Timothy Keller’s plan for churchianity to become MORE egalitarian.

Readership: All
Theme: Cultural Demise
Author’s Note: This post is based on an email exchange between Jack, Caterpillar345, Oscar, Red Pill Apostle, and Thedeti on 2023/7/17-18.
Length: 1,800 words
Reading Time: 10 minutes

Introduction

Aaron Renn’s latest newsletter, Newsletter #78: Big Eva Says Out with Complementarianism, In with Anti-Fundamentalism (2023/7/17), examines some recent developments in New Calvinism’s hefty influence on Big Eva. He focuses on the intra-church political stances of the late Tim Keller and his younger protege Russel Moore and how they’re planning to “adjust” their theological stances to appeal to the popular masses of churchians. It is hoped that this might preserve the legitimacy of New Calvinism among the next generation, and it is expected that this move could possibly consolidate the power and authority of the Protestant church in an age when the church is losing cultural relevancy. If successful, it may even become the grand historical legacy of New Calvinism as a religious movement.

Renn is speaking to a slightly different audience than the Based / Manosphere / Red Pill crowd, and so his description of Complementarianism isn’t anything like what we’re familiar with. So in order to offer readers a sensible understanding of this topic, I put together the previous post, The Beta Factory (2023/7/24), which compared Complementarianism and Egalitarianism, both in theory and in practice.

In contrast to the Christian Manosphere’s defacto approach, Keller and Moore (and Renn himself in his report) are not addressing the nature of real intersexual relationships, but are more focused on official church policies about gender identities and gender roles within the church. As such, they are sticking to an abstract theoretical approach of Complementarianism and Egalitarianism (i.e. men and women are “equal” and have complementary roles and responsibilities). For example, the word “Complementarian” denotes that women should not be allowed to hold a church office, whereas “Egalitarian” implies that men and women are equally welcome to fill any and all roles including elders and pastors.

Renn’s article only makes sense within the context of these solipsistic abstractions, so when you read Renn’s piece, think of it in terms of Christianese politics and selling an egalitarian message that would appeal to the vast majority of Blue Pilled churchians. Once you understand these assumptions, it reframes the whole context.  If the reader fails to think within this frame while reading his essay, you probably won’t be able to follow what they’re talking about. I (Jack) had to read Renn’s newsletter twice to pick up on this, the second time with these things in mind.

img-1783682589-6a50d61d65d842.55330391.jpgTimothy Keller img-1783682591-6a50d61f3f6e35.13837229.jpgRussell Moore

Keller’s Plan to Shift the Overton Window Leftward

Before his death, Tim Keller devised a strategy that is best described as a scheme to form a more monolithic Protestant entity which would be more or less “catholic”. By “catholic”, I’m not implying any reference to Roman Catholicism, but rather as the word means, “universal in extent; broad or wide-ranging in tastes, interests, or the like; having sympathies with all; broad-minded; liberal“.

Perhaps the easiest way for readers to understand what is happening is to think about it from an Overton Window perspective.  What Aaron Renn is talking about is the next step for moving the church forward as the Overton Window shifts along societal lines.  (Renn never states this explicitly, but leaves it to the reader to gather from the overall context.)

Renn reports of a plan contrived by Keller in his later years, in which the two largest factions of the church, the Complementarianists and the Egalitarianists, are merged together under one doctrinal teaching. This is recast, predictably, as an appeal for “unity”, but the result of this superposed doctrine is decidedly more Leftist and is only about unity in terms of official church polity.

Concerning the polity, this is a case of theologians trying to make the message more palatable to the masses instead of keeping with the simple message of God’s word and courageously telling the truth, which is that male elders are to be the authority over the church, husbands are to be the authority over their wives as the weaker vessel, and that this structure of authority is necessary to raise their congregations and children respectively in the fear of the Lord. The message that men need to hear is that their authority is good and necessary, and should neither be neglected (e.g. the sin of Adam) nor abused (e.g. if they lord that authority over their wives and kids instead of using that authority to raise and protect them the way a shepherd protects a flock).

img-1783682592-6a50d62099da59.87341113.jpg

Aside from a cowardly omission of these simple truths, the error in Keller’s plan is that instead of reforming the actual problems of Complementarianism and Egalitarianism within the church, the intended implementation entails a broad political shift for the church to stay closer in line with societal norms in order to retain relevancy and gain traction with a larger mass of people. Renn’s article reports that Russel Moore, et al. are actually working on the task of combining the false doctrines of Complementarianism and Egalitarianism (or else blend the boundaries) and coopt this combined ideology to consolidate warring factions of the church and prevent it from dying.

Critical readers will find that there is a conspicuous absence of any scriptural foundation or adherence to doctrine, and that Keller, Moore, et al., are subtly assuming a very liberal and pragmatic approach in tinkering with the false doctrines of Complementarianism and Egalitarianism that are already established.  

The most interesting thing about the quotes in Renn’s article is that they are from men who are very scripturally knowledgeable, and yet they appear to be entirely ignorant of the horrendous effects of women’s desire for unfettered feminine control, as if they have never had to endure this from their own mothers and wives.  This is the most likely explanation for why these men who know scripture so well can tie themselves into knots trying to reinterpret scripture that is so simple to understand, in a manner that more aligns with current societal trends in the West.

Fundamentalism is the Sacrificial Lamb

Aaron Renn wrote a follow-up post to his newsletter, entitled, Who Is a Fundamentalist? (2023/7/20). Here, Renn summarizes Keller and Moore’s take on Fundamentalism as basically, “It’s so uncool.”  Renn goes further by tacitly agreeing that Fundamentalism has some real problems that need to be addressed. On this he writes,

“There is a sort of fundamentalist social impulse that is anti-intellectual, overly wedded to Americanism (though of multiple varieties, often not of the kind Keller seems to have in mind), and is very focused on doctrinal purity and pursues that through a general posture of hostility and combativeness.”

IOW, the problem with Fundamentalism is that its constituents actually revere the scriptures, they are resistant to convergence, and they aren’t “nice enough” for Churchian / Feminist sensibilities.

img-1783682594-6a50d6229ae770.84125905.jpg

It is not stated explicitly, but I would assume that Headship (as we understand it) is an assumed part of Fundamentalism.  It’s sad that any mention of Headship is so assiduously avoided.  After all, this is the very thing that allows a man and wife to reflect the image of God and thereby extol His glory through their union.

The bottom line is that, in making this shift, they’re rejecting Fundamentalism and Headship in favor of MORE Egalitarianism!

Final Statements

Society has shifted leftward for the last 100 years or more in the West.  Since the increasing rise of Feminism about 50 years ago, the church has modified its views on marriage and church leadership in an attempt to make its doctrine palatable to the masses.  The bible clearly puts men in authority over the church and over their own wives and kids.  This does not work with modern sensibilities so we get Complementarianism and Egalitarianism, which was the focus of the previous post, The Beta Factory (2023/7/24).

Well, as our regular readers know, women are never satisfied with anything other than world domination. Eve lived in a perfect paradise and yet she was still unhappy that she did not have God the Father’s power. So the appeasement of 50.1% Complementarianism would never last.

Once the reader can see how society is shifting further away from God, while masculinity and masculine authority are increasingly under attack, it becomes clear that Keller, Moore, et al. are looking to affect inter-protestant church politics such to move further away from God’s order to a place where Egalitarianism is adopted as an official church doctrine.

img-1783682596-6a50d62468c870.35867935.jpg

Overall, Keller’s strategic move towards the centrist Complementarian / Egalitarian line is not incongruent with his leftward intellectual move in his later years.  Later in life, especially during the Trump years, Keller seemed to move politically leftward. His stance on having families with children accept h0m0sexu@l people into their homes to allow them to experience family life is an example of this, as he’d rather bow to the alphabet mafia under the guise of grace and forgiveness rather than simply explain how the gospel of salvation works and tell them to come to God to overcome their sin.

Perhaps it is a sign of the times that Keller and Moore are not even trying to hide their motivations to feed the masses what is most appealing to them rather than the truth.  This is Herodianism (converging with political expediencies and the popular mood of the times).  Jesus warned us against this in Mark 8:15.

Overall, their efforts are doing little more than propping up churchianity for another generation or so.  This can’t be good, and it can’t last for much longer.  If this is the forecast, I expect the church will continue to shrink in numbers and its reputation in the West will continue to decline, simply because it is not that much different from the World, except with the added burdens of sexual purity and marriage — both unpopular teachings that easily morph into legalism (another thing Jesus told us to avoid in Mark 8:15).

Judging by the way Keller, et al. are playing fast and loose with scripture as a tool to be utilized for political expediencies, New Calvinism, and Big Eva by extension, is dangerously close to becoming “catholic” in another sense — believing that they act as ecclesiastical arbiters of the authority of Christ, and that the political authority of churchianity / New Calvinism / Big Eva IS His Holy authority.

As time goes on, I expect whatever remains of Protestantism will become more converged, yet also more authoritative, similar to what happened with the Catholic church a millennium ago.

Imagine a church which requires the sacrament of a debased egalitarian marriage as a necessary prerequisite for salvation.

Related