Modern America is now Gomorrah in the hands of Cultural Marxists.  We tend to forget and ignore the fact that Marxism itself has a history, and its history always results in the shedding of the blood of millions of people.  We must be pro-life, not pro-death, even beyond the womb.  For non-cultural theologians, their hope may be in believing that persecution is the best way to heaven.  For cultural theologians, persecution may be their calling, too, but in time to come, the Kingdom of God will come to earth in its fullness, and the glory of the Lord will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea, all before the second coming of Christ.

I have never met Doug Wilson personally.  I have been present twice when he spoke, once at the Auburn Avenue Conference in 2002 in Monroe, Louisiana, and then twenty years later at the Fight, Laugh, Feast (FLF) Conference in 2022 in Knoxville, Tennessee.  In his book on the Book of Revelation he cites two times from my book on the Book of Revelation, so I know he has read at least one of my books.  When I was a local church pastor, I used his book on marriage (Reforming Marriage) often in marital counseling. It was, and maybe still is in my opinion, the best available.  I listen to his YouTube presentations on occasion, but I find that he can be difficult to follow because his vocabulary and phraseology seem to be channeling either the genre of G. K. Chesterton or C. S. Lewis, two of his heroes.  I find this frustrating.  Yet, his impact on the modern evangelical and reformed church cannot be denied.
I am older than Doug Wilson, and I was probably reading Rev. Rousas Rushdoony and Dr. Gary North long before he was.  I personally knew both Rushdoony and North.  Thus, I am not one of Wilson’s warrior children as Mr. Gordon classifies in his article (See Wilson’s Warrior Children by Chris Gordon, December 11, 2023).  I call myself one of Rushdoony’s warrior children. The main point of contention with Wilson from Rushdoony’s children is over the legitimacy of natural law in Stephen Wolfe’s book, The Case for Christian Nationalism published by Wilson’s Canon Press.
Mr. Gordon in the title of his article plays off Professor John Frame’s article Machen’s Warrior Children. However, I think he misses the mark because Frame deals in his presentation with all the controversies (21 of them) that divided those who followed Machen.  Wilson’s children are not battling each other, at least not currently.  The Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), which originates in Moscow, Idaho, portrays an ecumenical spirit of unity which includes those from Reformed Baptist backgrounds. The Church as a denomination has its own identity and communion now apart from Wilson.
I do think, however, that Gordon gets to the important point about Wilson and his followers.  Gordon deals more with substance than form, and I think he is right on target here. There is something missing in the modern Reformed world, and a multiplicity of young men are flocking to Wilson and others to fill that vacuum.  It is more than just a mood.
As a balance, before I say anything else, I should mention several church leaders and conferences that add much to the discussion of reformed theology and piety today. They are godly men.  These godly men are included in Gospel Reformation Network (GRN), Presbycast, Together for the Gospel (T4G), The Founder’s Ministry of the Sword and the Trowel (TS&TT), and the G3 Ministries (Gospel, Grace, and Glory), to name a few. These represent prominent pastors, many of large churches, and their numerous conferences, webpages, and podcasts.  I call these non-cultural theologians. They indeed have much to offer, but the problem is that they are not dealing with the issues that are drawing young men like a magnet to Wilson and Moscow.
Actually, the theological engine that propels Wilson and Moscow includes a much broader family than Wilson and Moscow.  Others include The Center for Cultural Leadership (CCL) headed by Dr. P. Andrew Sandlin, the Ezra Institute (Dr. Joe Boot), Apologia Ministries (Pastor Jeff Durbin), and Right Response Ministries (Pastor Joel Webbon).  I would also include (without his permission) Apologist and Reformed Baptist Dr. James White, a postmillennialist who interviewed Doug Wilson on the topic of Federal Vision.  I call these cultural theologians.
Many young men are not hearing from non-cultural theologians what they need in order to be good fathers and to be faithful in their callings in life outside of the church.  The application of God’s law which challenges the modern culture is missing. Thus, they often go home after church and get their needed supplements (as in vitamins) from cultural theologians via various social media outlets.  This might be a surprise to many non-cultural theologians, but it is happening.  Cultural ministries like Canon Press and the Crosspolitic programs are quickly growing in popularity.
Most Reformed pastors avoid crucial and popular issues that are raging outside the church sanctuary. They are probably not going to be dragged off to jail.  Their linear expository preaching somehow enables them to avoid certain important topics.  They are comfortable still fighting the heretics from the Reformation period and the old liberalism of J. Gresham Machen’s time (which need to be fought).  However, they are stuck in the past.  They are so saturated in the New Testament period; they forget that Christendom has enjoyed centuries of blessings after the close of the New Testament Canon.
We are watching the end of American Christendom in our own day.  There is a new enemy.  It is called Cultural Marxism, and this demon is at the doorway of our churches.  However, I fear that this new enemy is not even on the radar of most non-cultural theologians.  I am not even sure they have the skills to fight this enemy. Their seminary training did not equip them to deal with this.  The only way to gain the needed skills is to read outside the box.  Dealing with Cultural Marxism publicly certainly might divide the church.  As a former pastor, I know how important church unity is.  However, I was never afraid to preach on topics like the Bible and inflation (Theology in a Reece’s Cup) or on Wokism (Are You Woke?).
What then are the substantive issues?  Let me mention a few.

Eschatology is one issue. Optimistic eschatology brings hope on earth, even in the most desperate times. As Isaac Watts wrote in “Joy to the World,” the blessings of the gospel will spread as far as the curse is found. This is no place to present the case for postmillennialism.  All I need to do is mention that most professors at Old Princeton were postmillennialists.  According to Professor John Frame in his article on “Machen’s Warrior Children,” J. Gresham Machen was a postmillennialist.
Covenantalism is another issue. This is why these men put so much emphasis on the family.  Yes, it is better to be with Christ than live on in a world filled with so much pain, but many of us believe that the world is not coming to an end anytime soon.  Abraham was a stranger in a foreign land, not because he was in the flesh, but because he was in a land full of idols.  Any perspective without the hope of the blessings of the covenant to a thousand generations tends to slip into Neoplatonism and Escapism.

We have a responsibility to our grandchildren and great-grandchildren (you can tell my age here), and we pray that they will become leaders in their own callings, including even those who serve from county commissioner to the highest posts in civil government.  Politics is not the way to blessing.  Covenant faithfulness over generations to our children and our children’s children is the way to bring the fullness of the Kingdom of God to earth before Christ returns in all his glory to reign on a purified and earthly earth. When training up your children, be sure to teach them Christian systematics and apologetics. Make certain they understand the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

Kingdom incarnation is another issue. Jesus came announcing the presence of the Kingdom and not the gospel. The gospel was the instrument to a realized (not over-realized) Kingdom, but not the Kingdom itself.  Too, the Kingdom is greater than the church.  Wherever the law of the King reigns, there is the Kingdom.  This is why Jesus told us to pray, “Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”  Again, Machen was an example of this when he testified as a clergyman before a United States Senate and House Committee on the proposed Department of Education. He was being salt in the world.
Worship is another issue. Worship is a calling to focus on Christ and his work.  It is the worship of the Triune God, especially on the Lord’s Day.  However, it is also a call to battle as men exit the doors of the church—not just to fight sin in their own hearts but to tame sin in a world we see with our own eyes.  Men want to fight for their families.  They do not want to see them swallowed up with the wicked. The wicked will commit suicide and we do not want our children to go to the grave with them.  Worship prepares them for this battle.

