A Discussion on Christian Nationalism w/ Perry & Whitehead

Perry and Whitehead define Christian nationalism as:

..a cultural framework—a collection of myths, traditions, symbols, narratives, and value systems—that idealizes and advocates a fusion of Christianity with American civic life … the ‘Christianity’ of Christian nationalism represents something more than religion. As we will show, it includes assumptions of nativism, white supremacy, patriarchy, and heteronormativity, along with divine sanction for authoritarian control and militarism. It is as ethnic and political as it is religious. (p. 10)

BLMc responds,

Let us consider this for a second.

Since Perry and Whitehead want to begin with cultural frameworks let us spend a little time first talking about culture and then how culture will always express itself nationalistically.

I would contend that culture is defined as the outward manifestation of a people’s inward belief. To make that even pithier, culture is theology externalized. Yet a third way to speak about this is that culture is the consequence of some theology poured over ethnicity. The constant in these definitions is that culture is inescapably tied to theology.

If that is true (and it is) the cultural frameworks will always and inescapably include a collection of myths, traditions, symbols, narratives, and value systems since those realities are downstream of theology. Those collections of myths, traditions, symbols, narratives, and value systems as a cultural framework will then always and inevitably be the result of some fusion with some religion becoming American civic life. The Christian Nationalist merely steps up to the microphone and insists that the inevitable fusion with religion that is going to occur — the fusion in question — be a fusion with Christianity as opposed to a fusion with some other religion. In other words, a Nation can’t exist apart from some religion creating its culture. The Nation itself, in terms of how it constitutes itself, is a living and breathing expression of religion. For Perry and Whitehead to imply that Christians shouldn’t desire a Christian Nationalism then is just a backdoor special pleading for some other kind of Nationalism that they favor.

The next step out from this is that what results in culture and theology being tied together, as they inescapably are, is always some kind of Nationalism. Even the Internationalist who says he hates Nationalism is advocating for Global Nationalism.

My point here is that Perry and Whitehead and Tim Keller and Russell Moore are one and all Nationalists. Their beef with Christian Nationalism is that it is not their version of Christian Nationalism. Their beef is that the Nationalism they are railing against is not the kind of Nationalism that they desire.

Perry and Whitehead and later Keller on steroids rails against nativism, white supremacy, patriarchy, and heteronormativity. Yet in all that railing all I hear is a plea on their part for a Nationalism that is alienist xenophilic, non-white supremacist, egalitarian, and sexually pluralistic. At least for Keller, he seems to think that this would be Christian nationalism at its best.


Next, where is the sin in some of these realities that Perry and Whitehead describe in their inquisition against Christian Nationalism? Where is the sin in abjuring multiculturalism in favor of the native? Is White Supremacy in lands settled and created by white people any more curious than Japanese Supremacy in the land that the Japanese ancestors settled and created? And as Scripture teaches patriarchy all Christian nations should have their social order structured around Christian patriarchy then patriarchy is a positive good. Finally, obviously, there is a great deal of horror in heternormativity. How could any Christian Nationalist ever desire that?

Perry and Whitehead start making it up when they suggest that Christian Nationalism is about authoritarian control and militarism. Remember, our Christian ancestors were the ones who created a divided government with checks and balances. That hardly sounds like authoritarian control. In terms of Militarism, we Christians were the ones who originally insisted that there should be no standing army and only a small navy.

Finally, as politics is downstream of theology and as theology creates culture as expressed by distinct peoples then of course Christian Nationalism is as ethnic and political as it is religious. So what?

When it is all said and done Perry and Whitehead are merely bitching that some people out there desire a different Nationalism as based on a different religion than they do. They want a Nationalism that is the exact opposite of what they are complaining about and as such they seek to criminalize the Christian Nationalism that makes them scream like Junior High girls seeing a mouse in the shower.

Article From Webzine Defends McAtee & Christian Nationalism

Since the Jericho March in December and the events of January 6th, “Christian nationalism” has become a bogeyman.  In the process, secular and Christian elites have fused indistinguishably and are working hand-in-glove to neuter Christianity as a public presence while simultaneously strangling the burgeoning nationalist movement in the crib.  The standard epithets—racist, nativist, white supremacist—are casually directed at white Christians yearning for nothing more than to live in the country of their grandparents.

A template has also been established. Rather than produce a robust biblical or theological analysis, an academic misconstrues and caricatures Christian nationalism, defining it as outside the parameters of historic orthodoxy.  Seeking accommodation with elites, celebrity pastors assume the efficacy of the given Politically Correct definitions and label any related viewpoints as heresy and a threat to the “moral witness” of the church. 

Writing in the New York Times, Thomas Edsall, citing Andrew L. Whitehead and Samuel L. Perry’s book Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States, ominously warned that, “It’s impossible to understand the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol without addressing the movement that has come to be known as Christian nationalism.”

Perry and Whitehead define Christian nationalism as:

..a cultural framework—a collection of myths, traditions, symbols, narratives, and value systems—that idealizes and advocates a fusion of Christianity with American civic life … the ‘Christianity’ of Christian nationalism represents something more than religion. As we will show, it includes assumptions of nativism, white supremacy, patriarchy, and heteronormativity, along with divine sanction for authoritarian control and militarism. It is as ethnic and political as it is religious. (p. 10)

Author and pastor Tim Keller, famous for his book The Reason for God, reviewed Taking America Back For God for the quarterly Life in the Gospel. “We must recognize that Christian Nationalism in its most pure form is indeed idolatrous,” Keller somberly intoned. “It looks to political power as the thing that will truly save us”

Russell Moore, leader of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, also denounced Christian nationalism as a heresy.  The wrath of God,” said Moore, “is revealed against ‘Blood and soil.’” 

And in February, 100 housebroken evangelicals signed an open letter “condemning the role of ‘radicalized Christian nationalism’ in feeding the political extremism that led to the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 by supporters of former President Donald Trump”

But who will enforce the new orthodoxy against the “heretics”? 
Though many Christian institutions have been browbeaten into conformity with the shibboleths of Cultural Marxism, a remnant of largely leaderless Christian nationalists persists in the hinterlands, resisting assimilation into a new Tower of Babel.  

Enter the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), abetted by Big Tech and a compliant press.  The scattered holdouts who refuse to bend the knee to Baal, even if they are culturally and politically powerless, must be targeted with public shaming and ritual humiliation.    

The SPLC, America’s most successful and prosperous hate group, recently released its 2020 Hate Map and Hate List.  Since 1971, the SPLC has raised hundreds of millions of dollars peddling the myth that Middle America is teeming with legions of hatemongers draped in Klan hoods waving copies of the Turner Diaries and the Bible.

As always, the SPLC chronicle of the “hate industry” includes immigration restrictionists.  VDARE, along with the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), made the cut.


But the SPLC casts a wide net.  Its definition of hate is elastic enough to encompass not just the Westboro Baptist Church and Aryan Brotherhood but also relatively bland Christian organizations like Alliance Defending Freedom, the Family Research Council, the Ruth Institute, D. James Kennedy Ministries (DJKM), and more. 

However, it is not merely large Christian organizations with national platforms that earn the “hate group” moniker.  In central Michigan, for instance, a small rural congregation (and its pastor, Bret McAtee) was named a “White Nationalist” hate group by the SPLC.

What are the criteria for being defined as a hate group?  Mark Potok, who spent twenty years with the Southern Poverty Law Center, told the Lansing State Journal that McAtee’s words, both spoken and written, are likely what landed the small church on its hate map.  Potok explained that it is about the ideology of the group or its leaders rather than concrete and specific acts: 

“Our criteria for a ‘hate group,’ first of all, have nothing to do with criminality, or violence, or any kind of guess we’re making about ‘this group could be dangerous.’ It’s strictly ideological. So we look at a group and we say, ‘Does this group, in its platform statements, or the speeches of its leader or leaders… Does this group say that a whole group of people, by virtue of their group characteristics, is somehow less?’”

Potok has said openly that the motivation of the SPLC is to destroy groups that it targets for ideological reasons.

“Sometimes the press will describe us as monitoring hate groups, I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, completely destroy them,” Potok said at an event in Michigan in 2007.

Lamentably, with the pretense of objectivity, the SPLC is not just the arbiter of bigotry but also the media’s expert witness for evaluating “extremism.”  When the SPLC releases its Hate Map the media respond like Pavlovian dogs, producing salacious and often slanderous stories about the “racists” and nationalists allegedly terrorizing Middle America.  The purpose is to silence dissenters and exile social traditionalists and nationalists to the periphery of American life for the crime of articulating positions that were common, indeed almost universal, until the 1960s. And the hive descended upon pastor McAtee. 

Michigan Public Radio (MPR) claimed McAtee, “has maligned a panoply of persons and groups, including LGBTQ individuals, feminists, non-Christian immigrants…other pastors, and people who support diversity.”  The Fox affiliate in Lansing offered coverage and the Lansing State Journal (LSJ), said McAtee “frequently expresses racist, white nationalist, homophobic and transphobic views.”


MPR offered no quotations or links to buttress their claims.  The LSJ and Fox47 casually and carelessly ripped portions of McAtee’s blog posts from their broader context to build an indictment not supported by his words.    

Indeed, many of McAtee’s challenges to the smelly orthodoxies of our era were fairly standard conservative cultural critiques until quite recently.  Echoing the warnings of Sam Francis about Anarcho-Tyranny, McAtee said “diversity” is a weapon designed to produce statism.  Multiculturalism is built on an egalitarian foundation, fueled by envy, and wielded so as to further undermine the cracked foundations of the West.  

A “multicultural, multi-faith, multi-racial, pluralist diverse social order…is the death of the West and the God who made the West,” said McAtee.

Adding to his list of transgressions, McAtee has unapologetically argued that nationalism is natural, taught in scripture, and affirmed historically by the church.  

“God still deals with people as being members of nations, peoples, and races,” wrote McAtee.  “This is a very unsavory truth for the modern Evangelical with their love affair for the erasure of all the creation distinctions. God has not given up on nations anymore than He has given up on families from where nations arise.”

And here we get to the heart of the matter.  The “heretical ” teaching being attacked is Christian nationalism.  

McAtee and his congregation had a loose affiliation with the Christian Reformed Church (CRC).  The CRC has been in decline for decades, a consequence of its ongoing theological drift into apostate liberalism.  In 2018, McAtee was released from the CRC after a dispute over his teaching of “Kinism.”  In 2019, a CRC synod declared Kinists heretics.  What exactly is Kinism?

Kinism is a variant of Christian Nationalism that rests on a series of theological assumptions about social relations associated with traditional doctrines of Reformed Protestantism.  It begins with the assertion that men are inherently religious creatures and that all “government” is by definition theocratic in nature.  Whether personal or familial, church or state, every system and social order is necessarily faith-based and presuppositional rather than religiously neutral or empiricist in nature.  

Second, the normative order for families and nations, which are a product of extended families, is primarily racial and ethnic rather than propositional.  Culture is principally though not exclusively a product of people and place more so than ideas.

In this view, even multiculturalists have a “theocratic” view of authority and a tribal anthropology:  by the power of reason (their deity), they construct a global order which blends all racial and national distinctions into a single people, the race of Adam or humanity (their tribe). The dispute thus is over the teaching of holy scripture and the church.  Is cosmopolitanism, globalism or empire a Christian social order?  Or does the divine economy rest upon nations?

For 2,000 years, Christians have taught that national, ethnic, and language groups are not arbitrary human creations or social constructs, but divinely created entities that reflect the purposes and glory of God.

