As with Trump’s rise in 2015-16, evangelical elites and their aspirants—a group Stephen Wolfe has aptly called the “evangelical arm of the ruling class”—have evidently still learned nothing. And this year will be no different. Evangelicals will vote in overwhelming numbers for Trump in the general election after his inevitable victory in the Republican primaries. And evangelical elites will continue to reserve their harshest judgment for their own tribe, a relationship that looks more and more tenuous by the day.

Don’t make Donald Trump your idol.” “It’s not about Left vs. Right but about the Messiah who already came.” “Saving souls is more important than saving your country.” “Jesus isn’t running in 2024.”
Ever since the former president soundly defeated his opponents in the Iowa caucus last week (as polls had been predicting for quite some time, to the consternation of the political class), and then immediately repeating the victory in New Hampshire, the crush of evangelical elite rhetoric targeting Trump’s evangelical voters has been deafening.
Passive aggressive tweets from pastors and online theologians and op-eds from individuals in the midst of some form of deconstruction have flooded the zone. Accusations abound, and sweeping, ideological generalizations are rampant. Even the very salvation of Christian Trump supporters has been called into question yet again.
Ben Ziesloft has pointed out that the veritable cottage industry of anti-Trump books written by the self-proclaimed guardians of “our democracy” is only equaled by the pile penned by evangelical thought leaders who castigate the evangelical hoi polloi who don red MAGA hats. (Whether or not the term “evangelical” is simply a sociological label or captures orthodox, low-church Protestants who attend church weekly is a different question entirely.) As Miles Smith has trenchantly observed on X, “Is their [sic] any more boring type of self-loathing American than an ‘Evangelical intellectual’ who is still writing about Trump?”
Aaron Renn has already begun reviewing one of the latest entries in this genre, Tim Alberta’s The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism. Among other things, Alberta profiles the “well-organized, well-funded” network called “The After Party” that anti-Trump evangelicals Russell Moore, David French, and Curtis Chang, a liberal Silicon Valley consultant, created in the wake of the 2016 election. This group has been working hard ever since “to reduce Republican voting by evangelicals by providing doing so with a theological rationale.” Unsurprisingly, in original reporting at First Things, Megan Basham has shown that they’re bankrolled by a number of left-wing foundations.
In other words, Moore and French are doing the very same thing that Vote Common Good, a progressive Christian nonprofit, is doing: making sure that a Democrat stays in the White House for the foreseeable future. As Vote Common Good’s website notes, they too are looking to persuade “an additional 5-10% [of evangelicals] who are looking for an ‘exit ramp’ from supporting the Republicans who sacrifice the common good.”
In an election year, the spigot will undoubtedly be opened even more. Scott M. Coley’s forthcoming Ministers of Propaganda: Truth, Power, Ideology and the Religious Right (published by the increasingly heterodox Eerdmans Publishing Company in June), is a prime example. A talk he gave in August 2022, where he described the “ideology of the religious right” as including “creation science, illegitimate appeals to biblical authority or sufficiency, [and] Christian colorblindness,” is likely a preview of some of the arguments Coley will draw on in Ministers of Propaganda. Upholding orthodoxy, it seems, is not part of his project.
Books like Alberta’s and Coley’s, however, aren’t meant to be read. Rather, they are for signaling one’s own inclusivity, rejection of power, and care for the migrant—all elements that are consistent with regime-approved morality.
As with Trump’s rise in 2015-16, evangelical elites and their aspirants—a group Stephen Wolfe has aptly called the “evangelical arm of the ruling class”—have evidently still learned nothing. And this year will be no different. Evangelicals will vote in overwhelming numbers for Trump in the general election after his inevitable victory in the Republican primaries. And evangelical elites will continue to reserve their harshest judgment for their own tribe, a relationship that looks more and more tenuous by the day.
On the surface, this is akin to political consultants who consistently run losing campaigns featuring outdated and ineffective messaging but nevertheless remain extremely confident that next time, Americans will finally pick someone who can defeat the Soviets and balance the budget. But if it didn’t work last time, why would deploying the same strategies work this time? Instead, why not reach out to dissident figures on the Right? Or men who lift weights or work with their hands for a living?
Read More
Related Posts:

We really don’t have generalizable data on how widespread (or not) the practice [of unordained women serving as deaconesses] is in the PCA. How many churches have deaconesses? How many deaconesses are there in the PCA? The purpose of this project is not to pick a fight, but to shed light, in the hopes that it will lead to more productive debate at PCA General Assembly.

