are these different? - 1

Amittai

baggage apostate
Aug 20, 2006
1,426
491
✟41,180.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Are there contrasts between what and who is evangelical and what and who is reformed? Or to put another way, between what and who is reformed and what and who is evangelical? ;)

And are some open to / liable to further reform and some not? Can we tell from their subliminal word usages or body language? :confused: And if so what kind of further reform? :eek:

I've studied "confessions" and "statements" and "declarations" and observed people from hanging around them, and need your help pinning these issues down better. o_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pioneer3mm

tampasteve

Pray for peace in Israel
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Angels Team
CF Senior Ambassador
Supporter
May 15, 2017
25,196
7,287
Tampa
✟767,634.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Do you mean "Evangelical" as in a more "spirit filled" contemporary worship service or "Evangelical" in the traditional sense? My church is part of the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC) and is Reformed and Confessional, we abide by the Westminster Confession.

I would venture to say that in the States, most "Evangelicals" are not Reformed. On the spectrum they would be closer to Baptist, but not Reformed Baptist.
 
Upvote 0

Amittai

baggage apostate
Aug 20, 2006
1,426
491
✟41,180.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
In the UK, it turns out the same franchise are behind "both" tendencies, regardless of what nominal denomination. My new friends don't do nearly as much bad amplifying, but have mentioned "membership".

How much do these all see themselves as reform - ING? And, what would "reformed" or indeed "evangelical" have reform - ED out of or from, thus far, and why? It can't be to separate from bishops, because look at the C of E.

And, is there such a thing as an "unevangelical" who holds the Nicene Creed? Why, according to the opinion of the NON "spirit filled", do the "spirit filled" call themselves "spirit filled"?

(And in the US, apparently there are "reformed" who call themselves that but whom the Reformed don't call "reformed"? All the "trends" are flooding rapidly into Britain.)

I find "confessions" or "catechisms" confusing because it's difficult to figure out the real reasons for any weak emphases. Westminster - I missed that one, shall check it out, but it will probably not answer many of these questions.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
And are some open to / liable to further reform and some not? Can we tell from their subliminal word usages or body language? :confused: And if so what kind of further reform? :eek:

What do you mean by this statement? It appears your thread is using two different definitions of "reformed".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amittai
Upvote 0

Amittai

baggage apostate
Aug 20, 2006
1,426
491
✟41,180.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Yes and I'm not the only one. There perhaps was a relatively established meaning in the US which some prominent personalities are trying to pile into, but in the UK, it is far more complicated.

Any more members' perspectives about what we are / shall be "reforming from" and the slogan "reformanda" with an -a on the end, would be welcome, please.

For example there are:

- organisational ties (this seems to be the main thing now in the UK: the term they apply is "positioning")
- ceremonial proceedings which maybe wouldn't mean much to some attending
- actual belief and meanings of belief
- varying points of dogma

(I only put this in "Calvinist / Presbyterian" because almost all churches are "reformed".)

("Non denominational" is not my choice of self description, when I last looked the list didn't have "multi-denominational".)
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Yes and I'm not the only one. There perhaps was a relatively established meaning in the US which some prominent personalities are trying to pile into, but in the UK, it is far more complicated.

Any more members' perspectives about what we are / shall be "reforming from" and the slogan "reformanda" with an -a on the end, would be welcome, please.

For example there are:

- organisational ties (this seems to be the main thing now in the UK: the term they apply is "positioning")
- ceremonial proceedings which maybe wouldn't mean much to some attending
- actual belief and meanings of belief
- varying points of dogma

(I only put this in "Calvinist / Presbyterian" because almost all churches are "reformed".)

("Non denominational" is not my choice of self description, when I last looked the list didn't have "multi-denominational".)

"Reformed" though (as applied to this forum) entails a certain set of doctrines; (which I'm assuming you know that). That's a different context than a church (or other organization) "reforming" (for example) their statement of faith / statement of purpose to "keep up with the times".

Now if "reforming churches" (i.e. "keep up with the times") is what your referring to as happening in the UK; and it's not related to what's commonly called "calvinism" doctrinally? That would be a different question altogether.

In general though; there has been a trend also in the US of "evangelical" churches moving more toward "calvinistic" doctrine. (And tell me if I'm wrong here; but that I think is the question you're really asking?)

So if the questions leading off of that are:

"Is there a distinction between evangelical / doctrinally calvinistic churches and traditional doctrinally calvinistic churches?"

My experience over the past 30 years would say "yes". "Evangelical calvinistic" churches tend to be closer in "evangelical behavioral practices" to (conservative) "arminian evangelical churches" (like typical "run of the mill" baptist churches) than they are to "traditionally calvinistic" churches.