The biggest opposition to Cultural Theologians is the Westminster West Seminary R2K proponents.  They promote the idea that the Bible is for the Church only, and has nothing to say to the Civil Magistrate.  The Civil Magistrate is bound to follow Natural Law only, and whatever the Civil Magistrate does is right because God has given him this authority apart from consulting the Holy Scriptures.  One of them has even pushed the idea that if the Civil Magistrate decides to kill Christians, he is doing the right thing because, after all, he is the Civil Magistrate.  Cultural Theologians find this appalling.
Non-cultural theologians are mission-minded.  However, what some of us find puzzling is that as we put more and more missionaries on the field to disciple other nations, we are more and more in this country dying as a Christian nation.  It is difficult to teach others to fly a plane when you have failed to fly one yourself.  The Church has lost its ability to be salt and light in America.  How then can we take the good news to the whole world when it seems that at home the Christian Faith is failing, and it is irrelevant outside the church sanctuary and personal devotions?
I have watched similar so-called movements as Wilson and Moscow in the past destroy themselves, whether it be the Tyler, Texas fiasco or the ministries of Mark Driscoll. However, things may now be different.  Neither of these two failures resulted in a new denomination nor were accompanied by numerous other separate ministries headed in the same direction.  Even if Moscow were to implode, the message will continue.  So, non-cultural theologians need to realize that cultural theologians are not going away.  The best way to deal with them is to recognize that they are legitimate and pursue a right relationship with them.
Cultural theologians are not in a panic mode.  No, they do not believe the sky is falling tomorrow.  We are not out to reclaim through politics the structure of America.  Donald Trump is not the answer.  God is sovereign. That is our hope.  However, we do not swallow the dialectic of the cross verses glory.  We believe in both, that because of the cross, Christ will be glorified not only in heaven but also upon earth as his people seek to bring every thought captive to his authority. Meekness in the heart granted by the Spirit of God is the way to the realization of this glorious kingdom, not for the glory of mere mortals like us, but for glory of our majestic God!  The Kingdom is not from this world, but it is indeed in this world.
Modern America is now Gomorrah in the hands of Cultural Marxists.  We tend to forget and ignore the fact that Marxism itself has a history, and its history always results in the shedding of the blood of millions of people.  We must be pro-life, not pro-death, even beyond the womb.  For non-cultural theologians, their hope may be in believing that persecution is the best way to heaven.  For cultural theologians, persecution may be their calling, too, but in time to come, the Kingdom of God will come to earth in its fullness, and the glory of the Lord will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea, all before the second coming of Christ. Whether they see it in fruition or not, it gives them a purpose on earth, both in their families and in their callings. It is wonderful to think that you had a part, be it ever so small, in the long-term victory. We are in it for the long-haul.  That is why Wilson’s children and others are fighting as warriors.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The boundaries of the Christian Faith have been exchanged for other boundaries contrary to the Christian Faith.  What we are watching today is the replacement of the Second Commandment by a secularized First Amendment.  That was not the original intention of those who approved the First Amendment. The First Amendment was there to encourage the freedom of men to be faithful to the Holy Scriptures, not debasing a Holy God. 

When I heard of the statute of the Satanic idol being destroyed at the Iowa State Capitol Building, I thought of Charlie Daniels’ famous hit “The Devil Went Down to Georgia.”  In this song the Devil challenged the young man Johnny to a fiddle-playing contest. The prize for Johnny was a golden fiddle if he won, and the prize for the Devil was the soul of Johnny if he won.  Johnny won. I think a new song might be appropriately written by Charlie now, and as a man who lives in the South, I would call it “The Devil Went Up to Iowa.”
This statute has been demolished by a man from Mississippi. The head has been cut off, and only part of the statute remains on site.
Although I must confess that there was a joyful response in me as I visioned the ram’s head on the floor, yet, as a Reformed Christian I cannot support vandalism.  Men, even men like Michael Cassidy, who is a Christian and a former Navy fighter pilot, do not have the right to destroy public property.  You know—such an attitude toward the legitimacy of vandalism could lead to vigilante riots and the destruction of millions of dollars of property in cities like Minneapolis where the police are told to stand down while the city burns to the ground. Or it could lead to robbing jewelry stores in San Francisco in broad daylight and the only criminal is the owner of the store.  I am glad I live in a country where vandalism and vigilantism are not tolerated.
The real issue on trial here was not the statue of a pagan idol by the name of Baphomet in a public place set up by the organization called the Satan Temple of Iowa with the approval of the Iowa State Legislature.  The real issue here is the concept of free speech.  Does it violate free speech by restricting objectional material from public display?  One Iowan representative, who is a follower of Christ, and also an ordained minister, spoke approvingly of this public display as protecting the right of civil liberties guaranteed in the United States Constitution.  It is a matter of the First Amendment, he said.
Reactions in the Reformed world vary, as you might expect. The most common response is simply to grimace and ignore it.  “I do not like it, but idolatry in worship at my local church is a much bigger concern than an ugly statute of Satan in a State Capitol.”
So, what about the free-speech argument?  If we curtail free speech, are we curtailing rights guaranteed by the Constitution?  If we are, then this might lead to worse things.  It could even lead to being fired from work if you speak the wrong pronoun preferred by a transgender.  It could lead to a world-renown medical scientist being punished for publicly questioning the validity of the covid vaccine.  Or, likewise, it could lead to a presidential candidate being cancelled from social media for posting what high-tech corporate leaders call disinformation. Paraphrasing A. J. Liebling, the freedom of the press is only free to those who own one.  Another result of restricting the freedom of speech might be stamping out the call by young college students at Harvard University for the genocide of the Jews from the River to the Sea. I hope you see the potential danger of restricting free speech.
Of course, I am being a little facetious in this article.  Foolishness needs to be exposed at times. “Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit (Prov. 26:5).”  When the statute of Robert E. Lee comes down and the statue of Satan goes up, it all seems a little controverted to me.
However, I think the confusion can be cleared up if we consider one thing. The issue in Iowa is not free speech but rather a matter of who sets the limits of free speech.  All free speech is limited.  Free speech is not absolute. You will get in trouble if you shout “fire” in a crowded theatre.
When America was a Chistian nation, it was assumed that the public display of Satanic symbols was outside the boundaries of free speech.  The First Amendment was created to protect the Christian Faith by the disapprobation of a national church in exchange for the approval of existing Christian denominations within the various States.
The First Amendment protected the Christian Faith by guaranteeing the freedom of Christian men to live with a conscience bound only by the Word of God. Yea for the Baptists!  Early America chose the Ten Commandments as its foundation for civil laws and for liberty. Apart from the Christian Faith, the United States Constitution becomes a purely secular document, and as such it is now being used to crush the basic tenets of Christian morality in the public square. Old-school Americans cannot seem to get beyond the sacredness of the First Amendment, even when it is being used as a weapon against them.
As America has drifted from a Christian Nation to a Polytheistic Empire (see A Polytheistic Empire – A New Experiment About to Fail?) the limits on free speech have changed.  New limits have been created and the old ones have been cast away.  That is what makes the conversation about the First Amendment so confusing and contradictory.  We highly value it, but for Christians it is no longer working for us.
The boundaries of the Christian Faith have been exchanged for other boundaries contrary to the Christian Faith.  What we are watching today is the replacement of the Second Commandment by a secularized First Amendment.  That was not the original intention of those who approved the First Amendment. The First Amendment was there to encourage the freedom of men to be faithful to the Holy Scriptures, not debasing a Holy God.
Presbyterians are bound by such documents as the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, but what I have found is that we, too, tend to be confused.  For example, the Larger Catechism Question #108 asks, “What are the duties in the second commandment?” The answer given, even for those in the special calling of civic leadership, is as follows. The duties are “disapproving, detesting, and opposing all false worship, and according to each one’s place and calling, removing it and all monuments of idolatry.” Of course, this does not legitimize vandalism, but it does command men to act where they legally have a right to do so in accordance with the commandments of God, even in the sphere of civil government.  It includes preaching about it too, something the modern church needs to do.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

Christianity compromised God’s biblical antithesis in the name of national unity.  If we were a Christian nation, we might have a hope for survival, even with variations in language and race.  However, like those who sought a humanistic unity at the Tower of Babel, we are doing the same thing as they did, and we are seeing the judgment of God in our own day.  With the passage of laws legalizing abortion and homosexual marriage, the American people have declared war against the God of the Bible.  Judgment follows the rejection of blessing. We no longer live in a post-Christian age but rather in an Anti-Christian age.