Overture 26 from Northwest Georgia presbytery proposes a change to chapter 7 of the Book of Church Order that would disallow unordained people from being “referred to as, or given the titles connected to, the ecclesial offices of pastor, elder, or deacon.” RE Brad Isbell wrote that the overture effectively addresses “a big ecclesial deal” and helps the PCA “get ahead of things for once,” since there seems to be some lack of clarity (or at least consistency) on the issue. More recently, Isbell provided some examples of the practice in the PCA. On the other side of the debate, TE Tim LeCroy warned of the coming fight with the “far right of our denomination”: “Watch out! Do you have unordained women serving as deaconesses?” But we really don’t have generalizable data on how widespread (or not) the practice is in the PCA.
How many churches have deaconesses? How many deaconesses are there in the PCA? The purpose of this project is not to pick a fight, but to shed light, in the hopes that it will lead to more productive debate at PCA General Assembly.
Method
We drew a random sample of presbyteries in the PCA, stratifying by US Census region. We stratified by region so that at least two presbyteries were chosen from each region to ensure geographic representation. We sampled more presbyteries in the South region, a region densely populated with PCA churches and presbyteries. Random sampling is important because it allows for generalizable inference. Randomization is important because, since each presbytery had an equally likely chance of being chosen, it allows us to say that our findings are generalizable within a certain margin of error. This method is similar to what pollsters using during election season to claim that a candidate is polling at some level, plus or minus some margin of error.
We also drew a random sample of presbyteries from two sister denominations in the North America Presbyterian and Reformed Council (NAPARC): the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) and the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA). Since these denominations are smaller, we did not do a stratified randomization. In total, we sampled 14 presbyteries from the PCA, 4 presbyteries from the OPC, and 2 presbyteries from the RPCNA (see Table 1). These sister denominations are good comparisons for this analysis for a few reasons: (1) the PCA has fraternal relations with both of them; (2) they share doctrinal standards (Westminster); (3) the PCA and OPC do not allow for deaconesses as an ordained office, while the RPCNA does.

Table 1. Presbyteries sampled for analysis

US Census Region
Presbyteries
Denomination

South
James River
PCA

South
Central Florida
PCA

South
Tidewater
PCA

South
South Florida
PCA

South
Central Carolina
PCA

South
Georgia Foothills
PCA

South
Metro Atlanta
PCA

West
Canada West
PCA

West
Pacific
PCA

West
Pacific Northwest
PCA

Northeast
Westminster
PCA

Northeast
Ascension
PCA

Midwest
Ohio Valley
PCA

Midwest
Great Lakes
PCA

Northeast
New York and New England
OPC

West
Southern California
OPC

Northeast
New Jersey
OPC

Midwest
Ohio
OPC

Midwest
Midwest
RPCNA

Northeast/South
Alleghenies
RPCNA

Together, these 20 presbyteries have 465 congregations. We excluded 36 churches from our analysis if no functioning website could be found or if the website was predominantly in a language other than English. We retained over 90% of all churches sampled in each of the three denominations.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of church websites

PCA
OPC
RPCNA

Presbyteries sampled
14
4
2

Congregations in sample
319
101
45

Congregations excluded
25
10
1

Total churches in analysis
294
91
44

% churches in analysis
92.2%
90.1%
97.8%

Website information

% TE only
17.0%
20.9%
20.5%

% TE/RE only
21.1%
46.2%
40.9%

% TE and Staff only
16.3%
1.1%
0.0%

% Deaconesses
4.1%
0.0%
13.6%

% No deacons, no deaconesses
50.0%
51.6%
59.1%

The purpose was to capture what is clearly portrayed on each church’s website, rather than to conduct a deep investigation into each church’s website. As such, we typically spent no more than 30 seconds per website to count the number of Teaching Elders (TEs), Ruling Elders (REs), deacons, and deaconesses, typically summarized on a “Leadership” or “Officers and Staff” page.
To be counted as a deaconess, a website had to explicitly identify the woman as a deaconess. Ours is therefore a very conservative estimate because if there were ever any reason not to count a woman as a deaconess, we did not count her. Deaconess with parenthetical note? Nope. Mercy team? Nope. Women to pastors? Nope.
Limitations
Before we proceed to share what we found, the reader should keep in mind that this kind of research is subject to several limitations.
Because the practice of having ordained deaconesses is de jure not allowed in the PCA and the practice of having unordained deaconesses is contested (see this year’s Overture 26, for example), PCA churches may be pressured not to report deaconesses, even if the practice is de facto in place. Indeed, many of the websites we found mentioned “deaconesses” or “women on the diaconate” without listing the number or names. These churches were coded as having zero deaconesses for the purpose of our analysis. As such, we suspect that our findings are a lower bound estimate, underreporting the practice in the PCA.

Our method does not allow us to account for churches that forgo ordination of deacons and commission “mercy ministry teams” in lieu of a diaconate (e.g., Evergreen Church). or in addition to a diaconate (e.g., Christ Presbyterian in Santa Barbara, CA). These were not counted in our data. Others list deaconesses with a clarifying note that these are not considered ordained officers (e.g., University Reformed Church).
Different readers will come to different conclusions about our assessment of titles and practices, so we expect there will be competing views about the inferences that can be drawn from the data. Nonetheless, we believe it will be helpful to both sides of the debate to have some data on the issue.
Findings

PCA churches have nearly as many publicly listed deaconesses on average as the RPCNA, a denomination that allows for women to hold the office, but the practice is less widespread in the PCA.

In our website searches, we found that PCA churches have 0.19 deaconesses listed on their websites on average while RPCNA churches have 0.27 deaconesses listed on their websites on average. However, only one in twenty-five PCA churches listed deaconesses and six presbyteries did not have any deaconesses (Ascension, Canada West, Georgia Foothills, Ohio Valley, Tidewater, and Westminster), while the practice was almost three times as common in the RPCNA. The PCA churches listing deaconesses had 4.3 deaconesses on average and RPCNA churches doing the same had 2.0 deaconesses on average. The 101 OPC churches in total listed zero deaconesses on their websites.

2. PCA churches are more likely to give the impression of being “staff led” and OPC and RPCNA churches are more likely to give the impression of being “officer led.”
This is not to say that PCA churches are not in practice “officer led,” but as far as what is reported on their websites, they are more likely to give the impression of being “staff led.” A smaller proportion of PCA churches list only a TE on their websites (17%) than either OPC churches (21%) or RPCNA churches (21%). Similarly, a smaller proportion of PCA churches list only elders (ruling or teaching) on their websites (21%) than either OPC churches (46%) or RPCNA churches (41%). In contrast, PCA churches are more likely to list only TEs and staff (16%) than either OPC churches (one church) or RPCNA churches (zero churches).

3. The practice of having deaconesses appears to be common in some presbyteries, less prevalent in others.
On average, most churches in our analytic sample list between one and two TEs, two and four REs, and two and four deacons. There are, of course, some exceptions to that rule. Churches in Central Carolina and Tidewater had over five ruling elders on average and, in the latter presbytery, over six deacons on average. Much of this variation is explained by church size and membership.
There is more variation when it comes to having deaconesses. It should come as no surprise that not all presbyteries are the same with respect to this practice. Six presbyteries in our sample did not have a single deaconess listed on their churches’ websites (Ascension, Canada West, Georgia Foothills, Ohio Valley, Tidewater, and Westminster). Metro Atlanta had the most, with 0.79, followed by Central Florida (0.34), Pacific Northwest (0.28), and Great Lakes (0.19).
Matthew Lee is a ruling elder at Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Fayetteville, AR, where Liam Carr serves as a deacon.
Related Posts:

Written by Aaron M. Renn |
Monday, June 12, 2023
Do we, can we, should we trust the government, other institutions, or other citizens? There are multiple dimensions of this: trustworthiness (ethical dealings), competence, delivery of results (a product of trustworthiness and competence applied to a defined mission). If you have this trust, it operates as a force multiplier that makes everything else work better. When it’s lost, it undermines everything else you try to do.

One of the most challenges passages in the Bible is the Parable of the Talents. In it, initial resources are distributed to the servants in a highly unequal manner, with a 10x ratio between the highest and lowest recipient. And then that which was held by the least endowed servant was redistributed upward to the person with the most resources. It concludes with the famous line, “For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away.”
Let’s be honest, doesn’t this seem to be how the world actually works? It does seem that there’s a natural concentration toward the top, which is only reversed with great effort (or great calamity like war).
We see this on display in a recent study in Medellin, Colombia. Chris Blattman, one of the researchers, tweeted an interesting thread with findings and a link to the full study. In Colombia, policing is a national function, so cities that want to do something about crime and disorder have to employ civilians to try this. (Former Bogota mayor Antanas Mockus famously sent out an army of mimes to try to encourage better driving).
This study involved randomly assigning civilian liaisons to various Medellin neighborhoods, creating a task force to address needs identified by the liaisons, and putting on a public services fair. The net result of this was “No change in crime. No fall in emergency calls. No increase in perceived services. No gain in legitimacy.” This was after a “60-fold intensification of street-level staff + a 3-fold increase in central attention.”
But this headline finding obscured something going on under the covers. Some of the neighborhoods started off with better services, better policing, etc.
Read More
Related Posts: