Calvinist Ascol Defends Calvinist Dishonesty

I recently added this section to my post "9 Marks of a Calvinist Cult #2 (hidden agendas)" about a Calvinist article I just read and wanted to highlight:  

Now here's a Founder's Ministries article by Calvinist Tom Ascol that really irks me - and alarms me.  And it should alarm the Church as well.  It's called "Dishonest Calvinists (?) and the call for integrity," and it's basically just a defense of Calvinist pastors hiding their Calvinism, and it pushes the blame on us - not the Calvinism - for any disturbance that Calvinism causes in a church.  Here are some things from that article [my comments are in italics and brackets]:

"Does anyone else find it troubling to hear what sounds like a growing chorus of criticism directed toward Calvinistic pastors who run into difficulties when trying to shepherd their congregations toward greater spiritual health?  [The "difficulty" comes because Calvinists are stealthily and strategically taking over churches, and yet Ascol reframes it as "shepherding their congregations toward greater spiritual health".  Now, of course, I don't doubt that's what Calvinists think they're doing... but therein lies the problem!]  Mixed in with the criticism is a charge that such men have been dishonest in the way they have gone into their churches because they did not make an issue of Calvinism from the very outset.  Perhaps this can be legitimately said for a few, but they would be the exceptions and not the norm.  Why, then, all the criticism?"

Farther down the article, Ascol defends Calvinist Al Mohler (president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, providing pastors to SBC churches) who was accused of "destroying the seminary, wounding the body of Christ and hijacking one of our prized institutions in an attempt to push his Calvinistic agenda".  He says that "Al Mohler has no agenda to promote five-point Calvinism.  What he obviously is doing, however, is restoring doctrinal and ethical integrity..."  [So once again, "pushing Calvinism" is reframed as "restoring doctrinal and ethical integrity."  If this is how they see it, do you think they'll see any reason to stop or to be more upfront about their Calvinist agenda to take over churches?  *And see below what Mohler himself says about Calvinism.]

Ascol goes on to say that it's not Calvinism that's causing the problem in the church, but it's that the church is full of godless people who resent the Bible's teachings: "... in the great majority of cases that I know about where Calvinistic pastors have encountered turmoil in their efforts to preach and teach God’s Word, it was not because of Calvinism.  It was because of biblical Christianity.  Calvinism tends to be the tail on which the donkey of controversy is pinned, but the real culprit is the erosion of real biblical Christianity that has occurred over the last generation or more in many of our churches... [And so therefore] if a man tries to introduce a biblical ministry into such a situation does it not stand to reason that there might indeed be some controversy along the way?  When the Word of God begins to be taught and followed, those who have no appetite for it–and who have been not only allowed but encouraged to live happily in the church without it–will inevitably feel threatened, deceived and even 'lied to' by the preacher.  The reason is not Calvinism, but because of the strong reaction of godlessness to biblical Christianity..."  [In their eyes, Calvinism equals biblical Christianity.  So, according to them, if we reject Calvinism, we reject biblical Christianity, which means we're godless.  Can you see the kind of power this will give them over the church and its members, the accusations they can lobby at anyone who disagrees with them or tries to stop them?  And as you'll see coming up, Calvinist 9Marks' churches can remove you if you deny "Christian doctrine" - their Calvinist doctrines disguised as "Christian doctrine."]  

As Ascol says in another Founder's Ministry article, regarding the recent pushback Calvinist pastors are facing: "Calvinism is being made the whipping boy for many of the serious problems that are coming to light in denominational entities as well as local churches."  [See?  Calvinism's not the problem.  Poor Calvinism is being unfairly persecuted for the sins of others.]

So, there you have it, fellow non-Calvinists!  The problem is not that Calvinist preachers are stealthily and strategically taking over our churches with bad theology; it's that we are godless and hate God's Word.  

Wow, I had no clue that we godless sheeple are such a cancer in the church, that we're the problem.  

Thanks, Ascol, for clearing that up for us.  

(Go ahead, try and convince me that this isn't the kind of attitude and tactics that go with authoritarian personalities, the "don't question me, I'm in charge, I have the truth so you all just shut up and listen, and those who disagree with me can leave" types.)  

And finally, he goes on to say that pushing Calvinism is really just teaching Christianity, trying to justify why a Calvinist pastor can and should hide their Calvinism (their "theological system"): "Should not that fact, coupled with the wisdom that recognizes that the proper goal of a genuinely Reformed ministry is not to 'Calvinize' a church but to 'Christianize' it more and more, lead a man who candidates for a church to emphasize his commitment to biblical Christianity more than to a theological system?  This is not dishonesty.  It is wisdom...  

I am not at all suggesting that a pastoral candidate refuse to speak plainly with a search committee or church regarding theological commitments.  [Umm, yes, you are.  We're not stupid.]  But the reality is that most churches–including their search committees–are not very equipped to have that kind of conversation.  [So, once again, the problem is us, not them.  And these Calvinists, with their superior intellect, don't really have a very high view of the rest of us, do they?  Of our ability to understand Scripture without their help?]  Should the details of Calvinism... be spelled out anyway, even though there is no understanding of the language, categories or constructs?  [So notice how he starts with (paraphrased) "I'm not saying don't be upfront about your theological views with search committees," but then he immediately goes into reasons why Calvinists shouldn't be upfront with their Calvinism with search committees.  Liar, liar, pants on fire!]  

Or would it be wiser to stick with biblical categories, language and constructs?  [Translation: "So don't bother to explain what Calvinism is because they won't get it anyway.  Just hide it, cloaking it in words and verses from the Bible."  Okay, wait, I want to stop right here a moment and point something out: If the vast majority of us Christians, us non-Calvinists, have no understanding of the language and constructs of Calvinism, then isn't the most likely reason because IT'S NOT CLEARLY TAUGHT IN THE BIBLE!  In a backhanded way, Ascol is admitting that we don't find Calvinism clearly in the Bible, that we have to be educated into it.  That's telling!  And alarming!]  

When a man does the latter [hides his Calvinism in biblical language] for the purpose of communicating as clearly as he can [yet not clear enough to actually admit he's a Calvinist!] I find it disheartening to hear Southern Baptist leaders criticize him as being dishonest."  [He's got a funny view of what's honest and what's dishonest, if you ask me.  And apparently, acting with integrity doesn't mean being upfront with your Calvinism; it just means continuing to push Calvinism but cloaked in more acceptable language.]

Clearly, to Calvinists, if we disagree with them, we disagree with God, with the truth, with biblical Christianity.  How long do you think non-Calvinists can survive under a Calvinist pastor who thinks like this?  And do you really think any good Calvinist pastor would not be all about promoting Calvinism, if this is how they view Calvinism, that it's "biblical Christianity" itself?

[*See what Mohler himself says about Calvinism in the clip from The Wartburg Watch's "Church Takeover Success Using Strategies from the Calvinista Playbook": "If you're a theologically minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you're committed to the Gospel and you want to see the nations rejoice in the name of Christ, if you want to see Gospel built and structured and committed churches, your theology is just gonna end up basically being Reformed, basically being something like this New Calvinism... There just are not options out there [besides Calvinism] and that's something that I think frustrates some people.  But when I'm asked about the New Calvinism, I'm gonna say, 'well, just basically where else are they gonna go?'... [pastors] are gonna have to [side with Calvinism] if they're gonna preach and teach the truth."  

Clearly, to Mohler, it's Calvinism or nothing.  Calvinism is "the truth."  And so if we wanna believe the Bible and be committed to the gospel, then we have no choice but to be a Calvinist, according to Mohler.  

And some things worth noting about Mohler from a Christianity Today article called "The Reformer":

1. Within "a year or two" of Mohler becoming president, his "intention to steer Southern seminary in a Reformed direction became clear."  

2.  Non-Calvinists "indicted him as the main carrier of a theology they viewed as an alien spore in SBC life."  But by then, it was too late.  Calvinism was seeping out all over the place, and so no one could prove that he and his seminary were responsible for its spread.

3. Within three years of his leadership, almost all faculty and administration had turned-over completely.  Through his efforts to control the hiring and tenure processes, to force resignations, to offer appealing retirement packages, and to plant students spies in classrooms to report back what everyone was saying, Mohler was eventually able to replace staff with only those who agreed with "his brand of Reformed theology," among other issues.  (But some faculty claim that Mohler allows "diversity" because they allow four-point Calvinists to work there too.)

4. Because of his influence, every year there are more and more Calvinists graduating from the seminary and filling pulpits across the country, preaching Mohler's brand of Reformed theology.  

5. Mohler says that non-Calvinist conservatives "are not aware of the basic structures of thought, rightly described as Reformed, that are necessary to protect the very gospel they insist is to be eagerly shared."  Necessary to protect the gospel!  And according to the author of the article, Mohler is "elitist... he is certain he has the truth" and so those who disagree with him "simply are not initiated into the systematic splendor of Reformed thought."

Only the most naive people - or deliberately deceptive ones who have a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" agenda (as this Baptist News Global article says, "Mohler's influence also is responsible for mainstreaming another once-fringe organization, Founders Ministries [Ascol!]... a group of Southern Baptists who adhere to... Calvinism.") - would say that a guy who believes like Mohler does, in the authority position he is in, "has no agenda to promote five-point Calvinism".  (Oh, wait... my mistake... I forgot that he allows four-point Calvinism too, if he has to.  I stand corrected!)