It is too early to tell whether Orbán’s agenda will ultimately be successful—but it is indisputably true that he is one of the only conservative leaders who is actually attempting to fight back in any significant way. He is funding conservative institutions, working to spread conservative ideas, fighting to keep LGBT propaganda away from children, seeking to reduce abortions and promote families, and refusing to back down in the face of elite opposition.

If there is to be a backlash to the cultural revolution that has conquered the West, what might it look like, politically speaking? Many writers have been considering what it means for Christians to live in a post-Christian world, but outside of the United States, where every federal election has taken on a frenetic and frantic tone, there is little discussion about what political leaders seeking to turn the tide might actually do to accomplish that—if it is even possible.
One example of what it might look like is the Viktor Orbán agenda in Hungary. I’ve been fascinated with the ongoing government project to reduce abortion, boost the birthrate, and encourage marriage for some time, and have interviewed both Hungarian ambassador Eduard Habsburg (yes, from that Habsburg family) as well as Family Minister Katalin Novák for The American Conservative to discuss this agenda. We don’t yet know how the Hungarian agenda will play out in the long-term, but there have been some encouraging short-term results.
Rod Dreher of The American Conservative has been writing from Hungary for several months while he works at the Danube Institute, and it has been interesting to see him become a full-throated supporter of Orbán (while admitting that it is obviously not all roses.) Most conservative leaders tend to conserve whatever status quo they get handed when achieving power. Thus, progressives utilize their time in office to move the ball down the field; conservatives do nothing to turn back the clock, and we go from debating same-sex marriage to whether or not minors can get castrated in two decades without any meaningful opposition from conservatives. Especially in the Anglosphere countries (Canada being a particularly egregious example), so-called conservative politicians have shown little to no appetite for fighting back even when it comes to minors getting sex changes. Cultural surrendur is the standard.
Viktor Orbán, perhaps due to his past as an anti-Communist, understands how progressives won (and win) in the first place. Interestingly, when Orbán does precisely what progressives do—appointing like-minded people, funding conservative outfits, and launching a right-wing long march through the institutions—he gets called an authoritarian. The New York Times, for example, recently reported that Orbán’s government has granted a total of $1.7 billion to Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC) “with the aim of training a new generation of conservative elite across Europe.” That is precisely what conservatives should have been doing for decades, instead of ceding one field after another to those who hate Western civilization. Progressives, of course, don’t care for being beaten at their own game.
Hungary has even modeled one potential method of pushback to the LGBT agenda. Over the last several years, an internecine fight broke out amongst American conservatives over the limits of the use of government power, with David French representing the libertarian wing and Sohrab Ahmari making the case that conservatism has conserved almost nothing over the past several decades. I think Ahmari was being hyperbolic, but then again, French did refer to Drag Queen Story Hour as one of the “blessings of liberty” in his insistence that there was nothing conservatives could do in response to these new cultural cancers. Over at his blog, Rod Dreher describes how Hungary has responded to the explosion of LGBT propaganda targeted at children:
Hungary is being punished severely by the European Union for having passed a law this summer that restricts the presentation of LGBT content to children and minors. Hungarians are not religious, but they are culturally conservative. The government, seeing how the constant stream of LGBT propaganda aimed at children is changing Western societies (e.g., a 4,000 percent increase over a decade in the number of UK minors referred for transgender treatment), chose to fight back in a modest way. Every society chooses what is appropriate for its youth to experience, and usually codifies that in law. Not every society agrees on these points, but every society sets these rules. There is a reason why our laws set the age of sexual consent at a certain point. Societies differ on what that age is, but all societies recognize that children must be protected from the sexual desire of adults. Societies also set restrictions on whether or not minors can receive certain kinds of sexualized information — porn, I mean. Unlike the countries of Western Europe, Hungary believes that children and minors should not receive information normalizing LGBT. They are trying to protect their youth from the cultural revolution that has consumed the West. They are trying to protect their kids from decadent propaganda.
Read More

The Reformed tradition, with its rich legacy of psalmody and hymnody, offers a vast reservoir of spiritual songs that teach theology, recount God’s mighty acts of creation and redemption, and express the joys and sorrows of the Christian life. Singing these truths embeds them deeply in our hearts, often becoming a source of comfort and strength in difficult times. Moreover, family worship serves as a vital tool in countering the toxic influences that pervade our culture. In a world where families are often fragmented and isolated, this practice provides a much-needed space for connection, conversation, and spiritual growth.

