| instauratio magna | President of Institute of Christian Politics | Author of The Case for Christian Nationalism | email: [email protected]

Joined October 2019
Kevin DeYoung has chosen the CN study committee members. They are free to contact me at any time. To aid them in their study, here's a selection of my work:
56
101
26
1,001
206,320
Ironic that it was the Roman Catholic position that civil magistrates cannot exercise theological judgement. The Reformers held the opposite view. So, the “semper reformanda” folks actually “reformed” back to the papist position. David Pareus:
5
11
2
138
4,081
guy: “do not politicize the gospel” same guy: “the gospel commands us to welcome the immigrant”
37
157
8
1,832
20,389
A princess—Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia—refuting Descartes’ substance dualism is one of my favorite anecdotes of philosophical history.
1
1
1
66
2,485
Sorry Cartesians. Descartes was OWNED, by a princess.
2
19
823
I bet that over two-thirds of Protestants in the US hold Baptist theology, and they’re still afraid of what the Presbyterians will do to them. Baptists, You don’t have to live like this.
Replying to @PerfInjust
Baptists for CN is like chickens for KFC.
33
26
2
361
10,035
Baptists in recent years have written entire books refuting the idea that the state can coerce faith—an idea that literally no Protestant in history affirmed. Darling repeated that refutation like a month ago.
Actually Baptists are doing very good work on church and state. You just don’t like the fact that it’s still . . . Baptist.
6
6
4
173
6,632
But it’s not an issue only with recent Baptist political thought. Presbyterians today say it all the time.
1
22
780
Finishing up a long essay arguing that Baptist theology does not logically deny Christian nationalism, Baptist church establishment, or suppressing false religion. tl;dr Baptist and Presbyterian CNs are friends.
46
21
10
505
11,937
Sorry guys. You’ll probably have to wait until the Spring to read it. Complicated business.
2
47
1,171
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
America itself is inescapably Calvinist (as Josh Mitchell & others have shown), but point taken. Can’t help but note however that this move is essentially, “yes, it’s an evangelical future but not highbrow Protestantism.” Ok. This is just a recognition of a perennial American reality. It’s not high church. The future isn’t Pentecostal, tho (& I definitely don’t notice Wesleyan churches exploding). What Matt is noticing is the frontierist, revivalistic impulse that, again, is just part of America. The future is non-denominationalism. Most of non-denom is de facto Baptist tho I predict you’ll see more of other groups going to unaffiliated models (again, as a short term future to grapple with past decade of disruption & inept institutions). We’ll see.
Ross is right about the vibrancy of evangelicalism. But a distinction needs to be made. The strongest currents of Protestantism in the US are Wesleyan, not Calvinist, Pentecostal rather than Presbyterian. When intellectual Protestants wax triumphant about an “evangelical century,” they are celebrating the success of a form of Christianity that differs in significant ways from their own. I was raised in a non-denominational evangelical church. When I became “young, restless, and Reformed,” my parents were alarmed. They asked the pastor how to handle my evident defection from the faith. Whatever I believed, they thought, it wasn’t true Christianity. Intellectual Protestants—the kind who attend Anglican churches or imbibe high-proof Calvinist texts—represent traditions of belief that have helped shape this country. But in terms of sociology and doctrine, they are alienated from the most vigorous contemporary expressions of American Christianity.
6
6
2
76
4,099
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
The playbook will go something like this: 1) win back the House and Senate, and hopefully the Presidency in 2028; (2) admit DC and Puerto Rico as states, which doesn’t need a constitutional amendment, to gain 4 new Senate seats and cement control; (3) pack the Court, which only requires a change to the Judiciary Act of 1869, not a constitutional amendment; (4) eliminate the electoral college, which is unconstitutional, but not when you have a rigged court that finds the ‘loophole’; (5) flood the country with pliant migrants, swamp the natives, and hold power indefinitely.
Hillary wants the Supreme Court expanded to 13 Justices -- but not until "Democrats are in power." Because it's all about making the court less partisan and has nothing to do with entrenching Democrat power, of course.
1,257
4,857
364
24,881
3,463,815
Moore has backed virtually every major American military intervention in recent history, but is compelled by an evolving “pro-life ethic” to denounce the death penalty in cases where a defendant is tried, convicted, and has every opportunity to appeal.
Where Russell Moore, in a new Christianity Today article, reveals he's pretty much against the death penalty now.
3
29
1,078
Should Government Enforce God's Law? | Christian Nationalism Debate SECORD vs BAIRD TONIGHT 7PM EST
1
2
1
11
962
This is why, among other things, that civil government ought to promote true religion.
You can’t restrain irrational passions by reason alone.
5
28
343
3,443
It is not a problem for Christians at all. archive.americanreformer.org…
Replying to @PineTreePatrick
Hazony doesn't make this distinction because he's Jewish. But, more fundamentally, I think he's correct that *political* nations form organically when they are taught to see other clans as family, which is what God does in the OT. But this is exactly what the NT does too! This isn't a problem for Hazony, because he doesn't accept the NT. But it's a problem for Christian Nationalists who want to accept his reasoning.
47
1,631
If you knew the variety of people who have attended Thiel lectures, I don’t think you’d condemn attendance.
16
5
10
180
10,985
guy: “do not politicize the gospel!” Same guy: “those post-liberals are outside the faith”
7
25
351
5,456
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
The Westminster Confession of Faith taught the CoW was given "voluntarily." That is the definition of "positive law." In contrast, we "owe obedience unto him" as Creator regardless. Natural law is built into nature, part of man's knowledge, even when suppressed (Rom. 1).
I could be wrong but it seems that the kuyperians and modern 2ks agree that the covenant of works is inherent in or constitutive of nature/creation. So, CoW is essential to natural law. Their disputes are centered on its political implications. But it seems that classically CoW was understood at connatural or logically instituted subsequent to natural law (by order of decree). Natural law is necessary for CoW but CoW is not necessary to natural law. My political thought assumes the latter formulation.
4
2
47
1,868