Nations arise organically as extensions of families and in the Old Testament nations are the descendents of a particular ancestor (See Genesis 10).  People organize themselves into distinct groups for the purpose of securing safety and providing a series of collective goods. Nations have a collective identity and a shared ancestry along with a shared worldview that is the product of a common language, religion, and customs. 

God created tribes, nations and races to have an affinity for their own people.  This is expressed in the words of St. Paul in Romans 9:3:  “For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh.”  A deep affection for one’s kinsmen is natural and good, indeed an outgrowth of the commandment to honor our fathers and mothers.  And nationalism is simply the self-conscious awareness that seeks to develop and improve the nation and to codify its existence with the laws, government, mores, and institutions that make civic life possible.

Scripture likewise teaches that nations serve the purpose of aiding man by pointing to greater transcendent realities.  Boundaries and nations are designed to point us to God himself.

“He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him.” (Acts 17:26-27)

Christ assumed the goodness of unique nations, teaching that the gospel does not flatten or eliminate nations.  He commanded the church to disciple nations as nations, not merely as individuals: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,  teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Matt. 28:19-20).

The church–Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox–has also taught that nationalism is biblical, an aspect of personal piety, and a reflection of the goodness of God.  

“The Bible recognizes the validity and rightness of all the constitutional principles and impulses of our nature.” wrote Presbyterian Charles Hodge.  “It therefore approves of parental and filial affection, and, as is plain from this and other passages, of peculiar love for the people of our own race and country.”

Thomas Aquinas said:

Man is a debtor chiefly to his parents and his country, after God. Wherefore just as it belongs to religion to give worship to God, so does it belong to piety, in the second place, to give worship to one’s parents and one’s country [i.e., one’s people]. The worship due to our parents includes the worship given to all our kindred, since our kinfolk are those who descend from the same parents.

“Nations,” said Alexander Solzhenitsyn in his Nobel Prize speech, “are the wealth of humanity, its generalized personalities. The least among them has its own special colors, and harbors within itself a special aspect of God’s design.

It should also go without saying Christian Nationalism is not “White Supremacy,” but applies these biblical principles to all national groups–red and yellow, black and white.   The gospel of Jesus Christ is not an affront to this natural order and does not seek to overthrow it.  

McAtee Contra Pattengale on the Legacy of Dr. Glenn Martin on Tyranny

You can read the whole article I’m interacting with over at

The Capitol offense: A Christian professor’s warning 50 years ago

___

It seems today is a day to go after the Wesleyans. I didn’t plan it that way. As many readers of Iron Ink know Dr. Glenn Martin of Marion College was the closest thing I ever had to a mentor. As such you can understand my desire to see that the man is not misrepresented in the media. Unfortunately, that is what happened back on 27 January Religious News Service ran an article by an old friend, Dr. Jerry Pattengale, who was trying to tell us what Dr. Martin would have thought about the protest at the Capitol on 06 January 2021. I went to Marion College with Jerry. He was two or three years ahead of me. We were acquaintances — neither friends nor enemies. We both ran in the same circles sharing a common major.

Jerry did a fantastic job giving Dr. Martin’s eulogy in 2004. I was there and I wept as Jerry recounted the life of Dr. Martin. I was glad for Jerry’s words that day.

However, I am not glad for this piece that Jerry wrote in January. It mischaracterized Dr. Martin’s teachings on Government.

Jerry starts the article by reminding us of Martin’s conviction that the US Capitol was not impregnable. Martin was consistent on this score. He did not think that any institution was necessarily permanent. Martin taught repeatedly that only God is eternal.

Next Jerry quotes from Martin’s 2004 book, “Prevailing Worldviews of Western Society Since 1500,” where Martin wrote,  that American Christians should “reverence government as a gift of God for the orderly procedure of man in a fallen world.” Martin went on to note that the reason is that “to deny government leads first to anarchy, but ultimately back to tyranny. Out of anarchy must necessarily come authoritarianism, because anarchy produces nothing but a vacuum, and a vacuum must and will be filled.”

This is all true but Jerry has absolutized Martin’s words in a way that Dr. Martin would not have countenanced. Actually, Jerry Pattengale in this article has not given us the whole Martin here. Having been a student myself of Martin and having sat under every course the man taught save one and having taken one on one projects for credit with Martin I would remind Jerry that Martin clearly articulated his support for the Southern uprising in 1861 against the Jacobins and the proto-Marxist Lincoln.

Jerry thus is cherry-picking from Martin and giving a twisted account of the Man’s convictions. I am not convinced that Martin would have said that there is never a time and a place for Godly revolt against ungodly government. Jerry’s words in this article suggest that is exactly what Martin thought.

Jerry is in error to state categorically that Dr. Martin believed categorically that all government should be reverenced. I don’t believe that Martin believed that. Certainly, a godly government should be reverenced but would Jerry have us believe that an ungodly government of the stripe of a Stalin or a Lenin or a Trotsky should be reverenced? How about Mussolini, or Mao? Jerry has to deal with the reality that at some point a biblical Christian has to draw a line to remind wicked magistrates that they are not in the seat of God. John Knox understood this principle. Oliver Cromwell understood this principle. The Huguenot Admiral Coligny understood this principle.  I believe Dr. Glenn Martin understood this as well as evidenced by his refusal to condemn the antebellum South.

There are many other things wrong with Jerry’s article. There are things we know now that we did not know when Jerry wrote this. One example is that we now know that LEO Brian Sicknick was NOT murdered at the rally on 06 January in DC. Jerry should have waited before drinking the Media kool-aid.

Jerry also suggests that Martin only feared that the liberal view would exalt the state. Martin repeatedly said that the liberal view had exalted the state and that we were living in times where the State had taken the place of “God walking on the earth.” Martin did not merely fear that the liberal view would exalt the state. The man directly said repeatedly that modern man had come to see himself as “living and moving and having his being in the State.”

Also, Dr. Pattengale suggests that Martin would have been squeamish about the vitriolic exchanges during the Trump impeachment hearings. Certainly, no Biblical Christian is happy about that but Martin no less than any other Biblical Christian would have been a realist about the nature of politics. He knew that politics did not follow the queen of marquess boxing rules. Martin knew that politics was a dirty game that included “any means necessary,” when pursued by the pagan. Martin did not live in some kind of idealistic world.

Pattengale goes on to say,

“The attack on city, state and federal property and the killing of innocent people in the process — including civil servant defenders such as Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick — is always criminal. Somehow, many Americans have digressed into calling the same criminal actions by different names.”

The simple fact of the matter is that we really do not know yet what happened on 06 January and it is unlikely we ever will. Many accounts tell us that Police Officers opened doors for the protesters. Other accounts insist that many of those pursuing the mayhem were not Trump supporters but were Antifa as imposter Trump supporters playing the devil’s game. Next, in the above-italicized paragraph, Jerry speaks of the killing of Brian Sicknick — a Capitol police officer. We now know that Officer Sicknick’s death had absolutely nothing to do with what happened on 06 January 2021. We now know that the whole narrative about Sicknick was a Marxist Media dog and pony show in order to increase the putative guilt of Trump supporters. The Marxists created that narrative to shame Trump and His supporters. Jerry should have waited before swallowing that torpid media narrative.

Next Jerry takes a swipe at those who have not yet been convicted of killing Ahmaud Aubrey. Clearly, Jerry is writing this piece from a left-of-center mindset. I promise you … Martin was anything but left-of-center. Jerry’s left-of-center mindset shows through again where he supports Peter Berger’s pluralism. Jerry, along with Berger, has not yet realized that the classical liberal worldview that birthed pluralism is dead dead dead. It only continues to exist as a Zombie now. Pluralism was never a particularly Christian idea — at least not as it has come down to us from its Endarkenment origins.

Jerry goes on to say how “Martin called biblical Christians to look first to Jesus to repair our society.” This is true. However, this looking to Jesus to repair our society doesn’t happen apart from the context of Biblical Christians pressing the crown rights of Jesus Christ in every area of life. A wicked government will stand against Biblical Christians who are looking first to Jesus to repair our society.

So, following one of Martin’s heroes Biblical Christians have to understand there comes a time when we reverence God by not reverencing the government.

The bottom line is that at a certain point there is not only the right, but the duty, to disobey the state.

(A Christian Manifesto, in The Complete Works of Francis Schaeffer, 5:468–69)

If Jerry disagrees with this he is falling into the same sacred/secular mindset that Martin warned against and that by making the government sacred and so not to be touched under any circumstances.

My old acquaintance Jerry ends by quoting Martin again as saying,

“All should reverence government as a gift of God for our orderly procedure in a fallen world.”

I think that Jerry is trying to rescue the tattered remains of the social compact that has glued Americans together for decades now by repeatedly invoking this mantra. We noted earlier that Jerry is misrepresenting Martin here. We would only offer here that our government is pressing down upon our brows chaos and not orderly procedure and as such Biblical Christians have a responsibility to start asking the question that the Southerners that Martin supported asked. That question is, “How long do we keep reverencing a government that is trying to kill us and our posterity.” If Jerry can’t see that our current government has been pursuing that for decades and now is pursuing it in spades, well, he’ll just have to read back entries to Iron Ink.

Dr. Glenn Martin is no icon for tyranny and I resent more than a wee bit Jerry trying to turn him into that kind of icon.

Postscript: I can see all kinds of people accusing me of writing this as a Trump supporter. I was not and am not a Trump supporter as many articles on IronInk will attest. I preached, from the pulpit, that Christians had no business voting for Trump. I thought, and still think, that Trump talked a great game but legislated as a 1960’s liberal. In brief, I did not support Trump because as a Biblical Christian I am a genuine conservative. Trump was and is no conservative.

It’s ok… not many people are.

 

 
 
 

Hey Indiana Wesleyan University Bureaucrats … Leave Those Kids Alone

I grew up Wesleyan and so there will always be a place in my heart for Wesleyans. When I say I grew up Wesleyan, I don’t mean merely that I attended a Wesleyan Church. I mean that Wesleyans were my best friends. I mean Wesleyans shepherded me through some pretty tough adolescent times. I mean Wesleyans took me in as a foster child at age 17 and helped me finish high school. I mean Wesleyans educated me on the first leg of the higher education journey.  I mean the first sermon I preached was in a Wesleyan pulpit. I attended their summer camps, I dated their daughters, and I studied their theology.   Because of all this and more, I will never cease being grateful to God for the Wesleyans.

I think (at least I hope) that it is this gratitude that every once in a while finds me dipping into their culture to see what is going on as well as prompting me to go after the same kind of stupidity they are pursuing as you find in spades in the “Reformed” world. Recently, that stupidity was brought before me as my wife directed my attention to the Alumni magazine that we receive (and which I almost never look at).

The stupidity of this June 2020 edition of “Triangle” is so jejune that I just had to write something here on Iron Ink. Below find III Roman numerals and my engagement with them.

I.) “Under Vice President Diane McDaniel’s leadership within the Office of Diversity & Inclusion, many important initiatives began or have strengthened in the last six years.”

BLMc responds,

I comment here in order to put into the absolutely ridiculous nature of the titles these people are holding. We are looking at three people here and here are the offices/titles they are associated with putting back to back;

1.) Office of Diversity and Inclusion
2.) Intercultural and Global Office
3.) Executive Director for Inclusive Excellence and International Education
4.) Executive Director of Multicultural Learning & Engagement

The least egregious sin of #1 is that it is redundant. If you have an office of Diversity doesn’t that automatically mean you’re chasing down Inclusion? I mean, how can an Office of Diversity be exclusive at the same time?

All of these offices and Titles are sucking off the Worldview teat of Cultural Marxism and Critical Race Theory. Having an Office of Diversity and Inclusion is just another way of saying, “Office of We Need Fewer White People.” Think about it … How many Universities in Peking, China have an “Office of Diversity and Inclusion?”  No… it is only stupid white people swigging away at Marxist hooch who create an “Office of Diversity and Inclusion.”

All of these Offices/Titles suffer from Job Title Inflation. What a resume enhancer it must be to have once been the Executive Director of Multicultural Learning & Engagement of some backwater Wesleyan University who was a Critical Race Theory wannabee.

Next, consider the money that is being bored into the budgets of these nonsensical (make-work) offices and positions. Every year I have my Alma Mater — Indiana Wesleyan University — calling me or sending me junk mail begging me for money. Never once have I called them or sent them junk mail asking them to support the Church I serve. Yet, were I to send them money they would pour it down the rat-hole that is “The Office of Diversity & Inclusion,” or give it to some feminists working in the “Intercultural and Global” Office. You know these people with the titles of “Executive Director” are making 6 figures easy. And yet despite the fact that Indiana Wesleyan University is pursuing an anti-Christian Worldview as part of their University culture (Critical Race Theory), they want the working blue-collar people of the Denomination to send them money to fill their blood money coffers. This goes beyond being criminal to become sacrilege since it is all being done in the name of Jesus.

If you’re a Wesleyan, and you’re sending money to support Indiana Wesleyan University you’re doing the Devil’s work.

II.) “Dr. Joel Olufowote joined IWU Marion’s Intercultural and Global Office in 2018. He serves as the executive director for inclusive excellence and international education.” During his first two years, Dr. Olufowote laid a conceptual foundation for inclusive work that is Kingdom-focused. He helped to systematize aspects of our protocols and culture that reflect the Lord’s color-blind love.

BLMc

The “Lord” is color blind? The “Lord” doesn’t know the color of the people He calls to Himself? Certainly, when it comes to salvation, the “Lord” is no respecter of persons, but to suggest that he’s color blind would suggest some imperfection in the “Lord,” and that I find quite curious.

Alternately, maybe they are saying that God doesn’t care about the color of one’s skin when building the Kingdom. But if God is color blind on these matters shouldn’t His people be as well and so not emphasize color by having an Executive Director of Inclusive Excellence? I mean, what else is the University doing but emphasizing that God does see color by having an office that is all about seeing color and making sure that the color quota on campus is met every year? It seems to me that God indeed is color blind but all the University is seeing is color everywhere.

I mean … understand that Olufowote’s work is to make sure the Campus is not too White. The man was hired to see color … to be “Inclusive.” God may not see color but I guaran-damn-tee you that Olufowote does. If nobody was seeing color nobody would notice that color was lacking and needed to be pursued.

II. B) With the events of this past summer, Joel’s work quickly moved to action. “Because of COVID-19, our students were not here [on campus],” said Dr. Olufowote. “Still, we wanted them to know that we are always here for them. We knew our students were being impacted but they did not have a community to process with, to lament with. At the same time, they were being overwhelmed by the media. We thought ‘we should reach out and listen.’” Through “I Can’t Breathe” forums for students and employees, Dr. Olufowote fostered an opportunity for the residential community to lament, to listen, and to learn. It gave him the chance to arm IWU’s commitment to move along the spectrum of inclusion…. The outflow of these conversations will manifest themselves during this 2020-2021 academic year; one of note is the formation of the Black Student Union.

BLMc responds,

a.) Let me get this straight … students were doing school online at home because of COVID and so not on campus but the poor tender darlings couldn’t cope with the stress of it all?  The students — now off-campus — needed some “lament outlet” because the media was bruising them so badly and Joel was there to rescue them by providing a “I Can’t Breath” forum? This is the stuff of a stand-up comedy routine. Who comes up with this drivel? Indiana Wesleyan University is paying this guy six figures to be a hand-holder and wet nurse for adults who can’t find the intestinal fortitude to go on with life because of the pain coming from TV media anchors?

