Last June, the Presbyterian Church in America’s General Assembly, under the leadership of moderator Kevin DeYoung, commissioned a denominational study and report on Christian nationalism.
This is really good, and I agree with pretty much everything stated here--and I think it's hilarious that the guys who wrote the WCF are less "based" than those who claim to be their successors.
The one quibble I have here is that I would also anathematize those who speak disparagingly of men. While this seems to have gone largely by the wayside in conservative circles in recent years (thankfully!) guys like Webbon played on the apparent double standards within the "commanding heights" of evangelical culture in their efforts to garner a following, and you still see this today.
And that's really the thing. No partiality means just that. I suspect, though I can't prove, that a lot of female exvangelicals come from churches where women were disparaged and a blind eye was turned to male sexual sin while the women were watched like hawks, and a lot of young men who went CN come from churches where men were treated as defective women and female sexual sin was excused while male sexual sin was treated with its due gravity.
I appreciate the PCA taking this on, but I've always thought CN had sort of an underpants gnome quality about it. And I don't think many of the people on the CN train who think JD Vance is their future realize just how Catholic he is.
I was at General Assembly in Chattanooga when this report was commissioned, and my fear was that it would either be bland to the point of irrelevance, or that it would exacerbate divisions within the PCA by coming down too hard on one side or the other. I'm really pleased with this outcome, and my main hope is that it acts as a final statement on this topic so we don't have to keep re-litigating it every time there's a presidential election.
This is really good, and I agree with pretty much everything stated here--and I think it's hilarious that the guys who wrote the WCF are less "based" than those who claim to be their successors.
The one quibble I have here is that I would also anathematize those who speak disparagingly of men. While this seems to have gone largely by the wayside in conservative circles in recent years (thankfully!) guys like Webbon played on the apparent double standards within the "commanding heights" of evangelical culture in their efforts to garner a following, and you still see this today.
And that's really the thing. No partiality means just that. I suspect, though I can't prove, that a lot of female exvangelicals come from churches where women were disparaged and a blind eye was turned to male sexual sin while the women were watched like hawks, and a lot of young men who went CN come from churches where men were treated as defective women and female sexual sin was excused while male sexual sin was treated with its due gravity.
I appreciate the PCA taking this on, but I've always thought CN had sort of an underpants gnome quality about it. And I don't think many of the people on the CN train who think JD Vance is their future realize just how Catholic he is.
I was at General Assembly in Chattanooga when this report was commissioned, and my fear was that it would either be bland to the point of irrelevance, or that it would exacerbate divisions within the PCA by coming down too hard on one side or the other. I'm really pleased with this outcome, and my main hope is that it acts as a final statement on this topic so we don't have to keep re-litigating it every time there's a presidential election.