There is a great divide in the United States over the Israel-Hamas war in the Middle East.  Most Americans are surprised at the size of the pro-Palestinian sentiment as seen in large public demonstrations, and now resulting in actual physical violence. The Middle East has been literally imported to the United States, and madness is raising its ugly head.  The reason for this division in the United States is that we no longer have a Christian consensus.  We have shifted from a Christian Nation rooted in the truth of the Bible to a Polytheistic Empire rooted in Marxist ideology.
The United States was once a Christian Nation.  Regardless of your view on Christian Nationalism, it cannot be denied that even though we bear little resemblance to a Christian Nation today, we have been living off that capital for many years.  The Bible provided a reference point for both personal and civil law.  Christianity was the seedbed for national unity.
Christianity has dominated the landscape of this country since its beginnings.  Contrary to the United States Constitution, nine of the original thirteen colonies required a religious test for officeholders which reflected a recognition of the Christian Faith.  The States created the Union.  The Union did not create the States. With the loss of State sovereignty in the Civil War, with the rise of the power of the federal government, and with a federal Constitution not demanding a religious test, the shift to a Polytheistic Empire began. Today, we now have Muslims occupying legislative positions in our national government. This would have been unthinkable to most Americans just a half-century ago. I know because I was there over a half-century ago.
A Polytheistic Empire is a country where a multiplicity of nations adhering to a variety of religions seek to live in peace, all under the same roof—in the name of Democracy.  It is believed that Muslims, Jews, and Christians can live together in peace within the same borders.  We have been told that this is possible because Democracy will keep us united. In Democracy the ballot box is the common sacrament among the various religions.  It is the glue that holds us together. The problem is that all this verbiage is a big lie!  Democracy might be possible in a Christian Nation, but in a Marxist regime it becomes a weapon to impose Marxist equality on everyone.
The Bible is clear that nations are defined by a common religion (Ps. 33:12), a common border (Acts 17:26), a common language (Acts 2:6), and a common patriarch (or ancestry) (Rms. 9:3). The Japanese understand this.  The Chinese understand this.  The Russians, the Germans, the French, and the English once understood this.  In recent years western Europe thought they could mix Christianity and Islam within their own borders, but they are beginning to reverse that movement.  It has proved to be catastrophic.
The Biden Administration is an agent of this new political thought.  Open borders are now somehow supposed to be a means of ushering in this new utopia.  As White Christians are marginalized, color becomes the mark of God’s election. Victimhood is now the evidence of holiness, and laws must be reenacted to punish the oppressors to reflect this new Marxist social order.
The problem is that no nation has ever existed since Adam and Eve as a Polytheistic Empire with a multiplicity of nations existing peaceably within the same borders. Empires have existed by exercising raw power over various other nations—each living within their own national boundaries, even with their own religions. However, a Polytheistic Empire with a multiplicity of nations living within the same geographical boundaries is not possible.  It is as insane as creating a zoo where all the animals are put together in the same cage.  As a result, the melting pot we were promised in the typical yellow schoolhouse has become a boiling pot.
Do not forget that America is a new experiment in the history of nations.  We have only been around for a few hundred years—a very short time as compared to the thousands of years since Adam and Eve.  For at least a hundred years or so, we have ignored the biblical definition of a nation and sought by our own hubris to create a utopia based on the inherent goodness of man and the compatibility of all religions. We are like the young teenager who thinks he is wiser than those who came before him—you know the pitch—that the hope of the future is in the hands of our young people. But with time, like most of us, they find out they were just fools.
Christianity compromised God’s biblical antithesis in the name of national unity.  If we were a Christian nation, we might have a hope for survival, even with variations in language and race.  However, like those who sought a humanistic unity at the Tower of Babel, we are doing the same thing as they did, and we are seeing the judgment of God in our own day.  With the passage of laws legalizing abortion and homosexual marriage, the American people have declared war against the God of the Bible.  Judgment follows the rejection of blessing. We no longer live in a post-Christian age but rather in an Anti-Christian age.
Most of you who read this article will not be affected by this shift to a Polytheistic Empire.  However, you are watching it happen.  Decay happens gradually over time. You probably are alarmed, but not too much.  You have accumulated wealth and life is good.  It is your children and grandchildren who will have to pay the price for the error of our way. They will have to live with the fruit of our mistakes.
As a postmillennialist I believe before Christ returns that all the nations shall be converted through the preaching of the gospel.  For now, it is obvious that we have made a grave mistake in this country.  We failed to understand the basic definition of a nation. However, future generations will learn from our failures, and the day will come when God’s people shall see the glory of the Lord cover the earth as the water covers the sea.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

I believe that Christians need to be busy in restoring the dominance of the Christian faith in the public square beginning with the preaching of the gospel that captures not only the hearts of the people but the institutions that permeate our nation…. My point is that most arguments against blasphemy laws in America are bogus. There is no need to get all distraught about their existence.  Blasphemy laws regulate every society.  It just depends on what a nation considers sacred and profane.

