Over the last year and a half, I have become increasingly uncomfortable with the word "Reformed". It started with a realization that, by and large, most of the Reformed ministries that I knew of were just simply not helpful to me anymore. While much of the basic doctrine was and is sound, something just wasn't right. I couldn't put my finger on it at first, but over time I think I have nailed it down.
With that in mind, I wish now to enumerate two reasons why I have decided that I no longer consider myself "Reformed", though I still affirm the 5 Points of TULIP. In its place, I describe my understanding of salvation (soteriology) as "Predestinarian". This is just a decision that I have made personally based on my experiences. I cannot tell others what to do with their lives and ministries.
Firstly, it became clear to me that I am fundamentally at odds with many traditional Reformed doctrinal convictions. To be specific:
- I deny Covenant Theology
- I deny Infant Baptism
- I deny The Regulative Principle of Worship
- I deny The Third Use of the Law
In their place:
- I affirm something close to New Covenant Theology
- I affirm Believer Baptism
- I affirm the Normative Principle of Worship
- I affirm the cessation of the Law of Moses in toto as a rule for believers to follow
The second reason I am not Reformed is that I am convinced that a truly Charismatic emphasis and practice is antithetical to both traditional Reformed models of ministry as well as to their "New Calvinist" counterparts. To yield to the Holy Spirit's moving in the full range of spiritual gifts requires an openness and spontaneity that are lacking in Reformed settings in my experience. New wine requires a new wineskin (and yes I am very familiar with the original context of new wine and new wineskins, but I believe that this is one proper application).
I came to the conclusion, that really and truly, there is no such thing as a "Reformed Charismatic". The two traditions and models of ministry are mutually exclusive. Outside of Christian basics, there isn't much with which I agree with traditional Reformed Confessionalists, but I do agree with them here, albeit for different reasons. Now certainly one can be Reformed and be a purely theoretical continuationist. One could also be a Charismatic and believe in predestianation like I do; or one can be neither. But no one, in my humble opinion, can be both Reformed and Charismatic. One will always cancel out the other.
I do not mean to be cynical, but in my experience, most who call themselves "Reformed Charismatics" only believe in an on paper Continuationism. They make no room for Charismatic gifts and often discourage their practice out of the fear of "Charismania".
None of this should be construed to be libelous or bitter. I understand that many of my friends who agree with me concerning spiritual gifts will decide to continue to align themselves within a Reformed theological framework. For myself, I believe that a more intentionally Charismatic emphasis, while still acknowledging the truth of God's sovereign and unconditional election, is both more biblical and more honest.