And churches that are more "evangelically lively" tend to be (at least what people in the US would refer to as) "Spirit filled". On the flip side of that question though; for conservative evangelicals (be they "arminian" or "calvinistic") "spirit-filled" tends to evoke notions of pentecostalism. I don't know if that's the same in the UK or not? In the US though; depending on "conservative" or "liberal"; "spirit filled" tends to evoke images of pentecostalism. And if the evangelical is more "conservative" they'll see that as negative. If they are more "liberal" they'll see that as positive.

And in that mix (which as a British person you might find this odd about American churches); you will see some convergence between political "conservative / liberal" that trends into those diverging circles. America right now is very politically divided; which also manifests with ideological social divisions too.

So (as I'm sure you are aware of this too); just as "evangelical" carries its own stereotypes; so does "reformed", "calvinistic", "conservative" and "liberal".

Now as for your question of things like "organizational ties"?

You will see some "narrowing of parameters" in certain denominations. For example; the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) in America tends to be a very "traditional reformed" / "non-evangelical" "calvinistic" denomination. A church of common tenant in Europe might be the Dutch Reformed Church. (There's a lot of Dutch Reformed people in the OPC in the US.)

Practice wise; the OPC church would be the most "puritan". They sing songs, read Bible, have prayers, sermon, communion (usually once a month) and that's it. It's a very basic and predictable service; but not liturgical like C of E, or Lutherans would be.

Eschatology wise; OPC tends to be amillennial / partial-Preterist; whereas arminian evangelicals tend to be premillennial dispensationalists.

The OPC also tends to be very historical document / catechism orientated. Much of the seminary learning of the preachers comes out of that historical background. Also the OPC does not have female preachers or elders; but may have female "deacons" in the sense of administrative type church work (treasurer / building upkeep / community use committees. Churches in the US do rent out their buildings to non-church civic organizations; like 12 step groups, scouts groups, or day care centers.

Whereas the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) (which had been 25 or more years ago; much more like the OPC in belief and religious practice); now tends to be more "arminian" / socially / politically "liberal" in practice. Despite the fact that the profession of faith may be very historically aligned to the documents that came out of the Reformation.

America also has quite a few "community churches" that can run the gambit of "evangelical", "Calvinistic doctrine" "conservative", or closer to "pentecostal" etc. There's a real mixed bag in that category.

Now in America; the more "evangelical" / "arminian" / "pentecostal" leaning a church gets; the more "contemporary Christian" the music tends to become. Those churches also can get quite large. But also "evangelical" / "arminian" / "non-pentecostal" churches can be quite large too. Sometimes large churches are called "mainstream churches"; which tends to be an adjective related to size. (Usually 500 or more people there every Sunday.) If one gets 2000 or more attendees; than they earn the title "mega church".

Rarely does a "calvinistic" church get that big; but there are some. John McArther Grace Community Church has 8,000 weekly average attendance. Music wise though, I think that church is pretty much still hymn type music.

Now "dogma"? Differences there tend to ebb and flow with what ever is "trending" in those circles. I remember maybe 10 or more years ago there was a trend "headship doctrine" that was going around conservative "doctrinally calvinistic" churches. Things like that though tend to eventually cause "break offs" into what usually becomes some sort of "independent reformed baptist" type church.

My experience with those is that they tend to be so "reductionist" that they don't tend to last long. Some small groups like that though do function well. I was once in a "house church" that was very supportive. There were maybe 4 couples and a couple of single people who were part of that group. It only lasted for a couple of years though because the guy who was serving as the "pastor" worked for a defense contractor and they got moved to another state. But that's happened with a lot of smaller groups I've been in; (even attached to established churches). People move, then you loose track of each other. It can be hard; but it happens.

So, I don't know if I answered your questions; but? That's kind of my "stab in the dark" as far as what I think you might be asking.
 
Upvote 0

Amittai

baggage apostate
Aug 20, 2006
1,426
491
✟41,180.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
In England churches are very Conservative Party oriented (as is the Labour Party) and the pew sitters are either the same if considered important or indifferent / mixed / dissenters if considered unimportant. Calvinism has swept the board except a few methodist, and I know there were a few little congregationals in existence a while ago (the decent old fashioned pentecostals seem to have succumbed). Organisationally everything is done by "certain" umbrella groups and channels, and not by denominations (except one of them who claim not to be one).

A lot of English churches are start-ups. C of E parishes are treated as start-ups by elements out of control of bishops or favoured by bishops. Discussion of the eschaton (which was all about our ministry all along - as pointed out by a writer called Ian Paul) seems totally banned in the UK.

We can't be perfectionist and should pray for the good conduct by our superiors and I'm not to blame even if I've been accepted into membership (an idea which has rapidly spread) so I'm interested in what it's like for the ordinary folks to have belief(s). The actual idea that we are to be "reformanda" hasn't caught on. Yet the leaderships seem increasingly fluid in views in a shallow way.

It is sometimes said "reformed" meant "not Roman" yet Calvin's theology was almost Roman as demonstrated by the prevalence of similar dynamics. Hence the "reformanda" anomaly remains (in England).
 
Upvote 0

The Righterzpen

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm
Feb 9, 2019
3,389
1,342
53
Western NY
Visit site
✟144,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
In England churches are very Conservative Party oriented (as is the Labour Party) and the pew sitters are either the same if considered important or indifferent / mixed / dissenters if considered unimportant. Calvinism has swept the board except a few methodist, and I know there were a few little congregationals in existence a while ago (the decent old fashioned pentecostals seem to have succumbed). Organisationally everything is done by "certain" umbrella groups and channels, and not by denominations (except one of them who claim not to be one).

A lot of English churches are start-ups. C of E parishes are treated as start-ups by elements out of control of bishops or favoured by bishops. Discussion of the eschaton (which was all about our ministry all along - as pointed out by a writer called Ian Paul) seems totally banned in the UK.

We can't be perfectionist and should pray for the good conduct by our superiors and I'm not to blame even if I've been accepted into membership (an idea which has rapidly spread) so I'm interested in what it's like for the ordinary folks to have belief(s). The actual idea that we are to be "reformanda" hasn't caught on. Yet the leaderships seem increasingly fluid in views in a shallow way.

It is sometimes said "reformed" meant "not Roman" yet Calvin's theology was almost Roman as demonstrated by the prevalence of similar dynamics. Hence the "reformanda" anomaly remains (in England).

Well, that's interesting. Obviously politics plays a big part in religion and vice versa. That's true on "either side of the pond".

As per the US; yes, there are definitely more "calvinistic doctrine" churches, but certainly not "all protestant churches in America have gone that way"; as you report is more prevalent in Britain.

As far as "calvinistic" being "anything but Roman Catholic"; that is another difference between Britain and the US. Here "calvinistic" means more "TULIP" = total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints; although not everyone uses that terminology and there's varying degrees of what that means.

As per "Roman-(Catholic)-ism"; I think there's some what of a difference between the US and Britain there too; as protestantism in America tends to have more "historically puritan" roots. Whereas the C of E is more "liturgical" than protestant churches tend to be here. So here "Romanized" means more "Roman Catholic formalities" than it has to do with doctrines such as election or limited atonement. Here too, I think most RCC churches are primarily "arminian" as Roman Catholicism is very heavy on "behavioral" (works) aspects as their "definition of belief".

Which if we went back in time 400 years; the "official stance" from the RCC on election / limited atonement etc. was probably closer doctrinally to "calvinism" than it is now (at least in American RCC churches). The difference primarily being (which we see "hang over" in more "traditional" RCC churches here) that the RCC are "the elect". Most Roman Catholics / Protestants in America don't have much animosity toward each other. Although there is pockets of it. The division is more prominent in the British islands; particularly Ireland.

So this conversation ("cultural" differences) is interesting to me.

Also, are you a clergy person looking for confirmation of a position within a church hierarchy? The reason I ask is that your question seems a little complicated for "just a lay person" "I'm going to join a church" type of situation.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Amittai

baggage apostate
Aug 20, 2006
1,426
491
✟41,180.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
"just a lay person" "I'm going to join a church" type of situation

Thank you. No I'm a layman and I've been hanging round a variety of churches for over 60 years.

Suddenly I see most of the protestants going somehow reformed (some trying to be a bit "charismatic" as well) and meanwhile the attitude in the RCC is nearer to Calvinistic (managing to look fatalistic and playing down Holy Spirit help) - which it was all along really *** as long as you ignore the fancy bits.

I've a habit of looking beneath the surface, I've learned the hard way.

{ *** I was earlier nominally RCC with informal pentecostal relationships as well as probably C of E / nonconformist neighbours & teachers; I later "enquired" at the RCC }

I'm trying to do due diligence, I study the cited and advertised relationships (officially played down parallel channels) and the dynamics (parallel channels in action).

If I pray, and whether I'm accepted as "member" or not, I can help as best I can, especially by praying, and by encouraging others, and not be frightened if anything more goes wrong: this is what I'm now coming to realise. Worried yes, but not frightened.

I'm trying not to be rude about all you good Presbyterians! ;)

I found relations across the denominations good, but they aren't in NI, Liverpool or Glasgow.

So to recap:

- "evangelical" is loosely a little wider than "reformed" loosely is. ("Charismatic" a different subject.)

- the word "reformanda" in Latin = how to seek to further reform not a particular issue for most

- my new bunch are very kind and to my relief, though they seem to be linked to the same people as the rest, don't behave like them :prayer::crosseo::clap::bow::amen:
 
Upvote 0