What the Venezuela Crisis Reveals about the Collapse of Christian Moral Reasoning
Nathan (00:02)
Hello and welcome to Thinking Out Loud. I'm your co-host, Nathan Rittenhouse.
Cameron (00:07)
and I'm your co-host, Cameron McAllister. The US did a thing in Venezuela and people have strong opinions about it. I know that surprises you. We talk about that in this episode, but we also talk about the mood where efficiency is being prioritized over any kind of ethical considerations and how people just don't want lots of verbal sophistry. We just want the answers and clear ones at that. This will be helpful to you as you think through what it means to be a Christian in a time of great cultural transition.
As always, like, share, and subscribe. And if you'd like to support the work that we do, you can do that by going to www.toltogether.com.
Nathan (00:10)
And today we're going to suggest that nobody cares what Aquinas thinks about Venezuela. And, ⁓ I know this is a little bit of a niche angle on looking at the news of Maduro now being in New York, ⁓ as his punishment for his despotic rule in Venezuela. But, ⁓ as I was processing this and thinking through it, it was interesting looking at the responses that people had. You'd have some people like, this is a violation of international law. Or some people like this doesn't fit with American policy or.
Cameron (00:18)
Hmm.
Nathan (00:39)
I thinking, you know what? bet most people aren't really looking up to say, you know, does this check the detailed boxes of... Turns out Cameron did. But, of even those who did try to go looking for it, there's huge disparity in the interpretation of whether or not this was a legal or justified move and blah blah blah. You can pick your news source and figure out which talking heads think it is or isn't. Whatever. But, for some reason, Cameron, lately, David French...
Cameron (00:48)
.
Nathan (01:07)
⁓ as the, evangelical in the New York times keeps coming back to me is like this, watching from a distance of like, it's a, he's like a relic of an era. yeah, sometimes we should do a deeper, a deeper dive into what I think is going on there, but basically he's, he's giving a kind of a crash course theory. And his point is probably true that, you know, Trump is opening, you know, unleashing forces that he can't control. And that anytime that the U S gets involved, they're
Cameron (01:21)
Mm.
Hmm.
Nathan (01:37)
All sorts of unforeseen consequences that happen fair enough But he starts trying to make his case for his perspective on this using just war theory and Aquinas and saying they know this doesn't work and fit and as I'm reading through this it just the word started to blur together to me and we're more of a blah blah blah blah blah blah blah like like this just is not like this argument is not The punches aren't landing here man. And then sure enough by the time you get to the comments people are like, this is theological nonsense
Cameron (02:03)
Yeah.
Nathan (02:07)
Nobody cares. And there's a, there's a sense in which that feels more true to me of like, nobody cares. Our, our, our philosophical moral justifications for all sorts of actions have basically flown out the window. And I'm not making this like a political thing. I'm just saying just by and large, it's a hard sell right now to say, you know what? Well, here's what Aquinas would have said because the fact of the matter is
Cameron (02:34)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (02:36)
Very few people care and very few people in decision-making places care and very few people consuming the news care. so our Christian ideals of deep American culture are on the ropes, I think we keep saying this, but.
Yeah, it's hard for me to get motivated to think, man, this is really a theological fight that we now need to battle out in the streets in order to change policy.
Cameron (03:08)
Well, it's interesting because I think with somebody like David French, for instance, if you know the name, you are either going to roll your eyes or you'll take him seriously. the point is you're with media personalities and then there's a conditioned response and, okay, David French, he has been highly critical of the Trump administration from the start. so he's going to any rights for the New York Times for goodness sakes. So also your reaction to hearing the New York.
Well, I read in the New York Times, if somebody says that to you, you're going to have a pretty definitive response. And based on that response, we could probably determine whether you're going to take what French has to say seriously. Yes, at a certain point also, Nathan, I want to put in here, not solving anything by any means, that it's also just a matter of people having stuff to write in articles these days. It's just the big, vast, monstrous content machine.
