Logical priority makes a huge difference! For instance, if God’s love is prior to His sovereignty, then sovereignty is subservient to love. If on the other hand sovereignty is prior to love, then God is not ultimately good, because God’s power is literally the priority. In that case, God is also not a primarily morally concerned being by nature because He has a choice to do what is good but not a moral consideration about what is powerful, which may not correspond to what is good; such as negating providence to maintain order, even if evil is a result.
In other words, God will not prevent genuine evil providentially rather than God being powerless by nature to prevent such evils because of love.
A God that is love cannot be the God of Calvin. The God of Calvin is logically powerful by nature and thus irrespective of any moral nature God may have, God’s morality is not absolute. If we look at scriptures more closely, and the world too, God doesn’t allow evil but is powerless to prevent it, or God is not absolutely moral; because either way, there is genuine evil.
The nature of God, according to some thinkers, is love and love leads to creation which entails genuine freedom. If genuinely free, it is logically impossible for God to contradict his nature by restricting freedom, even if one could predict or foresee some consequence would be evil.
This would provide a way to address “the problem of evil”, but it also requires not only the Calvinist but nearly the whole of Christianity to reorient itself and theories of atonement, soteriology, christology, and eschatology; in essence, the entire doxastic enterprise.
Some of these are ideas presented in Thomas Jay Oord’s book, “The Uncontrolling Love Of God”, and some are consequences of accepting that God is love.
Many Christians will not genuinely accept that God is love because for them, God must be power first and foremost.