“More than any other discipline, theology is prone to becoming a political ideology. Theology’s source is supernatural; it’s propositions are above nature. And so people use it to conceal or to generate “tension” with obvious natural truths known by reason and experience.
Mixed with doctrines of utter depravity, theology is a constant source of trouble for basic truths informed by experience. Everything you think you know from observation, or from deep instinct, is actually “fallen” and needs to be replaced by seemingly absurd supernatural ethics.”
Stephen Wolfe
X posting
Bret responds,
When I read this I couldn’t belief Wolfe was serious since this was such a blatant appeal to the scholastic dualism wherein grace and nature stand opposed to one another. Note here that for Wolfe there are two sources of truth. One source is theology which is supernatural. The other source is natural which comes by “reason and experience.” These two sources of truth conflict with one another because supernatural truths are to be confined to an area that deal with matters that are “above nature,” while natural truths are, presumably, to stay out of “the above nature domain.” To be faithful in interpreting reality one has to keep in mind these two different truth sources and apply accordingly.
Now, as to this area of Wolfe’s “natural truths,” we find an epistemological appeal to autonomous man’s
1.) reason
2.) experience
3.) observation
4.) deep instinct
However, Wolfe’s problem here (a problem shared by all Thomistic Natural Law “thinkers”) is first the presupposition that reason isn’t itself fallen, and so is an untrustworthy guide for interpreting reality. The second problem that Wolfe has here is that experience, observation, and deep instinct all themselves are held to be likewise not affected by the fall. The four factors listed above do not suffer the consequences of original sin but are, in Wolfe’s classic scholasticism, all trustworthy guides to interpreting reality. Reason, experience, observation, and deep instinct being definitional of who we are as humans all share in our fall and so are not sources of knowledge that can be cordoned off from theology as the source of truth.
Another thing that Wolfe does here is he tries to suggest that those non-dualist Reformed folks disagreeing with him are guilty of embracing “utter depravity.” Wolfe is trying to turn the pedestrian Reformed doctrine of Total depravity into the obscene doctrine of Utter depravity. It is most certainly not utter depravity to teach that all of man is fallen including his reason, experience, observation, and deep instinct.
Scripture supports this doctrine of total depravity which teaches that man’s experience, reason, observation, and deep instinct are fallen.
Romans 8:7 teaches
“The carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”
And Ephesians 4:17f teaches,
17 This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as [f]the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, 18 having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart; 19 who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.
I must say that it is past odd that Wolfe, who repeatedly noted in his recent book that he was no theologian and so had no intent to take up theology, has apparently as of late become a theologian and so can post on theological matters like total depravity.
However, the fact is that Wolfe is a theologian — just as all men are — and only sought to sidestep thorny issues in his book by seeking to push theology off the table as he took up the subject of Christian Nationalism.
In closing, I can’t help but note how close Wolfe is to blasphemy when he above writes above about appealing to “absurd supernatural ethics.”
Wolfe is a practitioner of dualism and so is to be warned against. It is true that the man comes to some conclusions that we wholeheartedly salute but his methodology finds him to be nought but a blind old sow who finds a felicitious acorn once in a while.
2.) experience
3.) observation
4.) deep instinct
Wolfe “sought to sidestep thorny issues in his book by seeking to push theology off the table as he took up the subject of Christian Nationalism”. Articulating a half-truth and sidestepping controversy is not an acceptable trait in a leader. If I correctly recall the reviews I read of his book, Wolfe built the case that a nation *should* be an ethnos, without unequivocally stating that a nation was an ethnos or it else was not actually a nation. He could have identified himself with Kinism, but chose not to, because he is not one. Wolfe is somewhat like Ron Paul was back in 2008, better than the system but far short of what we need to dismantle a corrupt government and social order. And as time goes on, Wolfe will probably continue to drift left.
Yes… as long as these “Christian Nationalists” seek to try and avoid Kinism they will be living in contradiction-ville.