Nathan (03:39)
You
Cameron (04:06)
that is the web or that, you know, so something happens, a big item in the news and everybody's expected to weigh in with an opinion. so, well, here's Thomas Aquinas with his just war theory. This will sound really profound. can, I can just see why people dismiss this and think this is just a waste of words. Why are we even talking about this? What? And how does this, how does this affect my life right now here on the ground? Not saying that what's happening.
internationally doesn't matter at all. I'm talking about, think Nathan and I are describing a mood that has set in here when it comes to some of these conversations.
Nathan (04:39)
That's it. Yeah. So we're
not commenting on a specific... I mean, it's tangential to this, but just... Okay, is Putin using Aquinas to think about just war theory right now? Does Xi Jinping care? Give a rip about... I mean, these same talking heads we could back up three years when Russia was amassing troops on its border and they're like, ⁓ no, Putin said he's not going to invade Ukraine, so we know he's not going to. We're coming into a time in which the rules are off. And basically...
Do you know why the U S went and grabbed Maduro? Cause we can. And you play around in the, in the political sanction game for 10 years or something. And you're like, you know what, at some point it's a grab and go lunch snack. Let's let's end this thing. Now, of course that's going to have all kinds of unforeseen implications to it, but I'm saying we're, living in a time in which the, the, the God of efficiency has, has come home to rule and that.
Cameron (05:18)
sandbox and yeah right sure. ⁓
Nathan (05:38)
haunting little phrase was when did ⁓ Jacques Alouel, 1952-1954, wrote the Technological Society somewhere, Technological Society, and that line in there, the 50s, where he said, Efficiency is fact and justice is a slogan. Man, that's a haunting phrase, but it really feels like 70, almost 75 years later here. That is the world in which we live. Like, you know why we do it? Because we can.
Cameron (05:48)
Psychological society? Yes. In 50s,
Nathan (06:07)
and it works. Now, whether or not it actually does work, but I'm just saying the mood to me, Cameron, feels like, and this is not a left right kind of thing. It's like, you know what? We can, so we will. And this is the expedient thing. Hoorah.
Cameron (06:09)
Yeah.
Yeah. Pretty powerful also coming from a man who lived through the ravages of the second world war and saw firsthand what the technological society is capable of doing when a mechanistic mindset kind of is prioritized. And if you want an interesting crash course on that, you can look at Jacques Collot's thoughts on a concentration camp and the ways in which he describes that really, really powerful stuff.
Yeah, it's, I hear you Nathan. And also I think for those of us who have these conversations with, with people, even just in our day-to-day lives, there's a growing level of, think Nathan, you use the phrase, we're, we're coming, we're speaking different languages now. It does, it reminds me, it does remind me a little bit of that famous picture from After Virtue. Alistair McIntyre talks about how there's been, imagine there's been some catastrophe and
Nathan (07:08)
Mm-hmm.
Cameron (07:19)
There's been this decimating event, everything's been destroyed and people are in the laboratory trying frantically to piece together the broken fragments and the lab notes. And on the basis of that, reconstruct a kind of scientific approach. He says, basically that's what's happened to our moral language these days. And even more so now it's happened to almost, if we try to have any kind of substantive conversation about why aren't we to do something, you know, I mean, basically, yeah, a moral conversation.
We seem to be using a common language of words, but we're all saying very different things and they're completely incompatible languages. But the one thing I think, Nathan, that you're right, seems to win out all the time is efficiency. the question is, the number one question I think for most people nowadays is will this work? Will this be effective? The question of whether it's right or wrong is secondary. We need results.
And I think we've been there for a long time, but now we're, that is very much the air we breathe. so anybody who brings up Thomas Aquinas or just war for that matter, they're going to be looked at as somebody who is just wasting time, irrelevant, pass their sell by date and yeah, not helping, not contributing anything.
Nathan (08:37)
Well, okay.