I can only speak for myself but I found myself constantly thinking when I was a student at IWU, “I wish the bureaucrats would just leave me the hell alone.” Apparently, now the students need bureaucrats to help them get through life even when the students are not on campus.

b.) I’m sure it is just coincidental that Dr. Olufowote, who is black, is forming a Black Student Union. I’m wondering which Latino IWU is going to hire now so that he can justify his salary by forming a “Hispanic Student Union.”

III.) Dr. Karen A. Dowling, executive director of multicultural learning &
engagement, collaborated with IWU National & Global leaders to address these same missional interests. As a team, they organized two “Hoping Together” forums for online students and another ten “Growing Together” sessions for employees as a response to the “Sharing Our Hearts” employee forum….move forward in this important work. One faculty member took the initiative to form a task force to evaluate program curricula for more integration of inclusion and equity content.

When is the work done? When Biblical justice and equity is the common culture of our communities, and specifically IWU…

BLMc

a.) I’d bet my retirement that Dr. Karen A. Dowling is a full-blown feminist.

b.) Hoping Together/Growing Together/Sharing Our Hearts? Is this University or is this pre-school? Did she put on her sweater and tennis shoes before getting started like Mr. Rogers used to do?

Honestly, if students really do need this kind of stuff we are in more troubled waters than I even thought we were.

C.) Twice in #3 the word “equity” is used. This is the main tip that we are talking about Critical Race Theory in this whole agenda. Keep in mind that equity is a step beyond equality. (And equality the way Progressives define it is already a step too far.) Equity is about redressing past grievances. Equity says that since perverts, women, and minorities were (allegedly) discriminated against in the past, therefore, it is fitting, proper, and necessary for white people (especially white males) to be discriminated against today. Equity is about settling old scores against the putative way white people treated minorities, perverts, and feminists. When the word “equity” is used it means payback.

Indiana Wesleyan University has now become an arm of the Cultural Marxist movement to marginalize white Christians by reinterpreting Christianity through the prism of Critical Race Theory. I would guess that many of the Professors there who are contributing to this worldview shift are just useful idiots who don’t know what they are doing. I suspect even President David Wright falls into this category. However, you can be sure that there are some people on that campus who know exactly what they are doing. You can also be sure that some people are on campus who are against this but who are too fearful for their professional careers to speak out against this nonsense.

All of this is ubiquitous on Christian campuses of every Denominational stripe.

 

Michigan Gov. Whitmer says to Michigan Peasant Class; “Rules for Thee, but not for Me.”

I.) Michigan’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer, came under fire in May/2020 as allegations popped up that her own husband had been trying to flout her strict COVID shutdown rule by cutting in line to launch his boat in Northern Michigan. Whitmer’s husband apparently forgot Whitmer’s request to Michiganians “not to descend on to the waterfront in crowds over the weekend.”

When Gov. Whitmer found out about her husband’s actions she said,

“I wish it wouldn’t have happened, And that’s all we really have to say about it.”

II.) Last month, it was revealed Whitmer took an out-of-state trip in March to Florida, while at the same time urging people to stay home, as COVID-19 cases surged in the state. She had missed her Daddy and wanted to spend some Daddy-Daughter time. When asked about the inconsistency of telling Michiganders to stay at home while she galloped across the country Whitmer said,

“When a family member of mine needs a little help, though, I’m going to show up” even if I have to defy the orders I place on Michigan peasants.

III.) This weekend photographic evidence came to light of Michigan Gov. Whitmer violating her own Covid policies for the Citizens of Michigan as she was photographed yucking it up at a bar in Lansing Mich. with approximately 10 friends… all unmasked and all nearly sitting on top of one another. When queried about this action the Governor said… YET AGAIN…,

“I am human. I made a mistake, and I apologize.”