The troubling trends in America’s ‘Calvinist revival’
美国‘加尔文主义’复兴恼人的张力
By Jonathan Merritt
When Mark Oppenheimer declared that “evangelicalism is in the midst of a Calvinist revival” in The New York Times earlier this year, he was only partially correct.
当Mark Oppenheimer在今年年初于纽约时报中宣称‘福音派主义如今在加尔文主义的复兴中’的时候，他的论点只有部分是正确的。
According to a 2010 Barna poll, roughly three out of 10 Protestant leaders describe their church as “Calvinist or Reformed,” a proportion statistically unchanged from a decade earlier. According to the research group, “there is no discernible evidence from this research that there is a Reformed shift among U.S. congregation leaders over the last decade.”
根据一项2010年的Barna调查，大约30%的抗议宗领袖描述他们的教会是‘加尔文主义或改革宗’，这个比率与一个世纪前尝不到。根据这个研究机构，“这个研究中并没有任何明显的迹象显明美国在过去10年中的领袖们展现出改革宗神学的转移。”
And yet, Oppenheimer is correct that something is stirring among American Calvinists (those who adhere to a theological system centering on human sinfulness and God’s sovereignty that stems from 16th century reformer John Calvin). While Calvinist Protestants—including Presbyterians, some Baptists, and the Dutch Reformed—have been a part of the American religious fabric since the beginning, Oppenheimer points to a more vocal and visible strain that has risen to prominence in recent years.
然而，Oppenheimer关于美国改革宗主义者（那些坚称一种源自于16世界的宗教改革家约翰加尔文，以人类的罪并神的主权为中心点神学系统）间有一种骚动的观点却是正确的。在同时，加尔文派的抗议宗——包括长老会，部分浸信会以及荷兰改革宗教会——从而美国一开始就构成了美国宗教信仰的一部分，Oppenheimer指出在这几年中，有一种口头上并可见的张力变得越来越显而易见。
They’ve been called the “young, restless, and reformed” or neo-Calvinists, and they are highly mobilized and increasingly influential. Their books perform well in the marketplace (see John Piper or Paul David Tripp), their leaders pepper the lists of the most popular Christian bloggers (see The Gospel Coalition and Resurgence), and they’ve created vibrant training grounds for raising new recruits (see Reformed Theological Seminary, Westminster Theological Seminary, and The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary).
他们被称为“年轻，躁动并改革宗的（young1, restless, and reformed）”或新加尔文主义者（neo-Calvinist），他们具有很强的机动性，并越来越有影响力。他们的书籍销路不错（参考John Piper 和Paul David Tripp），他们的领袖建立了最具有人气的基督教博客（参考福音联盟与复苏运动（The Gospel Coalition and Resurgence）），他们为了新募集的人员创立了富有活力的训练中心（参考改革宗神学院，卫敏斯特神学院，南浸信会神学院。）
This brand of Calvinists are a force with which to reckon. But as with any movement, America’s Calvinist revival is a mixed bag. None can deny that many have come to faith as a result of these churches and leaders. The movement is rigorously theological, which is surely one of its greatest contributions. Just as Quakers teach us much about silence, Mennonites teach us much about peace, and Anglicans teach us much about liturgy, so Calvinists spur us on with their intellectual rigor.
这一派的加尔文主义者是一股引人注目的力量。但是，就像其他所有的运动一样，美国的加尔文主义复兴本身就是一个大杂烩。没有人能够否认，许多人透过那些教会和领袖们得到信仰。运动本身具有严格的神学性，这肯定也是其最大的贡献。就如同贵格会教导我们如何安静，门诺派教导我们什么是和平，安利甘会教导我们什么是礼仪一样，加尔文主义者则教导我们理性的严谨性。
And yet, from where I sit, there are several troubling trends that must be addressed if this faithful faction hopes to move from a niche Christian cadre to a sustainable and more mainstream movement.
然而，从我的立场而言，若这个源自于一种原本恰当的基督教核心观念的宗派要进一步成为一个更为持久甚至成为一种主流的运动，有几个恼人的张力必须被提及。
ISOLATIONISM—孤立主义
One of the markers of the neo-Calvinist movement is isolationism. My Reformed friends consume Calvinist blogs and Calvinist books, attend Calvinist conferences, and join Calvinist churches with Calvinist preachers. They rarely learn from or engage with those outside their tradition. (My feeling is that this trend is less prevalent among leaders than the average followers.)
一个新加尔文主义运动的标记是孤立主义。我的改革宗朋友们建立了加尔文主义的博客，读了加尔文主义的书，参加了加尔文主要的特会，加入了由加尔文主义牧师带领的加尔文主义的教会。他们很少学习或解除他们传统之外的事物。（我的感觉是，这种张力在牧师中要比在一般的跟随者中严重。）
The most sustainable religious movements, however, are those which are willing to ask hard, full-blooded questions while interacting with more than caricatures of other traditions. When neo-Calvinists insulate and isolate, they hyper-focus on those doctrines their tradition emphasizes and relegate other aspects to the status of afterthought. The Christian faith is meant to be lived and not merely intellectually appropriated. This requires mingling with others who follow Jesus, are rooted in Scripture, and are working toward a restored creation.
最能够持久的宗教运动乃是那些愿意极力学习，并与不同的传统互动，而不是讽刺其他传统的运动。当新加尔文主义者将自己隔绝的时候，他们极端的关注与那些他们传统所强调的教义，进而忽视了其他的方面。基督教的信仰应当是活生生的，不仅仅是理性活动。这要求他们与其它跟随耶稣的信徒打成一片，需要根植与圣经，并努力恢复创造的状态。
Gregory Thornbury, a Calvinist and president of The King’s College in New York City, told me, “I think the ‘young, restless, and reformed” are different than the Dutch stream in that they tend to stay with authors and leaders that they know. It does run the risk of being provincial, but I don’t think it is intentional. There are universes where people stay, and they read the things they know.”
Gregory Thornbury，一位纽约市国王大学的加尔文主义者并校长，告诉我，“我认为，‘年轻，躁动并改革宗的’与他们所认识的，并尝试追随的荷兰改革宗作者与领袖是不同的。这会产生地方主义的危险，但我认为这并不是刻意为之。人们或者不同的世界，他们只能阅读他们知道的东西。”
To guard against this, Thornbury says he encourages King’s College’s students to be “intellectually gregarious” and to “read promiscuously.”
为了避免这种情况，Thornbury说他鼓励国王大学的学生要更为‘理性的合群（intellectually gregarious）’并‘广泛阅读（read promiscuously）’。
“People need to read outside of the tradition,” Thornbury says. “We say we want to have contact with people outside of our culture, but we ghettoize so easily.”
Thornbury说，“人们需要阅读他们传统之外的书籍，我们说我们希望接触在我们文化之物的人，但是我们非常容易成为少数民族。”
His words remind me of Yale theologian Miroslav Volf, who speaks of “thin” and “thick” expressions of religion:
他的话让我想起耶鲁大学的神学家Miroslave Volf，他论到宗教的“薄”与“厚”的表述：
“[Thin religion is] religiosity reduced to a single symbolic gesture. And once you reduce religion to that . . . you can project everything that you want onto that . . . [Thin religion] isn’t textured. It doesn’t have depth. It doesn’t have relief. It doesn’t rely on a long history of that religion with all the varieties of reflections that have gone on in the religion.”
“[浅的宗教是]从宗教的角度而言，被消减成为一个单一的符号学性的东西。只要你将一个宗教消减到那个程度。。。。你就能预测你想要做的所有事情。。。[厚的宗教]不是质地粗糙的。它也没有深度。它也没有减轻自身的内涵。它不依赖宗教本身悠久的历史，并该宗教所折射出不同的方面。”
Coinhabitation with other Christians guards a movement against “thin” expressions of religion.
与其他的基督徒和睦同居房子一个运动成为以[薄]的方式表述的宗教。
TRIBALISM—部落化主义
Another troubling trend I see in the movement is tribalism. This is the kinship tendency within a group to protect insiders while combating outsiders.
我观察到另一个恼人的张力是部落化主义。这是一种当一个群体为了保护内部人士并同时与外人征战时产生的张力。
Several prominent Calvinists, for example, declined the opportunity to comment on this story due to fear that their words might be used to disparage the movement. Said one well-known leader via email, “I don’t want to be a brick in a wall that’s used against the tradition/movement I identify with.”
例如，好几位加尔文主义领袖拒绝评论这个故事的机会，因为他们害怕他们的话会被用来贬低该运动。有一位广为人知的领袖透过电邮说，“我不想成为我所认可的那个传统/运动中的害群之马。”
To be sure, neo-calvinists don’t shy away from controversy and aren’t reticent to critique those outside of the movement. (One might refer to some Calvinist’s blistering responses to Donald Miller’s announcement that he doesn’t attend church.) Yet these same leaders are often resistant, delayed, and then tempered with their critiques of other Calvinists who seem to stray.
新加尔文运动当然不会惧怕任何的争议，也毫无保留的批判那些在此运动之外的人士。（有些加尔文主义人士可能会激烈的回应Donald Miller所宣称他从来不去教会。）然而，同样的那一群领袖们往往有抗拒，拖延，甚至被他们对于其他看起来似乎偏离正道的加尔文主义者引诱而发出批判。
An illuminating example of this might be the recent glut of Mark Driscoll controversies—from sexist comments to charges of plagiarism to proof that he bought his way onto the New York Times bestsellers list using ministry monies. Leaders in the movement were effectively mum until a select few broke the silence of late. The first accusations of Driscoll plagiarizing were revealed on November 21st, but the first truly critical response posted by neo-Calvinist mega-blog, The Gospel Coalition, trickles out on December 18th. One might compare this with the response to Rob Bell’s book “Love Wins” that was in full bloom before the YouTube trailer finished buffering.
最近发生的Mark Driscoll争议可能就是一个非常好的例子——他以性别歧视的方式抨击对于他使用教会职事的款项作为购买并贿赂，以进入纽约时报畅销书作者，并他的剽窃行为的证明。这个运动的领袖出奇的保持沉默，直到11月21日，一个新加尔文主义者的大型博客（mega-blog）才发出第一个真正批判性的回应。福音联盟（Gosple Coalition），在12月18日发动批判。有兴趣的人可以比较对于Rob Bell的‘爱战胜一切（Love Wins）’这本书的批判在他的Youtube广告推出前就已经大量出现的速度。
Even those who were brave enough to critique Driscoll were mostly moderate. And several Calvinists told me off-the-record that many who offered full-throated criticisms of Driscoll—like Carl Trueman of Westminster Theological Seminary—have been relegated to the margins as a result.
甚至那些敢于批判Discoll的人都是最为温和的人士。好几位加尔文主义者私底下告诉我，许多权利发声批判Driscoll的人生——例如，卫敏斯特神学院的Carl Trueman——最后都把他们的批判降级。
Tullian Tchividjian is pastor and blogger at The Gospel Coalition who has been challenging neo-Calvinists from within the ranks. He announced just this morning that what he calls “the powers that be” were forcing him to take his blog elsewhere. The decision was less than ideal, he said, and is a result of having “some differences with some of the other contributors.” Tchividjian said the decision was “probably over due” since “the messaging of The Gospel Coalition has morphed over the last seven years.”
Tullian Tchividjian是福音联盟的牧师和博客编辑者，他一直在内部挑战新加尔文主义者。他宣布，今早他所谓的‘那股力量’迫使他把他的博客移到别的网站。这个决定并不是理想的，他说，这乃是‘与其他的支持者产生不同意见’的结果。Tchividjian说，这个决定‘可能是’因为‘福音联盟的信息在过去七年中已经变形了。’
We might also make mention of Tim Keller, a paragon among neo-Calvinists if there ever was one. Keller is a part of Francis Collins’ Biologos and a theistic evolutionist. He holds many of the same views that triggered the forced resignation of Old Testament professor Bruce Waltke from Reformed Theological Seminary. Another Calvinist leader, Southern Baptist Seminary president Albert Mohler, has called theistic evolution “a biblical and theological disaster” and said that Biologos leaders were “throwing the Bible under the bus” with “ridiculous” logic.
我们也可以提及Tim Keller，一位典型的新加尔文主义者，如果能够有这么一个典型的话。Keller是Francis Collin的Biologos的成员，并神导进化论者（Theistic Evolutionist）。他坚称许多被改革宗神学院（Reformed Theological Seminary）强迫退休的旧约教授Bruce Waltke的观点。另一位加尔文主义的领袖，南浸信会神学院的院长Albert Mohler，称神导进化论为‘对于圣经并神学的灾难’并说Biologos的领袖们都‘用荒谬的逻辑把圣经放在巴士下任其碾压。’
Because Tim Keller has become something of a prize hen for Calvinists—New York Magazine called him “the most successful Christian evangelist in the city”—you won’t likely hear other neo-Calvinists mention Keller’s views. Tribalists attempt to “clean house” when it comes to outsiders but “sweep under the rug” when it comes to insiders.
因为Tim Keller已经成为加尔文主义者的金母鸡——纽约杂志称他为‘纽约市最为成功的基督教福音大师’——你可能不会听见其他的新加尔文主义者提及Keller的观点。当他是加尔文主义的外人的时候，部落主义者尝试想要“清洗”他，当他成为其成员后，部落主义者则尝试“遮掩”他。
As Roger Olson, Baylor University professor and author of “Against Calvinism“, told me, “[Neo-Calvinist’s are] a tribe, and they’ve closed ranks. Somehow they’ve formed a mentality that they have to support each other because they are a minority on a crusade. Any criticism hurts the cause. I’ve seen the same thing among feminists and black theologians.”
就好像Baylor大学的教授，并“反加尔文主义”一书的作者奥尔森（Roger Olson）告诉我的，“[新加尔文主义者是]一个部落，他们对外是封闭的。但是，他们形成了一种思维模式，就是他们必须彼此相互支援，因为他们是一个由少数人组成的十字军。任何批判都会伤到他们的动机。我已经在女权神学并黑人神学的神学家中看见同样的现象。”
Olson says that when he speaks to Calvinist leaders, they will often critique the movement and its other leaders in private, but never in public. My experience has been identical.
奥尔森说，当他与加尔文主义的领袖沟通的时候，他们往往只敢私下批判这个运动并其灵修，但是从未公开这么做过。我的经验与其完全一致。
“There is a fundamentalist ethos in [neo-Calvinism],” Olson says. “You get pats on the back and merits for criticizing outsiders, but not for criticizing insiders. There is a system where if you are young coming up in the ranks, you get points for criticizing or exposing those outside the movement but it’s not your place to criticize those who are above you in the movement itself.”
奥尔森说，“在新加尔文主义者间有一种基要派的思潮（fundamentalist ethos），有人轻抚你的背，鼓励你批判外人，但从未批判自己人。这是一个你在年轻的时候加入，在其中因批判或揭发这个运动之外的人士而得到奖励点数的系统，但是你根本没有资格批判在这个运动中位于你之上的人。”
This tendency is more curious given that neo-Calvinists claim to be rooted in the ancient rallying cry, “Ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda” or “The church is always to be reformed.” You can’t maintain a constant state of reformation when you refuse to self-reflect, when you preserve for preservation’s sake, you’re your modus operandi is both “circle the wagons” and “fire the canons.”
这种张力在新加尔文主义宣称他们根植于古代教会的呼召并高喊“Ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda”，或“教会不断地在被归正”的口号下，是非常怪异的。当你拒绝批判自身的同时，你无法维持一种持续不断地归正状态，当你因着护短的原因护短的时候，你塑造了一种鱼与熊掌都像兼得的运作模式。
Let me be clear: I’m not arguing that Calvinists should criticize themselves more harshly. Rather, I wish they might extend the same grace to others that they give to themselves.
我可以明确的说：我并不是在争论加尔文主义者应当更为严厉的自我批判。我反而认为他们需要把同样的，赐予自身的恩典分赐给他人。
EGOTISM--自尊自大
A final troubling trend I believe plagues America’s “Calvinist revival” is egotism. This one may sound like ad hominem at first blush, but I mean it more as an observation of the movement’s predominant tone. Talking so much of sovereignty and salvation and atonement can inflate the ego. It is the type of thing described in Helmut Thielicke’s book, “A Little Lesson for Young Theologians.” Attaining theological knowledge often leads to the idea that one is in a better place to understand God or more in tune with God.
最后一个我相信正在横扫美国的‘加尔文主义复兴运动’的恼人张力是自尊自大。乍听之下，它听起来就像是ad hominem(从个人偏好除非)的看法，但是我的意思是，你只要观察那个运动的主宰性的语调。过分论及神的主权，救赎并代赎会造成自我膨胀。这就是Helmut Thielicke的书——“A Little Lesson for Young Theologians（给年轻神学家的一封短信）”中所描绘的情况。得到神学的知识往往产生让人觉得自己占有了解神或与神一致更为有利的地位。
As the ego inflates, the body rises and one begins to speak from above rather than from across. This is often seen in the way neo-Calvinists speak as if they are the arbiters of the term “gospel.” Search the term “gospel” on the web site of the Reformed publisher Crossway and you’ll see what I mean. Or listen to the way some neo-Calvinist leaders frame every ethical issue of the day, not as a difference of opinion among Christians of mutual goodwill, but rather an affront to the gospel itself.
当自我膨胀，身体飘升，人就开始站在高处，而不是以平等的地位说话。这在新加尔文主义者往往以福音的‘仲裁者’自居的说话方式中看见。你只要在网络上的改革宗出版商Crossway（十字架的道路）搜寻‘福音’这个字，就会看见我描述的情况。或听听某些新加尔文主义领袖如何规范今日的道德问题，他们并不是以善意的方式在基督徒中提供不同的意见，而是公开侮辱福音的本身。
“The perspective of many today is that if you aren’t a Calvinist, you don’t really have a grasp of the gospel,” Olson says.
奥尔森说，“今日许多人的观点乃是，若你不是加尔文主义者，你就根本没有得到福音。”
Sometimes it seems as if Calvinists view themselves as judge, jury, and executioner of the Christian movement at large—determining who is faithful and not, who believes the gospel and who doesn’t, who is in and who is out. (One might call to mind John Piper’s iconic and infamous “Farewell, Rob Bell” tweet.) Some within the movement talk of God’s sovereignty while seeking to control the destinies of other Christians and often speak of man’s depravity with a haughtiness that undermines it.
有时候，这甚至看起来就像加尔文主义者把自己视为审判官，并基督教运动的刽子手——可以决定谁是忠信的信徒，谁相信福音，谁是基督徒，谁不是基督徒。（大家可以想想John Piper滑稽并声名狼藉的维特‘再见了！Rob Bell’。）有些该运动的人士在论到神的主权的同时，同时却又尝试掌握其他基督徒的命运，常常用傲慢的态度论及人的堕落。
As Scot McKnight, professor at Northern Seminary told me, “Calvinists can give really strong impressions that those who disagree with them are both unfaithful and that they theologically and intellectually lack courage. And that trend is relatively new.”
就像Scot McKnight，北方神学院的教授告诉我的，‘加尔文主义者会给人一个非常强烈的印象，就是那些与他们持不同意见的人若不是不忠心，就是他们在神学或理性上缺乏勇气与胆量。那种张力还算是非常新颖的。’
A large ego often precedes a harsh tone—an surefire influence limiter. Scholar Martin Marty says the religious world isn’t divided into liberal and conservative, but rather “mean and non-mean.” Those who opt for a mean or arrogant tenor—whether real or perceived—have a short-shelf life in the span of history.
膨胀的自我往往产生尖锐的语气。Martin Marty这位学者论到，宗教世界不能被分割为自由派与保守派，而是“粗鄙与不粗鄙。”那些选择刻薄或高傲的高调的人士——不论是他们有没有察觉到——在历史中都只有短暂的生命期。
Bethany Jenkins, director of The Gospel Coalition’s faith and work initiative, thinks some of her fellow Calvinists’ tonal problems may be unintentional: “I think some Calvinists have come to think that in order to be faithful you have to be strident, but you don’t need to be. As Tim Keller has said, ‘We are a chosen people, but we are not a choice people.'”
福音联盟的信心与工作部门的主管Bethany Jenkins，认为她的某些加尔文主义同工的那种语气往往是不自觉的：“我认为某些加尔文主义者认为，为了成为忠信的人，你必须要昂首阔步，但是你不需要这样做。就像Tim Keller说过的，‘我们是选民，但是我们不是做决定的百姓。’”
I reflect on the Apostle Paul’s observation that “Knowledge puffs up.” Which is to say, egotism is a human problem rather than a Calvinist one. Yet, the vice seems to afflict this movement with consistency. If neo-Calvinists don’t get a rapid infusion of humility—and quickly—then perceptions of egotism will be an albatross around their necks.
我反射的是保罗所观察道的“知识让人自高自大。”也就是说，自尊自大是一种人性的问题，而不是加尔文主义的问题。然而，从另一个角度而言，这个问题不断地折磨这个运动。如果新加尔文主义者不被迅速的灌输谦卑的观念—必须非常迅速—那么自我膨胀的观念就会成为挂在他们脖子上的磨石。
Though these problems are serious, I am for any movement that lifts up Jesus and proclaims the Christian good news. I have many friends within the neo-Calvinist movement that challenge me with their commitment to scriptural fidelity and the supremacy of Christ. If America’s “Calvinist revival” turns out to be a resurgence, I hope they abound in grace–both inside and out. Ah yes, grace. Another cherished Reformed virtue.
虽然这些问题都是很严重的，我仍然愿意随时随地的高举基督，并宣告基督教的福音。我有许多在新加尔文主义圈子中的朋友，他们往往用他们对于属灵忠诚的献身并基督的超越性挑战我。如果美国的‘加尔文主义复兴’最后变成一种驱策的力量，我希望他们能够也被恩典充满——里里外外。是的！恩典。恩典是另一个令人愉悦的改革宗美德。