So, but maybe we're just calling a spade a spade here. ⁓ I was reading some stuff on, if you go back to just right before the American Revolution and things are heating up between the colonists and the British Empire, and then stuff starts to kick off and the church immediately by and large comes out and says, we cannot participate in this. There's a lot of just war theory language being used.
Cameron (08:43)
.
Nathan (09:04)
None of the American Revolution fits into just war theory like it just isn't like if you're going through Aquinas It doesn't work and you know how long that theological argument held up Somewhere around the length of one Sunday afternoon I mean the the the moral conviction and and the theology of the preachers of the nation were run over Somewhere around three and three hours by the political
Cameron (09:22)
Mmm.
Yeah.
Nathan (09:33)
vision and ambition of the colonist. And so, anytime that you get into some sort of something like that, your theological vision is always steamrolled by a grander political narrative and vision. some of it is like, this has never really been there. It's a story we like to tell ourselves. And you had people running around with a pill to heaven flags, because you remember what Jesus said, ⁓ give unto Caesar what is Caesar's, unless it's taxation without representation.
Cameron (09:59)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (10:02)
and give unto God what is God's. I mean, direct quote. there's always a way in which we're going to use theological, and hey, I'm happy to be an American and not British by the way. So that's a whole different category. But I'm saying the degree to which we were willing to use theological language politically to justify stuff that nobody in their theological right mind has ever historically or philosophically in a coherent way connected these dots is,
Cameron (10:06)
Yeah. Yeah.
I drink coffee, not tea. Sorry, Dad. Just kidding.
Nathan (10:32)
I'm not like despairing. I'm just kind of like throwing up my hands of like welcome like let's let's just call it as it is
Cameron (10:36)
Okay.
Okay, but it.
All right, but it sounds a little bit despairing, Nathan. So let's work through that a bit because you and I are both in the position of being somewhat in sympathy with the annoying killjoys who are really concerned about, is this the right thing to do? Aren't we to do this? And all of that. Is there a way for us as Christians to hold fast to Christ and his way?
Even in the face of everybody who wants to get on board with political expediency and just to get things done, is there a way for us to do this without becoming obnoxious, despairing, annoying? I mean, I'm describing all of the characteristics I'm describing. These are ways in which now sometimes we're just going be labeled this way and that's okay. you're such an Eeyore. But I know a lot of Christians who share our convictions on these matters, Nathan, and they're
lighthearted and jovial and fun to be around. I can think of one guy whose name is Grandpa Rittenhouse and we quote him a lot on this. So let's talk a little bit about how that comportment happens because you don't drift into that.
Nathan (11:45)
Yeah.
Yeah, it's well, so you get there by having and so this is why you and I are going to stick with the philosophical and theological and Christian side of this is because those perspectives do make deep lasting long-term changes and have significant outcomes in and of themselves in ways that maybe don't manifest themselves immediately. But the differences there do really matter.
And one of those is the degree to which you're putting your hope in political structures and efficient systems in order to bring you contentment and joy in life. And for the Christian, that has always been a big old nope. ⁓ Like I'm not putting my eggs in that basket as the foundation for ⁓ like the fruit of the spirit can only be manifest under these administrations. That's a, that's a, yeah.
Cameron (12:51)
Ooh,
when you put it that way. Yeah. The fruit of the spirit is conditional when it's conditioned on the, political superstructure. Yes. No.
Nathan (12:53)
You so, so, well, I mean, so think of grandpa. So, so you're quoting grandpa
written house there. mean, here's a guy who's lived through 13, 14 different U S presidents, you know, as an adult, her family's been here before the colonies were even formed. I mean, you see some stuff come and go when you're, when you can look at this from like your church's perspective of like, Hey, we've been here for before the U S was even an idea. ⁓
Cameron (13:10)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (13:23)
These are things that we see and we notice, but we don't orient ourselves around them as they go by. It's not apathy. It's a different vision that this stuff is a distraction from a lot of the time.
