Speaker 1: 0:19

What is up, universe? Oh hey, welcome to the Theology in Pieces pieces podcast, where we hope to rebuild your theology that the church, the world or somebody has shattered to pieces, and we are your hosts, slim and malcolm. And today we are a little under a week away from the election and we thought yeah, we thought why not talk about church politics with Adam Joyce?

Speaker 3: 0:45

Well, not church politics, but like politics and the church. That's why.

Speaker 1: 0:51

I titled it Church Politics. You don't think that's a good idea?

Speaker 3: 0:54

No, because it's not about the politics within the. It's about the politics of the world as we, the church, talk about Anyway it's fine, but that's like the double meaning.

Speaker 1: 1:03

That's the innuendo. I'm the uh, the innuendo.

Speaker 3: 1:05

I'm trying to be trying to be innuendo-y. It's inappropriate slim. That's that's what people call me. It's inappropriate slim slim the innuendo.

Speaker 1: 1:15

Oh dear, oh dear malcolm, besides that exchange we just had, I have, I have, I have it's confession time oh dear I have lots to confess to you oh gosh and to the world and to repent of, oh dear.

Speaker 1: 1:35

On our last episode I had one of the biggest blunders. Oh and miss, miss speakings, what did? Did you do when we talked about our favorite movie? I said my favorite movie. And you would think that would not be something you would miss up, right. But I went back and listened to the episode and I said my favorite movie was Inception.

Speaker 3: 1:57

Hmm, I still remember.

Speaker 1: 2:00

I just and it's a Christopher Nolan movie, so I even talked about Christopheropher nolan but, I thought I was saying interstellar, oh, which is my favorite movie? Got it and that seems to be really important for me to, to make sure I confess and repent. I inception's great.

Speaker 3: 2:17

I forgive you for deceiving me yes yes, yes and I will.

Speaker 1: 2:20

I promise I will never do it again. And now for reparations to happen.

Speaker 3: 2:25

I don't know how that would work Okay, but I will always take cash.

Speaker 1: 2:34

Just so we're clear. Speaking of, how's the anti-greed gospel getting? Just so we're clear on that.

Speaker 3: 2:37

Look man, it's good, we'll see three, three and a half months and it'll be out. I will have, I'll have some. I'll have some book launch events in waco in that in that week so everybody keep your, keep your eyes open for those. Yes, are you excited? Oh, yeah, man, uh, it is like the single thing I'm most excited about and will be for the next like six months.

Speaker 1: 3:02

Uh, well, I mean not thanksgiving, not christmas, whatever all that's all that's fine. Happens every year um, not the birth of your, your first son look, I don't know who is.

Speaker 3: 3:12

I don't even know what that'll happen, so just you know um no, no still still there's no announcements here.

Speaker 1: 3:21

No, no, there are. No, there are not no there are not. You're gonna get someone, nobody get excited um speaking of malcolm as a dad, let's talk about our favorite section of uh, our podcast terrible tweets oh, no, uh, malcolm oh no this tweet caught my eye a little while ago and, as a dad, it infuriated me. This is from the Blaze on Twitter slash X, depending on who wants to call it what how a beloved children's cartoon turns fathers into mothers, and what the Bible says about it.

Speaker 3: 4:05

And you click the article.

Speaker 1: 4:06

Yes, it's an article about how Bluey turns fathers into mothers and what the Bible says about it. Have you ever watched Bluey? Yeah. Are you a fan?

Speaker 3: 4:20

I've only watched a few episodes, but it's great. I mean, I think there's a lot of stuff on emotional regulation which is great for your kids and also great for you Apparently, you're abdicating your role as a father. Wow.

Speaker 1: 4:30

Because here's what this author has to say. It depicts the ideal father who embodies all the elements of the traditional mother purged of the essence of elements from the historic father. Oh, um, it says the. The dad bandit is seen as constantly nurturing Uh huh, oh, always present playmate oh to his two daughters, Bluey and bingo. And he's so present, In fact, that the fans of the show often joke about when bandit finds the time to work.

Speaker 1: 5:02

And in the show, it when bandit finds the time to work and in the show it's clear the mother has less time to play than dad, and so if there's anything we need in our society, more is more workaholics right, and more fathers that are not nurturing.

Speaker 3: 5:17

We need more absent fathers. Yeah, and not nurturing and not nurturing. But like that, like that's the other thing, like as though. As though though it is only good for a mother to be nurturing and fathers are not supposed to be nurturing, as though, children it's seen as constantly nurturing as though one of the primary things that a child needs is nurture. Okay, All right bro.

Speaker 1: 5:40

God created the concept of male and female to create the kind of family that would maximize fruitfulness and multiplication that, over the generations of collective effort, would subdue and rule the created order. Okay, okay, we compliment one another well. Embracing these kinds of betrayals, especially in a high symbolic medium like a cartoon, will go a long way in shaping our intuition around the essence of these roles.

Speaker 1: 6:03

Huh, our intuition around the essence of these roles? Oh, so is it. Is it bad that that Bluey is father, is, is bandit, is being present and and taking on some of the more female roles? Is that are these?

Speaker 3: 6:19

female roles. That's the other thing, like I don't think it's, I don't think it's female to be nurturing or to be present. I think that's good parenting, uh-huh, which is something that both fathers and mothers should do I mean and like, and also you know who know, also for the critique, for the critique, the whatever job uh bandit has, like maybe, maybe he organizes his life in such a way that he prioritizes his time with his children.

Speaker 1: 6:55

Yeah, and also, like that's what you see on the show, like that, like I it's I cannot imagine watching to be a good bluey and going, yeah, this is wrong, this is what a father should not be.

Speaker 3: 7:13

I feel like this is one of these playing with his children. He's got to be running the capitalistic right rat race. What is he? Everyone who's watching the show is loving your children business I think everyone's watching the show is loving your children business.

Speaker 1: 7:25

I think everyone's watching shows like man. Finally, a depiction of a healthy family and of a father, you know, not dying in the middle of the early of the season or anything like that, but like actually being there I'm gonna pull up this article so I can respond to it this is absolute garbage, oh my goodness.

Speaker 1: 7:44

And so I'm wondering, though, is sometimes, when watching Bluey, I see it as more of like oh, I love it. That's a great depiction of a dad. Also, it gives me ideas and reminds me of what, what's more important in life. I'm wondering if this person his name is Jeremy Pryor saw it and felt convicted. I could be wrong. There's, there's, jeremy Pryor saw it and felt convicted I could be wrong. There's so many, you know you cannot presume upon what's going on at their home, it seems to be the only way of reading this, unless you also come to it with such hyper-sexualized male and female roles.

