In a recent post, Roger Olson (whom I always find stimulating to read) offers his thoughts concerning how traditionally Arminian-based-or-leaning congregations and/or denominations should respond to the (unwanted) influx of Calvinism into their ranks via pastors, leaders, or others who have been influenced by reading Piper, Sproul, Driscoll and others associated with the current (agressive) spread of TULIP Calvinism.
Some of these denominiations, he notes, are simply ill-prepared for this unexpected intrusion, either because they have no authoritative creedal documents or faith statements (Anabaptists) or because they lack theological groundedness in and historical consciousness of their own denominiational roots.
In essence, he argues that this kind of ‘evangelistic’ activity is inappropriate and that churches and denominations should take an active stance against it. Why? Well, for a number of reasons, for example: (1) Calvinist beliefs are foreign to and, in many cases, antithetical to the historical and theological roots of these denominations (e.g., imagine a group that started advocating the Roman papacy in Protestant churches!); (2) Those who aggresively promote Calvinism within these groups are casuing division and disunity; (3) Evangelicalism has, historically, had room for both Calvinists and Arminians; the distinctiveness of Arminian denominations should be protected lest we smother the diversity of the Evangelical movement; and (4) Calvinism is simply wrong, being theologically and ethically problematic, and thus should not be promoted (in accords with reason 1 above).
For Olson’s full statement, see the following link: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2013/09/calvinism-appearing-in-unexpected-and-innapropriate-places/
I agree with Olson’s comments wholeheartedly AND (please NOTE) with his qualifying statement that we would expect nothing less or other from denominations whose theological and historical roots are Calvinist. (E.G., would the CRC or a major Presbyterian denomination tolerate the rise of a group of aggresive Arminians in their midst?). Note also that we are not talking about those who simply hold to particular beliefs within a denomination that are contrary to its mainstream history and theology, but those who promote such beliefs agressively.
I imagine that there will be questions and pushback to this post, which I’d welcome. It think it’s a great discussion topic.