Cameron (13:41)
Let's talk a bit about, so this is, we're crossing into meddling now, Nathan, but we as God's people, we have a mission.
And the mission is not to push forward a certain political vision. It's not, and it's not to save the world.
we have a great mission and that is, I mean, we have a supreme ethic to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, and mind and strengthen to love our neighbors ourself. And we have a mission to go and proclaim the evangel, the good news, that Jesus is Lord and to make disciples of all people, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. So that's the mission that we have. I think.
Nathan (14:02)
But, but.
Cameron (14:27)
we need to be very aware of the level of distraction that we deal with. Now I'm not talking about social media. I'm just talking about the fact that we often get sidetracked from what we're supposed to be doing as God's people, because there are all sorts of other people who have a wonderful plan for your life and for my life, for your life, and think, hey, here's what you ought to be doing. Here's how you ought to be voting. Here's what you ought to do. And I'm not saying you shouldn't be a responsible citizen.
But we have a mission and we have a vision as God's people and it does not look the same as what the world is trying to push down your throat, wherever you find yourself in history.
Nathan (15:07)
Mm-hmm. I think there's a little bit of role playing that happens in our minds as well, where we see ourselves in our, ⁓ as the, you know, we are the straw that's going to sway the scale one way or the other on the outcome of the battle between good and evil that we perceive in the world around us. ⁓ And that's not exactly how this works if you're a Christian. And so, because the danger here, Cameron, is, and if there is an element of despair here, ⁓ there is a bit of a marketing
issue in that the work of the church does not seem to have the same, ⁓ it doesn't have a spokesperson or a voice really that so, all of this work is happening, but there isn't really a marketing campaign that makes it known. And you got to admit that, you know, going to church on Sunday, worshiping the Lord and spirit and truth, being equipped for the ministry that God has called you to and loving your neighbor just doesn't have the pizzazz is like fire falling from the sky and helicopters.
I it doesn't have the attention grabbing, visceral, immediate change ⁓ excitement to it that a lot of other things that you can get invested in do have. So I think that's the, it's it's a time scale timeline sort of thing here, but marketing is a crude term, but simple obedience to Christ isn't that snazzy.
Cameron (16:08)
Not at all, yeah, not at all.
You know, well, no, let's,
let's, no, it's not. And let's talk about in terms of marketing or optics, there's a word you don't hear as much anymore. In 2016, was optics this, optics that. I don't like the optics of this. Well, I think in North America, we have bought in evangelicals, I think have bought into a certain vision of success that I think is very dangerous because it's cultural success. It's,
success that's spelled in terms of some form of cultural prosperity rather than fidelity to Jesus. I think we came to this with the best of possible intentions, and the best of possible intentions would have been expressed in terms of, we want to have a positive influence on the culture. But the idea there was we're going to hold major cultural sway so that we can call the good shots for the good of everybody. And again, I'm not trying to be condescending or patronizing here.
The concern has always been, but we, it goes something like this, Nathan. I'm just going to state it in crude terms, just to be very direct. won't, so no, no Thomas Aquinas here. Let's just, let's just, people think, okay, we're Christians. We have the truth and the whole truth. We know what's best. Where are the, and here's a phrase I often, I quote Dallas Willard a lot in, very glowing terms. Here's an area where I take exception from him a little bit.
He would talk about how we Christians are experts in living. And so our churches ought to be academies of how to live life. Now, I'm sympathetic to some of what he's saying, but if you hear him the wrong way, you're going to take away, we are superior, we're better. We are the ones who who ought to be calling the shots. If you buy into that, I don't think Dallas Willard was necessarily saying that, although sometimes I think he was kind of close to it.
