New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
More generally, where do we go to from here? A wider issue, I admit, than the immediate question.
It seems to me that in responding to current issues of race relations, we need to find a middle way between ‘wokeness’ on one side; and on the other side, the attitude in too many quarters that “we don’t have an issue here, what’s the problem?” Which I’ve seen crop up in some parts of the Christian media. Now, what that middle way looks like, I really don’t know, but would welcome the feedback.
And I’m fairly certain what Buswell III had to say is worlds apart from what Bradley is saying.
Any truth at moral shear points in our culture today spoken or written by Christians is world’s apart from any similar thing spoken or written by Christians back in the forties and fifties—whether the church men today are goodies or baddies. Our commitment to truth that is fully congruent with the church across the ages as it is revealed in Scripture may be somewhat intact, but our commitment to confess it clearly is attenuated to the point of ridiculosity. We’re still able to do so with safe doctrines not under attack. We repristinate the past in those areas of theology, but only because it requires no faith or courage. Otherwise, we’re a church of cowards whose statements of faith at the gaps in the wall would be unrecognizable to any generation of fathers across two-thousand years.
Talking this past week with a fellow Gordon-Conwell MDiv from same time there, a man who’s remained one of my closest friends and is quite meek and humble, a man who is a reformed baptist BTW, he said he feels like a time traveler from a past unrecognizable to younger generations today. We were talking about Wheaton. He was an assistant city manager at Wheaton and member of College Church back in the seventies, and his simple statement was that the college has long been done for because its leaders are “worldly.” Hadn’t thought of it being so very simple, which truth usually is.
Back to Bradley, we should, I think, note carefully that he reads Buswell III and finds comfort for his soul, which I think indicates good things about the man. If what we don’t like about him is his joining the political bandwagon with the wicked, who today is able to withstand that enticement?
Not Wheaton’s best and brightest. No one in Moscow. Not Mohler… Love,
PS: If you read my dad’s article, you’ll find some beginning articulation of themes that hint at a middle way. Note his descriptions of the pressures and desires of whites and blacks concerning the integration of education and housing, and what each should be free to do.