Though once a vehicle of personal theological certainty, Reformed theology no longer presents any appeal to my interest, for I find it no longer suited to address the problems and questions of faith today. Perhaps I feel that Reformed theology is not reformed enough, in that it has abandoned its own axiom of semper reformada and has become an immobilized school of antiquarian belief and practice – the very thing it once battled against.
Essentially, my problem with Calvinism (I’m using this term specifically in reference to American 5-point theology) is that it has embraced everything that I dislike about modernity. It gives the sense of certainty that is the quintessence of Cartesianism, that is, methodological doubt followed by strong foundationalism.
Allow me to elucidate. I am referring to a problem in epistemology, which is more than a simple theoretical reality, but rather, it works its way up into the entire framework of Calvinist thought and being. As Michael Foucault has so rightly pointed out, power is inextricably linked to knowledge in the Western tradition, and concomitantly, power becomes the vehicle for ideological conquest. I mean, both modernity and Calvinism set up an apologetic in the form of a “totalizing metanarrative”.
While modernity sets up its system of rationalism, Calvinism similarly sets up a foundational system of knowledge that demands certainty rather than faith. Thus, the Bible must be certain, and all truth derived from it is also certain (notice the relationship to the Cartesian system). This certainty allows for an apologetic of power that engenders a particular form of argumentation known as “presuppositionalism” or “presuppositional apologetics”. My problem with this form of argumentation is that it finds its strength in domination, in force, in the method of bellum. It mirrors the hubris that is the strong characteristic of modernity, and thus it fails to acknowledge love as its impetus, but rather, it builds on fear.
This fear-based method is the result of a certain hermeneutical problem, in that, the Reformed exegesis of scripture is a form of “phallocentric” hermeneutics. Furthermore, many Reformed thinkers completely misunderstand the use of metaphor in the Bible. Instead of understanding institutions like patriarchy, nationalism, and militarism as ways of attempting to understand the divine and the work of the divine in the world, these thinkers interpret those institutions as God-given ways of domination. Meaning, God desires that we best understand God as a man, that we best understand gender as a hierarchy, and that we best understand the nation-state in terms of theological hegemony and institutionalized morality.
Lastly, I fail to see how this form of theology can help the world in its present condition. We live in an era that is watching the collapse of ideological framework. Systems of rationalism, patriarchy, and imperialism have undergone heavy examination resulting in a nearly complete rejection of them in academic circles, and somewhat in popular culture as well. Why then must Reformed theology cling so radically to these principles of modernity? Why must Reformed theology reject semper reformada?
Of course, I have painted in broad strokes, I have made a generalization. I have tried to keep my critique limited to narrow 5-point Calvinism and its modalities, for I know that many Reformed “theologies” exist, and many of them deserve to escape my polemical words. I am even fortunate enough to know of several churches that are rooted in Reformed theology that are “self-reforming” and are viable resources for theological and cultural transformation. However, there also exists several churches and think tanks that embody this type of theology. They live far from the Christian essentials of love and humility and must surrender their certainty and mythical beliefs in absolute truth, and reform their ideas in order to address and meet the demands of a world in need of theological transformation.
With a commanding lead over democratic rivals Clinton and Edwards, Barack Obama secured a victory in the Iowa caucus. Interestingly, the percentage of African-Americans in Iowa is a low 1%, which I think silences critics who assert that Obama will ride on the African-American vote. What the Iowa caucus shows us is that mid-west white Christians support Obama, who happens to be both a democrat and of a minority ethnic group.