But if you buy into that, you're going to see any kind of loss of influence in the church. You're going to see cultural opposition as something that needs to be fought very severely because, we have to win because we're the ones who will save this culture. But that's not the Christian vision of reality. Ultimately, the one who triumphs will be Jesus. He is Lord. But in the meantime,
The basic rule of thumb for you, if you're a Christian, you're in the world, you're not of the world, you're going to experience opposition and resistance. I mean, in this world, you will have trouble, but fear not, I have overcome the world. I mean, that's the basic picture that we have. And so here we are in North America in a time of cultural transition. Things are changing. New generations are coming up. People are freaking out, as they always do. A lot of people are getting older, and when people get older, if they're religious, they tend to talk about the end of the world being near.
That's a little bit of a soft form. That's kind of sentimentalism right there. It doesn't necessarily, well, the end of your world is certainly coming up. It doesn't necessarily mean the world's going to end tomorrow. We have a tendency to do that.
Nathan (19:37)
Well, can I try to put my finger on this? Let's go back to your Willard quote. I do want to defend what he's saying there little bit. think what we're trying to put our thumb on is in this idea. Yes, Christianity definitely does outline a way of life. It does have a moral vision. It does have a deep sense of oughtness to it. It does have a deep invitation to it.
Cameron (19:38)
But is this making any sense Nathan? I mean, yeah.
Nathan (20:04)
There is this way in which we exclusively believe things that are right or wrong, true, false, good, bad, and ugly. ⁓ So, it has all of that. I think the tension that we don't know how to work out is how to do that and then how do you actualize that vision in a Christ-like way. That's the whole million-dollar question here. Throughout history, the Church has had a vision.
Cameron (20:30)
Mm.
Nathan (20:32)
and said, okay, it would be good if everybody was a Christian. Therefore saddle up the Knights and we'll go make everybody Christian. there's a, there's a good desire there to see a good outcome, which is an ideal. It's to what degree are we going to use material efficiency to get to the end of a moral outworking. And it's easy to play this game on like a historical global scale and much harder in your own individual life.
Cameron (20:41)
Right.
Nathan (21:03)
to back up and say, okay, what is the vision that I have here and what tools are and aren't on the table for me in order to see that happen. That's a little bit about, yeah, go ahead.
Cameron (21:06)
Yeah.
Well, I have a problem.
Yeah. Well, I was going to say my, my, take exception to the word experts of living because the word expertise in living would, I just think it has a tendency to mislead us into thinking that we're better than other people. And, and also I point of fact, I don't think anybody's an expert in living. I think human beings are much more mysterious than that. And I think sin is an ongoing factor and problem that we have to deal with.
Now, do I think that Christians have the truth? Yes. I wouldn't be a Christian if I didn't think that. Do I believe that Jesus' way is superior to all other ways? Yes, I do. But I think we have to hold tightly also in our hands the fact that we are, and I think Willard would agree with this, by the way, that we are sinners who have been forgiven everything. And it's on the basis of that forgiveness that we are able, liberated to live well in the first place. So that ought to, if we've really
tried to wrap our heads around that a little bit, you can't wrap your head around it entirely, that ought to really undercut spiritual pride. It doesn't always, sadly. I don't, so I want to, because the expertise language, the notion that we are, we can go from I'm following a better way because of Jesus and by his grace. There's a thin line sometimes between that and I am better.
than other people. This is just a perennial human problem. It mutates into the father, thank you that I'm not like my neighbor over there who is just absolutely horrific and just completely bought into all of this stupid stuff. It happens so, so easily. don't want to fall prey to that, but also just again, this picture of, have we conflated faithfulness to Jesus with a vision of cultural success that's alien to the church?
I think that's a really important question for us to wrestle with.
Nathan (23:13)
You're sounding pretty Presbyterian through that whole thing, Cameron. So you're very own brand. Good job. No, it's all good. Yeah, it's genetic. were chosen. ⁓ Let me try to hit this from a different angle. In that, by and large, if you look at the New Testament,
Cameron (23:17)
Sorry about that. I said it, I was hearing it and it was making me cringe. you know, what can I do? My dad's Scottish. It's not my fault.
Yep, from the foundation.
