Denominations and theological traditions have a way of taking on the ecclesiastical equivalent of national character. This is, in part, because some of them have a strong ethnic component. But there is also a tendency to take after the leader.
For example, Islam is a projection of Muhammad, and Muslims emulate his character-traits.
This extension of national character can even take on a physical aspect. Just compare the average, corn-fed Baptist preacher-man with the cadaverous and bespeckled Anglican cleric or the equally anorexic, silver-haired, ashen-faced appearance of the average Episcopalian woman—complete with her page-boy hair-cut. It’s almost as if each theological tradition had seeped into the DNA, creating a genetic uniform.
As such, different denominations and theological traditions are prone to certain strengths and weaknesses. Lutherans are likely to be rather insular and ingrown. The Church of England, because it’s a national church, born in the heat of political and theological compromise, is given to immoderate moderation and a sweet-tooth for Anglican fudge. Fundamentalists are in danger of showing more interest in the Second Coming than the First. Pentecostalism is prey to charlatanry. Roman Catholicism, with its pig-headed attachment to mandatory celibacy, is an open invitation to sexual scandal of one sort or another. Churches which concentrate power, whether hierarchical denominations or independent megachurches, are liable to abuse of power.
The apple never falls far from the tree--which is one reason it's so important to be finicky about your orchard and diligent in matters of spiritual horticulture.
The Calvinist is also vulnerable to certain excesses. It is sometimes said that the Scots are a bit dour. And it is sometimes said that the Reformed style of worship is a bit dour. Historically speaking, the two do, in fact, overlap.
As to the Dutch, well…to say nothing more…no one would ever confuse a Dutchman with an Italian! Indeed, one can see how the operatic eye and ear of Catholic piety would predispose an Italian or Latino against the austerities of Reformed worship. Or just compare Calvin’s dry, Gallic wit with Luther’s heavy Teutonic humor.
In addition, Calvinism places a premium on orthodoxy. After all, it broke with Rome over doctrine. And there’s a reason the Puritans were called…well…were called Puritans!
Related to the above, the Reformed faith is heir to a very polemical tradition. This is because it was forged in the cauldron of the Reformation and Counterreformation, when a Calvinist had to be ready to die for his faith, or--if not die--be tortured, or exiled.
Those formative stages have cast the die of Reformed theology in a highly combative, keen-edged vein.
In addition, although Presbyterian theology is anti-legalistic in its soteriology, it's apt to be legalistic in its ecclesiology or polity.
This is also due to the politicization of the Reformed faith during the Reformation and Counterreformation. Back then, there could only be one true church, and it was literally a life or death issue which one you landed in.
This has resulted in putting an undue emphasis on fine points of church government out of all proportion to their intrinsic importance.
The combination of a polemical tradition and a Byzantine appellate process can make Presbyterians a contentious and litigious lot. And, to some extent, their prickly epidermis can rub off onto their Reformed Baptist brethren as well.