I have made it known publicly that I am not a fan of the term “Christian Nationalism” (see Christian Nationalism” Dump the Term While We Still Can).  I believe that the term “nationalism” evokes an association with Hitler’s Nazi Nationalism or Mussolini’s Fascist Nationalism. This expression has not been helpful in the debate over the relationship between the State and the Christian Faith.  I think the tumultuous discussion over the use of this term in the past year has proven me correct.  I prefer the term Christendom or Christian Nation.  I do believe that the United States was once a Christian Nation, but now it is not.
I believe that Christians need to be busy in restoring the dominance of the Christian faith in the public square beginning with the preaching of the gospel that captures not only the hearts of the people but the institutions that permeate our nation. We need to make America Christian again.  I believe in the restoration of the law of God as revealed in the Ten Commandments as the standard for justice and equity in our country, and I believe that this includes the first table of the Ten Commandments.
I remember the days when businesses were closed on Sunday, otherwise termed the Christian Sabbath.  This was mandated by Blue Laws.  They were called blue laws because the original laws in New Haven, Connecticut, were written on blue paper. I remember when there were no Muslim mosques within our national boundaries.
Whether one uses the term Christian Nationalism or Christian Nation, one of the issues that inevitably arises in any discussion of this issue is the legitimacy of blasphemy laws.  For some reason, this term creates every type of negative reaction from the fear of creating a pope in America to the phobia of creating some type of tyrannical Prince ruling the Federal Government. People get all bent out of shape. It is considered a threat to freedom of speech. We are told that it goes against the Constitution and therefore is un-American.
However, blasphemy laws are inevitable.  Whether a law is written on paper or is simply a social norm makes little difference. And as laws, they are enforceable. Blasphemy is exacting a penalty for verbal or written speech that disparages something considered sacred in a particular group or society.  It all depends on what a group or society considers as being sacred. Ultimately, it depends on the dominant religion of that group or society.
Those of us raised in a previous Christian generation remember blasphemy laws quite well.  First, in the home there were usually unwritten blasphemy laws.   If a vulgar word came out of my mouth in my home, then my mother would threaten to wash my mouth out with soap.  I have watched a mother do this, literally!  Freedom of speech was not an absolute right in my home.
Blasphemy laws were enforced in our local community.  If a group of men and women were together in a social context, and a man used a curse word with God’s name, then the other men present (who were not even professing Christians) would either verbally or non-verbally condemn the bad language because we were in the presence of women. The perpetrator of vulgarity was sent a message that he needed to refrain from speaking such language.  He got the point quickly and the matter ended there. Blasphemy was not permitted.
In 1879 a Maryland law (Article 72, Sect. 189) stated that “If any person, by writing or speaking, shall blaspheme or curse God, or shall write or utter any profane words of and concerning our Savior, Jesus Christ, or of and concerning the Trinity, or any of the persons thereof, he shall, on conviction, be fined not more than one hundred dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both fined and imprisoned as aforesaid, at the discretion of the court.” In 1836 Abner Kneeland was jailed for breaking the state’s blasphemy laws in the State of Massachusetts.
Today, blasphemy laws still exist but they have changed because the dominant religion of America has changed.  There are some words that cannot be used without paying a penalty for your speech.  Using an incorrect pronoun for a transgender person is now considered blasphemy. In Canada in 2021, Robert Hoogland surrendered himself to the court after a warrant was issued for his arrest by the attorney general of British Columbia. His crime was calling his daughter, a biological female, by female pronouns, and refusing to affirm her medical transition to become a trans male.
In 2020, if medical physicians made disparaging remarks about the covid vaccine, then they could be deplatformed from social media or fired from their jobs.  They were considered guilty of disinformation.  To disagree publicly with a governmental agency simply was not allowed. Statism was the new national religion, and any deviation from the pronouncement of the sacred state was blasphemy.
The old arguments for freedom of speech based on the U.S. Constitution made sense when America was a Christian nation.  All free speech has limits and the Christian Faith provided those boundaries.  We as a people agreed on what was sacred and what was not.  Since we are no longer a Christian nation, these old freedom of speech arguments based on 1950 civic courses (Eisenhower era) are no longer useful.  When the sacred becomes profane and the profane becomes sacred the blasphemy laws change. They never disappear.
My point is that most arguments against blasphemy laws in America are bogus. There is no need to get all distraught about their existence.  Blasphemy laws regulate every society.  It just depends on what a nation considers sacred and profane.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The gospel does not repudiate the existence of the nations. It Christianizes them as they maintain their unique cultural distinctives that do not conflict with the Christian faith.  In the New Jerusalem that comes down to earth, the Bible says, “The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it (Rev. 21:24).” Nations will not cease to exist in the new heavens and the new earth.  Jesus told us to disciple the nations, not to assimilate them.

When I was in my last year as a student at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia in 1972, I had to preach my senior sermon under the tutelage of Dr. Jay Adams.  Videotaping was the new thing back then, and after the sermon was preached Dr. Adams would sit down in a small room with the student, and while playing the tape he would critique the sermon. I’m sure he heard better sermons than mine.
Dr. Adams was always honest and to the point. There was one thing he said to me that I will never forget.  “Larry, you need to either change your accent or go back to Appalachia.”  He was right and I went back to Appalachia.  I have been ministering here now for over fifty years.  Although the Appalachian Mountains extend from Maine to Alabama, the heart of Appalachia is southern West Virginia, Southwest Virginia, and extreme Eastern Kentucky—what might be considered coal country.
The heart of Appalachia is my heritage.  Traditionally, it has been a closed community because of its rugged mountains and its people who have a common ancestry.  Not many people move to the heart of Appalachia.  It developed a unique culture of its own and formed a distinct version of the English language. We shared a common religion, common habits, and common rituals.  For example, the rite of passage for a boy to become a man required hunting with a rifle (or preferably with a bow and arrow) and killing a deer, a male buck.  The number of points on the antlers added to your masculinity.
A common tale among my folks there in Appalachia was that the best place to find a wife was at a family reunion. Although, I did not meet my wife at a family reunion, I did meet her at a church picnic.  After we were married, she became interested in genealogy, and we soon found out that we were cousins. We were kin.  As a community-oriented people we tended to marry others within the Appalachian boundaries because we didn’t travel much beyond the mountains.
Before I was married, and after graduating from a local college, I moved away from Appalachia to attend Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia.  I soon felt a bit out of place in the big city.  Educationally, I was behind most students.  Culturally, I did not quite fit in. I found some American students to be condescending. I felt much more at home with fellow Asian students because it seemed to me that I was from a different country as much as they were. My roommates and best friends during my seminary years were from Korea and the Philippines. Living outside of Appalachia made me aware of how much I had in common with my own people back home, how much I had in common with minority groups, and how different I was from most other Americans.
Now to my point.  Having read much of the literature of Kinism and being from Appalachia, I often wonder if I am a Kinist (soft or hard?).  Samuel Sey’s recent article on The Aquila Report (Why Some Evangelicals Are Embracing Racism) pushed me to ask that question again, as I have asked myself many times in the past.
Any friendship with Kinists in the modern Reformed world is almost the kiss of death.  Kinism and Anti-Kinists are major enemies of each other. Most communications are filled with troubling language and inevitably someone on either side is accused of denying the gospel.   I have dear friends on both sides of the issue.  I don’t always agree with the Kinists and when I do disagree, they are quick to call my hand.  Among Anti-Kinists, I don’t usually even bring up the topic.  I read the literature from both sides of the isle, and I try to pick the choice nuggets from each.  Because of my experience in Appalachia, I can identify with some tenets of Kinism, and yet I’m still working on how this may apply to other people in different places.
I don’t believe interracial marriage is sinful.  For those who choose to make that decision, I am fully supportive, even though I believe it brings additional challenges with it.   Some of the finest Christian people I know are in interracial marriages. What bothers me today is that the modern media is normalizing it through popular venues such as TV commercials.  Individual choice among consenting adults is one thing.  Propaganda is another.
I have no problem with legal immigration. However, I am opposed to the invasion of illegal immigrants. The melting pot in America is quickly becoming a boiling pot.  I don’t believe multi-culturalism will survive in the long-run. I believe that nations are biblically defined by a common border, a common language, and a common religion (see my book on Critical Race Theory and the Church – Chapter 3).  In addition, my experience in Appalachia tells me that a common heritage is also critical.  Cultural Marxism is pushing the United States into tribalism, and the humiliation of this once-great country may soon be ahead of us.  I am afraid we interpret the Bible through the lens of American pluralism (now polytheism) more than we do through biblical categories.
The creation of languages at the Towel of Babel was not a judgment upon the concept of a nation per se.  It was a judgment upon a false religion that refused to implement the cultural mandate to subdue the whole earth (Gen. 1:28). God’s mandate required people-groups to spread across the entire globe, conquering all things on this earth for the glory of God, not building one large city with a tower reaching to heaven for the glory of man. Grace does not negate the creation of the nations; it redefines and redirects their goals in accordance with the words of Christ.
Having studied the arguments from both Kinists and Alienists (as they are called by Kinists), I could only wish that they could sit down at a table and discuss their differences in a civil way.  However, I don’t expect this to happen, no more than I expect a conversation between Christian Nationalists and their opposition.  I don’t expect these Christian leaders to talk to one another.  Just inflammatory words from both sides.  I’ve been around too long.  The future will reveal who was right and who was wrong. We’ll just have to wait and see, or maybe our grandchildren will see. In the meantime, the ammunition will continue to fly.
I believe Christians from various ethnicities can worship in the same local church.  We can all worship together.  However, I find that if different people-groups want to worship separately, it is not a sin.  In the PCA, more than 10% of our churches are Korean-American churches who speak the Korean language in their worship services. To help them in this endeavor, the PCA Book of Church Order has been translated from English into the Korean language.  Of course, they are welcome in traditional white Anglo-Saxon Christian churches, but they have chosen to worship in accordance with their own nationality, even as they live in America. They feel much more comfortable in doing so.  I have no problem with that.  They are my brothers and sisters in the Lord, and I respect their choice. On a denominational level where we all speak English we work well together. No one ever accuses them of being racists.
The gospel does not repudiate the existence of the nations. It Christianizes them as they maintain their unique cultural distinctives that do not conflict with the Christian faith.  In the New Jerusalem that comes down to earth, the Bible says, “The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it (Rev. 21:24).” Nations will not cease to exist in the new heavens and the new earth.  Jesus told us to disciple the nations, not to assimilate them.
Thus, am I a Kinist?  I married my cousin.  We have common ancestors.  We were both raised in the Appalachian culture, and we were both Presbyterians. We have been very happy and blessed. It’s natural to love your own people as we respect other people-groups as well. It has nothing to do with racism. My way is not the only way, but it has been a great blessing in my life.  In that sense, maybe you could even call me a hyper-Kinist.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