In the quiet corners of our homes, where the light of the gospel meets the daily rhythms of life, lies the sacred practice of family worship. Rooted deeply in the Reformed and Presbyterian heritage, this practice is not merely a tradition, but a profound means of grace, a spiritual lifeline connecting families to the very heart of God.
The Scriptures, our ultimate authority for faith and godliness, lay the foundation for family worship. Deuteronomy 6:6-7 exhorts us to diligently teach God’s commandments to our children, talking of them when we sit in our houses, walk by the way, lie down, and rise up. This holistic approach to discipleship underscores the necessity of integrating our faith into every aspect of life. It is within the confines of our homes that the seeds of faith are sown, watered, and nurtured.
In the Reformed and Presbyterian tradition, family worship is not an optional addendum, but an essential component of our Christian walk. John Calvin, a pillar of Reformed theology, emphasized the need for Christian instruction in the home. The Westminster Confession, a cornerstone of Presbyterian doctrine, echoes this sentiment, underscoring the duty of heads of households in nurturing their family in the grace and admonition of the Lord. Presbytery candidates and examining committees are wise when they inquire into the daily practices of private devotion of prospective candidates for ministry.
At its core, family worship is beautifully simple, yet profoundly influential. It typically involves three key elements: reading the Scriptures, praying, and singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. This triad forms a balanced diet for the soul, fostering a holistic spiritual development within the family.
Reading the Scriptures together as a family anchors our lives in God’s truth. It allows every member, from the youngest to the oldest, to hear the voice of God speaking through His Word. The practice of daily Bible reading as a family instills a deep reverence for the authority of Scripture and equips every family member with the wisdom and guidance needed for life’s journey.
Read More
Related Posts:

Basham’s Shepherds for Sale is a book that addresses the political and market captivity of the church from a particular angle. It does so with greater or lesser effectiveness with regard to the charges she makes. But her ultimate point is that the church is often subject to influences that may be hostile to its actual mission. And that is the takeaway that should persist long after the specific controversies are exhausted.

Megan Basham’s bestselling new book Shepherds for Sale: How Evangelical Leaders Traded the Truth for a Leftist Agenda has created a massive furor. Those of us who live (and especially those of us who work) in the evangelical community in the U.S. are doing a great deal of reading, talking, reviewing, and yes, battling, over Basham’s claims.  She argues with great force (and to a contested degree with “the receipts”) that various evangelical elites have sold out the church in order to obtain left-wing money and status. Significant individuals such as Eric Metaxas (famed Christian author and broadcaster) and Kelly Kullberg (editor of Finding God at Harvard) have supported and promoted Basham’s book, while several others such as the apologist Neil Shenvi and the president of Ministry Watch, Warren Smith, have offered strong critiques. Given that Basham has built part of her case by pointing at popular figures such as J. D. Greear (megachurch pastor and former president of the Southern Baptist Convention) and Gavin Ortlund (the well-known Christian author and apologist), the conflict has been intense as allies of her targets seek to defend them (and others) from charges of unfaithfulness and compromise in the pursuit of worldly acclaim.
Is Basham right? Has she uncovered a scandal that must be revealed to the flock in the pews? The answer is that it is complicated. And it is more complicated than one might understand simply by reading the book.
My interest is not in striking a blow either for or against Basham and the like-minded folks who feel empowered and justified by her claims. Rather, I want to talk about why I think the book is important and how a more expansive framework might help us understand the strife and atmosphere of suspicion more accurately.
One of the organizations Basham discusses is the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) of the Southern Baptist Convention. While I have never been an employee of the organization, I have been a fellow of the ERLC for many years now, and I have written for their publications and participated in their programs. I had an acquaintance with Russell Moore, who is a target of the book. My experience of the ERLC is that it advocates public policy that Baptists consider important, such as religious liberty and the sanctity of life.
Several years ago, I participated in a meeting at the ERLC in Nashville aimed at generating a group statement on the ethics of artificial intelligence. We had a barbecue dinner at a restaurant the night before our meeting, stayed in a nearby hotel (probably a Hampton), and then convened for a productive discussion of artificial intelligence followed by drafting of a document. We had also had some virtual meetings prior to the event.
There was a feature of the meeting that is noteworthy in light of the controversy caused by Basham’s book: she has documented significant contributions by left-wing groups to major evangelical organizations as a way of demonstrating that these groups are buying influence on issues such as same-sex marriage, climate, race relations, and immigration. In attendance at our meeting, and understood to be a financial sponsor of it, was a representative of the Koch Foundation. For those not familiar with Koch, the group pushes for a more libertarian/small government philosophy. They would generally be classified on the Right side of American politics. The young man from Koch did not exert a strong force on our meeting or our discussion. He merely mentioned once or twice that the Koch Foundation’s position is that “a light regulatory touch” is preferable. He certainly made no effort to guide the course of our conversation or to affect the written document.
Read More
Related Posts: