It is an interesting point nonetheless. I think that, in the same sense as mentioned in the post, the new-Calvinists are driven by a spirituality, but this spirituality takes on some different emphases than others. It is formally the same, if I can put it this way, but materially different. Their spirituality, rather than being based on a conversion experience (maybe), is based on preaching God’s sovereignty (or something like that). I think it will probably be based around doctrinal commitments more, like sovereignty, glory, etc. (and maybe that was just your point), while other evangelicals might be based simply on their own experience in a revival-like setting (camp, Christian concert, etc.).

Of course the downside is that this focus on personal relationship can become to inward and individualistic; and w/o any real grounding in a dynamic theological grammar . . . so that we end up with a spirituality that is “me and my Jesus”.

Great post. That distinction was exactly was occurred to me while reading Patricia Ward’s excellent recent book, Experimental Theology in America. Evangelicalism doesn’t really “fit” into the strictures of a tradition, which is why it always seems to function as an adjective (e.g. evangelical Reformed, evangelical Lutheran, evangelical SBC, etc.). But it’s still possible to recognize an evangelical sensibility when you see it, regardless of where you find it. Ward is particularly interesting here, since she brings out just how eclectic and adaptable the evangelical sensibility really is. How else would you find evangelical book distributors selling Wesley, Guyon, and Brother Lawrence side-by-side in their spirituality section? Accomplishing something like that requires both a certain freedom from specific confessional boundaries plus an ability to re-interpret something as extreme as 17th century French Quietism.