Nathan (23:42)
We're trying to create a hybrid of saying, we're following Jesus in His way, and then that touches every component of everything. And the New Testament doesn't necessarily get us there in the sense that Paul and Jesus both talk about political and military operations as like something over there that the state does. So read Romans 13, where Paul's like, yeah, it's, you know, the agent is, you know, it's an agent of God's wrath.
So the state's going to... ⁓ So I think the Apostle Paul, I mean, he's saying be submissive to a government that ultimately ended up chopping off his head. And I don't think he saw any tension there. He like expected his mission with Christ to conflict with what Rome was up to. And him dying was the logical outworking of that. I'm sure in his mind he's like, yeah, this makes about sense. ⁓ Jesus wasn't making any big speeches about Rome's illegitimate authority during his crucifixion or something like that. He's like, states are going to...
Cameron (24:12)
Mm-hmm.
Nathan (24:40)
do state stuff. think Paul would look at the US, Maduro, Venezuela and be like, yep, that's a Venezuela goofed around and the agent of, know, the state, states are going to do stuff like that. That's how this game goes. And, and maybe not put any theological veneer or spin on it other than ⁓ states or God's agents to, maintain order in the world.
Cameron (24:49)
you
Nathan (25:06)
thumbs up you guys go do that, but we have a totally different mission and vision of what we're trying to do in life along the way. And so you get that language of like a good soldier doesn't get involved in civilian affairs. A lot of New Testament theology and a lot of historic Christian theology too has made that distinction of saying that's a state project over there for the state to be involved in. Hmm. That's interesting to watch. And here's what we do and kind of separated those, those categories out. So
Cameron (25:26)
Hmm.
Nathan (25:36)
That is another way in which I think some people have maintained some levity through this, is to isolate out what is it that we as Christians are called to, what is it that the state is called to, and then there's a huge conversation about the degree to which Christians can be involved in the being part of the state and how that all works out. Everybody's gonna have to work that out on their own, but let's recognize that historically there has been this pressure relief valve of saying, yeah, that's interesting, but that's not us.
Cameron (25:43)
Hmm.
Yeah
Yeah, I think it's just one of those difficulties of living in a time of great transition, because there are other times, Nathan, where you've got relative civilizational stability, and you don't have to think about these questions in such earnest terms. And that again, that just speaks to the basic kind of cyclical nature of history.
Nathan (26:31)
Well, let's point to just to bring in what you're saying here to one other thing. So, U.S. Venezuela. Okay. ⁓ Israel-Palestine. Suddenly, that's a different kind of conversation. Like, I haven't heard many people, you know, immediately making great big theological, biblical revelations about the U.S. and Venezuela's relationship. Have you seen this yet? I've missed this by and large because it's not framed in theological terms.
which is refreshing to me, I might add. And I think that was part of the naughtiness of trying to make sense of Israel and Palestine, is that people immediately see that conflict in a theological ⁓ concept. Because there would be a whole degree of Christians out there, I think, who could go either way of saying, you know, ⁓ God of the oppressed, we're looking at this from the Palestinians and Christ, you
refugee side over to the Israel. God blesses Israel. It's the people of God and the place in the land of God. And then there would be an intermediate group who'd be like, hey, I think there's some good strategic ⁓ reasons to have an ally ship here and we can understand what's going on. And let's just kind of leave the Christianese out of what the U.S. is doing as a political strategy in the Middle East. ⁓ And so I was making fun of you for sounding Presbyterian.
Cameron (27:49)
Hmm. Yeah.
