Last year, Aaron Wren posed the question about X: “Who is America’s leading Protestant intellectual?” The answers were mostly unsatisfactory, with a few important exceptions. My own list would be quite different from the list many people suggest. There are also some young up-and-comers (Samuel James and Jake Meador, for example) who I think will emerge over the next few years.I hope that a general edition of Joseph Minnich’s recent book will be published. The bulwark of unbelief: Atheism and the absence of God in a secular age It will also be published, as was Carl Trueman. The rise and triumph of the modern self and strange new world.
Any list of major Protestant intellectuals must also include Andrew T. Walker. Walker is associate dean of theology and associate professor of Christian ethics and public theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, director of the Carl F. H. Henry Institute for Evangelization, and editor-in-chief of the magazine. world opinion.he has written valuable commentary public discussion, national review, First timeand american religious reformer, among other outlets.His 2022 book God and transgender debate: What does the Bible actually say about gender identity? It is an important contribution to an important cultural debate.
Walker is coming Faithful Reason: Natural Law Ethics for God’s Glory and Our Good (B&H Academic, 2024) is an ambitious corrective to Protestantism’s distance from the theology of the Reformers and their spiritual descendants. Walker graciously agreed to be interviewed about his work in churches and public squares. european conservatives.
What do you think is the main goal of your work to inform the congregation?
Play on offense. Western Christians now know that their views are becoming a minority. My answer to that is, “Who cares?” Modern secular morality is bankrupt, barbaric, and fragile. That’s extremely unreasonable. If not, we are borrowing from Christianity. Secular morality has no satisfactory answers to humanity’s deepest questions. It’s a cesspool of relativism, therapeuticism, and hyper-individualism (if my next book is picked up by a publisher, it will be about the failures of secularism). If so, Christians should confront secularism head on. It shapes much of my teaching and writing.
My main desire is for Christians to understand the easy-to-understand reasons for the ethical beliefs we hold, to find that those reasons are more satisfying than competing secular imitations, and to help us live our lives. I would like people to understand that this is something that preserves our culture. I have no excuse for “taking America back for Christ” in the sense of God and country. No, we need to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ amidst the ruins of secularism. I truly believe there is no better time than now to be a true Christian, especially in the West. Frankly, there’s something refreshing about resisting secular progressivism. Moreover, the growing class of “red-haired” ex-liberals shows how impossible secularism’s attempts to transcend the outer boundaries of natural law are. Christians need to be there when reality suddenly returns and people find themselves in the depths of secularism, burnt out and demoralized.
Much of your recent work involves analyzing how American Christians can respond in practical ways to the post-Christian era.What is the key? temptation Do you think Christians should avoid facing this cultural moment?
Despair is the greatest temptation. Despair is incompatible with joy and gratitude. The older I became in my Christian faith, the more I became convinced that joy and gratitude were the source of Christian holiness and Christian witness. In Romans 1, Paul compares cultural despair and rebellion to a failure of gratitude. Gratitude accepts limitations and sets direction. Despair breeds apathy and bitterness.I don’t want any more spiritual and political enemies of Christianity. [than] Christians not only lose tactically, but also give up hope.
I think we also need to be constantly vigilant and keep our honor in the eyes of the world strict. The sin of respectability is simply an updated version of what the Apostle Paul called “people-pleasing” (Galatians 1:10). It just turns you into a ventriloquist dummy who just spouts the gist of what those who hate Christ expect of you.
From Rod Dreher’s “Benedict Option” and Douglas Wilson’s “Christian Nationalism” (and the Catholic version of Integralism) to Aaron Wren’s practical advice for navigating “the increasingly hostile Much has been written over the past decade about how Christians should respond to culture. negative world. ” In your view, what should be the Christian approach to this new situation? Do you share any of these views?
There is an element of truth in each of the above approaches you mentioned. Depending on your definition, I have criticized “Christian nationalism” not because I am opposed to a nation that exhibits Christian values (though I hope so), but because the gospel is opposed to secular politics. This was due to theological concerns about playing the role of a pastor. . In my theological worldview, governments are poor disciples and even worse pastors and priests.
In short, and since this question could take a book’s worth of answers, my general approach to Christianity and culture comes down to the church-centered vision once written by Carl F.H. Henry. And God’s standards that humans and society must follow in order for civilization to survive will be judged. ” In my opinion, no promises have been made. total A victory (albeit a possible victory) in this era. In the meantime, we should stand firm and state the truth publicly, if only to refute those who spout lies about human nature, humanity, and the true basis of the common good. The task of Christians in this age is to remind them that Babylon actually belongs to God and is not sovereign of Babylon itself.
your new book, Faithful Reason: Natural Law Ethics for God’s Glory and Our Gooddeals with areas of theology that are largely (or almost completely) ignored or forgotten by Protestants. For centuries, natural law ethics has been considered part of the collective heritage of Christians, but many Protestants today seem to think this is the prerogative of Catholics. What should Protestants understand about natural law as part of the Reformed tradition?
The loss of natural law in the Reformation is a 20th century phenomenon. Returning to natural law (as we must) means returning to one of the oldest areas of Christian moral thinking. It is very unfortunate that Protestants abandoned natural law under the influence of figures like Karl Barth. Although I think he is vastly overrated, he helped anchor his midwifery theological liberalism into 20th century language. To delve deeply into Protestant history is to cease to be Barthian and voluntaristic in ethics. Additionally, I encourage Protestant people to go read Protestant sources. They would be shocked to learn, for example, how aggressively Thomistic men like Calvin, Hemmingsen, and Junius sound ethically.
what do you hope to achieve reason to be loyal?
My goal is bold and simple at the same time. I want conservative evangelicals to regain their affinity for natural law, natural law theory, and natural law tradition. As I wrote in the introduction to this book, my goal is to flame How should we think about natural law (this is one of the biggest hurdles)? explain What is natural law and how can we do it? apply It’s about a variety of issues. I know I can’t do it alone. But I can join a chorus of like-minded Christians and work together to reclaim our lost traditions.
But to further narrow down my goal to writing, reason to be loyalConservative evangelicals believe that the primary usefulness of natural law lies not in its explanatory power (although I do think it is persuasive), but rather in its explanatory power to make Christian moral claims intelligible. This is for people to understand. I think a catechism for Christians is what I need most.
In your view, does Protestant ignorance of natural law ethics lead to significant compromises since the sexual revolution? Are there other influences?
Ah, that’s right. I don’t think we can fully understand the extent to which the modern Protestant sexual ethos has been shaped by modern ideas of sexuality. A typical Protestant pastor or a typical Protestant believer does not have the taboo category of contraception in Christian history. The fact that Protestant Christians generally fully embrace the idea of contraception means that we obliterate sexual teleology, thereby obscuring the uniqueness of marriage as an inherently generative institution. This means that it has been changed into a system that is mainly focused on adults. By not understanding our design, after all Governed by the reproductive telos, we have replaced eros as the highest good desired. Starting with false assumptions about sexual design creates a cascade of ethical failures.
When it comes to Christian apologetics in public, especially as Christians increasingly speak what amounts to a foreign language on a variety of issues, which approaches are most effective for having “breakthrough” conversations? There has been much debate about whether this is the case. Including sex and gender. Which approach do you think is true and effective in communicating complex Christian principles to a post-Christian audience?
I don’t mean my answer to be flippant, but the pretense that we live in a society in which rationality has collapsed and that it is natural law, and only natural law, that will help the West climb out of its limits. There are very few. Sexual paralysis. Non-Christians like Louise Perry and Douglas Murray understand that it is only through the Christian moral tradition that the brutality and barbarism of late Western secularism can be countered. However, these individuals are not (yet) Christians at this time (we should pray for them). I want someone on my culture team to be someone who understands the failures of secularism and the triumphs of Christianity, but ultimately what I want is someone who understands the failures of secularism and the triumphs of Christianity. Our goal is to get such people to come to Jesus Christ. He alone has the words of eternal life (John 6:68). As much as I care about cultural health, I’m an evangelical. So my greatest source of energy is that I want people to know Jesus, who has forgiveness, reconciliation, and peace of soul. I would like to begin and end my entry into the square with the declaration that Jesus is the Risen Lord. That is the central claim of Christianity.
Evangelical witnesses must do two things at the same time: (1) We must proclaim the sovereignty of Jesus Christ over sinners. (2) asserts Christ’s sovereignty over creation, as evidenced in the pattern of design we call natural law; I wonder about the fact that no amount of natural law reasoning can convince unconvinced people if what they really fear is how Jesus threatens their sense of autonomy. I recognize it clearly. To progressive skeptics and die-hard ex-liberals, I would ask: Is Jesus alive? If he is, then everything he and the Bible says about sexuality, family, and civilization must be true. ”
Everyone must answer this question: Was Jesus Christ resurrected? How you answer that question is what matters most to you.