Speaker 3: 8:20

Well here, if you want to spend a little time, we can actually respond to it substantively. So he lays out three premises that he believes on the topic and if we disagree with any of these, then we'll likely disagree with his conclusion. Here are the three premises. First, masculinity and femininity are not social constructs or primarily biological concepts, but are family I don't know what a family concept is distinct from, Anyway, but are family concepts designed to create a certain dynamic and to construct a highly functional multi-generational family team. First premise. Second premise the Bible presents meta descriptions of masculinity slash fatherhood which is interesting because those are two very distinct things and femininity slash motherhood through symbolic characters primarily rooted in the story of Genesis. Three meta depictions of these roles are good and necessary to give culture at large something concrete to aim at, even though all of us as individuals will find some elements of these roles dissonant with our desires or even our innate wiring. Yeah, those are three claims that undergird his discomfort.

Speaker 1: 9:34

As you just said, we have problems with a lot of these. So I think just I don't want to spend a ton of time on this, but I just think we've talked about kind of the gender difference before and we do believe there are gender differences, um, we do believe that that. I love the way nt right talked about this is that the uh, complementarian or complimentary is too good of a word to let them have. It is, as he said, it um meaning that that male and female do complement each other. Very well, um, but I think to be able to start describing um anything with saying here's what masculinity is, most times we are bringing our social construct into the conversation, um, and so a hundred percent of the time. Then then what the bible actually says.

Speaker 1: 10:21

So what does the bible actually say about masculinity and about femininity? And is it saying that's actually what it is, or are you just saying, well, no, this is what the Bible says and you're going okay, is that descriptive of what males are doing, or is that prescriptive of what males? Or is it saying this is how it looked in this time and in this setting? Or is it saying this is what it should look like? And I think we misconstrue this all the time, but most times I don't even think he's even wrestling with biblical texts. He's not even arguing from like I mean, he references a few scriptures here, but in terms of like saying that this picture of the Bible if it's Ruth or whatever tells us this is what women should be and look like. But he's not doing that. Um, I think more of it's just us bringing our culture into the text and then justifying it that way, and so I just I want to say, yes, we have we, we compliment one another, but, man, you gotta be careful.

Speaker 3: 11:28

Cause it sounds. Now you are, now you are lambasted bluey. This, which is such a kind and happy show yeah, well, and yeah, yeah, I mean yeah.

Speaker 1: 11:34

So, uh, I saw that and that that killed me. I was like are you kidding? It's like, it's like beating up a, a animal.

Speaker 3: 11:44

Like what?

Speaker 1: 11:45

Who would do this? I'll tell you who would do this Jeremy Pryor would do it. All right. My other terrible tweet. This is from the conservative caucus and it says someone shouted Jesus is Lord. And Kamala gleefully said I think you're at the wrong rally. Christians know that Kamala hates you and all Christians. Get 10 fellow parishioners to vote with you. So did you hear about this? Yeah, I mean disregarding the fact that, like Hold on, let me play the clip real quick, okay.

Speaker 2: 12:23

Oh, you guys are at the wrong rally. No, I think you meant to go to the smaller one down the street whichever you think of it, that last line was pretty funny, all right.

Speaker 1: 12:51

So Kamala's at one of her political rallies last week and there is a group of protesters there that were protesting in the middle of the rally, which is like they have the right to do, but apparently they were shouting Jesus is Lord and it interrupted Kamala. And so then she responds oh, you're at the wrong rally. And now this conservative caucus and others, not just them. This was all over. People were saying Kamala hates christians. Malcolm, should we be worried that we have a presidential candidate that hates christians um a week away from the election?

Speaker 3: 13:36

it's far too risky for me to say what I really want to say, which I'm going to say anyway, which is, like, she's not the one who actually hates Christians, but, but I. So, first of all, I think the fact that we hear that and we think that what she's responding to is the specific claim that Jesus is Lord, right as opposed to. I mean, those folks were like I, I think, from what I, from what I saw, though, they were, um, they were, they were, they were anti abortion folks who disagree with her on her on, on her platform, on those on those grounds, um, and they shouted. They shouted jesus, they shouted jesus lord, because you know as Lord, because that's the position from which they make that political claim.

Speaker 3: 14:31

And then she's responding with I mean, if you're being heckled at your own at your rally, like obviously they're at the wrong rally, like that's, like that's what she's just basically saying, basically saying, if you're here, I expect you to be here to celebrate me. Like, like, there's like, there's just a sense in which, like that's a like, all this is just a very no, like it's just a very normal thing to say at your own yeah, at your own rally, and but, but, but for it to yeah, that's, that's yeah, so when I first heard this, I and I heard her response, I heard them um protesting I did not understand.

Speaker 1: 15:12

I did not hear from the audio them saying jesus is lord right, yeah and so all I heard was her response. I mean like that was pretty funny, yeah. And then it became this huge twitter storm of all of these christ, these Christians, saying how dangerous Kamala is and how Christians cannot vote for her because she hates Christians in this way that they are not welcome. And so I just think I mean, if I couldn't hear what they had to say from the audio there's no doubt she's in the middle of her speech and there's people interrupting her, clearly trying to protest.

Speaker 1: 15:49

She's saying she knows they're. They're not there to support her and so she's like you're at the wrong rally. It was a joke. It had nothing to do with her saying jesus for them saying jesus is lord, and I again, like I could be completely wrong. She could be be anti-Christians. It would seem one really unwise for her as she's trying to win over Christian votes. Sure yeah. So that doesn't seem wise. Yeah.

Speaker 1: 16:15

Two, it goes in the face of what she has put herself out there as as a Christian. Yeah, and I have a question and a problem with something she did after that, of course, but like what this I think this boils down to that I have a problem with is all of these Christians? I would say I could be wrong. I would say know better and that know that she actually isn't responding to that in the right way. It doesn't matter.

Speaker 1: 16:43

And yet they put forward a false narrative yeah which is is breaking the the commandment to bear you know to of bearing false witness against your neighbor yeah it's like they they are actually bearing false witness about saying that she is responding in this way.

