audience, so it can be hard to follow sometimes.

[Jon Watson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Think that Reformed theology is dogmatic, "fundamentalist," and cold? Think again, and read this book. Allen is gracious, thorough, and fosters conversation with those who would disagree with his theological positions. This is a book for thinkers, mincing no words on matters of truth but plumbing the depths of the beauty of Scripture through a Reformed lens.

[Paul Burkhart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really great intro to Reformed Theology. Whereas most other such introductions define Reformed Theology WAY too narrowly or WAY too broadly, this ecumenical, winsome, and comprehensive book offers depth, clarity, and grounding. I have a Masters degree from a Reformed Seminary, and yet I found much to learn about my own tradition in the pages.

[Pastor Ben · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's good to read about a theology not your own. Allen's book is a manageable introduction that never gets bogged down. No doubt it is pretty simple stuff for someone trained in Reformed theology, but for a Lutheran it was quite helpful.