Nathan (27:58)
in your earlier thing and I recognize that I'm sounding pretty Anabaptist in In my in my it's on my commentary here, too So we can both stay on brand as we go through this, but that is an option
Cameron (28:07)
We, all
we can do is, yeah, well, we speak from where we live and it's fine. And so I have, I think that makes perfect sense. Yeah. I mean, again, and this is, so this is, here we are in 2026 already. It's moving fast. lot is happening. I think, I sense that probably a good deal of our focus on thinking out loud throughout this year is going to be what's
what Christian comportment looks like in a time of massive upheaval and change. And you're right, Nathan, going to church and worshiping the Lord in spirit and truth. You know, the examples that came to mind for me were, so the basic habits of Christians, know, the basic, basic, basic ones, we do other stuff as well. if, mean, the very bare bones basics, which aren't so basic anymore, sadly, you know, praying, reading your Bible, going to church, those have about as much appeal as saying, hey, you know what? Today I brushed my teeth.
And often I've put it in terms like that, but when it comes to my having reading my Bible, by the way, I put that in the same. I think we need to take these things off of their pedestal sometimes so that we can recognize their importance as just basic, very, very needful habits. But also, yeah, they're not very glamorous. Hey, today I got dressed today. I brushed my teeth today. I prayed. think it wouldn't hurt to see things in those terms, but they will change you and they will make a.
world of difference and those who practice those things know that and they will change the way you see yourself and other human beings. They will change the way you see God and they will change the way you live. so ultimately they will have, they will make a colossal difference. But you're right. They don't sound as cool as helicopters in the sky or major political maneuvers, but they make that difference. And we're going to contend for that.
throughout 2026. I know that much.
Nathan (29:59)
So, let's
keep looking at, mean, so some of this is like not speculation, it's history. and I think you've seen, have you ever been part of a, so I take the small private four-year liberal arts college that was historically religious, kind of tried to stay that way a little bit just to appease some of its donors. Wasn't really, everybody knew it. It was kind of a lip-sync. It's just an awkward, um,
And so I went to one of those and was part of one of those and I was like, guys, can we just drop the facade? Like, let's just call a spade a spade here and be honest about, and it's going to be healthier and better for everybody. Like, let's break up and not try to put a theological veneer on what we're doing here because it's not good theology and it's not healthy for the institution. Like just stop. I think we're living in a moment where more of that is happening, but, but that's not to say it's a loss on the religious side. Think about.
Cameron (30:34)
You
Nathan (30:57)
Um, if you look at the correlate, there is not a correlation. It's just, yeah, I mean, there's no causation here per se, but you had this idea in the constitution that you're not going to have, you know, a federal church, but states could have state churches. mean, Massachusetts had a state church longer than anybody up, you know, way up into the early 1800s, I think. Um, finally the state, like Massachusetts, all the other states disbanded and dissolved.
their state churches. And you know what happened in the years right after that? It's what we call the Great Awakening. There was massive spiritual revival at the point in which the institutional churches lost their political power and influence because they disbanded themselves as a political entity. And so, we don't want to get into this rut of thinking that the church only has power and influence if it's controlling certain leavers in the world. There might be entire other options
here for deep cultural change that we haven't even thought about that are there that are historically, ⁓ approximate, like present to us that are options, but we're distracted by something else as we go along. so my, my agitation, you said it sounded like a despair at the beginning of this is that actually there might be some healthy things coming apart here where we can say we're, we're, trying to make a hybrid out of two things that don't really make sense for them to go together.
And actually both things might be better off not trying to be the other thing as they go forward. I don't know for sure, but I want to keep that as a viable option open within the way in which I read scripture, understand what Christ is calling us to and kind of look at the world around because the foundation of my hope very much is in what Christ has done and has promised rather than
Cameron (32:25)
Hmm.
Nathan (32:50)
a lot of other things and there's a degree to which I don't want to attach that wagon to the fullness of the hope and say that only by these things coming to fruition can ⁓ Christ's plan be I It feels like a denigration to me and a step back in the calling in order to try to blend some of these things together that are always uneasy for me, so that's a large verbal blah of of a of a mood as you called it but
It's different, but I don't know that it's better.
Cameron (33:26)
We will have more to say about all of this as the year unfolds, but thank you for sticking with us here. And in case you missed it in all of this, you've been listening to Thinking Out Loud, a podcast where we think out loud about current events and Christian hope.