There are blind spots built into the discussion about who the next Christians are and what shape Christianity should take—blind spots which can only be really seen properly when the movement is put into dialogue with both history and other communities.
A recent paper highlights the differences between evangelical and Catholic defense of traditional marriage.
If nothing is sacred, nothing can be profaned. The reverberations from a scandal surrounding colleges and sex might provide a little hope that the total disenchantment of sex is not yet complete.
Why we can’t understand the gospel—or ourselves—without the Trinity. A review of ‘The Deep Things of God.’
We should treat death with the sort of contemplative, cheerful deliberation that might mark someone at the beginning of a long voyage, for the journey into the far country is the beginning, not the end.
The gods of America, and the difference they make. A review of ‘America’s Four Gods.’
How hipster evangelicals have fallen into the same consumerist traps as their parents.
In the order of questions, how the world came into being, or whether the world is good, or what responsibilities we have toward the world are all derivative upon the questions of what the world is and how it is to be understood in reference to the Creator.
The complex relationship of procreation, gender differences, and reproductive impulses that is heterosexual marriage exists “pre-politically.”
Ros Douthat’s endorsement of traditional marriage is about as tepid as you’ll find, down to being nearly incoherent. He wants to talk about the ideal, but then let it go when it becomes socially inconvenient. He’s worried—rightly—about being called a bigot, but attempting to straddle both sides won’t satisfy anyone.
Conservative evangelicals are held captive by stories of secular institutions who refuse to allow the Christian worldview into their discourse about the nature of the world, stories which are used well to raise funds, but which reinforce a culture of negation and hostility toward those with whom we differ.
Van Leeuwen’s book is a provocative and thorough study of both Lewis the author and Lewis the man.
Both bad officiating and good officiating take their meaning–like everything else–in the eschaton, in the final resolution of the game, both in itself and in its relationship to its broader cultural context.
Chesterton is the anti-Nietsche—a poet-philosopher who understands that unless truth exists, the enterprises of art and beauty are rendered meaningless.
*Neither Beast nor God* explores the way in which birth, breeding, and death offend our sense of human dignity (and the ways in which human dignity must be maintained in those acts), and how human dignity and personal dignity relate to each other.
Drawing upon Augustine and the phenomenological tradition, James K.A. Smith argues that instead, humans should be viewed fundamentally, though not exclusively, as lovers, and—post regeneration—primarily as lovers of the Kingdom.
The secular space that the exists between now and the eschaton is the space in which the Church enacts its mission, which is a mission both to people and to the nations and societies that they compose. This allows us to approach politics from a different vantage point—one that is integrated into and reflects the redemptive work of Jesus Christ on the cross.
We must be evangelicalism’s harshest critics because we are her biggest fans. Only from such a position of loyalty and love will we be able to see evangelicalism as she is: always broken and dying, yet still being reborn and renewed from within.