White Horse Inn Blog

Know what you believe and why you believe it

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

The Hallway and the Rooms

Posted by on in General
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 671
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print
Movements are funny things.  Especially in the Internet Age, they can be like a summer monsoon in the Arizona desert, gathering impressive force with lightening and showers and then dissipating just as quickly.  For example, the Tea Party movement in U.S. politics has been grabbing the headlines recently, but time will tell whether it’s a tempest in a teapot.

All the hoopla over John Piper’s invitation to Rick Warren to speak at an upcoming Desiring God conference points up the vitality and challenges of the “young, restless, and Reformed” movement. Almost as soon as TIME Magazine hailed this as the third of the ten trends shaping our world today (March 12, 2009), fissures and fault lines became apparent.  Currently on Christianity Today’s liveblog, Collin Hansen (author of Young, Restless, and Reformed) has a good summary of the recent debate over the Warren invite.  David Mills over at First Things has just added a thoughtful take on it. Since both of these quote some of my comments from this blog, I thought it might be worthwhile to expand a little bit on some wider concerns.

The Hallway and the Rooms
Evangelicalism is a movement, not a church, and that’s been part of its strength.  In the wake of the Evangelical Revival in Britain and various “awakenings” in North America, a grassroots cooperation in missions and mercy ministries was formed between conservative Protestants ranging from Anglican to Anabaptist.  Ever since Wesley and Whitefield, the evangelical movement has struggled to keep flying with its Arminian and Calvinist wings.  Though dominated ever since the Second Great Awakening by Arminian sympathies, the “New Calvinism” of recent years has been nothing short of phenomenal.

However, evangelicalism—even in its “Calvinist” manifestation—is a movement, not a church. Movements are led by impressive and charismatic figures.  Even Ben Franklin wanted to cozy up to George Whitefield, a Calvinistic Anglican leader of the Great Awakening who was the closest thing to a rock star in 18th-century America.  Yet the tendency, then as now, has been to downplay the ordinary ministry of the church in favor of the extraordinary movements of the moment.

I’ve argued elsewhere that evangelicalism is like the village green in older parts of the country, especially New England.  There may be two or three churches on the grounds, but the green itself is a wide open space where people from those churches can spill out in conversation and cooperation. Evangelicalism is not a church, though it often acts like one.  It isn’t the big tent (more appropriate, given the history) that encompasses all of the churches on the green.  It’s just…, well, the green.  When it tries to adjudicate cases of faith and practice through conferences, press releases, and blogs, evangelicalism (including Calvinistic versions) exhibits its movement mentality.

My analogy echoes C. S. Lewis’s “mere Christianity”: a hallway in a large house where believers mix and mingle, often opening the door as non-Christians knock.  But, as Lewis insisted, it’s in the rooms where people actually live as a family—where they sleep, are warmed by the fire, fed and clothed, and grow.  We are formed in the family life of Christ’s body by particular churches, with their distinct confessions and practices.  You can’t live in the hallway.

I’m not against evangelicalism as a village green or hallway.  In fact, I think it’s a wonderful meeting place.  However, when it acts like a church, much less replaces the church, I get nervous.

Young, Restless and Reformed?
Like wider evangelicalism, the “young, restless and Reformed” movement is a grassroots trend among people who are, generally speaking, not Reformed.  I’m energized by this movement every day, as I interact with people from a variety of churches, backgrounds, and traditions who are drawn to the doctrines of grace.  I spend a lot of my time in this hallway and am enriched by it.

Nevertheless, not even a “Reformed” hallway is anything more than a hallway.  “Reformed” has a specific meaning.  It’s not defined by movements, parachurch ministries, or powerful leaders, but by a confession that is lived out in concrete contexts across a variety of times and places.  The Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Unity (Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, and Canons of Dort) define what it means to be Reformed.  Like Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism, and Anabaptism, Reformed Christianity is a particular tradition.  It’s not defined by a few fundamentals, but by a whole system of faith and practice.  If being Reformed can be reduced to believing in the sovereignty of God and election, then Thomas Aquinas is as Reformed as R. C. Sproul.  However, the Reformed confession is a lot more than that.  Even the way it talks about these doctrines is framed within a wider context of covenant theology.

It’s intriguing to me that people can call themselves Reformed today when they don’t embrace this covenant theology.  This goes to the heart of how we read the Bible, not just a few doctrines here or there.  Yet what was once recognized as essential to Reformed faith and practice is now treated merely as a sub-set (and a small one at that) of the broader “Reformed” big tent.  Yet now it would appear that the identity of the “young, restless and Reformed” movement is at stake over whether Rick Warren gets an invitation to speak at a national conference.

Nobody thinks a Roman Catholic person is narrow and exclusive for embracing papacy and the sacrifice of the Mass.  People don’t call themselves Lutheran just because they believe in justification. Baptists (at least historically) do not even recognize as valid the baptism of non-Baptists.  Yet increasingly those who affirm the Reformed confessions are treated with suspicion as narrow and divisive for actually being Reformed.

For centuries, the “Reformed” label has been embraced by people from Anglican, Presbyterian, and Reformed traditions.  Only in the last few decades has it included those who do not embrace a covenantal interpretation of Scripture, which encompasses baptism and the Supper, the connectional government of the church, eschatology, and a host of other issues that distinguish Reformed from non-Reformed positions.  I often run into Christians who say that they are Reformed—and also dispensational or charismatic, Baptist or Barthian, and a variety of other combinations.  Like the term “evangelical,” “Reformed” is whatever you want it to be.  It’s hard to challenge pragmatic evangelicalism’s cafeteria-style approach to truth when “Reformed” versions seem to be going down the same path.

In this situation, whatever divides confessionally Reformed and Presbyterian folks from others who affirm the five points of Calvinism has to be treated as secondary.  Most obviously, the baptism of covenant children and the nature of the Lord’s Supper are treated merely as relatively unimportant.  But the nature of the visible church and its ministry, especially the sacraments, have always been regarded as relatively unimportant in evangelicalism.  By the way, when a Baptist brother refuses to acknowledge our baptism as valid, it’s hardly secondary to Baptists.  I respect those who hold this view at least for the importance that they give to a crucial biblical doctrine.

Evangelicalism’s conversion-centered paradigm is different from Reformed Christianity’s covenantal paradigm.  It’s not just a divergence here and there, but a difference that affects (or should affect) how we understand, experience, and live out our faith in the world.  That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t hang out in the hallway from time to time; we should just be aware that it’s the hallway.

Regular listeners to White Horse Inn and readers of Modern Reformation are familiar with our regular reminder that we’re not a church, but a conversation.  Our organization isn’t Reformed, but a conversation between Calvinistic Baptists, Lutherans, Reformed, and Anglicans, drawing from our common agreement in the truths rediscovered in the Reformation.  Sometimes views are expressed that I don’t agree with as a Reformed person, but that’s fine.  Even when we defend truths we all agree on in substance, we are coming at it from the depth of our own traditions, which we did not invent.  We’re not looking for a lowest-common-denominator, a quasi-confession for a movement, but are hoping to provoke discussions that lead people back to their rooms with more understanding of the other rooms and resources for vital engagement with the issues of our time and place.  The old-style evangelicalism, where the movement is defined by parachurch conferences, networks, and personalities, is hopefully on the wane, as younger generations enjoy the conversation in the hallway but take the church more seriously.

Movements can serve an important role in shifting broad currents, but they are shallow.  They rise and fall in the court of public opinion, not in the courts of the churches where Christ has installed officers to shepherd his flock.  That doesn’t mean that they are wrong: it’s wonderful when thousands of brothers and sisters encounter the God of glorious grace in a deeper way.  Yet movements can’t go very deep: when they do, differences are bound to emerge.  The usually rise and fall with the personalities who lead them.  Nor can movements pass the faith down from generation to generation.  Only churches can do that.

If Not “Reformed,” Then What?
So I’ve wondered about a new term that we can use for the “young, restless, and Reformed” movement: “Evangelical Calvinism.”  Why not?  It’s the sort of term that can encompass J. I. Packer, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, John MacArthur, John Piper, and R. C. Sproul.  Reformed Christians should swell with excitement when brothers and sisters embrace the doctrines of grace and “evangelical Calvinism” distinguishes us from evangelical Arminianism.