Two competing religions are struggling in a battle against each other for control of our nation’s numerous institutions such as the civil government, the military, education, and even the church. Whatever labels you use for the two sides of the conflict, either wokeism versus traditionalism, or Cultural Marxism versus Christianity, the clash between the two factions is heated and intense.  We call them culture wars, but we need to be reminded that culture is downstream from religion.

America is no longer a republic.  The President of the United States, whether it be a Biden or a Trump, has now become something akin to a king.  Executive orders and regulatory agencies have replaced congressional action.  Also, it is now being recommended that Supreme Court decisions should either be ignored or circumvented.  As Andrew Jackson allegedly said, “John Marshall made the law, now let him enforce it!”
Government agencies are no longer considered to be neutral, but they have been weaponized to protect the king in power.  Some mothers of children in public schools are now classified as domestic terrorists, and some political opponents are already in prison. If Donald Trump goes to jail before the next election, then expect the “Storming of the Bastille 2.0.”
Two competing religions are struggling in a battle against each other for control of our nation’s numerous institutions such as the civil government, the military, education, and even the church. Whatever labels you use for the two sides of the conflict, either wokeism versus traditionalism, or Cultural Marxism versus Christianity, the clash between the two factions is heated and intense.  We call them culture wars, but we need to be reminded that culture is downstream from religion.  In essence what we are witnessing today is a religious war.  Both sides desperately want to win. Any semblance of neutrality is gone. There is no white flag being waved.
Christendom has controlled the west for hundreds of years, but there is a revolution seeking to overthrow it.  Hatred between zealots on both sides of the division looms under their skin, and many men that I personally know are about to explode with violence.  Most Americans will not want to be involved.  Life is just too good.  Some will choose slavery over liberty.  A small minority will choose to fight.  Small minorities often are responsible for revolutions, and the majority will be dragged into the fight whether they like it or not.
The next presidential election may be a threat to our sanity in this country, regardless of who is elected.  In just a little more than a year, as a nation, we may face the greatest danger to our very existence since the Civil War.  We are in the middle of a cold war, and I am afraid that it may quickly turn into a hot war, where blood could literally flow in the streets.  We could see our civilization as we know it collapse.  With whom the military will side, I am not sure—usually it does side with those in power at the time. But they will have to make a choice.
I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet.  I am not sensational by nature.  I avoid conspiracy theories like a plague.  One does not have to be a prophet to see into the future.  He just needs to be a man immersed in good biblical theology who can see trajectories. Printing money produces inflation.  Debauchery in morals produces depression.  Religious conflict produces hatred.  A divided nation cannot long endure.
I am a post-millennialist and believe that the long-term future on this earth before the second coming of Christ will witness a spread of the gospel that will capture the nations (and not just a few elect from the nations).  However, in the near-term, I fear that our country may face a bloody trauma not seen since the Civil War.  Ideas have consequences.  Cold wars rooted in malicious hatred often become militant conflicts.
What are we to do?  How are we to prepare? I am no prophet.  Only God knows the future, but he usually works within the realm of cause and effect.  Just remember, if I am wrong, I never claimed infallibility.
First, don’t go and hide under a pillow.  Don’t retreat into Netflix movies to escape reality.  Read a lot but read the right stuff.
Secondly, find a biblical church where you can be part of a network of believers.  No one will come to your side like another Christian with whom you have built a long-lasting and trusting friendship.  Pray a lot.  God does answer the prayers of his people.  This may be our most powerful weapon.
Thirdly, prepare to protect your family.  Whether it be learning a new skill (such as plumbing), stocking up on food, or learning how to shoot a gun, formulate a plan.
Lastly, encourage your state and local political leaders to study the issue of states’ rights as delineated in the Constitution.  One obvious evidence of the present conflict is the division of our country into Red and Blue States.  Multitudes of people are moving to Red States looking for freedom.  Churches in my home state of Tennessee are growing like wild-fire because of the transfer of other Christians from places like California and New York.
As I was discussing this issue with a good friend recently, we both agreed that one way to avoid bloodshed is a return unto the states the powers that constitutionally belong to the states.  Negotiation between State Governors and a king in Washington, D.C. may be the last option to prevent bloodshed.  How that will look exactly is not for me to speculate, but it may be our only hope.  We need strong State Governors.  Next to prayer, decentralization and negotiation may be the only way we can avoid a Second Civil War.
Remember, God is sovereign and he loves his people.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

As America has moved from a Christian nation to a post-Christian nation, the meaning of words have changed.  Gay no longer means gay.  Equity no longer means equity.  Rather than equity being defined by God’s law ensuring biblical justice, it now is a wealth redistribution scheme mediated through the force of law or through guilt-manipulation.

