I came across two interesting articles by James R. Wood that got me thinking: "How I Evolved On Tim Keller" and "This Article Is Not About Tim Keller". I've never been a particular fan of Keller's, or his approach to apologetics. But he was undeniably a major force in evangelical protestant circles throughout the late 90's and 2000's. His influence has waned since, but he fostered many acolytes who in their turn now pastor congregations, so his legacy lives on. Whether that legacy was altogether positive is still open to debate -- I suppose we'll have to leave it to the historians as to whether "winsomeness" was quite the Christian selling-point Keller thought it was. Wood's observation in the latter of the two articles that a certain brand of modern churchman (David French, for example) tends to "punch right and coddle left" strikes me as very much on point. I used to think that this tendency simply sprang from a well-intentioned but naive effort to hold their Christian brothers and sisters to a higher standard, but during the Trump administration, a darker motive came to the fore: neither French nor Keller seem particularly interested in actually contending for the faith. They just want Christians to be nice, and -- like the Washington Senators in baseball's early days -- accept that their job is to go out on the field and lose like gentlemen. This distaste that pastors like Keller have for Christians using political power is just confounding to me. Christianity, as a mode and method for living one's life (often under repressive political regimes) cannot help but be "political". We assert that Christianity is true: that Christ is our Priest, Prophet, and King by God the Father. And we assert that this is true for every human being ever born, not just for Christians. We are bound by Christ's Great Commission to spread the Gospel to all corners of the earth. Many Christians hold that a rightly-ordered human government exists to help and not hinder this mission. And so America was until fairly recently. But now that the overculture has once again turned hostile towards Christianity (as Rome did), we are faced with the unpleasant fact that we must engage in political action to preserve our own agency and physical safety in the face of (increasingly violent and anarchist) opposition. Wood seems to be advocating for the kind of "common good" jurisprudence and policy-making that Roman Catholic writers like Adrian Vermeule and Sohrab Ahmari have been talking about for years now. I don't think that "common good" conceptions are an RC innovation, however -- as I said before, American government even in our colonial days was often either explicitly or implicitly grounded in Christian concepts of justice and human flourishing under a Christian theory of the common good. The American Puritan colonies of the northeast were most explicit about this, but you can see echoes of this in the later Federalist Papers and ultimately the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. American constitutional rights clear into the 20th century were founded on natural (i.e., God-given) rights, not state-granted "rights" (more properly thought of as privileges or entitlements). But the New Deal and Great Society programs broke that chain, to the point that modern Americans think that all "rights" are conferred by the US government, not by God himself. People like David French wax eloquent about the benefits of pluralism and "the blessings of Liberty" (even if it means having to put up with drag queens reading vulgar stories to children). But for believing Christians, the 20th (and now 21st) centuries have been one long slide from ubiquity to near-irrelevance -- and we brought much of it upon ourselves by refusing to contend for the faith. I don't think Tim Keller is a bad person or even a bad Christian. But I do think that his brand of Christian witness has passed its sell-by date. We need a new Paul, a new Chrysostom, a new Augustine, a new Luther who can carry the Word fearlessly into the world and face all the futile rage and anger of the fallen with the truth of salvation through Jesus Christ, and Christ alone.
Speaking of David French.... He used to be a star op-ed guy at the National Review back in Ye Olden Tyme when that magazine was still a relevant voice among political conservatives. I never really understood his appeal. His conservatism was pretty shallow even by NR standards, and his Christian witness was equally milquetoast. In fact, his entire oeuvre reminds me of the passage in Rev. 3:16: "So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth." His main claim to fame these days is acting as a foil for the likes of Sohrab Ahmari and Michael Anton. It says something about how poor your apologetics are when most of your most effective enemies are on the side you are claiming to represent. So now French goes on MSNBC and CNN on a routine basis to bash conservatives and his Christian brothers and sisters, and I have to ask myself (as I do with Keller), "Did he turn into this guy, or was he this guy all along?"