I’m suggesting this not just out of a concern to protect the distinctives that I believe are essential to Reformed Christianity, but also out of a concern for the ongoing vitality of the movement toward the doctrines of grace.  Right now, it seems to me, this movement is being threatened by the movement mentality that characterizes evangelicalism more broadly.  The very lack of a doctrine of the church lies at the heart of this.  There are “evangelical Calvinists” from other traditions who realize this.  For example, my friend Mark Dever at Capitol Hill Baptist Church has a strong Baptist ecclesiology.  In comparison with mainstream evangelicalism, it isn’t “weak” in the least, although it’s also not Reformed.  He hasn’t settled for a movement-oriented evangelical ecclesiology, but bases his ministry in the local church.  In other words, for him, the hallway isn’t a substitute for the Baptist room.

Right now, though, the “young, restless and Reformed” movement is in danger of succumbing to the fate of all movements at their peak: splintering.  Our confessions help us major on the majors, leaving secondary matters open.  Yet the “New Calvinism” movement is already showing signs of stress over questions like the age of the earth. Churches have ways of dealing with questions of fraternal relations and cooperation, but leader-driven movements can’t handle the stress.  Conferences operate as quasi-official church courts, with vigilante benedictions and excommunications determining who’s in or out. It’s like the wild west.

Christ promised to be with his church to the end, expanding his embassy to the ends of the earth. Christ pledged that the gates of hell cannot prevail against his church.  The same promise can’t be invoked for a movement.  May God swell the hallway with new visitors!  And may we all have the charity to come out of our rooms every now and again to bless each other and bear witness together to God’s sovereign grace.  But discipleship has to be formed in the rooms—in real churches, where the depth and breadth of God’s Word is explored and lived.

-Michael Horton

Overall Rating (0)

0 out of 5 stars

Leave your comments

Post comment as a guest

Your comments are subjected to administrator's moderation.
terms and condition.

People in this conversation

Load Previous Comments
  • Guest - McWilliams

    Well, for me this seems to bring more questions than answers as it would appear to once more suggest we cozy up with those of different faiths in the hallway and to not come out from among them and be ye separate! I'm almost hearing the appearance of ecumenism again and I wont go there to call 'brother' those that are not but to speak the gospel to them and plead with them to know scriptural truth. If there is only one scriptural truth then why do the multitudes of believers show a lack of unity? I believe it is too much of man's opinion and too little time in the Word itself seeking Him! I love to call myself a five point flaming calvinist, but only as to clarify that I love His word and His truth. Taking on one more label will not make any of us more like Him as should be my goal and that of others. The only answer to this maze in my mind is knowing Him and spending more time in His presence.
    P.S. FWIW I would still object to Rick Warren being the speaker I choose to listen to and question the wisdom of seeking his collaboration in what is spoken to the multitude as Truth!

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • I want to second McWilliams comments above...and a few other thoughts.

    We already have a term to declare exactly what we as Reformed Calvinists believe...Christian! Let us not forget our confessions and creeds affirm only biblical truth. It's not open for interpretation. Why do we surrender words to contemporary vernacular?

    Also, if the LORD has brought people into the hallway, they aren't just visiting. Can they resist the call to enter a room? Or leave the home altogether? Of course not, thats the 'I' in TULIP.

    For more on John Piper's decision to invite Rick Warren to DGC check out my post with a video of Piper defending Warren's theology. Wow.


    Like 0 Short URL:
  • Guest - Frank Octigan

    I think:
    Bloggers need to learn from corporate executives
    Give me the executive summary
    Skip the filler
    Bullet points only
    Don't coddle me or the subject
    "Cogent & pithy" as Dr. John Van Till said.
    Thanks all.
    Please don't confuse terse with rude.
    Thanks again.

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • [...] Horton shares his thoughts in an article entitled The Hallway and the Rooms: If being Reformed can be reduced to believing in the sovereignty of God and election, then [...]

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • Guest - Peter Catalano

    This was an informative article. I love listening to \the boys\ on the White Horse Inn. They have been a blessing to me. I come at this issue from a baptist perspective and believe that if one embraces the doctrines of grace and the \solas\ of the reformation, that qualifies one to be labeled \reformed.\ BB Warfied and John Calvin would have disagreed over the age of the earth, which one would not be deemed reformed? I embrace covenant theology over against dispensational theology, not over against believer's baptism. I embrace Reformed theology and calvinism over against Arminianism. It seems to me the argument centers on the baptism debate in covenant theology. Do you really have to believe that infant baptistm replaces circumcision in order to be an \authentic\ covenant theologian? Dr. Horton believes one must believe and practice infant baptism in order to be properly deemed as covenant (What's So Amazing About Grace?). I loved the book until he started hammering away about infant baptism and wondered what this had to do with the title of his book. Currently, I am reading \Christless Christianity\ and thoroughly enjoying it!

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • [...] Michael Horton compartilha seus pensamentos em um artigo intitulado “The Hallway and the Rooms”: [...]

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • Guest - Candi May

    I do believe that creeds and confessions are very important. I do believe that labels can be useful to quickly identify what one believes, thus making it easier to know where one stands. I do not believe that having a "Tell me the password or you can't get into my club" mentality towards creeds and confessions reflects the brotherly charity Paul stressed in Romans 14:1-15:7.

    BUT, these issues were not the main point of this article. Look at the title, "The Hallway and the Rooms". Look at the analogy draw from C.S. Lewis (found in the last two paragraphs of the Preface of 'Mere Christianity'). The whole point is to make the main thing the main thing!!

    Yes, we should know what we believe and why we believe it. No, we should not toss labels around so carelessly so that they have no meaning (Lewis also deals with meaningless words in the same Preface to the same book). But what is of primary importance is that we 'get into our room'and get busy doing its work.

    We need to become intimately involved in the visible, local church of which we are members. Not activities, fund-raisers, or senior van trips. Those are fine and dandy, like pretty curtains on the wall, or a lovely vase on a shelf. The add a nice little touch to the atmosphere.

    A room, however, has far greater purposes: fellowship, meals, instruction, encouragement, protection from the elements. The intent of this article was to cause us to recognize the difference between the hallway (the areas upon which we can agree) and the rooms (the distinctives that make us unique members of the same body) and drive us to spend our time and energies primarily in our own particular room.

    Rather than standing guard at the door of our room deciding who we'll allow to enter, let us strengthen those who are already in our room and allow ourselves to be encouraged by them. Let us encourage the weak brother and not turn him away.

    Lewis's first instruction in the 'rooms' analogy was to prefer a room over the hall (which is the same as this article of Eric Landry's):

    "It (Christianity) is more like a hall out of which doors open into several rooms. If I can bring anyone into that hall I shall have done what I attempted. But it is in the rooms, not in the hall, that there are fires and chairs and meals. The hall is a place to wait in, a place from which to try the various doors, not a place to live in...And above all you must be asking which door is the true one; not which pleases you best by its paint and panelling. In plain language, the question should never be: 'Do I like that kind of service?' but 'Are these doctrines true: Is holiness here? Does my conscience move me towards this? Is my reluctance to knock at this door due to my pride, or my mere taste, or my personal dislike of this particular door-keeper?'"

    But Lewis's next paragraph address the crisis of disunity evidenced by the collective responses given to our present article:

    "When you have reached your own room, be kind to those who have chosen different doors and to those who are still in the hall. If they are wrong they need your prayers all the more; and if they are your enemies, then you are under orders to pray for them. That is one of the rules common to the whole house."

    Let us be more concerned with being a viable, living 'body of Christ' than who is an 'eye' or 'foot' or 'ear':

    "For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many.

    If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

    If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but one body.

    And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:

    And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked: That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular" (I Corinthians 12:12-27)

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • [...] Michael Horton compartilha seus pensamentos em um artigo intitulado “The Hallway and the Rooms”: [...]

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • [...] indoors, as though the faith is a matter of finding a place to settle down and get comfortable. Michael Horton and the folks at Modern Reformation advanced the complementary notion that we should think of the old New England arrangement of many [...]

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • [&] illustration that has helped me a lot in this comes from Michael Horton, drawing on C.S. [&]

    Like 0 Short URL: