Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Hart’s Secular Faith’ Category

Daniel Howe Can I try some Christian statements on civil government? (1) Jesus in his resurrection has defeated and de-authorized all governments. (With the anabaptists and “Christian anarchists”). (2) All governments are secular (they last only as long as the seculum), not eternal like the church. (3) Jesus has partially re-authorized the governments of the [...]

Read Full Post »

This is in response to some of the comments under the Hussein post, but I thought it big enough to make a new post. Bill asked who disagreed. I knew I could find some people to disagree, if the issues were framed properly. Thing is, this is what I have been arguing all along, and [...]

Read Full Post »

I used this point in one of my comments in another discussion thread but I still think it’s worth a wider hearing, if only for me to hear how those in the Covenanter tradition might respond. Post-mill’s and Christian Americanists generally identify the advance of Christ’s rule with certain political, social and cultural trends. In [...]

Read Full Post »

One of the most helpful features of Darryl’s argument is that it strips away the last remnants of theocracy and gives us an opportunity to be more consistent with our theological confession. There was unresolved tension in our 17th-century confession between our view of redemptive history as expressed in our covenant theology (covenant of works [...]

Read Full Post »

Question: Back in chapter 1: City on a Hill, Darryl wrote, “But as antithetical as the two cities were in Augustine’s mind, and as much as that antagonism might seperate believers from nonbelievers… (pg. 39). I am confused by this reading of Augustine. In this age, can the two cities be understood as really antithetical? [...]

Read Full Post »

Biographical Note

A short biographical aside appears appropriate at this juncture. I am a lawyer and thus my approach to these matters has probably followed a somewhat different course than others (excepting perhaps Chellis). My curiosity began largely from sociological/legal interest in how people construct, adapt, modify, and deliver argument. Specifically, the various kinds of political arguments [...]

Read Full Post »

So far I have been accused of holding to high a view of the natural law and to low a view of it. I want to do justice to a proper view so will allow the venerable ghost of Kirk to speak. I appreciate Kirk’s view as it seems to me very close to that [...]

Read Full Post »

Daniel Howe Darryl, thanks for the props on Englishness. If you think about it, it’s not that weird that the Scots and Scots-Irish would be the British exceptionalists. Bad experiences with Cromwell notwithstanding, the Scottish and Scots-Irish comprise the survival of muscular puritanism in the three kingdoms. That puritanism was marked by both relentless reformation [...]

Read Full Post »

Protestants at the time of the War for Independence and since have talked a lot about the need for a virtuous citizenry to protect this freedom-loving republic. The rhetoric of virtue has always made religion necessary to the health of the U.S. From George Washington to Jerry Falwell, the American religio-political tradition has been to [...]

Read Full Post »

In commenting on my review of Darryl’s book, Bill Chellis asks, I think that Darryl has a doctrine that makes Christianity applicable to politics. Darryl Hart is no heretic. He is no anabaptist. He affirms the soverign Kingship of Christ over both Kingdoms (one common and one holy). I am waiting to hear how, in [...]

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.