American Deformer?
What (and who) does the ecumenical organization want?
By Brad Isbell
The mission of American Reformer (a project that fancies itself the brains of a movement that seems to major in morphing and losing its mind) sounds tame and broad enough:
American Reformer’s mission is to promote a vigorous Christian approach to the cultural challenges of our day, rooted in the rich tradition of Protestant social and political thought. Focusing particularly on issues facing American Christians, we will seek to contribute to the reformation of Christian institutions that have become corrupted by false ideologies and practices…Our Reform work aims at reshaping important Christian institutions by partnering with their leaders and equipping them with the intellectual, strategic and network resources necessary to help their institutions remain faithful and flourish under current cultural conditions.
Based on American Reformer’s recent moves, operations, and acquired sub-brands, it seems quite obvious that the institutions in view include (but may not be limited to) denominations. The question for theologically conservative American protestants is, “Do you need or welcome the ‘help’ American Reformer offers to your denomination, seminary, or parachurch organization?”
Answering that question requires some idea of what American Reformer (AR) is. First, we can say that AR is a project of New Founding (NF), which, according to its website, includes “a select set of ventures, including a fund focused on early-stage startups and a real estate project focused on a new and aligned vision for what local life can mean.” So, as mentioned on the front page of their website, NF is 1) a venture capital fund, 2) a real estate project interested in turning undeveloped land into “rural towns and communities in the bucolic hills of the Eastern Highland Rim region of Tennessee and Kentucky,” and finally—hold onto your artisanal, locally-made hat because you are not going to believe this… 3) a podcast—all networks have podcasts in 2025. NF is either a network with funds, a fund with a network, or a well-funded network—you make the call after having done the reading of the little publicly available NF marketing material that exists. Fair warning going in: the material will be familiar if you are acquainted with pitches for schemes and pie hovering high in the sky above bucolic hills.
You’ll be shocked to learn that NF is not just a network, it’s also a coalition. Just as in the smarmy 1970s TV variety and talk show era when the surest way to garner a spot on the interview couch or variety show stage was to be a famous-for-being-famous actor-singer, nothing is thought to succeed like being multi-talented and attractive…or at least distinctive looking. What may be distinctive about NF (not to say shocking to Protestants with work ethics) is its for-profit character—a scent of money and a whiff of respectability.
A network-coalition-business with grand cultural and institutional designs needs a media arm besides a mere podcast, and that’s where American Reformer (and its growing McEmpire comes in. Such a movement also requires elites, ideas, and money. That’s where NF’s second “partner organization” comes in—the Society for American Civic Renewal, whose creepy website provokes far more questions than it answers. One question: Is NF a Protestant-focused organization? The answer appears to be “not exclusively.” The word “Protestant” appears but twice on the NF website—both times in strategy reiterations (the chief activity of modern network-coalitions) and both times in reference to American Reformer:
Beyond these core business units, we facilitate a range of connections and projects that advance our broader mission and strengthen our network. We have a talent network focused on placing members with aligned employers. We also support initiatives—including new businesses and nonprofits—that we do not run directly. American Reformer, a nonprofit dedicated to promoting a vigorous Protestant Christian approach to the cultural challenges of our day, grew from such efforts and has contributed significantly to our network. We have also been closely involved with the Society for American Civic Renewal, a fraternal organization, since its inception.
This more or less counts as transparency, except for the quite opaque Society (SACR), whose membership is “organized primarily around local groups overseen by a national superstructure, (and) is by invitation only.”1 The Society meets in lodges and sounds like a sort of drinking club/think tank/investors group with vague goals to resurrect Christendom, beginning with Idaho and North Texas. The spare SACR site mentions only “Trinitarian” Christianity. This is appropriate since the founder of SACR seems to be some flavor of Eastern Orthodox, and the lodges are reported to include Protestants, Romanists, and Orthodox men. The Society’s founder, whose great contribution to the Christian Nationalism debate is the concept (gleaned from Nazi jurist Carl Schmitt) of “No Enemies to (or On) the Right,” is described in an American Reformer article:
“NETTR (or NEOTR) has been brought back into discussion among the online Right largely through the work of Charles Haywood and his blog and podcast, The Worthy House. Haywood is an Eastern Orthodox former Mergers and Acquisitions attorney who built a highly successful business in shampoo products. He is now semi-retired and reviews books, ponders the future, hobby farms and makes the rounds as a guest on all the cool podcasts.”2
The NETTR strategy has tended to confirm the Very Online Christian Nationalism movement in its edgy and transgressive style and has preserved or legitimized some very questionable associations. These things are widely known and too tedious to repeat here.
So, the brains, inspiration, and money behind American Reformer are not necessarily Protestant. The larger NF/Christian Nationalist project is best viewed as a financial-ecumenical movement, of which American Reformer is just a part. And in this part, “American” (as in culture and politics) is more important than “Reformer” (in the Protestant Reformation sense). Recent developments at AR demonstrate this.
About 16 months ago, American Reformer gave birth to (or adopted) its first offspring: The Center for Baptist Leadership, an overtly political/reform organization working within the big market that is the Southern Baptist Convention. CBL operates under American Reformer’s EIN as a non-profit. American Reformer was founded by three presbyterians (only one an elder), so it was initially viewed by many as a presbyterian and Reformed enterprise, though it has always said its mission is to the wider evangelical church. The local leadership of the first NF-associated model community and real estate venture, as well as its associated church, is comprised of a former CREC (then independent) minister and an Anglican. This, along with AR’s latest acquisition, suggests that the movement is friendly to a free-form, likely paedocommunion-practicing type of marginal “Reformed” typified by the CREC.
The latest media acquisition is The North American Anglican,3 now “published by American Reformer,” for the primary benefit (we assume) of the Anglican Church in North America. This would seem to put the NF/AR stamp of approval on images of Christ, optional paedocommunion, and Romish Anglo-Catholic worship practices. The window widens; the market grows.
Even before AR took in (or birthed) the baptist CBL organization, their designs on the motley immersionist crew were clear. However, there was a minor issue regarding baptists and the state and their historic separation therefrom. Could they really serve the (at least semi-) established-but-eclectic type of New Christendom in the USA favored by NF and AR?
About 6 months before the CBL’s nose entered the AR tent, an AR article pleaded with baptists to reconsider a few things. A presumptuous presbyterian post typer quoted The True (baptist) Confession of 1596 to establishment-averse SBC rubes, delighted to have found a baptist calling for a Christian Prince with purging powers: 4
“Princes and Magestrates (ought) to suppress and root out by their authorities all false ministries, voluntarie Relligions, and counterfeit worship of God, to destroy the Idoll Temples, Images, Altares, Vestments, and all other monuments of Idolatrie and superstition…”
Are the newly favored North American Anglican priests (with their vestments, images, baubles, and Romish worship) safe from the American Reform(ing) baptists? Maybe not, if they retain the convictions quoted above. Or will it fall to those American Reform(ing) presbyterians (who find the anti-establishment American Revisions to the Westminster Standards to be “dismal”) to correct (or protect!) the Anglicans? Also, how do the presbyterian readers of AR feel about their tax dollars going to support baptist churches rather than presbyterian ones?
A Baptist establishment—or an establishment of any one denomination, for that matter— with penal backing in our present time and place is much more akin what was just described. An establishment need not include penalties against dissent and can amount to something simple as financial support, which would be much more viable in our time. In other words, promotion and demotion are separable and need not accompany one another. Stated differently, an establishment as such does not require punishment of dissent but does require promotion of the preferred religion.
Rule by benevolent baptists sounds great, no? Sorry, but AR sounds like the Christendom bros’ version of a community college poli-sci or social studies seminar brainstorming session. Yes, as good as that! Ecumenism in the service of nationalism is a hoot. Those interested in “doing the reading” can learn about early 20th-century ecumenism which radicalized J. Gresham Machen—a version that was intended to bolster progressive Christian nationalism and its version of social gospel.5
The institutions that American Reformer and friends mean to shape are quite obviously denominations. Again, the question for those in the denominations AR seeks to bless is this: Are we in need of that which they offer? Whatever that is this month.
The North American Anglican is not averse to paedocommunion: “Through a nuanced understanding of the sacraments and their interrelated roles in the life of the believer, we can appreciate the theological flexibility that allows for varying sequences. Ultimately, this exploration aims to demonstrate that receiving the Eucharist prior to Confirmation is not only acceptable but can be seen as a profound means of aligning with the divine economy and fostering deeper spiritual growth and union with God while also practicing paedocommunion.” https://northamanglican.com/on-the-ordering-of-the-sacraments-of-initiation/
“Drop the Persecution Complex, Embrace Your Tradition(!)” https://americanreformer.org/2023/11/a-thanksgiving-plea-to-baptist/
Right-wing Christian Nationalism may be considered a version of social gospel:
All of this seems like a nothing-burger. Just complaining about guys doing good work.
I've written for The North American Anglican on a couple of occasions as has at least one somewhat frequent guest on your own program. I'm proud to be associated with them and have proudly linked to them on my parish website and plan to write for them again as the opportunity presents itself.
Do I agree with every single thing that TNAA has ever published with no reservations? Obviously not -- I don't know of any publication that features more than a single author for whom that could be said (and very likely only for that author).
That being said, TNAA tends to run material from the classically Protestant side of Anglicanism. They've serialized Browne's classic Commentary on the Thirty-nine Articles, for instance.
This was a very disappointing post.