Recently, talk-show host Bill Maher asked Senator Bernie Sanders what the difference between equality and equity is.  Sanders responded that he did not know. It was a humorous exchange between the celebrity and the senator who is a socialist leader in modern politics.  It was also very revealing.
The word equity is being used as a weapon in the modern woke and cancel-culture movement, but no one seems to be able to define what the word means. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) officers are everywhere to ensure equity, so someone needs to define it.  Even in the church there is an absence of knowledge about the meaning of the word.  I think this is because the meaning has changed over the last 20 years, and the church has not kept abreast of a world that is being transformed right before her very eyes.
The meanings of words do change.  For example, the word gay used to mean happy and delighted. The Flintstones were gay – both Fred and Wilma.  Every episode was introduced by their theme song that invited us to participate in a gay experience. “We’ll have a yabba-daba-do day.  We’ll have a gay old time.”   However, today the word gay refers to sexual perversion.  Similarly, my mother used to tell me to stand up straight; “don’t slouch,” she said.  Today, that might be considered an inappropriate directive.
The meaning of the word equity has changed. There is the old meaning and a new meaning. The dictionary tells us that it means “even, fair, and impartial,” but that is not enough to capture the use of a word in any society. We always need a reference point or a context.
Historically and traditionally in a Christian society, the meaning of the word equity was rooted in the Bible. It appears at least ten times in most modern English translations.  An important text is Psalm 99:4 where the Psalmist says, “The strength of the King loves justice.  You have established equity. You have executed justice and righteousness in Jacob (NASB).” Equity was equated with treating people fairly, justly, and righteously in accordance with the Law of God.
For example, regarding crime and punishment in the Old Testament, equity was mandated.  If a man steals another man’s property, he is not to be put to death or sentenced to ten years in prison.  He is to pay back double.  This is equity (fair) according to God’s law.  If a man steals business property, then he is to pay back more than double, not just to restore the that which was stolen, but to compensate for lost income. This is equity (fair) according to God’s Law.
My wife and I watch old British movies on Britbox, and invariably the story involves someone who is put in prison for 10 years for the theft of something like a few items of clothing.  This is not biblical.  It is not fair. Old Britain might have been considered a Christian nation, but they drifted too far from the biblical concept of equity.  In some societies the punishment for theft is to have your hand cut off.  Horrible!  Unjust! The same could be said for horse thievery in early western America.
If a man murders another man the punishment is not probation or life imprisonment, but death.  “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed (Gen. 9:6).”  Murder was a capital offense, when verified by two or three witnesses. We could go on with many other examples, but I hope you understand something of the old concept of equity.  It was rooted in the Bible, especially in God’s law.
Also, it should be noted that justice or equity must not consider race, gender, or economic status in judgment.  Lev. 19:15 says, “Do not pervert justice, do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but in righteousness you shall judge your neighbor.”  The symbol of Lady Justice who is blindfolded is appropriate and biblical.
Since we have become a post-Christian society, the meaning of the word equity has changed.  It has been hijacked. Maybe this is the reason Senator Sanders could not define the term.
The modern meaning of equity is probably derived from the world of finance. For example, if you purchase a $500,000 home and pay $100,000 as a down-payment, then you have $100,000 of owner’s equity in the home.  You own one-fifth and the bank owns four-fifths.  In a sense, if it has five bathrooms, you own one of them and the bank owns the other four.  Thus, the word equity has been popularized to refer to wealth.
In modern parlance, equity has come to mean the transfer of wealth due to injustice in the past which has resulted in disparity between different groups of people. This transfer is accomplished by either force (government statute or corporate directives), or simply by guilt-manipulation.
It should be noted that wealth is more than just money. Wealth can include positions of power or privilege. Certain other symbols of wealth such as talents and godly parents cannot be transferred, but this does not stop the woke movement from transferring all they can. The goal of modern equity is to right every social wrong by the transfer of wealth, without any reference to biblical law or ethics.
Modern equity is a redistribution of wealth scheme which must first be enforced by civil government.  For example, in the City of San Francisco, shoplifting of merchandize under the value of $950 has been decriminalized, and any retailer that seeks to apprehend such thieves can be sued. You can walk in a store, steal property, and walk out and go home.  No one is allowed to stop you.  You don’t have to go before a judge.  You don’t have to return the merchandise.  Theft is now considered to be an act that creates equity, not disparages it.  It is a state enforced equity in direct opposition to the definition of biblical equity.
The Supreme Court recently declared Affirmation Action as unconstitutional.  Again, this was a law that sought to promote the redistribution of wealth based on race or minority status rather than on merit.  Remember that wealth is more than money.  It includes position and power.
Also, the forgiveness of student-loan debt was another equity scheme to transfer wealth by law from one sector of society (many of those who chose not to go to college) to another sector (students in debt).  Reparations is one more scheme to transfer wealth from one class of society to another – again by force of law.  From a biblical perspective, reparations is just another form of theft – sanctioned by government force.
In addition to the implementation of modern equity by the force of law, the other major scheme to transfer wealth is simply guilt-manipulation.  Because some white men owned slaves in the South, all white men today are perpetrators of injustice or inequity.  If you can make another person feel guilty, they will become putty in your hands.  This seems to be the goal of the modern social justice movement.  Guilt is associated with the color of your skin or into what family you were born.  White men are guilty, period!
I must admit, that as a white man I am privileged, but this privilege comes by the grace of God, and not because there is any inherent goodness in me more than what exists in any others.  We are all wretched sinners because of our connection to Adam.
It is also interesting to note that within the structure of the white race there are inequities. I was raised in Appalachia where the sun hardly shined (because of the mountains), and where there were few dentists.  We wanted to improve our way of life, but we never wanted to do it with handouts from the civil government or by the force of law.  The Peace Corps was never welcome in our town.  We wanted to climb out of our poor condition, but only through merit and hard work.
As America has moved from a Christian nation to a post-Christian nation, the meaning of words have changed.  Gay no longer means gay.  Equity no longer means equity.  Rather than equity being defined by God’s law ensuring biblical justice, it now is a wealth redistribution scheme mediated through the force of law or through guilt-manipulation.
The gospel is the only answer to this change in America.  Only the gospel can right what is wrong.  Only the gospel can put fathers back into the home.  Only the gospel can give men the drive to use their gifts to the fullest for the glory of God.  Only the gospel can give privileged men humility and give marginalized men a hope of advancement in a society such as ours.
It appears that the church is choosing to avoid the cultural battles of our day because we have left the public square, and because we have retreated from leading our people in understanding the issues in the modern culture wars.  Understanding the hijacking of the word equity is necessary in order to participate in that war.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

Another critical issue was related to the use of the term “pastor” as being reserved for ordained teaching elders.  It seems that the modern evangelical church tends to label everyone contributing service to the Lord’s work as pastor.  From nonordained youth “pastors” to nonordained music “pastors,” it has become a very generic term.  This has contributed to much confusion in the wider church.

On my Facebook page I recently referred to the 50th General Assembly (GA) of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) as a silent coup d’état. I realize that for some folks this language would be considered too strong, but I believe it is fitting.  As a commissioner this year to the GA in Memphis, and as a founding father who attended the original GA in 1973, I believe the use of this term is appropriate.
Because of a lack of better terms in defining opposing parties in the PCA, in this brief article, I will use the political terms of conservative (confessionalist) and progressive.  In short, almost every vote at the GA this year was won by the conservatives, and that by a large margin. That is one reason for the use of my strong term.  It seems like for years now, we have been losing, but things dramatically changed this year.
For example, progressive churches are always pushing the envelope and trying to put women in the pulpit. Such was the case recently when a woman ascended to the pulpit in a worship service at a church in Metro New York Presbytery.  It was called a Bible Study and not a sermon, even though it was a worship service with the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper being celebrated at the end of the service.
The Assembly voted overwhelmingly to send this matter to the Standing Judicial Commission (SJC) to hold this Church and this Presbytery accountable for their actions.  This now will become a test case for the SJC.  Hopefully, they will hold the line on women preaching in our pulpits.
The Side B homosexuality issue was handled by a proposed new change to the Book of Church Order.  This again will require a two-thirds majority approval by presbyteries, and the approval at the next General Assembly meeting in Richmond, Virginia.
Although this new language of the proposed amendment to the BCO says that an officer “should conform to the biblical requirement of chastity and sexual purity in his description of himself, and in his convictions, character, and conduct,” in my opinion, there is too much wiggle room here.  In my view, the words are too generic, and not direct enough.  But then at the same time, ultimately, the whole issue depends on the integrity of the elders in the PCA, and not on the language itself.  Hopefully, integrity will win out here.  Even though Greg Johnson has left the PCA, we need to be ever diligent on this issue. I never heard one reference at this Assembly to same-sex attraction or to celibacy, and this was a blessing.
The Assembly adopted the recommendation that the PCA Stated Clerk send a letter to the President of the United States, and to other civil magistrates (including letters from presbytery clerks to governors) protesting the surgical mutilation of children in what has become described as gender-affirming care. Somewhat contrary to the PCA’s own doctrine of the spirituality of the church, I was glad to see the Assembly do this with an overwhelming vote. The political/spiritual divide has hampered the Church since the Civil War, but boldness on major political issues is the need of the day.  Church leaders can no longer close themselves off in a monastic life and avoid the cultural issues facing us in this nation.  One commissioner, from Canada I assume, requested that the letter be sent to the political leaders of Canada also. I believe a Canadian presbytery could do this. This would include a letter to Justin Trudeau. This would take a lot of courage.
The Assembly chose to leave unchanged the BCO which takes the position that atheists cannot give testimony in church court proceedings.  Progressives thought that this might hamper the whole truth being presented at church trials.  Their appeal was that those involved in abuse trials might not get a fair hearing.  They appeared to argue that somehow the present limit in the BCO is unloving because it would exclude an expert witness who is an atheist.  Substitute oaths to objects not of the “god category” could be used in oath-taking.  The Assembly did not buy into this argument, and left the BCO as it presently reads.
Another critical issue was related to the use of the term “pastor” as being reserved for ordained teaching elders.  It seems that the modern evangelical church tends to label everyone contributing service to the Lord’s work as pastor.  From nonordained youth “pastors” to nonordained music “pastors,” it has become a very generic term.  This has contributed to much confusion in the wider church including the Southern Baptist Convention.  The Assembly voted to place in the Book of Church Order a restriction that the term elder/pastor and deacon should only be used only of ordained officers in the PCA.
I consider all these votes as victories for the conservatives in the PCA.  We have seen the reversal of a long period of control by progressives.  Let me conclude this article by stating my perspective as to why this is happening.

