The Audacity of (Christian) Hope
— Monday, March 23rd, 2009 —
Last week I hosted Biola University philosopher John Mark Reynolds as he delivered the 2009 Norton Lectures. As several of us talked about after, he seemed to be a combination of my friends Robert George, Greg Thornbury, and Mark Coppenger (that’s high praise from me, on all three counts).
The Norton Lectures were brilliant, in both content and delivery. I wish you could have heard the after-lecture conversations over meals around here (about everything from West Virginia-Mississippi comparisons to Plato to emo-whining worship music). I also had the great privilege of having someone far to the Right of me at the table. I learned I’m a “squishy moderate” because I’m one conservative who would have voted (had I been alive and coherent from the time travel) for FDR four times and Harry Truman once (What’s the alternative? Hoover? Landon? Willkie? Dewey? Please. And I still think the Marshall Plan and the TVA were pretty good ideas. Oh, and whipping Hitler and starting the beat-down on Stalin were both pretty good too). But that’s a digression.
The thing that I liked most about John Mark is that he’s not depressed or cynical or skeptical (except of the things that one ought to be skeptical about). He’s joyful and hopeful without being utopian. You can listen to his Norton Lectures at the Southern Seminary site. And here’s a piece John Mark wrote for the Washington Post’s faith page about his time at Southern, and other reasons he’s not wringing his hands about the future of Christianity.
It would be worth it if only for the line “deepest darkest Vermont.” Say, didn’t Vermont vote against FDR four times in a row?
Well, as Trent Lott reminded us a few years ago, Ol’ Strom was an option in 1948. I wonder if he was the choice of this far right friend? Most likely he was to the right of Dewey on most issues, Civil Rights notwithstanding. Thurmond of course carried your state (Miss.) and mine (Louisiana) as well as Ala. and SC. My understanding is that Thurmond and Wright were listed as the regular Democratic ticket in those states.
To borrow a phrase from Phyllis Schlafly, in 1940 the GOP rather clearly offered up an echo and not a choice with Willkie.
Being from West Virginia myself, you tweaked my interest with the “West Virginia-Mississippi comparisons” comment. When I think of Mississippi, I think of the one state that generally keeps mine from being last in the things you’d rather be first in, and first in the things you’d rather be last in!
God Bless!
I’m looking for these online at SBTS.edu but not finding them yet.
It sounds like they are going to be great!
Perhaps you’ve see Michael Spencer’s essay in a recent Christian Science Monitor on the imminent collapse of evangelicalism. I know that Spencer’s expectation of doom seems utterly contrary to Reynold’s optimism. If they’re not contradictory, it’s likely because they’re speaking about differing groups of people.
From my perspective out in the sticks, it appears the future for broadly evangelical American Protestantism is very fluid, probably chaotic. The theological ferment (rot?) in the area of so-called “gender theology” alone is sufficient to keep things roiling for a good while yet.
But this sort of chaos is never necessarily a bad thing. When foundations are shaken (everyone’s foundations), it’s much easier to repair faulty foundations or extend good foundations or lay needed foundations, as needed. This gives Reynold’s optimism a decidedly happy twang, if indeed there are those coming up the ranks who can reinvigorate the good deposit we have from our Lord and His apostles.