Name: Richard Mouw
Why you’ve heard of him: As the president of one of the leading non-denominational evangelical seminaries in the country and an articulate spokesman on social issues, Mouw is often the first name that comes to mind when the major media wants to get the “evangelical” perspective.
Position: President and Professor of Christian Philosophy at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, CA
Previous: Professor of Christian philosophy at Calvin College for 17 years
Denomination: Presbyterian Church (USA) [Mouw sides with the conservative but non-seperationist wing of the denomination]
Education: B.A. Houghton College; M.A. University of Alberta; Ph.D. University of Chicago; Litt.D. Houghton College; L.L.D. Northwestern College
Area of expertise: Social Ethics, philosophy of culture
Books: Ten, so far, including: The God Who Commands: A Study in Divine Ethics (Notre Dame, 1990), Uncommon Decency (InterVarsity, 1992), Consulting the Faithful (Eerdmans, 1994), The Smell of Sawdust (Zondervan, 2000), He Shines in All That's Fair: Culture and Common Grace (Eerdmans, 2002)
Political leaning: Mainly centrist, though conservative on cultural issues.
Regular contributer to: "Beliefnet" Web Magazine
Assessment: While his views are solidly evangelical, Mouw is not as politically conservative as many ordinary church-goers, particularly Southern evangelicals. He is probably closer to an ideal of what politically active evangelicals should be rather than truly representative of the way they actually are.
Recent media citations:
New York Times, “Book List for the Candidates” (Mouw recommends that Bush read John Howard Yoder’s “The Politics of Jesus” and that Kerry read the documents of the Roman Catholic Church's Second Vatican Council,’ "especially those that deal with the church's calling to address issues of culture and public life,’”)
New York Times News Service, “GOP seeking help from conservative churches” (Mouw complains that the Bush/Cheney campaign tactics "smacks of too close an alliance of church and Caesar.")
Writings on the web: Calvin College archive
(This is #1 in the Know Your Evangelicals series)
1
Hmm. As I understand it, Fuller != Evangelical for several decades, holding more with Jack Rodgers than with the Lausane Covenant or the Chicago Declarations.
More of a neo-Bultmanian, neo-Barthian mix, IIRC.
posted on 07.27.2004 5:00 PM2
Joe, shouldn't step one be defining clearly the term evangelical as you will be using it in these "know your" posts? Unless you have done so previously.
Fuller in my view is a "living prooftext" of this Laodicean age - especially when one studies its founding and initial mission and purpose.
I wonder if you have an article that only deals with Mouw's views on Scripture. The titles of those you link do not seem promising. I read the initial one expousing his replacement theology.
If you have such an article, it would be nice to see it. I think any "know your Christian" concept is inadequate unless we know his or her view on the Scriptures and the gospel.
posted on 07.27.2004 5:13 PM3
JOE!! 1000 pardons for I did not even see your very next post!! Forgive me.
posted on 07.27.2004 5:15 PM4
What sets Mouw apart is that on the one hand, he takes his Reformed theology very seriously, knows it well, and is always willing to talk to people far more conservative than he is. On the other hand, he takes the broader culture very seriously, knows it well, and is always willing to talk to more liberal Christians and non-believers. He balances the antithesis of Christ and the world with a recognition of God's common grace better than anyone I can think of, which seems to get him in trouble with both sides.
posted on 07.29.2004 1:20 PM5
Prof. Mouw is one of my favourite public intellectuals. He is certainly a neocalvinist, while at the same time making a serious effort to be as generous as possible in evaluating the contributions of people from traditions different to his own.
posted on 07.29.2004 3:27 PM6
I have known Rich Mouw since 1978 when I was a student in his Ethics course and then in his Social and Political Philosophy course. I was raised fundamentalist, but as many 20 year olds, chaffing against my upbringing. What I learned in Mouw's classes (and later while reading his books) felt liberating. In the Soc/Pol class, we read Yoder's The Politics of Jesus, as well as Kuyper's Lectures on Calvinism. We were encouraged to think about and develop a Christian perspective on public life and culture.
I consider him an evangelical, with a decidedly reformed bent (which, being interpreted means he is right on most issues--ha, just a little humor). Seriously, I find much of what he has to say compelling and challenging.
For me, the evangelical camp is rather broad. It not only includes me, it includes folks that I would find it painful to go out for coffee. I'd enjoy having coffee with Mouw, even though he would likely poke at some of my sensitive spots. Sort of like exercise--sometimes it hurts but you enjoy it because it is good for you.
posted on 08.17.2004 9:12 AM