I.) “The fear of ‘human autonomy’ in determining suitable law, which some corners of Protestantism today voice, is misplaced.”
The Case for Christian Nationalism — p. 269
This is a breathtakingly amazing, naïve, and jejune statement. Does Wolfe live in the same culture I live in?
II.) “Spiritual unity is inadequate for formal ecclesial unity.”
The Case for Christian Nationalism
I would bet my retirement fund that 90% of conservative clergy would viciously disagree w/ that statement.
III.) “Taking dominion is not an adventitious duty or a divine positive command. It proceeds from the very nature of man, and so it cannot be rescinded, even by God, without violating the fundamental nature of man. The right to rule creation as vice-regents is derived naturally and necessarily from divinely granted majesty.”
The Case for Christian Nationalism — p. 53
Well said!
Which is to say that dominion taking by the sons of Adam is an inescapable reality. It is never a question of “will you take Dominion” but only if you will take dominion badly or well.
IV.) “Supplying a set of laws, in my judgment, only feeds into the tendency of Westerners to retreat to universality, whereby people look for something outside themselves to order themselves concretely. A people need the strength, resolve, and spirit to enact their own laws, and they should not seek some ‘blueprint’ they can rubber-stamp into law.”
The Case for Christian Nationalism — p. 264
WOW! For sure no Christian people would ever want to look outside of themselves to order themselves concretely. What was Alfred the Great doing when he gave the people the Book of Doom as a law code? Clearly, the Book of Doom was a sad example of a Christian people wanting to be ordered by a law outside of themselves.
How is this not pure humanism. I almost want to ask how this is not blasphemy.Keep in mind that Dr. Wolfe here is giving the backhand to Theonomy which does indeed insist that God “supplies a set of laws,” that should be implemented in every Christian culture while at the same time conceding that all Christian cultures will not look universally alike since it will inevitably be the case that different cultures will understand the principle of the general equity of the law differently. Yet, despite those very real differences each culture will rightly be understood as a “Christian culture” all following God’s law standard.
When Wolfe writes about, “A people need the strength, resolve, and spirit to enact their own laws,” all I can hear is the lisping of the serpent saying; “hath God really said?”
Look, we need to realize that despite all the good things Dr. Wolfe says in his book, in the end he really is opposed to Biblical Christianity as demonstrated by this quote.
There is no predicting from page to page what Wolfe will say. No consistency. I can peg thinking to pragmatism, Thomism, squishy conservatism, Lutheranism, and yes, some Reformed thought. It is a pick and choose approach. Dr. Wolfe gives us a “total package theology.”
V.) “Christian homeland is a mode of true religion; it directs you to your ultimate home. Thus, serving one’s Christians homeland is serving the Kingdom of God.”
The Case for Christian Nationalism — p. 179
So, here we stand and applaud Dr. Wolfe.
I think if I spent a year reading Wolfe I would become bipolar or suffer from multiple personality disorder. It is amazing how one man can be so right and so wrong at the same time, as in one volume.
