A review of Kenneth Stewart's Ten Myths about Calvinism: Recovering the Breadth of the Reformed Tradition

Last updated on: August 18, 2011 at 7:28 pm by Roger E. Olson

A review of Kenneth Stewart's Ten Myths about Calvinism: Recovering the Breadth of the Reformed Tradition 2011-08-18T19:28:25-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This is a book everyone interested in Calvinism, whether for it, against it or simply thinking about it, should read. I am told it will be available within the next few weeks if not already. It’s an engaging read, very informative and stimulating.

My review of it (separate from this one) will be published in May. I’ll announce where later when I get final word of acceptance from the editors of the publication. Here I will make a few remarks about the book, but not pre-publish my review. You’ll have to wait until May to read my full review.

I approached Ten Myths thinking I was going to get a tongue lashing from a dyed-in-the-wool Calvinist. Nothing like that happened. Stewart’s main concern seems to be to get Calvinists to be more cognizant of their own history. Of course, along the way he demonstrates the falsity of several misconceptions of Calvinism held by both Calvinists and non-Calvinists.

Here are the myths: 1) One man (Calvin) and One City (Geneva) is determinative [for all Calvinists]; 2) Calvin’s view of predestination must be ours [i.e., Calvinists’]; 3) TULIP is the yard stick of the truly Reformed; 4) Calvinists take a dim view of revival and awakening; 5) Calvinism is largely antimissionary; 6) Calvinism promotes antinomianism; 7) Calvinism leads to theocracy; 8) Calvinism undermines the creative arts; 9) Calvinism resists gender equality, and 10) Calvinism has fostered racial inequality.

The first four myths are said to be held mainly by Calvinists themselves whereas the last six are held by (some) non-Calvinists. I have not believed any of these myths for many years and can’t even remember whether I ever did believe them. Fortunately, I had a very good seminary education that presented Calvinism and non-Calvinism in a very balanced and fair way. (One of my seminary professors was James Montgomery Boice and another was Sam Mikolaski. Boice, of course, was a Calvinist and I consider Mikolaski an Arminian whether he uses that term for himself or not.)

Stewart does a very good job of demolishing all ten myths using primary historical sources. I think he goes a little too easy on Calvin (in the chapter on theocracy) in his discussion of the Servetus affair, but overall and in general his history is sound. Calvinism as such is not guilty of these things–any more than other Protestant traditions.

I suspect most flack at Stewart’s book will come from the cranky and brittle wing of contemporary Calvinism because he criticizes them heavily. He contends that Reformed theology is broader than Calvin and the stream that extends from him. He contends that TULIP is not even a good rubric for expressing the essence of Reformed theology. And he rejects double predestination including especially the “horrible decree” of reprobation.

But most importantly he takes after contemporary Calvinists for being cranky and brittle and for pretending to themselves as well as others that their Calvinist theology just fell from heaven without historical mediation. Among other things he says “We need fewer angular, sharp-elbowed Calvinists who glory in what distinguishes their stance from that of others, and a lot more supporters of the Reformed faith who rejoice in what they hold in common with others.”

This is clearly aimed at those Calvinist leaders who claim, among other things, that Calvinism and Arminianism are two entirely different world views and that Arminianism is at best defectively evangelical and at worst heresy.

Stewart calls on contemporary Calvinists to study their own history to find that the Reformed tradition is broad and flexible and diverse and that the contemporary “young, restless, Reformed” movement did not just pop into existence from nowhere; it is the sixth in a series of Calvinist resurgences since the French Revolution and it has its own history and tendencies that are not synonymous with “true Calvinism.”

Nowhere in the book does Stewart depart from historical Reformed theology; he endorses the essence of TULIP while arguing that the TULIP rubric is of recent vintage and expresses the Calvinist essence in an unfortunate and misleading way.

I cannot recommend this book highly enough. If you claim to know about Calvinism or claim to want to know about Calvinism this is a must read. From here on out I will refuse to consider anyone truly informed about Calvinism if they have not read this book or at least show clear evidence of already knowing its material (which is unlikely as the material in it is massively detailed).

I hope the fanatical Calvinists of new Calvinism movement (and I don’t lump all of them together as fanatical–only some are) read this and allow its message to sink in–especially Stewart’s statement (well argued) that “TULIP cannot be allowed to function as a creed.”

Uncategorized

Previous Post

February 25, 2011

Is it possible to believe a paradox?

Next Post

February 27, 2011 When will we ever learn....?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I wanted a vineyard so badly that my wife arranged the owner's death through false witnesses. Who am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

David Ahab Jezebel Naboth