1. The “third way of the gospel” has been used as a rubric for public life. Its main point is to stress that Christ's kingdom (upper register) reveals a politics “from above” (Jn 18:36). The gospel transcends human political categories (and false binaries)—and critiques them all. 
2. However, this “third way” is often presented with a rhetorical “balance” (e.g., “the gospel is neither...nor...”) that implies that kingdom faithfulness necessarily entails political-cultural centrism and an equitable critique of each side.
3. But the gospel doesn't critique each side in symmetrical fashion on every issue. At times the best public expression of a particular kingdom principle or priority may be found on one end of the spectrum. The still transcendent gospel might make us “lean left” on one issue...
4. ... and it might “lean right” on another issue. The kingdom of God is not always “equilateral.” The gospel critiques both sides, but often in asymmetrical ways. Moral clarity may on the surface appear “partisan,” but it is always informed and shaped by the transcendent.
5. Even when the political choices are falsely offered as non-intersecting, exclusivist ideological options (yellow OR red), faithfulness may reject such binaries, embrace both/and elements of the truth (yellow AND red...orange!) and make prudential choices across the spectrum.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
