Just some thoughts. I’m not looking to discern or critique intentions, but in general, Christian Nationalism appears to be an effort to dumb down and trivialize Christianity. Christianity is THE WAY, but too many inside and outside the Church are getting in the way by offering solutions or merely a fight when they should merely reflect the spirit of the One they follow. There’s no modern-day platform to mass produce that or stifle it. The true ways are ordained. The vessels are described. These are not mysteries. But our hearts are too often comfortable or combative… to what end?
Machen, has some good things to say, however…
“ A man can believe only what he holds to be true. We are Christians because we hold Christianity to be true. But other men hold Christianity to be false. Who is right? That question can be settled only by an examination and comparison of the reasons adduced on both sides. It is true, one of the grounds for our belief is an inward experience that we cannot share–the great experience begun by conviction of sin and conversion and continued by communion with God–an experience which other men do not possess, and upon which, therefore, we cannot directly base an argument. But if our position is correct, we ought at least to be able to show the other man that his reasons may be inconclusive. And that involves careful study of both sides of the question. Furthermore, the field of Christianity is the world. The Christian cannot be satisfied so long as any human activity is either opposed to Christianity or out of all connection with Christianity. Christianity must pervade not merely all nations, but also all of human thought. The Christian, therefore, cannot be indifferent to any branch of earnest human endeavor. It must all be brought into some relation to the gospel. It must be studied either in order to be demonstrated as false, or else in order to be made useful in advancing the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom must be advanced not merely extensively, but also intensively. The Church must seek to conquer not merely every man for Christ, but also the whole of man. We are accustomed to encourage ourselves in our discouragements by the thought of the time when every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. No less inspiring is the other aspect of that same great consummation. That will also be a time when doubts have disappeared, when every contradiction has been removed, when all of science converges to one great conviction, when all of art is devoted to one great end, when all of human thinking is permeated by the refining, ennobling influence of Jesus, when every thought has been brought into subjection to the obedience of Christ. “
It is an excellent site for review of what our great Triune God has done, is doing, and will do as He redeems His Church which Jesus, His Son, purchased with His own blood.
Oh, so the ideas lumped under the moniker "Christian Nationalism" are now on par with the KKK and twentieth-century fascism?
You're really not doing yourself any favors here, Brad.
Let me put it to you this way: you may not like the men who are taking up positions to your right on a variety of issues. You may find those ideas dangerous, even scary. But you really, really, aren't in any position to criticize them. The fact that they're growing in popularity is your fault. Yours, and people like you in positions of leadership in the PCA. Men who consistently make noise about opposing the influx of progressivism and decay of institutional integrity while never seeming to get around to taking concrete, decisive, action reasonably calculated to make any tangible difference.
Sure, after years of wrangling and heated floor debates, we got a few BCO amendments passed. But the men who will be enforcing those amendments are the same men who couldn't find it in themselves to enforce the previous rules. Sure, Memorial Presbyterian is no longer with the PCA. But both Memorial and Johnson left without any discipline of consequence being imposed. Sure, the Jonesboro 7 were ultimately vindicated by the SJC. But that vindication took years, and there has been no public effort to correct or discipline either the men on that temporary session who abused their authority, or men at the presbytery level that sided with the temporary session against all reason and precedent. There are now rumors that, at long last, there are efforts towards something called "reconciliation" being made there, but I'd be gobsmacked if those efforts involved any of the relevant players eating the gigantic bowls of crow bearing their names.
If you were doing your jobs, taking the sort of timely actions your public discourse and writings suggest are necessary and appropriate, putting your money where your mouth is, not only would you be very well positioned to criticize anyone who might be pushing for actions you deem problematic, but it's quite likely that there wouldn't be as much agitation along those lines as there is now.
So no. I don't think you'll find many people that find "Christian Nationalist" ideas attractive to be of any mind to listen to criticism like this from you. I'm certainly not.
"Machen also opposed a between-the-wars ideology in the USA called “100% Americanism” which bears some resemblance to the now-fashionable Christian Nationalism....100% Americanism was a nativist, anti-European, anti-immigration, all-American-and-only-American-everything jumble of prejudices. Some associated the revival of the Ku Klux Klan with it; others would point to a more benign American Legion version that was more generically patriotic." -- "bears some resemblance to" does not equal "on par with the KKK and twentieth-century fascism." But if you wish to invoke 20th-century fascism, good: Please explain the CN folk who extol "Protestant Franco" and welcome or tolerate tons of followers and sycophants who revel in Nazi symbolism and imagery.
Oh, come on. You were the first one to invoke fascism, not me.
Everyone can see what you implied in your original post.
Everyone can now see that you're trying to avoid taking responsibility for that implication with this comment. It's a convenient way of avoiding having to answer for your own inaction.
You smearing "CN folk" as Nazis is exactly the same move made by those who smear anyone who expresses a modicum of concern about infinity immigration or protested COVID lockdowns as Nazis. It's dishonest when they do it, and it's dishonest when you do it. You know better. You are better. Or, at least, you're supposed to be.
If you're going to make the comparison, own it. Otherwise, maybe consider not needlessly antagonizing those who ought to be your most vigorous allies.
Brad, you're a shepherd. You have no business attacking people who are trying to fight the wolves, especially not when you're so reluctant to wield that rod yourself.
You're going to read this the way you want to read it. I'm sorry the facts and/or my opinions about them disturb you. I'm sure you are not one of those playing around with fascist ideas (including antisemitism and kinism) and symbols, but too many are doing those things. Maybe you aren't bothered that this is clearly happening. I am.
I'm more bothered by the fact that when people who hate the both of us say that there's a "clearly" a boogeyman to your right, you dutifully turn around and attack the alleged boogeyman.
Why are you so convinced that this is "clearly happening"? Hasn't it occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, the loudest voices condemning "CN folk" for their "fascist ideas. . . and symbols" might not have your best interests in mind? That maybe, just maybe, there could be a reason not to take such smears at face value?
Think about it this way: Do you pay any attention to elders who call you "divisive" for thinking consistency in liturgical practice is important?
I should hope not. I certainly don't. It's transparently dishonest. I should also hope that when those same people attack someone else for being "divisive," your immediate reaction is one of skepticism, not credulity.
Well, many of the people who attack you for your positions and actions--even as ineffectual as I'd argue they are!--are exactly the same people saying that a meaningful number of influential "CN folk" are "playing around with. . . antisemitism and kinism."
I have no beef with the author, who I am only vaguely familiar with, but seems to be doing good work.
But I do think we have to be careful as not to gaslight our brethren. My problem is not with those who identify with a form of Christian nationalism. But I do see some commonalities with the fundamentalists of Machen’s day (who actually made an excellent case in some vital areas, but were lacking theologically). Their principles and practices were worthy of further consideration and debate. I don’t believe today’s CN leaders are nearly as strong. Nor would I consider you (from what I can tell, and others, short of say, a Doug Wilson, in that light). The truth is we have no seat at the table. Not sure the CN movement is a proper avenue. What I see is a designed effort by the elites to play both sides to further fan the flames of ideological conflict. The Israel-Gaza issue is a perfect example. Both protests and support are being elevated and exaggerated to foward global fascism. The rise of fascism requires manufactured consent. The problem and the response from both sides are convenient tools to forward an agenda. I would like to see greater discernment and skeptical analysis but I’m just not seeing it (even from men who are typically reliable and discerning). Some realities are too daunting to comprehend I guess. So Trump cannot be my savior any more than Biden can. Look up congressman Thomas Massie on twitter. He seems to be one of the few who get it.
I’m just saying I think guys like you and sometimes myself are getting gaslit by those who should be more charitable but on the other hand the CN movement feels like a setup. It’s theologically shaky and convoluted. It’s also pretty dispensational. I look at Israel (not the people, but the location) as the epicenter of the NWO. Is that where CN is quietly aligned? Or is it a domestic terrorist setup? I’m not sure, but I don’t see anything good coming out of it. The right and left establishment are aligned and using the fringes “as an example” for clamping down…
“Sean Feucht, Eric Metaxas and Russell Johnson reshape their Christian nationalism tour as pro-Israel protests
ANALYSISKRISTEN THOMASON | MAY 9, 2024
Outside agitators are striking back at pro-Palestinian protesters on college campuses across the country. Seeing an opportunity to further their own agenda, Christian nationalist groups are joining them.
On April 25, worship leader Sean Feucht, along with conservative pastor Russell Johnson and author Eric Metaxas, led the first of their “United for Israel” marches outside the Morningside Heights campus of Columbia University. Feucht said the rally was intended to show solidarity with the university’s Jewish students and faculty, although neither group invited the Christian leaders to the campus.
Rather, this pro-Israel rally portends a shift from Christian nationalism to Christian militantism among the Religious Right.
Another United for Israel march was held last night at the University of Southern California, and more are planned for other locations.”
I don’t support any genocides - Jews or Muslims. I don’t support blind allegiance to any pro or anti-Israel movement. I don’t trust any brand of CN to honor the label Christian. It’s hard enough to get an honest and accurate news report/war justification. So how is anyone jumping on any bandwagon? Massie is getting pressured by Israel backed superpacs to stop putting America first. That’s problematic…
“Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie Approximately 1% of Gaza’s CIVILIAN population has been wiped out by Israel in 7 months.
We should not fund this war.
[1% is between Israel’s 0.7% and Gaza’s 1.5% official claims in this article]”
Just some thoughts. I’m not looking to discern or critique intentions, but in general, Christian Nationalism appears to be an effort to dumb down and trivialize Christianity. Christianity is THE WAY, but too many inside and outside the Church are getting in the way by offering solutions or merely a fight when they should merely reflect the spirit of the One they follow. There’s no modern-day platform to mass produce that or stifle it. The true ways are ordained. The vessels are described. These are not mysteries. But our hearts are too often comfortable or combative… to what end?
Machen, has some good things to say, however…
“ A man can believe only what he holds to be true. We are Christians because we hold Christianity to be true. But other men hold Christianity to be false. Who is right? That question can be settled only by an examination and comparison of the reasons adduced on both sides. It is true, one of the grounds for our belief is an inward experience that we cannot share–the great experience begun by conviction of sin and conversion and continued by communion with God–an experience which other men do not possess, and upon which, therefore, we cannot directly base an argument. But if our position is correct, we ought at least to be able to show the other man that his reasons may be inconclusive. And that involves careful study of both sides of the question. Furthermore, the field of Christianity is the world. The Christian cannot be satisfied so long as any human activity is either opposed to Christianity or out of all connection with Christianity. Christianity must pervade not merely all nations, but also all of human thought. The Christian, therefore, cannot be indifferent to any branch of earnest human endeavor. It must all be brought into some relation to the gospel. It must be studied either in order to be demonstrated as false, or else in order to be made useful in advancing the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom must be advanced not merely extensively, but also intensively. The Church must seek to conquer not merely every man for Christ, but also the whole of man. We are accustomed to encourage ourselves in our discouragements by the thought of the time when every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. No less inspiring is the other aspect of that same great consummation. That will also be a time when doubts have disappeared, when every contradiction has been removed, when all of science converges to one great conviction, when all of art is devoted to one great end, when all of human thinking is permeated by the refining, ennobling influence of Jesus, when every thought has been brought into subjection to the obedience of Christ. “
It is an excellent site for review of what our great Triune God has done, is doing, and will do as He redeems His Church which Jesus, His Son, purchased with His own blood.
Oh, so the ideas lumped under the moniker "Christian Nationalism" are now on par with the KKK and twentieth-century fascism?
You're really not doing yourself any favors here, Brad.
Let me put it to you this way: you may not like the men who are taking up positions to your right on a variety of issues. You may find those ideas dangerous, even scary. But you really, really, aren't in any position to criticize them. The fact that they're growing in popularity is your fault. Yours, and people like you in positions of leadership in the PCA. Men who consistently make noise about opposing the influx of progressivism and decay of institutional integrity while never seeming to get around to taking concrete, decisive, action reasonably calculated to make any tangible difference.
Sure, after years of wrangling and heated floor debates, we got a few BCO amendments passed. But the men who will be enforcing those amendments are the same men who couldn't find it in themselves to enforce the previous rules. Sure, Memorial Presbyterian is no longer with the PCA. But both Memorial and Johnson left without any discipline of consequence being imposed. Sure, the Jonesboro 7 were ultimately vindicated by the SJC. But that vindication took years, and there has been no public effort to correct or discipline either the men on that temporary session who abused their authority, or men at the presbytery level that sided with the temporary session against all reason and precedent. There are now rumors that, at long last, there are efforts towards something called "reconciliation" being made there, but I'd be gobsmacked if those efforts involved any of the relevant players eating the gigantic bowls of crow bearing their names.
If you were doing your jobs, taking the sort of timely actions your public discourse and writings suggest are necessary and appropriate, putting your money where your mouth is, not only would you be very well positioned to criticize anyone who might be pushing for actions you deem problematic, but it's quite likely that there wouldn't be as much agitation along those lines as there is now.
So no. I don't think you'll find many people that find "Christian Nationalist" ideas attractive to be of any mind to listen to criticism like this from you. I'm certainly not.
"Machen also opposed a between-the-wars ideology in the USA called “100% Americanism” which bears some resemblance to the now-fashionable Christian Nationalism....100% Americanism was a nativist, anti-European, anti-immigration, all-American-and-only-American-everything jumble of prejudices. Some associated the revival of the Ku Klux Klan with it; others would point to a more benign American Legion version that was more generically patriotic." -- "bears some resemblance to" does not equal "on par with the KKK and twentieth-century fascism." But if you wish to invoke 20th-century fascism, good: Please explain the CN folk who extol "Protestant Franco" and welcome or tolerate tons of followers and sycophants who revel in Nazi symbolism and imagery.
Oh, come on. You were the first one to invoke fascism, not me.
Everyone can see what you implied in your original post.
Everyone can now see that you're trying to avoid taking responsibility for that implication with this comment. It's a convenient way of avoiding having to answer for your own inaction.
You smearing "CN folk" as Nazis is exactly the same move made by those who smear anyone who expresses a modicum of concern about infinity immigration or protested COVID lockdowns as Nazis. It's dishonest when they do it, and it's dishonest when you do it. You know better. You are better. Or, at least, you're supposed to be.
If you're going to make the comparison, own it. Otherwise, maybe consider not needlessly antagonizing those who ought to be your most vigorous allies.
Brad, you're a shepherd. You have no business attacking people who are trying to fight the wolves, especially not when you're so reluctant to wield that rod yourself.
You're going to read this the way you want to read it. I'm sorry the facts and/or my opinions about them disturb you. I'm sure you are not one of those playing around with fascist ideas (including antisemitism and kinism) and symbols, but too many are doing those things. Maybe you aren't bothered that this is clearly happening. I am.
I'm more bothered by the fact that when people who hate the both of us say that there's a "clearly" a boogeyman to your right, you dutifully turn around and attack the alleged boogeyman.
Why are you so convinced that this is "clearly happening"? Hasn't it occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, the loudest voices condemning "CN folk" for their "fascist ideas. . . and symbols" might not have your best interests in mind? That maybe, just maybe, there could be a reason not to take such smears at face value?
Think about it this way: Do you pay any attention to elders who call you "divisive" for thinking consistency in liturgical practice is important?
I should hope not. I certainly don't. It's transparently dishonest. I should also hope that when those same people attack someone else for being "divisive," your immediate reaction is one of skepticism, not credulity.
Well, many of the people who attack you for your positions and actions--even as ineffectual as I'd argue they are!--are exactly the same people saying that a meaningful number of influential "CN folk" are "playing around with. . . antisemitism and kinism."
Has this honestly never occurred to you?
Hey Ryan,
I have no beef with the author, who I am only vaguely familiar with, but seems to be doing good work.
But I do think we have to be careful as not to gaslight our brethren. My problem is not with those who identify with a form of Christian nationalism. But I do see some commonalities with the fundamentalists of Machen’s day (who actually made an excellent case in some vital areas, but were lacking theologically). Their principles and practices were worthy of further consideration and debate. I don’t believe today’s CN leaders are nearly as strong. Nor would I consider you (from what I can tell, and others, short of say, a Doug Wilson, in that light). The truth is we have no seat at the table. Not sure the CN movement is a proper avenue. What I see is a designed effort by the elites to play both sides to further fan the flames of ideological conflict. The Israel-Gaza issue is a perfect example. Both protests and support are being elevated and exaggerated to foward global fascism. The rise of fascism requires manufactured consent. The problem and the response from both sides are convenient tools to forward an agenda. I would like to see greater discernment and skeptical analysis but I’m just not seeing it (even from men who are typically reliable and discerning). Some realities are too daunting to comprehend I guess. So Trump cannot be my savior any more than Biden can. Look up congressman Thomas Massie on twitter. He seems to be one of the few who get it.
Not really sure what to make of that, but yeah, Massie makes some good points from time to time.
I’m just saying I think guys like you and sometimes myself are getting gaslit by those who should be more charitable but on the other hand the CN movement feels like a setup. It’s theologically shaky and convoluted. It’s also pretty dispensational. I look at Israel (not the people, but the location) as the epicenter of the NWO. Is that where CN is quietly aligned? Or is it a domestic terrorist setup? I’m not sure, but I don’t see anything good coming out of it. The right and left establishment are aligned and using the fringes “as an example” for clamping down…
“Sean Feucht, Eric Metaxas and Russell Johnson reshape their Christian nationalism tour as pro-Israel protests
ANALYSISKRISTEN THOMASON | MAY 9, 2024
Outside agitators are striking back at pro-Palestinian protesters on college campuses across the country. Seeing an opportunity to further their own agenda, Christian nationalist groups are joining them.
On April 25, worship leader Sean Feucht, along with conservative pastor Russell Johnson and author Eric Metaxas, led the first of their “United for Israel” marches outside the Morningside Heights campus of Columbia University. Feucht said the rally was intended to show solidarity with the university’s Jewish students and faculty, although neither group invited the Christian leaders to the campus.
Rather, this pro-Israel rally portends a shift from Christian nationalism to Christian militantism among the Religious Right.
Another United for Israel march was held last night at the University of Southern California, and more are planned for other locations.”
I don’t support any genocides - Jews or Muslims. I don’t support blind allegiance to any pro or anti-Israel movement. I don’t trust any brand of CN to honor the label Christian. It’s hard enough to get an honest and accurate news report/war justification. So how is anyone jumping on any bandwagon? Massie is getting pressured by Israel backed superpacs to stop putting America first. That’s problematic…
“Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie Approximately 1% of Gaza’s CIVILIAN population has been wiped out by Israel in 7 months.
We should not fund this war.
[1% is between Israel’s 0.7% and Gaza’s 1.5% official claims in this article]”
I agree!