Calvin's Triumphalist Offspring

Don't know if you saw the story, but it seems that my assertion that conservatives don't understand irony is playing out again. Calvin College, that fortress of dusty, theological nonsense, is going to force a black, female professor to abide by a clause that requires Calvin professors to attend churches with ties to the Christian Reformed Church. The professor, Denise Isom, is attending a traditionally black Missionary Baptist congregation. My first thought was, "well, those are the terms of her contract." Except that Calvin hired her to teach on education and race. Yeah, race.

I looked for an approximate percentage of minority congregants in the CRC but I've been unable to find anything. Based on the CRC churches here in Oklahoma, I'm going to go out on a limb and say the number is in the very small single digits, maybe even decimally small. So, a professor hired to teach about race and education finds a church in good standing with orthodox Christianity, a church that happens to be historically black, a church that is outside the Reformed tradition to some degree, and in which she feels accepted. Calvin says no. Two observations in no particular order.

1. When I was a Christian I was already weary of hearing the triumphalism and arrogance that issues from the Reformed churches. Now I'm just bored with it. These churches aren't doing Reformed theology post-Barth; in fact, there has been a resurgence of interest in Reformed theology pre-Barth, especially Calvin's writings. (Nicholas Wolterstorff is a pleasant exception; John Piper is not.) The Baptist churches, always a second cousin to the Reformed churches, are becoming so infected with it, it's likely that some SBC churches are, except for their polity, Reformed in every way that matters. The real issue though is Reformed theology's inability to get along with its relatives. Except for Barth, who recast Reformed doctrine in ways that make it accessible to Wesleyans and postmodern theology, Reformed doctrines are notoriously all or nothing in their application. Think about the descriptors for the five points: total, unconditional, limited (applied to the atonement), and irresistible. There's a recipe for getting along. Your theology is either Reformed or its aberrant.

2. If you are going to hire someone to talk about something that you aren't qualified to talk about, either by education or race or experience, why not allow for some modifications to the rules to allow for that "other" to be welcome in your midst? If you are an historically white movement and you want a minority to teach you about racial realities, try not to enforce a system that, though not racist, has racial implications. What is the benefit of bringing an outsider in to help you if you're going to insist that the outsider play like an insider? Arrogant? Maybe. Triumphalist? Certainly. Wrong-headed? Without question. Many schools have already taken the step of requiring religion/theology faculty to attend a denominational church, but faculty in other areas, like education or science, are exempt. I think that's a stupid and pointless rule as well, and one which serves only to reinforce the bunker mentality, but at least it's not prejudicial across the board. I'm hopeful that Calvin can work this out. Really, I am.

Comments

[Naz U]

http://thenazareneu.blogspot.com

http://nazbollah.blogspot.com

http://nazarenenews.blogspot.com