Uncategorized

can I be a quietistic, hawkish, creedal Fundamentalist evangelical of unimpeachable catholicity?

By J. L. Bastiat ⋅ May 6, 2008 ⋅  Email This Post ⋅  Print This Post ⋅ Post a comment

A Herd of Unicorns:
The Myth of Evangelical Political Engagement - the evangelical outpost

Boy, did The Conservative Intelligencer’s true self (I am certainly more alter than idem) ever jump into the middle of a good one, this time!

When Joe Carter begins detecting “echoes of neo-Fundamentalism” in the words of Phil Johnson, it’s time to get out the popcorn, because something’s bound to go down. These are some very vocal and active fellows, not only but definitely also in blogging, and while Phil carries quite a bit more weight in the Christian ministry world, especially where writing and publishing are concerned, Joe’s got some serious cred among social conservatives and many Christians.

I just entered the argument, didn’t I? Yeah, I guess I did. I am posting on a blog about this, after all. Pretty hard to avoid exposing my views when I start writing “social conservatives and many Christians,” as though these were not one and the same group.

After all, from Joe’s perspective, the State can and should be used to cultivate “moral ecology“; and for a Christian to espouse libertarianism with regard to the State is nonsensical. That would make conservatives who have opted out of Christian identity politics, while retaining the privilege and demonstrating the capacity for informed commentary and critique for the good of the church, and of the nation, roughly equivalent to conservative “race traitors” like The Honorable Justice Clarence Thomas and Thomas Sowell. Joe graciously declines to say that, which is one of many reasons he is at least a dozen times more worth agreeing with, or arguing with, than many of his closest “Religious Right” associates (and his favorite candidate for President).

But it’s not at all clear to me that identity politics is a good thing. It’s not at all clear to me that being regarded as a “voting bloc” and a “market” within a particular civil society reflects either the understanding or the witness of Christ’s Body, of the embassy of the Kingdom to come into this world’s nations. It’s not at all clear to me that teaching the People of God to dwell “among the nations” is more important than teaching them to live as aliens.

It is certainly clear to me that when an organization committed to political ends and objects, organized for the use of political means, organized within one of the nations of this world and for its betterment, which swears allegiance to a kingdom other than Christ’s, calls itself “Christian” and even dares to conflate itself with Christ’s Body, that something has gone dramatically wrong. Something has been fouled up that we were only just beginning to get straight after centuries of error. This is true even if those ends and objects are informed by or designed to appeal to a social vision espoused by many Christians; and sometimes especially so, as that very appeal can be subversive of the Gospel.

I try to stay informed, and to comment well. But I cannot wish that evangelicals were any more the political constituency they already are, being courted and appealed to by salesmen and demagogues because they behave along the same lines as any other “identity group.”

I can only pray for His coming who will put an end to this, soon enough, when His Body finally assembles in the newly-renovated Earth.