Why I'm Becoming Increasingly Hesitant to Call Myself Reformed

I have always identified first and foremost as a Christian, and I think that is the way it ought be, but I have never had a problem with identifying with a particular subset of Christianity.  I tend to resist any title that bears the name of a man (have you ever read 1 Corinthians?!), but I do not resist denominationalism per se.  Such titles can be useful for practical purposes.  Let's call them a necessary evil.

I have always called myself a Reformed Presbyterian.  As I get older, I realize that I am probably less of a Presbyterian than I had once thought (at least that's what Presbyterians tell me).  I'm not nearly as much of a "Confessional" person as most conservative Presbyterians are, I guess.  I still firmly believe in the Presbyterian form of government, though, I suppose not in all of the particulars of how most current conservative Presbyterian denominations operate that system.  Nonetheless I still have no trouble calling myself Presbyterian.  

I am also beginning to realize that maybe I am not as Reformed as I had thought.  I hold to the majority of Reformed teaching, but I am not as strict in my understanding of it as some would like me to be.  More than that, I am beginning to be hesitant in calling myself Reformed.  Here are a few reasons why:

1) Christianity was around for a long time before the Reformation.  Many Reformed people study history from Luther to Princeton (when it was still Christian), and that's about it.  If they study Christian history before that, which some, of course, do, it's basically to know what those heretics were teaching before the Reformers restored Christianity.  I am aware that I am generalizing and stereotyping, but I think that it's fair.  Most denominations are like this.  We tend to study the history that makes us unique.  We study our history, if any at all.  I, however, have come to appreciate my pre-Reformation heritage.  All of Christian history is our history because there is only one Church, both throughout the world and throughout time.  I have trouble defining myself by such a small period of the Church's history, so, while I celebrate my Reformed heritage, I hesitate to do so at the expense of my Apostolic heritage.

2) No one Christian denomination or theological heritage has a monopoly on the truth.  I have come to appreciate the differing perspectives and emphases within different Christian persuasions.  Humans have a tendency to lose balance and overemphasize things, usually as the result of someone else's overemphasis on the opposite thing.  Denominations are no different.  Some denominations emphasize Jesus, others the Holy Spirit.  Some emphasize personal piety, while others are all about evangelism.  Some prioritize God's control, while others emphasize man's moral agency.  All of these things are important.  If you never expose yourself to teaching, books, and ideas from outside of your theological perspective, you will most definitely miss out on some of the beauty of God and His Word.

3) No geographical/ethnic group contains all truth.  This is tied closely to my previous point, but it is distinct.  We have a tendency to view our cultural expression of Christianity as the only valid one. We think anachronistically (it's almost impossible not to).  We envision Peter standing in front of a sea of crowded pews, wearing a three-piece suit and delivering a rousing homily.  Only, that's not how it worked.  None of that actually would have happened.  Our brains can adjust for time (sort of anyway), but we have issues figuring out how different cultures work.  Different cultures have different emphases, just as denominations do.  Western Christianity has long prioritized the mind, while Eastern Christianity is more mystical.  African Christianity is often more expressive in worship, while Americans tends be more somber.  None of these things is necessarily more or less Biblical. We need to find a way to accept cultural emphases, so long as they do not overrule Biblical emphases.

4) Reformed guys are sometimes jerks.  This is sort of my underlining problem with much of what defines conservative Reformed Christianity in the modern, technology-driven era.  Reformed guys can be real jerks sometimes.  This is not to say that they all are, or that other Christian men are not, or that Reformed women are always angels.  I can only speak for the error within the movement with which I am intimately familiar.  Some of the kindest, gentlest, most pious Christians I know are Reformed men, and yet, the intellectual emphasis within the conservative Reformed world lends itself to pride, schism, and, frankly, hateful treatment of other people.  The number of divisive, scathing conversations conducted on the internet between Reformed brethren is overwhelming.  It's difficult to see Christ in this sort of conduct.  Many of the Reformed guys with whom I have interacted have completely and totally failed to show the grace of Christ in the way that they interact with people, whether the unsaved or their fellow brethren.  This sort of conduct has defined the Reformed movement since Luther himself, a dearth of tact defining many of the faces of Reformed thinking. The anti-ecumenical spirit almost inherent in Reformed ideology naturally leads to this sort of behavior.  I have caught myself being this type of person too many times.  I don't want to be that person, nor do I want to have a reputation for being that type of person.

I don't know that I will stop calling myself Reformed, but I'm getting close to that point.  I love the Reformed heritage into which I was born, but I have found that there is much more to Christianity that what is contained within it.