I believe the vast majority of Calvinists seek to be clear about their belief in Calvinism when interviewed by a pastoral search committee. I personally know some Calvinists who seek to make this very clear in the interview process. However, and quite unfortunately, that is not always the case.
Individual Human Responsibility. A major weakness in the Calvinist scheme is found here. It is a basic teaching of scripture that individuals are held accountable for their sin. This is the basis for judgment in both human law courts and the divine court.
Calvinism is a diverse and complex theological system. When one attempts a study of the system, it doesn’t take long to discover that there are many side roads and many twists and turns in the path to understanding. The problem is complicated by those who hold to the system because there is no single view that all Calvinists accept.
This is not the first time the ethicist and the Judge have been at odds. When the Judge refused to remove a monument of the Ten Commandments from the Alabama Supreme Court, Dr. Moore sided with the Federal Government. Now we have Moore-vs-Moore, round two.
A modified Arminian-Calvinistic position will generally not please either Calvinists or Arminians, “both of whom will seek to emphasize certain words or texts and exclude from consideration other texts and words. But in spite of all the arguments to the contrary, this tension between the divine and human aspects of salvation cannot finally be resolved by our theological gymnastics.”