We all hold in high-esteem the founding fathers of the PCA. Few people realize the godliness and the courage that motivated these men.  I have plenty of stories of persecution and suffering that many of them had to endure, even before the PCA was organized.  However, a number of these men were active participants in the National Partnership organization that tried to control the direction of the PCA for years.  A new generation has arisen and now the General Assembly controls the Church and not a secret minority in high positions.  There is a new day in the PCA.
I think the Church has been recaptured because of the increased involvement by Ruling Elders (RE). REs tend to be more conservative, and therefore the progressives are no long in control of the votes at the Assembly.  I think the Gospel Reformation Network (GRN), although keeping a distance from church politics, still has had a good influence on the PCA.  As a theonomist, I get frustrated with them, but I hold them in high regard with love and respect.
The PCA is still inundated by woke theology, but as the woke movement, which was originally a race issue, has been hijacked by transgenderism and drag queens, the woke movement is losing respect in the church, as well as in our nation. I think as the movement grows and as the plea for toleration becomes the threat of domination, churchmen may reconsider their support because, frankly, the entire woke movement has become an embarrassment and a threat to our national sanity. It is committing suicide. One overture this year asking for the Assembly to make a statement on Critical Race Theory was not adopted.  I think this is probably best because there is too much division in the PCA over the issue, and I think we need to wait and let wokeness kill itself.
Lastly, I only wish that those conservative men who have left the PCA would have remained with us. If they had remained, we would have been an even stronger confessional church today. In good conscience they believed they had to leave, but for those of us who stayed, the 50th Jubilee General Assembly was a happy week.  We have been patient, prayed, and fought hard.  God is blessings our efforts, and after a several years of grief, I am happy that I stayed in the PCA.

Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

It is my contention that even though the church and state must be separated…the church (whether in pulpit preaching or by synods and councils) still has the obligation to speak to the civil magistrate concerning the enactment of laws that God calls an abomination.  Calling out the sins of the civil magistrate is not intermeddling with civil affairs.  It is being faithful to our calling as witnesses of God.

The term “spirituality of the church” has become one of those phrases that often stops all further conversation about the relationship between church and state. Few Christians ever question the meaning of the phrase.  It assumes that the church should remain silent about all political matters.  Although the expression does not appear in any of our confessional standards, it has become a doctrine of Presbyterianism as sacrosanct as any one of the five points of Calvinism. No one is allowed to challenge it without being labeled with a pejorative term. It is my contention that rightly understood, it can be a useful phrase, but if contextualized in terms of either dualistic Greek thought, or in terms of present-day secular pluralism, it is not only faulty, but also dangerous to both the church and the civil government.

If the spirituality of the church is interpreted in terms of Greek dualism, then it assumes that the spiritual is the higher good and that the physical is the source of evil. The goal of mankind is to escape the physical (this world) and rise into another realm of spirituality where the pains caused by this present world will disappear. The Church is heavenly and therefore good. The Civil Magistrate is earthly, and therefore the root of evil. The goal of the Christian is to escape living in this world. From this perspective the concept of the spirituality of the church is more Neo-platonic than it is Christian.
If the spirituality of the church means that the church must not speak to political issues because we live in a pluralistic society, and we must not impose our views on others, then this is not only a faulty view, but a dangerous view. It is an impossibility because some law-system derived from some religion will always reign in any society. Silence by Christian leadership when sin is legalized by law, even in a so-called pluralistic society, is a dereliction of duty. It lets evil run wild without rebuke, and therefore will bring judgment on both the civil magistrate and the church. It may be worse than Greek dualism.  R2K theologians believe that the civil sphere should be ruled by natural law, but since homosexuality and transgenderism are now considered natural, this approach is bankrupt.
If the spirituality of the church means that there are two realms ordained by God and they must remain separate, then this view is biblical. If it means that the civil magistrate has been given the power of the sword to punish evil, and the church has been given the Holy Spirit to empower her to preach the word of God, to administer the sacraments, to pray, and to carry out church discipline (the ordinary means of grace), then it is a legitimate way to speak of the spirituality of the church. Both realms have separate powers and limitations on that power. The church is not to make laws for the body politic, no more than the civil magistrate is to make laws for the church.

