THINGS THAT BOTHER ME: I’M REFORMED… BUT PT. IV

This is the final writing in this series.

In summary therefore, we have need to ask ourselves what are the consequences of this Reformed... But Pentecostal thinking. To what does it point and what are its consequences? A few remarks are submitted below. It:

 rejects the comprehensiveness of Reformed Theology by denying that there is a unique pattern of worship corresponding to this teaching. Clear teaching on the theology and liturgy of Reformed worship can be found in such profound writings as Worship by Hughes Oliphant Old (part of the “Guide To The Reformed Tradition” series by John H. Leith and John W. Kuykendall); With Reverence And Awe: Returning To The Basics of Reformed Worship by D. G. Hart and John R. Muether; (my highest recommendation) Give Praise To God: A Vision For Reforming Worship, edited by Philip Graham Ryken, Derek W. H. Thomas and J. Ligon Duncan III; and others.

 regards worship as a market transaction, an interchange between consumer and provider, both of whom enjoy a win-win situation by jointly partaking of what best suits and entertains them.

 reveals a tragic situation in which our hermeneutics and experience determine our theology, and not vice versa. In this case, the contours of custom and the conveniences of culture form the basis for our theological understanding.

 rebuffs the internal coherency and consistency of Reformed Theology by promoting a schism between doctrine and practice.

 undermines the unity and cohesiveness of this teaching and creates unnecessary confusion and distraction by claiming to present an acceptable or suitable alternative. The fact is we are not promoting a new and competing brand of Reformed worship but are in fact distorting its true existing forms according to the whims of a democratic mass appeal.

 in the end, is a wearisome repetition of liberal thinking that Scripture can be rejected when it doesn't please us.


The dreaded conjunction BUT is one of contrariety, not one of consequence, one of exception, not one of enhancement. It speaks contrarily to the meaning and essence of Reformed teaching and is in fact a partial rebuttal of such thought. Since Reformed Theology, as we have stated over and over in this as well as in other writings, is a complete framework for understanding our world, the REFORMED ... BUT proposition presents a fragmented worldview. This is a sad oxymoron. Why? Because the evil exception BUT leaves us with an "almost" worldview, a "not exactly" (like the Hertz car rental commercial) perspective. It says we are Reformed except that we choose to be Pentecostal in our worship. We’re 95%, 96%, or 98.7% (pick a number) Reformed!! We’re almost there except for this one aspect. This simply does not and cannot make sense.

The most fundamental question at this point, and indeed, at all points, is not what I want but what does God require of me? Has He given us clear instructions on this subject? Have the historic Reformed churches handed down to us sound interpretations and applications of these principles? Does the Theological concept Reformed have its own principles pervading all of life? The answer to all of these questions is of course, yes. It is our task, therefore, to uphold these principles by faithfully applying them to all matters of faith and conduct.

The Reformation assertion that the church is semper reformanda intends a continuing application of these eternal principles to our local conditions in accordance with the increased illumination God grants us by His Word and Spirit. But (here is that dreaded word again!) there is a drastic difference between faithful application and pragmatic modification, between creative contextualization and convenient mutation. As the “pillar and buttress of truth” 1 Tim 3:15, the church is called to make this distinction continually. Faithfulness to this divine vocation renders her able to reject the Reformed… BUT anomaly and to uphold the Reformed AND continuum. It is a distinction between the common and the consecrated.