instauratio magna | Author: The Case for Christian Nationalism | email: stephen@wolfeshire.com
Mar 11 • 14 tweets • 2 min read
"Christian nationalism is unamerican" is political idolatry. America is not your home. Seek first the kingdom of God. Dont turn America into an idol. Fear is not a Christian virtue. The Gospel does not depend on you destroying Christian nationalism. Put not your trust in princes.
Do not concern yourself with the things of this world. America will ultimately burn. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter that America becomes Christian nationalist. Instead of using worldly means or hating your Christian nationalist neighbors; show them kindness.
Feb 8 • 23 tweets • 2 min read
“Winsomeness” is Christians partnering with atheists to attack fellow Christians.
“Winsomeness” is attacking Christians to your political right to appeal to the non-Christian left.
Feb 2 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
"Disagreeing without cancelling" only extends leftward. It never applies to anyone on the right.
The point being, the "extension of grace" to fellow Christians in disagreement only goes *toward*, not away from, the prevailing social dogma.
Jan 2 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
Almost everything you do each day is an act of partiality. Partiality is good and necessary.
What did you do this morning? Whom did you serve, help, assist, etc? Why do go to work? Who benefits mostly from your income?
You constantly act from partiality. It is the *why" for most of your actions.
Oct 25, 2023 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
The idea of a “Christian civil government” doesn’t require it to be a direct object of redemption as individuals are. It means that the gov establishes the best outward conditions for redemption. And in doing so, it doesn’t fulfill a duty of grace but a duty of nature, because God as Creator intended man to have eternal life.
Thus, one cannot reject Christian gov on the grounds that only “redeemed” things can be Christian and act for redemption. Nor that “nature” cannot aim at things above it.
Oct 20, 2023 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
Christians need fewer theologians writing about politics. Politics, for Christians, should mainly be a discipline of non-theologians.
Sep 20, 2023 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
Owen Strachan would have to conclude that Spurgeon doesn’t fully understand the Gospel.
As I think through the implications of my amillennial position, I'm realizing this one point:
Politics does not get progressively easier. It will always be hard, involve difficulties, and require a strong political will.
Postmill folks, by positing spiritual progress in history, can escape the hardness of politics. For them, we'll just ease into Christian political order, as the natural result of spiritual progress.
Apart from arguments in favor or against, this explains why postmill can be appealing. You can avoid the messiness and difficulties of the political, and instead simply wait on God to set the spiritual conditions to ease into Christian political order.
To be fair, weak forms of amill can be appealing for similar reasons: you can avoid the political by saying such conditions will never arise. This is a false and very modern understanding of amillennialism, in my view.
Jul 16, 2023 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
Also, it is quite absurd to think that all power is explicit, open, and clearly discernible. Our social world runs on subtle power relations. The problem with the left is they call them all arbitrary and unjust, based on an egalitarian principle (which the anti-woke largely share).
@Byzness @NeilShenvi @tlloydcline And it’s out in the open like never before, because few make arguments, most “arguments” rely on threats of social damage for disagreement, and it is all blatantly performative.
Jun 21, 2023 • 5 tweets • 2 min read
Postwar American conservatism, being dominated by Roman Catholics and Jews, was revolutionary in that it rejected the prewar and predominate principles of core ethnicity (Anglo-Protestant) and confident ethnic conformity (Anglo-conformism). These people viewed the Founding… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Postwar conservatism was, in a way, a replacement movement opposed to the old American political tradition of Anglo-Protestantism, by insisting on the exclusive and simplistic *universalism* of the Founding, which permitted Roman Catholics and Jews to have equal standing in a… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Mar 25, 2023 • 7 tweets • 1 min read
Ridiculous, of course. But the biblicism and anti-particularism inherent to much Reformed theology in the last few decades has made such reasoning plausible.
We must reaffirm the concept and necessity of just social customs.
This means that many things in life are indifferent in themselves but still moral for their effect and necessity in social life.
Jan 27, 2023 • 20 tweets • 3 min read
James White (@HwsEleutheroi) said on his podcast yesterday that he doesn't know where I got the idea that Adam's ultimate end was "heavenly life," not perpetual life in paradise. Here is a sample of where I got it. [thread]
“men were not created with the design that they should live forever in this small weak portion of God's universe; but that they should occupy the heaven, which in this life they so admire and in the study and contemplation of which they are continually engaged.” Luther
Dec 13, 2022 • 6 tweets • 1 min read
Almost all political theologies today, from evangelly neo-anabaptism to theonomy, are designed to give you an identity under modern liberalism. You get the feeling of being the opposition, but your opposition is only an identity under liberalism.
This is especially true for “church as embassy of kingdom” and “heavenly politics” types.
Four legged animals can run in the Kentucky Derby.
Unicorns have four legs.
Unicorns can run in the Kentucky Derby.
He says this is "sound". No, it invalid -- undistributed middle fallacy and four-terms fallacy.
Then he says that I "assume" my first premise (Government ought to promote true religion). I provide **eight** different and independent arguments for this proposition (pgs. 184-193).
Nov 28, 2022 • 13 tweets • 3 min read
Here is my friend Thomas Achord's final statement. See my response below: medium.com/@thomasachord/…
I have talked with him for hours over the last few days and I stand by his comments here. I join him in repudiating the offensive tweets appearing under the name "Tulius Aadland," which Thomas acknowledges was his account.
Nov 26, 2022 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
I’m disappointed that the educated people around @DavenantInst have devoted so much energy to destroying people—obsessing over old “likes” and tweets, searching for gotchas, conducting proxy wars to discredit me, etc. This institution was once about wisdom, retrieval, irenicism.
@zugzwanged has done irreparable harm to this once great institution — a place that published several of my articles.
Nov 25, 2022 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
Alastair's obsession with me has led him to this. After failing to find evidence that I'm a secret racist, he allegedly doxxed my friend & unleashed the twitter animals on him right before Thanksgiving. Why? for no reason but to discredit me. He destroyed a guy to get at me.
Ttwo of his three tweets in this thread mention me and my association. This is not about Thomas or the good of his workplace. Alastair used my friend's name to connect me with racism and to discredit my book. Alastair could have contacted Thomas' workplace directly. But no.
Nov 22, 2022 • 15 tweets • 4 min read
Brief response to Shenvi's review:
My method of approaching "nation" makes a precise definition impossible, especially since I am not talking about nation-states. Neil misses that I'm trying to restore a sense of particularity in the West, which requires seeing things anew,
viz. a conscious articulation of what remains in the background. I say this precisely.
Nov 21, 2022 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
"Wolfe’s Christian Nationalism is rooted in assertions wholly unacceptable to the Calvinist-Kuyperian tradition."
IOW, my book doesn't fit neo-Calvinist innovations. Yeah, I said that explicitly in the book.
bahnsen.com/blog/the-shine…
My theological assumptions come from Reformed orthodoxy, mainly the 17th century. I say that directly and explicitly.
Nov 11, 2022 • 6 tweets • 1 min read
Worship is not warfare. It is not “political”. It is a sacred service around sacred things for an otherworldly end.
Worship has political effects but it is not fundamentally political.
Nov 11, 2022 • 6 tweets • 1 min read
The ecclesiocentric view of the “nation” violates the basic distinctions of nature/grace, secular/sacred, earthly/heavenly, the ends of ministry/magistracy, lesser/higher goods, ecclesial/civil. It is incoherent and confounds the designs of church and state.
Just stick with the classical prot tradition. The instituted church is designed to serve sacred things for eternal life. It is not an alternative or preeminent, earthly polis.
