Can one affirm Semper Reformanda - "Always Reforming" - without actually affirming the Reformation?

If one wants to sincerely stake a claim for Semper Reformanda as the Reformers like Luther, Calvin and knox did, and in turn claim on top of that one's own theology is the fruit thereof, then it logically follows that:

1) There will be an affirmation of what Reformers past sought to contend for and a denunciation of whatever errors they rejected






2) There will be a continuation, as well as Contextualization, of what was fought for then and how the issues are applicable today








3) The core issues will become clearer and clearer consistantly and not merely adding to obscurity





and

4) There in no way will be a return to the mistakes of ages past. 




That being said, if you claim that you are "Always Reforming", what then, say you on the issues such as Works vs Grace, Justification by Faith, Election, Original Sin, et al? 

Or do you just write it off as just age-old debate with little relevance today?


To quote C.S. Lewis on the fallacy of "Chronological Snobbery":

"In the first place he [Owen Barfield] made short work of what I have called my 'chronological snobbery,' the uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate common to our own age and the assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that account discredited. You must find why it went out of date. Was it ever refuted (and if so by whom, where, and how conclusively) or did it merely die away as fashions do? If the latter, this tells us nothing about its truth or falsehood. From seeing this, one passes to the realization that our own age is also 'a period,' and certainly has, like all periods, its own characteristic illusions. They are likeliest to lurk in those widespread assumptions which are so ingrained in the age that no one dares to attack or feels it necessary to defend them."
- Surprised by Joy (chapter 13)

When one looks at the history of the church-age, was it God's Will that men like Calvin and Luther ignited the reformation? If so, why should what they fought for not be a matter of study and contention in the church today? 

That's the spirit of "Semper Reformanda".