Ligon Duncan started things off with a short post called Bavinck v. Nevin.
Then William Evans weighed in by reminding us that we need Bavinck’s warning against spiritual presumption and Nevin’s caution against conversionistic piety.
I entered the fray arguing for a confessionalism that is rich in piety and does not shun the good contributions of pietism (part one, part two, part three).
Next came Darryl Hart, who imagined a conspiracy was afoot when my initial post disappeared (I just hit the wrong button on my computer and posted it too soon). Hart went on to explain his disagreements with my posts here and quoted Nevin on revival here.
Back to Ref21, William Evans later argued that the issue is not about pietism and confessionalism as much as it is about different models of piety, one the stresses nurture and one that emphasizes conversion. Good point, and I would argue that churches should nurture faith in their covenant children, while also preaching/teaching in such a way that stresses the importance of heart transformation.
Yesterday Michael Horton posted a great piece that explores the historical dimensions of the discussion. This is a helpful summary:
Then Horton makes three concluding points worth repeating.
All in all, I would say this is a healthy conversation. I’m glad we’re having it.