The politics of the Civil War in the United States in the 19th century drove the southern church into a hidden cave where she thought she should retreat and rest in peace at a distance far from political issues.  It is very dangerous to take sides in the middle of a war.  Getting the elect into heaven became her primary calling.  We still have not recovered from that.  Unknowingly, the church became irrelevant to issues that her sheep must face every day in the workplace because of political decisions. The spirituality of the church still holds a powerful grip on neo-puritans.
The most powerful defense of the spirituality of the church is often proffered by reference to the Westminster Confession of Faith in Chapter 31.IV where it says that “synods and councils are to handle, or conclude nothing, but that which is ecclesiastical; and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs which concern the commonwealth, unless by way of humble petition in cases extraordinary; or by way of advice, for satisfaction of conscience, if they are thereunto required by the civil magistrate.” Generally, this is quoted as the final appeal in any debate on the spirituality of the church.
However, it is my contention that even though the church and state must be separated in terms as outlined in #3 above, the church (whether in pulpit preaching or by synods and councils) still has the obligation to speak to the civil magistrate concerning the enactment of laws that God calls an abomination.  Calling out the sins of the civil magistrate is not intermeddling with civil affairs.  It is being faithful to our calling as witnesses of God.
Certain sections of the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms were rewritten and adopted in 1788 by early American Presbyterians.  Part of that goal was to update an older view of the relationship between church and state that had existed in England which had permitted the existence of a national church like the Church of England.  The new revision also allowed for the freedom of Christian denominations to exist in the various colonies or states.
Too, it should be noted that the justification for adding the First Amendment to the United States Constitution was to avoid a national church at the federal level, and to guard the freedom of the states to establish Christianity as a state religion according to the conscience of the people in each of the various states.  Most colonies (and later states) had adopted Christianity as the official religion of those several states. For example, Virginia was Anglican and New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Massachusetts were Congregational.
Although the American version of the Westminster Confession of Faith was changed in several places, our forefathers meeting in Philadelphia in 1789 failed to be consistent and left several sections as they originally appeared in the original edition of 1647. The old way was not totally erased.  As such, they left in place the responsibility of the civil government to watch over the church, and the responsibility of the church to call out sin in our civil governments even though it be via humble petition.   Note the following quotes from the Westminster Larger Catechism on how we as Presbyterians should view the role of the civil magistrate.
Larger Catechism Question #108 asks the question “What are the duties required in the second commandment?” The answer contains the following: The duties are “disapproving, detesting, and opposing all false worship; and, according to each one’s place and calling, removing it and all monuments of idolatry.” The clear implication here is that a civil magistrate in his place and calling must oppose all false worship by removing it, and any evidence of it, from our body politic.
Larger Catechism #118 asks the question, “Why is the charge of keeping the sabbath more specially directed to governors of families, and other superiors?” The answer is that they as superiors are “bound not only to keep it themselves, but to see that it be observed by all those that are under their charge.” Again, the term “other superiors” includes the civil magistrate.
Larger Catechism #191 asks the question “What do we pray for in the second petition?” The answer says that we are to pray Thy Kingdom Come, and that “the Kingdom of God is to be countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate.” In other words, the work of the church in establishing the Kingdom of God is to be favored and protected by the civil magistrate as the church promulgates the rule of Christ over all the earth.
Politics is a big word that covers everything from political parties, to commerce between states, to the maintenance of highways.  To such commonwealth issues, the church need not concern herself.  However, if the spirituality of the church means that we cannot speak to the ungodly issues of the day legalized by politicians, then the idea of the spirituality of the church needs to be rejected.  If we cannot publicly call out the evil in abortion, in homosexual marriage, and in transgenderism, then we hurt both the church (by refusing to honor God) and we fail in our obligation to call the Civil Magistrate to repent, leaving our nation as potential objects of the wrath of God.  The United States was part of Christendom when the American Version of the Westminster Confession was written.  Christendom is now dead in this country and we must reevaluate our approach to the civil magistrate.
Modern America is in a pool of despair and wickedness.  Christ is her only hope.  The times have changed.  It is time for preachers along with church synods and councils to speak humbly, but boldly to the politicians of our day.  We are not talking about the state administrating the sacraments, or the church supporting a legislative bill to build more interstate highways.  We are talking about blatant transgressions of God’s law legislated and mandated by the civil magistrate.  It is time for both church bodies and individual preachers to speak to the issues of the day.  It is time for those with a large platform to enter the public square with the word of God.  It is time to pray for a few bold leaders like John the Baptist who told Herod, “It is not lawful for you to have her [his brother’s wife]” (Mt. 14:4).
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

In my opinion, the BCO is not the main issue. The issue is not simply women in the pulpit, nor the sexual mutilation of children, nor even the legitimacy of homosexuality (in some form or another).  The issue is transgenderism.  The issue is men and women giving in to sinful impulses that cross the lines that God drew in creation when he created male and female and assigned them their roles in the world he created.

Transgenderism has just recently replaced racism as the great sin of the modern day.  Yes, racism is still in the game, but it has been hijacked by the transgender movement.  Like the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement of a few years back, transgenderism is becoming very aggressive to the point of violence.  Transgenderism is the new wokism, and the church appears to be staying out of the debate, or in some cases following their lead.
In the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) we have seen a Christian school associated with one of our churches attacked by a brutal transgender murderer, leaving 3 children and 3 adults dead. Shortly after this event a national rally scheduled in Washington D.C. called the “Trans Day of Vengeance” was cancelled, but only because of bad publicity, not because there was any change in the attitude of the potential participants.
The definition of transgenderism is simple.  It describes men acting like they are women and women acting like they are men. Whether it is simply a mind-game, a creeping gender role reversal, a change of clothes, a change of name (or personal pronouns), hormone treatment, or surgical mutilation of the body, it all goes back to the same sinful impulse in the hearts of both men and women to be something they were not created to be.  God Almighty assigned our sex at birth, and our sex determines our gender roles in the church, and to some extent in society taken as a whole.
When women claim they have a right to the pulpit, whether in preaching, exhorting, or teaching, they are attempting to reverse the gender roles God has ordained in the church.  It is a form of what I call creeping transgenderism.   It is a subtle form, but it is one nonetheless. Paul said plainly in the context of church worship that “A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness, but I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man but to remain quiet” (1 Tim. 2:11-12).
Overture 15 seeks to change Book of Church Order (BCO) 53 by adding a new section number 7: “No woman shall preach, exhort, or teach at a public worship assembly, including assemblies or chapel services where men are present in any congregation, educational institution, or gathering overseen by the Church or one of its agencies.”  This is good as far as it goes, but it needs to be amended to add the prohibition of the public reading of the Scriptures and the public leading in prayer by women in congregational worship services. Afterall, Paul said women are to remain quiet.
But regardless, the main issue here is not simply women in the pulpit, but we must realize that the root cause is incipient transgenderism, that is, women unhappy with their calling and with their role in the church, and the sinful impulse to take on the role of a man. Or maybe, even worse, it is about men who are transferring their headship to the woman by taking on the submissive role of the female.
The second Overture (#12) requests that the PCA petition the United States Government and the 50 State Governments to “Renounce the sin of all medical and surgical sex change procedures in minors by the American healthcare system because they result in irreversible harm.” Again, this is good as far as it goes.  However, the Bible forbids any transgenderism, including in adults (see my article Deuteronomy and Transgenderism). Here again, we see the sinful impulse of males and females seeking to transform themselves or their children (or the children of others) into the opposite sex, and vice versa.
If we dive even deeper into the root causes which has necessitated both overtures (#12 and #15), it should be noticed that the need for these overtures arises out of the PCA’s ongoing struggle which is being addressed again this year (overtures #9, #16, #17, #23, #24).  This issue is that homosexuals (which includes those who identify as homosexuals, but do not practice it) have no right to the pulpits in the PCA. Homosexuality again is just another form of transgenderism.  It is nothing less than men seeking to play the woman in sexual relations. In the bedroom, you be the man and I will play the woman, or at least let me dream about it and go public about it without guilt.
The PCA seems unable to make definitive statements anymore.  Maybe, we hesitate because we think it would be unloving toward others to tell them the truth.  However, I believe it is better to preach the truth and call men and women to faith and repentance in Christ than make a half-way covenant with sin.
Every year, as we go to General Assembly meetings and to Presbytery meetings, we must recognize that we are engaged in more than simply ecclesiastical and mere academic exercises.  When we ask the question about what does the Bible teach on these issues, we are not just voting on changes to the Book of Church Order before we safely go home.  Actions have consequences.  How we vote will impact our people and our nation.  We are voting on issues that have resulted in the shedding of blood in our nation.
As we commissioners make our way to the 50th General Assembly of the PCA, let us make sure that we realize what we are doing.  In my opinion, the BCO is not the main issue. The issue is not simply women in the pulpit, nor the sexual mutilation of children, nor even the legitimacy of homosexuality (in some form or another).  The issue is transgenderism.  The issue is men and women giving in to sinful impulses that cross the lines that God drew in creation when he created male and female and assigned them their roles in the world he created.
Larry E. Ball is a retired minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is now a CPA. He lives in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts: