Some questions about Neo-Calvinism of the Kuyperian variety.

[Jash Comstock]

1. What exactly do Neo-Calvinists mean when they refer to "redemptive transformation of the culture"?

2. What exactly do Neo-Calvinists mean when they refer to cultural works being preserved across into the next life?

3. What is so controversial about the Neo-Calvinist idea that all cultural labor is "kingdom service"? How is this any different than the historical Reformed view of vocation?

 

[MW]

3. What is so controversial about the Neo-Calvinist idea that all cultural labor is "kingdom service"? How is this any different than the historical Reformed view of vocation?

I think we can get at the other two questions through this one.

A good construction can be put on the neo-Calvinist idea so that it might be regarded in the same light as the traditional concept of "vocation," but there are some distinctive teachings which take it in a whole new direction. The first of these is the creation-fall-redemption scheme of ethics. It overlooks the distinctly Christological fulfilment of the covenant of works which is apparent in the two-Adam structure of New Testament teaching. In so far as man's works are made a part of the redemptive order Christ the Redeemer's works are compromised. Secondly, and following on from the first, is the tendency to deny the covenant of works in an attempt to remove the nature-grace distinction of historic Calvinism. This leads to a "covenant of creation" which is thought to pervade every sphere of life and facilitates the redemption of the spheres. "Covenant" is then turned into a metaphysical reality and loses its sense of being a special providence of God towards man in which God promises Himself as the portion of His people. Thirdly, on top of this comes the so-called cultural mandate, which is given a pervasive spiritual interpretation, to the point that even the great commission is understood to be a fulfilling of it. This makes the church just one among many "redemptive" spheres, and the "holiness" of word and sacraments is extended to every thing, so that all vocational work is called ministry and all of life is called worship. When "vocation" is turned into ministry and worship it is apparent that it radically differs from the idea of vocation as historically understood in the reformed tradition.

 

[RamistThomist]

2. What exactly do Neo-Calvinists mean when they refer to cultural works being preserved across into the next life?

This isn't necessarily neo-Calvinist. It could simply be saying, with Revelation, that the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations; and kings bring their wealth into the New Jerusalem.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

3. What is so controversial about the Neo-Calvinist idea that all cultural labor is "kingdom service"? How is this any different than the historical Reformed view of vocation?

I think we can get at the other two questions through this one.

A good construction can be put on the neo-Calvinist idea so that it might be regarded in the same light as the traditional concept of "vocation," but there are some distinctive teachings which take it in a whole new direction. The first of these is the creation-fall-redemption scheme of ethics. It overlooks the distinctly Christological fulfilment of the covenant of works which is apparent in the two-Adam structure of New Testament teaching. In so far as man's works are made a part of the redemptive order Christ the Redeemer's works are compromised. Secondly, and following on from the first, is the tendency to deny the covenant of works in an attempt to remove the nature-grace distinction of historic Calvinism. This leads to a "covenant of creation" which is thought to pervade every sphere of life and facilitates the redemption of the spheres. "Covenant" is then turned into a metaphysical reality and loses its sense of being a special providence of God towards man in which God promises Himself as the portion of His people. Thirdly, on top of this comes the so-called cultural mandate, which is given a pervasive spiritual interpretation, to the point that even the great commission is understood to be a fulfilling of it. This makes the church just one among many "redemptive" spheres, and the "holiness" of word and sacraments is extended to every thing, so that all vocational work is called ministry and all of life is called worship. When "vocation" is turned into ministry and worship it is apparent that it radically differs from the idea of vocation as historically understood in the reformed tradition.

If this post were a play it would deserve a standing ovation.