Rich, I think you're stretching what he actually says here. He claims, at least, that Calvinism is where he falls theologically, but that he takes these other systems seriously. Frankly, that's a methodology that I'm fine with.
Let me be charitable and state that he "says" he is Calvinist but then makes 6 qualifications that seem to indicate otherwise.
Again, please point to where he makes this move. It seems to me that his main point here is that if we are to have a system, it ought to be Christ-centred.
I thought I tried but if I failed to make the case or read into it improperly then I'm willing for the author to prove that my inferences about "integrity" to be improper. While he speaks to his being "influenced" by Reformed theologians (and speaks to the WCF as "dominating" Calvinism), he also indicates that these are not "moderate" by the theologians that follow. He also indicates in this paragraph, and later, that other systems of thought have more "integrity" on some points.
And it also seems that he's attacking YRR Mark Driscoll types, not confessional presbyterians.
As I stated, I never felt personally attacked. He may have Driscoll in mind but also speaks broadly about how this is tearing up the SBC as a whole so he's got people within that communion in mind as well.
I'm more concerned about how he goes after those as a whole, however. He's completely dismissive where more charity ought to be granted. I once served on a Pastoral Search committee in an SBC congregation trying to call a mature Christian pastor. When it was learned that he had Reformed leanings, there was an article presented about "Calvinists" that broad brushed in the same way that the author broad brushes the YRR.
In many ways, I'm sympathetic to the concerns about the YRR and have written my concerns about a "Calvinism" based only in TULIP that has no Confessional or Eccelsiological grounding to it. It's a contradiction in terms.
That said, one also needs to recognize the sad reason that many are left with little understanding of Ecclesiology or a richer tradition of discipleship, etc. I was just telling someone the other day that one of our problems in American Evangelicalism is that there are movements that latch on to one aspect of Christianity and distort it out of proportion. One man my friend is dealing with is convinced of a certain form of discipleship based on a book that has some Scriptural example but is wrested outside of a broader understanding of Church membership, eldership, etc. The man is so convinced of this model that it makes it difficult to teach him. In other areas, he's sympathetic to the Reformed tradition but is pretty unbending in being instructed on this issue of discipleship.
Now, I could write a blog post about how ignorant this fellow is of all the tributaries of Reformed thought and refer to him as a "know nothing" and even cultic in his apprehension of Calvinistic ideas because he's somewhat unyielding but I'm called to treat him as a Brother in the Lord. In a real sense I pity the broad Evangelical Church that has lost its rich heritage of Church government and discipline and so the context of teachings that get integrated badly is not surprising. It doesn't eliminate responsibility for the sins some commit in their unbalanced zeal but it mitigates it and requires some compassion. I'm not a paragon of patience and compassion and have much to repent of but it ought to be my aim to gently correct them rather than sitting in a lofty perch of knowledge proclaiming how much more I know about such things than they and they are, after all, "know nothings".
Returning to the example of this young man, I had my occasions of rushing to teach a bit too quickly at times. I shamed him at one point with a 9th Commandment violation and it sent him through the roof. It was only after I spent some concerted effort trying to bridge his concern and helping him to understand a larger principle that he felt shepherded by me.
I've got a lot to learn as an Elder in Christ's Church. I was telling a friend at GA that I've made it a habit to look back over the years and remind myself how immature I have been and remain. I remind myself that, in ten years, I will look back with sorrow at how I used the gifts God gave me as very sharp weapons not to help but to harm.
I think the article, in general, is not helpful because it is treating a group as a bubble of those worthy of disdain. If there's one thing the Lord has taught me through adversity, is that grouping people and thinking of them with disdain is not what the Lord calls me to.
If I have overstated the case that this author seems to be calling confessionally Reformed people rigid then I will need to repent. I probably ought to have just stuck with the larger concern and point out that we are not given warrant from our positions of knowledge and office to treat other Christians with disdain. In a sense, I can hear Paul telling Timothy that he needs to keep working on those Cretans because the Lord is able to even work with people who are always liars.