Speaker 1: 16:56

and so I'm just going like, uh, this is wrong and if, if it's not even that, if it's not bearing false witness, is just is is breaking that, like that call for us, as Christians, to be as charitable as as possible, to hope the best for one another and saying like, no, she probably didn't mean that I'm going to, I'm going to assume that I hope the best in her and anyone. We're all called that, but we, we we always assume the worst in our political opponents and assume the best in ourselves.

Speaker 3: 17:23

Yeah, and even assuming the most uncharitable interpretation of what Vice President Harris did, to then translate that to quote unquote, vote accordingly, meaning vote for the other party because they're the ones who actually love Christians, which, which is the uh unspoken undercurrent right, that of that, of that claim. Um, you know then, I see, I see, on the republican side, just and just like essentially open, taking the name of the lord in in vain that is, that is obvious.

Speaker 3: 18:00

Like, that's like, like, not as a response to a heckler, but just like as un, I mean unforced, just unforced blasphemy, essentially, um, and I don't and I I said this in this article that I put out on set on on saturday we were looking at, we're looking at, just two, uh, essentially two forms of antichrist um, and and which is.

Speaker 3: 18:27

I mean, that's that's what a number of our, of our presidential elections have always, have always been, it is, it is, it is an, it is a distinct problem for you to think that you're going to choose a, a, that you're going to choose a christian option or b, that you're going to choose somebody who loves christians, as though that's, as though that's a primary, like as though that's a primary um, uh, category that we ought to look for in our politicians, whether or not they love christians. Like that, even like, from there you're already, you're already operating from a, operating from a faulty premise, which is my political decisions ought to be made in such a way that they benefit me the most, and one of the things that I already told, that I tell the congregation, is like look, when you think about your first question that you ought to ask, when you think about your political action, is how is this going to affect the needy, needy? So when you notice that somebody's rhetoric seems to constantly be going after the marginalized and the oppressed, that seemed, that is more, that that is significantly anti-christ. Yeah, um, and, and regardless of the things that I mean, I mean people and saying things that are anti-christian. Yeah, that's important.

Speaker 1: 19:41

But also, if you, if you see that somebody's actions continually trample the poor and the oppressed, that is anti, that is and that is that is anti-christ yes um so anyway, yeah, and it also puts us in the position of, if we're saying no, we need our, we need our politician to, to be on the the christian side, to to make sure sure that Christians have a seat at the table, like both candidates, and this happens in every election.

Speaker 1: 20:11

Both candidates are trying to appeal and say no, I am one of you. And so it puts us in a spot where we are the pawns that they're trying to win over and for us to go like, no, no, you know you, you now, now you're one of us and the other is not. And it I would, I would argue pretty convincingly that Donald Trump is not a Christian by his own admission. I think pretty, pretty, pretty convincingly when you say you have no reason to repent, but that doesn't mean I'm, that doesn't mean ever that christians cannot vote for him. I'm not saying that I, although I have questions, right, um, but I don't think he's. That seems to be clear. I don't know if she is, but some of her policies I would say like oh, I don't know, um, you know having the most lethal, you know, military force and kind of this, this view of of like, just like living into what it is to be an American president.

Speaker 3: 21:07

Yeah, Part of this you just gotta do if you want to run for president.

Speaker 1: 21:10

And yet, and yet she and this also made me question, you know like. She went to um a church in, I think, in Atlanta, new Life Missionary Baptist Church, and she spoke on their Sunday morning at their Sunday morning service. And this is where I'm like yo, I am not, I'm not saying I am, I am for one of these, one of these people be like this is wrong.

Speaker 3: 21:29

I've like for your church to say I'm going to give up the preaching of the word Right, but if I'm present, I mean if I'm running for president. I'm obviously going to take that opportunity. I blame the pastor of the church. Yeah, you go after the pastor for that Well, 100%, that's where I'm like.

Speaker 1: 21:44

Oh.

Speaker 3: 21:45

If I was running for president, I would do all that stuff too. I'd be like get me in front of as many people as possible.

Speaker 1: 21:51

Is there anything you wouldn't do? It's why.

Speaker 3: 21:53

I'm never going to run for president. They would run me out so fast. I'd be like dismantle the American military, Nope.

Speaker 1: 22:06

Nope, like dismantle the american military, nope, nope.

Speaker 3: 22:07

This is why cornell west did not exactly well the poll. Well, I mean, like I, I love the fact that you know, even the way that he talked about his campaign, that he's like you know, I want to be at the top of the empire to dismantle the empire, and I'm like, like he said that and I'm like bro, it's such a good line, but it is, but I'm like bro, it's like it's not gonna happen, uh, but anyway.

Speaker 1: 22:25

Yeah, that goes into the what. What are we doing with this two-party system?

Speaker 3: 22:29

uh, do you know? Well, maybe, maybe adam, maybe adam will help us, maybe adam will help us with this what a transition, malcolm.

Speaker 1: 22:35

So a few weeks ago, um, we, on episode 48, we talked about politics and third-wayism and we referenced this article from uh guy named adam Joyce. And today we get to have Adam come on to the podcast and we get to grill him and to ask him all of the hard questions. And so, without further ado, Adam Joyce All right y'all. Well, hey, we are welcomed by a longtime friend new to me, but besties with Malcolm, with Adam Joyce here, who's written a very thought-provoking and very, I would say, radical article. If there is a third way, this isn't it how Christian centrists acquiesce I love that word to America's broken political system. Adam, my first question out of the gate is who do you think you are?

Speaker 3: 23:43

Just like in general, that's more of a like who is adam joyce?

Speaker 2: 23:48

but I want to say it very aggressively uh best way to answer.

Speaker 5: 23:52

We're going to be asked somebody else who?

Speaker 2: 23:54

knows me well and see how they answer it, but I will happily do it, okay, here um, yeah, adam joyce I.

Speaker 5: 24:01

so I am chicago based. Um, I am originally from kind of all over, but DC is home, but now I would say actually Chicago's home, lived here the longest anywhere. I am a married to a Methodist pastor, um, and she, I will say, tricked me into Methodism in like an endearing and joyful way, saying that I had to become a Methodist in order to get my kids baptized.

Speaker 1: 24:27

So I am now a methodist in order to get my kids baptized.

Speaker 5: 24:29

So I am now a methodist, um. But yeah, I grew up in a myriad of faith spaces um, escapalianism, evangelicalism, a little bit of reform, judaism, uh. But ended up getting interested in theology when I was younger, went to Wheaton College and then went to Duke Div for that with the intention of pursuing ministry. But, as I say, god had other plans at that point and ended up kind of falling into the evangelical faith and workspace for a number of years spending time there, but about eight, about seven years ago spending time there, but about eight, about seven years ago transitioned and I now do non-profit consulting um. So I do capacity building and professional development for non-profits in the chicago area and I dabble in writing and politics local politics okay, as well. So that is a, I don't know.

Speaker 1: 25:20

That's my introduction, that's me that's good, so you got a little bit of everything your hands at everything, the consultant at nonprofits, though I feel like I'm so curious. Is it like I've watched the show the Prophet, where they go in and try to fix struggling businesses? Is it kind of like that you go in and you're like cut this fire, this person build this sanctuary?

Speaker 5: 25:41

Maybe I'm as aggressive as the Prophet sanctuary? Uh, maybe as aggressive as the profit? Uh, it's more, it's more so. I'm actually based at north park university, um, at a center there, but what we do is what we say is we are invested in not necessarily the programmatic side, but the infrastructure side. So fundraising, uh, board development, um, marketing, hr, legal, all that sort of stuff is our purview. So, like, what does it look like for a nonprofit to function well so that it can do its programs? Some of it is, I guess, hard conversations every once in a while, but a lot of it is like trainings and consulting conferences, things like that.

Speaker 1: 26:21

That's good, that's good. Well, hey, we are.

Speaker 5: 26:24

Yeah, it would not work. I guess reality tv show someone would watch it uh, yeah, somebody maybe but, it's, let's just say it's not reality tv.

Speaker 1: 26:37

Well, hey, we are about, uh, under under a week away from this all important united states presidential election, and we know there's other elections as well. There's, you know, senate races and all of this stuff. Um, it's the most important election of our lifetimes, correct, um? And that is, that is fact that cannot be challenged, um, the every every four challenged Every four years.

Speaker 3: 27:05

Right every four years is the most important election of our lifetime, but this one feels a little more amped up.

Speaker 1: 27:12

So we're trying to wrestle with this as pastors, to think about how we are to shepherd and care for our flock, but also just as fellow churchgoers. I think you cannot turn on the TV, you cannot turn on the radio, you cannot bump into someone without this being kind of the main thing. So it just feels like our nation is kind of in this collective kind of simmering happening right now. Maybe, malcolm, since you like to do the float, I'm sure there's a timer and there's like the timer that's about to go off You're like, oh no, I guess in the float you really enjoy it.

Speaker 1: 27:50

I don't think any people are enjoying this election season, they just kind of want to wake up next Wednesday and go. Here's the results, which we probably won't have by Wednesday, but nor will they be accepted by a party.

Speaker 3: 28:03

Whatever man Slim, why would we reach out to Adam to talk about this?

Speaker 1: 28:08

We want to reach out to you, adam, because this article that Malcolm shared with me. It struck a chord, in the sense that I started reading this and I started going I agree with what you're saying. In the opposite, I knew you were setting me up for a big you know, like pulling the rug out from under me, and so I want to. I want to read part of this for our listeners, and I think we're on the second section or whatever. So you say you know the far right and the far left are two sides of the same coin. They are just fundamentalist extremes with different, divisive orthodoxies. These are can you come up with a couple of phrases that Christian centrists would use? And I'm going yeah, I've said those things, I'm pro-life from womb to the tomb or womb to the grave. So the right is mad at me sometimes and the left at others, which means I must be doing something right. Basically, I'm not progressive or conservative, I'm a Christian and Christ is my king. Again, amen.

Speaker 1: 29:06

Who do you think you are saying? These are wrong. Political conversations are overwhelmed by toxicity and anger. The primary way the church can confront this out-of-control tribalism is through the long, humble work of faithful discipleship that confounds both partisan loyalties and cultural ideologies. Hallelujah, amen. So I can feel the rug about to be pulled out. The problem is the us-them narrative. We are more divided and polarized than ever, and this is why it's so hard for us to love our neighbor and why our politics is so gridlocked. So, adam, what is wrong with this? Are you saying that God is a Republican or that God's a Democrat? Are you trying to say that we got to pick one? Where? Where are you going with?

Speaker 5: 29:48

this. I do know that god votes every election and I do have the full record of those, just to be, quick fyi yes, please reveal that right now what?

Speaker 1: 29:59

yeah, I think, go ahead, go ahead. I was just gonna ask begin the conversation of how, because this all sounds so like refreshing to me, because we've, I've, I've been in circles where it's been very clear um, the I've not been, I've not been in a church where the pastor said you have to vote, vote this way. But they would say, for this election season. Actually, malcolm did something like this last week. He said for this election season, here's who you should vote for. But didn't tell us who to vote for, but said here are some guiding principles. However, these pastors' guiding principles were usually one party's ticket and it was always the right-leaning party's ticket principles. So hearing some of these more centrist views was like, oh, this feels healthier, would you say. Would you say it's not no, I would.

Speaker 5: 30:59

So you, I would right off the bat say I wrote this article, I think, with an affection for Christian centrists and I think, with also a deep appreciation for that desire to basically remove yourself from that like toxic tornado that continually manifests itself in both interpersonal and like structural politics.

Speaker 5: 31:27

Um, and I think all of those like the, the dynamics of the, the easy answer of god is naturally republican or god is naturally a democrat.

Speaker 5: 31:37

I mean, on one level I do think it's easy, but another level I think it's extremely complex. And the question of what does it look like to be faithful as a christian in politics is a living question that I think needs to be continually reinterrogated, depending on what your political situation is, what is the political economy, the policies, the politicians, the parties, and what faithfulness looks like in 1935 is maybe different than what faithfulness looks like in 2024, even depending on where you are. But I think I mean a big piece of it too. I think is why I wrote the piece is, I hope that Christian centrists are persuadable as well, and that is, I think, a big piece of the, at least hopefully the trying to faithfully recreate the argument and I think also the language, and even like the emotional flows I think the opening story of the student at Ted's is a big piece of that that moment of OK, how do I get my congregation to care about justice?

Speaker 5: 32:42

And I'm not thinking, I'm a liberal because I think I'm a liberal and I immediately have lost all of the party thinking I'm a liberal, um, because if I think I'm a liberal, then I immediately have lost all authority. Um, and that sort of immediate move of if I am labeled as such, then spiritually already I'm an unfit pastor, um, and so I think, trying to articulate, I think that I mean that's language that I have heard probably thousands of times um, I think it especially became even more pronounced during the trump era, um, interestingly enough, which is a, I think, maybe a thing to interrogate at some point.

Speaker 5: 33:14

Um, but yeah, I think I mean. That's why I've tried to put forward, I think, christian or christian centrism on its best foot, um, in order to then say why do I think it's insufficient response to the current political realities and I think the shalom that Christ calls us to to build that?

Speaker 1: 33:34

No, I think that's fair. I think that's fair and I've personally experienced that. At our last church, I was doing youth ministry and I had a theme of going the gospel according to and I would just take a kind of a whether a movie, um, or I think I did according to kendrick lamar, I did it to miley cyrus, I did it to the gospel according to donald trump, and this was when he was still just the candidate um, um in 2015, 2016, and I got lit up by one of our elders, just like the fact that I would even talk about this, and so it was like oh like and it was I was being labeled the liberal, the big L word, uh for just suggesting there's some critical things.

Speaker 1: 34:20

I even came back and said, no, I also said here's some positive things that I would have. You know that, like, what are the? What are the good messages that he's bringing uh in this? And yeah, that was so. That. That was something that was like hearing some of these other ways of like, just realizing like how um polarizing uh, this, these conversations can be and how radioactive. It was like, ooh, I'm, I'm liking these centrists. Um, I'm like the people you list of, you know Tim Keller and even the um you know compassion and conviction crew and things like that. I'm like they've been a kind of a, a cup of cold water in the midst of this. Um, but there was something about this article that resonated to where I wasn't just like I just outright disagree with you. Um, it was more of like, oh, you may be touching on something and I'm kind of mad that you are.

Speaker 5: 35:09

So Well, I'm sorry to hear that and also happy to hear that.

Speaker 3: 35:15

So, adam, in a nutshell, what would you note as the inadequacies of that kind of approach?

Speaker 5: 35:24

So, a number of the things that Slim just noted, these very, very common ways of speaking about the way that the Christian ought to interact with, specifically, the Christian in America, the way that the Christian in America ought to interact with politics is the way I kind of set it up in the article is first, it requires like a specific denial of the world as it is, um, and I think, uh, an inattentiveness, I think, to the dynamics of um wealth and power and race and how they shape the world that we live in. Um, and I focus primarily on like, basically like moments of injustice, um, long histories of injustice and what that looks like, and I think christian centrism and I mean we're using that as a catch-all term there's lots of subcultures and dynamics and different elements. So I'll give my little copy out there that ends up here talking about um but oftentimes tends to paper um, that that's not, I think, a real, quite deep question about why is the world the way it is?

Speaker 5: 36:29

um is not a core and central piece oftentimes, in terms of how those conversations structure themselves, and then as a result of that, it's that it doesn't set basically christians up for, I think, faithfulness in terms of how to respond to the current political realities as they exist.

Speaker 5: 36:45

Um, so that would be probably, and I think that's a, it's a dynamic that's also not just true of centrists. This is true of, I think, a lot of american political communities and formations. Um, that there is, uh about where we are and what has brought us here, um, but then from that, I think I kind of build out, in terms of trying to recategorize, um, an understanding of well, this presents itself as a third way. It's actually just a very same way about how most people actually engage in politics. Um, it's just with theological language added on top.

Speaker 1: 37:23

Essentially, um, can you give an example? It's that go ahead sorry I was asking can you give an example of that so we can put flesh to it like how that, how that might sound or look?

Speaker 5: 37:34

yeah, I think, um, yeah, I think, I mean, ultimately it resists, I think, certain partisan elements of politics. I think is how I frame it is that it resists the ultimate like partisan structuring of politics within the us, but it doesn't actually address, like, the political economy that structures the system as it is, so a lot of times it ends up just being third party, um, it's dissatisfied with the two parties as they present themselves, and so we ultimately just need a third party in order to answer the political questions that present us. And it also basically just kind of ends up like a party is an opportunity for ideological agreement for the individual. Um, I just need something that reflects my beliefs and then I can feel, um, without moral qualms or any questions, I can vote and or support candidates who are part of that party, which in a way, is like, I think, a very individual notion of understanding how politics works, as it is just essentially an act of moral, political hygiene and just kind of.

Speaker 5: 38:41

You know, a way for me to express my sanctification in this one moment every four years, and I think at least a big piece for me, and this is maybe embedded within the article itself too is that like voting, I think, is the lowest form of political engagement. In a lot of ways it's a necessary one and a vital one, but if anything, voting should be like the bare minimum for what actual involvement in our democracy looks like, and I think even that element of asking okay. So what is christian participation in politics look like? Beyond just once every four years and me flagging my agreement with you know one or the other, um, I think is like a vital next question on a lot of this, but but that would be my at least. It basically just says like I reject the two party system but I just want another party to fit my, my beliefs and what I think my needs are.

Speaker 3: 39:35

Does that?

Speaker 5: 39:36

make sense.

Speaker 3: 39:38

Yeah, when I so when we saw each other in Chicago we were, it was center center for past theologians. Their topic was kingdom, was kingdom politics and in many ways kind of inspired by inspired by your article and some other stuff. I mean, one of the things that I wanted to frame for folks was hey, um, what if we thought about, like, what if we thought about resistance to racialized capitalism as actually a primary political responsibility for the, for the christian? So not just, not just voting for particular people, but but looking at, but looking at the system in which we're or we're embedded and thinking about what, what it looks like to build, to build and support communities, that, that, that that operate in it in a different way.

Speaker 3: 40:25

Um, one of the things that you that you note in the article is one of the, it's kind of one of the deficiencies of what you frame a Christian centrism to be is that it's insufficiently material. So one of the ways that this can look and this is not to say that everybody in this in who fits in this camp would would say this, but it can it can look like okay, the issue with our politics is just kind of the way that we argue that that if we just if we, if we disagree better, um, then that'll, then, then, then, then that, then that'll, then that'll really solve the problem, as opposed to thinking about the ways in which the way that we exercise, the way that we actually exercise power in groups, and the way that we actually distribute resources and stuff like that actually kills people. And so when we think about the political decisions we make, like that's like we ought to be really willing to think in those terms. This is why the language of for those who are listening the language of political economy, points to those kinds of realities. When we're looking at the actual distribution of resources and of power and things like that, like that's what one of the claims it sounds like you're making, adam, is that, like those are the things that really matter.

Speaker 3: 41:55

So, as Christians, this is like as so, as Christians, like those are the things that actually ought to be at the front of our minds as we're thinking about the way that we exercise whatever power we have. Is that, is that, is that appropriate?

Speaker 5: 42:12

I 100 agree, um, and I think it's a. It's a helpful reframing to even with my just concentrating there on voting, um, at least for me. It's typically thinking of like the dual level of political work that christians have at this point, um, and a lot of it is like immediate and near term, um, and what does it look like for me to make my city a more beautiful and just place? Um, what does it look like for our schools to be fully funded, for everyone to have access to parks, like? I think things that would um something that christians should be invested in in terms of the near-term elements of their politics. But then I think it's also the secondary level of work which I think you're pointing towards, which is the.

Speaker 5: 43:03

What are the material realities that are structuring all of life? Um, so like as we racial capitalism. So what is the long history of racial capitalism that has brought us to this point and how it structures um all of life between? You know the workplace, uh, the home, the city, international relations, everything, and I think it is that there's the near-term work, um, which even like voting and you know, work in political, a lot of that is near-term, like immediate work. But then that deeper work of what does it look like to abolish systems of injustice that continually crop up and manifest themselves in all of these different ways in my life and in my neighbor's life, and I think, thinking on both of those levels, um, because it is.

Speaker 5: 43:48

It is that that more attentiveness to the material structures that structure all of life, um, and yeah, so that's, that's my long way of saying you're 100 agreement, um, and I think that is the again like the, bringing it back a little bit to christian centrism and attentiveness to that second level, um, to that question of history, of political economy, of the realities of racial capitalism, um, I think that is where there's that fundamental that not only fades in the background but is sometimes either rejected or ignored, or it manifests itself differently and I, but I think that is a a fundamental piece of when you know christian political discipleship should evolve.

Speaker 1: 44:30

Yeah, you kind of, I think, summarize this conversation we're having here and you say centrist Christians prioritize the sanctified process of politics over seeking liberation and justice. Their broad invocations of biblical framework or kingdom ethics or easy condemnations of both sides are at best insufficient and the partial truths of christian centrism eventually collapse into an acquiescence to the oppressive status quo, with a few extra theological steps. Um, and so I think maybe what we're kind of saying here, these are, these are the I mean you wrote partial truths, but they inadvertently reinforce oppressive status quos because they're not willing to maybe take a stand on some of these things, because it's more about how we argue than about what we're arguing about. Is that a way of saying that? Yeah, I would totally agree.

Speaker 5: 45:25

I think, um, I think a big and this is true, I think, in christian centrism, but also, I think, larger, just political centrism in the us.

Speaker 5: 45:35

It's that there is a myopic concentration on language and just how conversations, what does it look like to have a thanksgiving table conversation? Oftentimes, so I mean, this is not meant to be overly dismissive, but like that, like politics is not just one long thanksgiving dinner conversation with your uncle who you disagree with in politics, um, and it is about asking, like, what is the rest of political life like? And and that's also not to say like, being able to talk across difference and disagreement is vital, being able to, um, have life-giving, graceful, um I mean, for lack of better term or even joyous moments of, uh, what does it look like to be able to articulate your political beliefs and how? You think I mean a big piece of this is, I think, going back to the earlier point of this question of the dual level of necessary political work and what it looks like and I think it is important, I mean, I speak this status, as you know, christian leftists taking like specific stands on.

Speaker 5: 46:44

I think the direction that one might hope to go in terms of our politics, uh, is an important aspect, but I think, speaking to the piece originally, in terms of the overall concentration on questions of how, um and norms, uh, the structures of our political culture and all of those other different elements, I think that this manifests itself within the Christian centrist conversation, but also larger conversations within political centrism writ large within the US this over basically myopic conversation, concentration on language, on words, on capacity for conversation across difference, on, I think, polarization is another big piece of this, this continual lament regarding polarization as the fundamental issue within our politics, which is something that I would pretty strongly disagree with, but ultimately I think it does kind of set up to use a haphazard metaphor at this point it does set up politics as kind of one long Thanksgiving dinner conversation, in the sense that the primary thing that you need to go for is the ability to have a political conversation with someone who you disagree with.

Speaker 5: 47:57

You know, say, your uncle, who has a different political persuasion. Affirm, I think, that necessity for dialogue across difference, for, um, graceful, life-giving, truthful conversations about where you think, um, I think other people's political beliefs or actions harm those around, harm you, harm you, harm your neighbor, what that looks like, um, and even the capacity for those conversations. That doesn't necessarily neatly resolve themselves, but at the end of the day, conversation across difference is not how political change itself happens. I think this is something you can affirm, looking historically within the US, but also even within our present. So, while it is a necessary political action, putting that as the core issue, especially starting in 2016, these political dynamics that exist, like polarization and inability to converse with others. Is not at the core of the injustices and lamentable aspects of our politics?

Speaker 3: 49:02

that that is, uh, that is very important to say, especially because, like so, like so, in solidarity with you, and so this past week I did this piece of who to vote for, and I refer to specifically the polarization point that you make in that article, but also like the point that the polarization that we see is asymmetrical, and it's important for us to note the particular way in which it's asymmetrical.

Speaker 3: 49:36

And it's interesting that one of the things that people who read it, who get upset about it, that's one thing that they freak out about, specifically the fact that the right has moved more rightward than the than than the, than at least in Congress, that then then the left has moved, has moved leftward, and people are like, no, that's not true, no, that's not true, and I'm like that's what the data is. I'm not just like saying this out of the blue, that's what the data says, but there's this perception that's just gotten into people's minds, apart from fact that not only is that particular kind of polarization untrue, but that that's the primary issue, and so, yeah, it's just that's striking to me. Do you have any hypothesis as to why people have rested on those realities that well, on those understandings of reality, that polarization is the issue, that not being able to have conversation across difference, that those are our primary political issues.

Speaker 5: 50:55

What is it that precipitates that kind of thinking about our situation? That is a really good question. I mean, I think I'll give half-assers answers at this point that I say without any confidence but I will, and I'll just press you on it and it's fine.

Speaker 5: 51:13

You're like that is the dumbest thing I've ever, so I would maybe start. Maybe I'll start here and then I will. I will circuitously answer your question. So this there was was a there's a. There's a piece that came out after I wrote this, um, and I would like to take it as a hopefully a half confirmation of some of my piece of the thesis on this, because there is a ton of literature on polarization in us politics, all of the different varieties of polarization effective polarization, social polarization, ideological, yeah, and, as you mentioned, like even within congress itself um, and your, your position is that you are for polarization is that right?

Speaker 5: 52:01

oddly enough, actually yes, oh hey, there we go no, I and I mean this in like a, but in a very specific manner. So this is I think they are sociologists, political theorists, creason McGregor this is in 2023. They published a piece on polarization and blackness and a lot of it is a huge piece of. It is like a summarization of polarization literature, all of the different angles and aspects of it, um. But then they ask a couple of like core questions and one of them is like is social media driving polarization? Um, and what? What role the social media play in polarization? And their answer, like, basically their summary, is yes and no. It really depends, um, like, there's lots of different ways to try to like frame how you understand that. Their other core point is is that actually, polarization is a good thing?

Speaker 5: 52:56

and that actually it's not necessarily bad for democracy, but because polarization is an indication that there are significant movements trying to achieve democracy in this moment, that there are significant movements trying to achieve democracy in this moment and that polarization is a reaction to basically like pro-democratic, pro-racial justice, um like basically struggles for justice within society, and that polarization primarily manifests itself as white backlash um and that within those moments, like when you have heightened polarization, the core piece of that is white backlash to those movements for racial justice and they have sociological argumentation for this, but their historical one is that I mean essentially the lowest time of polarization I guess in u history is when there was a racial apartheid.

Speaker 5: 53:46

Yeah.

Speaker 3: 53:47

Jim Crow.

Speaker 5: 53:48

Both parties supported it and that moment of United Party support for racial apartheid was a time of quote, unquote, low, low polarization.

Speaker 1: 54:00

We were united, just united, around terrible stuff.

Speaker 3: 54:05

So it sounds like what most unites us are systems of domination and exploitation. Is what you're saying. There we go.

Speaker 1: 54:13

Okay, so I can follow you there, because that sounds like. Yes, let's be united around our sin.

Speaker 1: 54:22

However, I can't see celebrating the and maybe we need to define polarization. I can't see celebrating the and maybe, maybe we need to define polarization. I can't see celebrating um, the toxic polarization that we see in our politics right now. Where it's you? You don't listen to anyone charitably, you misinterpret everything the other person says in the worst possible light and you, you, you assign motives and and other things, uh, and in very negative way. So I can't see that like. That, to me, is what we think of when I think of polarization, um, but it sounds like you're saying it's more of just like picking, actually like having convictions and standing up for your convictions that might be against what someone else believes. Is that what you would say?

Speaker 5: 55:05

yeah, and I think, and I, I would my um, I'm not well versed, I guess, in terms of like the specific, maybe like psycho social dynamics that manifest themselves in conversations over politics and how it necessarily connects with some of this larger, I guess, argument or at least like way of viewing polarization um and I would agree, like I think, that the yeah, I'm happily to those toxic dynamics are horrible and make it really, really difficult, um, and especially too, when it is the, the immediate jerk reaction, um, in any space, when you're attempting to create at least some sort of capacity for understanding, yeah, um, or the capacity to live together, even if it's not in full and comprehensive agreement, um, but at least that.

Speaker 5: 55:55

This is, at least for me, maybe sort of like the, the underlying, it seems like social, historical dynamics um and to to your point, malcolm I, I um like this question of why did people talk about polarization and not the other things?

Speaker 5: 56:13

Um, it's a lot easier to talk about like this, to basically, to be honest, to like blame it on individuals um to blame it on a, or to blame it on, like just certain and specific dynamics in terms of how people have been trained to talk to each other, um, or how they've been formed to think that, you know, winning is the only thing that you need to do in a conversation. And while those are things I think are barriers, and they manifest themselves even in spaces where people have agreed, like almost comprehensive agreement, each other, um, like those dynamics, I mean, I see it. I've thought when, in like many of the conservative institutions that I've spent time in, I've see it even in leftist institutions um that in what is the your first reaction to something?

Speaker 5: 56:57

um, when you think it might not be in full alignment, um, but so I think that, yeah, that is the thing that must be resisted and pushed against. And what does it look like to have, um spaces that have the for lack of better like grace, can manifest itself as time, the willingness to stay in a certain and specific, like form of conversational relationship with another person, um, but at the but at the same time, I I think that dynamic of polarization, still, that question of is this just white backlash? I think is a pretty, at least for me, it has a lot of explanatory power, especially when you look at the different moments of increasing polarization within US history. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm.

Speaker 1: 57:42

Mm-hmm, then kind of for kind of a let's chew on this and then let you know, try to apply it. You know, how can Christians move beyond, you know, both extreme partisanship and kind of that toxic way of doing it, and then like also move beyond passive centrism to embodying a more faithful public witness. What would that look like? First is to think and believe like I do that's definitely a partisan or a poll that you could recommendation for every yeah yeah, yeah, yeah great great.

Speaker 5: 58:29

It's a pretty simple thing just everyone to have the same understanding of the world. I mean that I this is a question that is I'll be honest. I feel like this has been the question I've been grappling with for the better part of a decade and I'll I'll half go through one door and maybe sprint out the back door. Um, in terms of my answer at this point, like my really quick answer with this, always even if it's someone who I mean, if they're like a christofascist, my answer would be different than this.

Speaker 5: 59:05

But my first answer would be to get involved in local politics? Um, yeah, because if someone's a crystal fascist, I don't want them involved. Fair, like I, I don't want them to be investing at all in the community fascism seems to be on the rise yeah, exactly that's like. I think there are like certain political formations that I I pray for their disappearance fully. Yeah.

Speaker 5: 59:32

And I do that with enough belongs, but I at least for me, involvement in local politics has added, I think, boatloads of complexity and grace, but also understanding of what the different hopes and joys and fears and loves that people have when they think about what they want their life and their common life with others to look like um and like local politics takes and this is kind of going back to my other like voting is important, but it's also, I think, like one of the least important things and I say that with massive qualifications, but it's something that takes at least a small amount of your time to get accessible public transportation or, you know, beautiful parks or all of affordable housing, all of the different elements of what does it look like to have a life that is joyous and sustainable for others.

Speaker 5: 1:00:41

But I think that like that being the first place where um people you can I mean it depends on your community, your city where you live but like where you can encounter others who maybe have at least similar values and similar desires, but they might even still have very different visions of what those values look like um. But that moment I think of encounter um, and I mean even sometimes of maybe struggling for something similar, even if you don't fully agree with someone.

Speaker 5: 1:01:12

I think this is what I'm saying here, like this is it's a very small point, but it's also a point that I think hopefully would be something to expand on quite a bit, which is that Christians often think that sanctification is something they bring to the political process rather than the political process being a space for them to be sanctified, and I think that is an important and vital point in which, um it hopefully reorients the sense in which, like you are not gift necessarily, um, you are struggling for gifts with others yeah, um and I think, like even in terms of thinking about how people I like, there are plenty of people who I've worked alongside, of, who I have disagreed um but in those moments that's also, I think, the space for deep, radical change even in people's ideological beliefs that oftentimes isn't fully and comprehensively dependent upon just talking to them.

Speaker 5: 1:02:15

Yeah, yeah working together for something um that, like you can see it in unions, um you can see it in local elections, you can see it in, like you know, working for, to get full funding for the homeless.

Speaker 3: 1:02:29

To you like, in those moments, that those are oftentimes the spaces of transformation yeah and that that sort of like interpersonal, like solidaristic moment is when the spirit speaks loudest, I think, rather than necessarily through like your words with someone which they again not to denigrate it, but like those are the, I think, the spaces in which you can really see the spirit of adam, I think one of the things that you're pointing to is that, uh, one of the reasons that we might flee to thinking that polarization and the way that we talk to each other, uh that those are our primary kind of political problems uh, one of the things that that may indicate is that we have an anemic understanding of what love, of what love is. We think that love is, uh, primarily rooted in the words that I use with you, or the kind of positions that we take, as opposed to thinking about, um, what our actual material commitments look like.

Speaker 3: 1:03:26

It's why it's it's, it's why, as you were saying, when we actually do things together, like that's, that's one of the ways that we actively change.

Speaker 3: 1:03:37

I mean there's there, there are the, the studies that are that are done on the fact that, like truths quit, like, just like facts don't don't change people's, don't change people's lives, because there are, because there are, because, because, because, because there are, I mean because really there are ways in which our, our habits change, who we are and so which, which also points to the fact that love is best expressed by concrete action, and so so, so there are, there are particular, and also I mean when we think about political activity, like we're thinking about, like actually walking with people, one of the great uh, I keep going back to this line from the evangelical commitment to a simple lifestyle, but in it um, in it, um, I think stott's stop, john stott's one of the one of the primary writers, but one of the things he encourages us to do is to is to um, is to walk alongside the poor and the oppressed and to learn issues of injustice from them, and that is like that's a different way of thinking.

Speaker 3: 1:04:38

I mean that's a different way of thinking about kind of our political activity. It's not just kind of the way that we talk to each other and stuff like that, but it's actually walking alongside people who are suffering, learning what it looks like to live in solidarity with them, like that's what Christ has called us to do, that's what love of our neighbor actually looks like. And that's a lot harder than just thinking, well, I just need to think about my neighbor in a particular way. It's like, well, no, like, what does it look like for me to actually, what's it looking for me to actually invest in their, in their, in their well-being? Um, and that is fundamentally a political like.

Speaker 1: 1:05:17

That's a political question, um, so I think, kind of pulling the thread on both of what y'all have both have been saying here, um, I think I keep wanting to go to um a different question than the one that you're answering, which I think is telling.

Speaker 3: 1:05:35

That's interesting.

Speaker 1: 1:05:36

Which is telling to me, I think, revealing to me what I think, where I'm lacking in my own sanctification of politics and going. I keep wanting to be like well, so then, what should we say at the Thanksgiving table? Like, should we end our relationships with our parents and with our uncles and should we just throw it all out there? You know, this is the election of the lifetime. I want to ask those questions or ask, you know, what should we, as pastors, be doing during this season? What should we be saying? But it seems like both of y'all are kind of going like yeah, and how? What should we be saying? But it seems like both y'all are are kind of going like yeah, but like how do we love one another?

Speaker 1: 1:06:15

How do we get involved in local politics? Cause this is the question that the centrists are like yeah, but let's talk about the how we say these things. Cause it reduces our politics to what we say, versus like actually meeting material needs. And, um, maybe that's one of the reasons that we we are so desperate to like fix this, Cause we want to reduce it to like just the vote, or just what we can post on social media and say like oh yeah, this is this is why I vote this way, or this is why this is important, versus just like actually volunteering in our local politics and you know, or in schools, or doing these things that actually do embark or embody the love of Christ to our neighbor. So that's fair.

Speaker 5: 1:06:55

I. I would unquestionably fair and I think it is the. I'll maybe try to actually answer your first question. You're good, you're good, but also to like point on that, like it's not. This answer is not an easy. Um, yeah, like, even like I say, involvement in local politics, like local politics is often often kind of sucks, like it's very difficult. Um, there's so many meetings um committees. Like there's questions of like is this worth my time, is it not?

Speaker 5: 1:07:29

um but it is like, uh it. I'll say this maybe it's a form of costly discipleship, that's necessary um because it's. What is it? The departed gustavo gutierrez said you know, like to know god is to do justice, and this is what doing justice looks like, um, and I think that, like on his point too, like the, you have the conversion to faith, but you also have the conversion to the table, and that is the essential.

Speaker 5: 1:07:55

Those two things are fundamentally inseparable from one another and stands at the core of what love will prize to conversations with people even across like difference or deep disagreement um which I think is a different question than if somebody actually actively wishes you harm or ill, um, but you can make a distinction between basically someone's political beliefs, whether it is relationally important to you or whether it is politically strategic.

Speaker 5: 1:08:29

And I think politically strategic conversations are, at least for me, like this is the frame that I use when I'm canvassing, or somebody who's on a committee that has an essential vote, or all of the thousands of times I've phone banked like all of these, or like an acquaintance that I value. I think I want their best, I want us to be united in our pursuit of justice and I'm happy to have conversations with them like that. There are ways of like, basically moments of conversation or dialogue or discussion that are politically strategic for there to be more justice and good. That is very different than probably like the core set of friendships and family in your life and not wanting that to be actively full of strife and disagreement and pain and just a continual rat's nest of conflict. And those type of conversations are very different than the politically strategic conversations. Um, those are conversation oftentimes. I mean I I've had a number of like.

Speaker 5: 1:09:40

I guess yeah pieces of my core nuclear family my parents especially, is who I'm thinking of here is like that transition from, I think, a space of a different type of conservative faith, um, to something very different to what I would say is liberation faith. That is, it takes decades, it can take, you know, five to six years, and that is, and I think it means, also being just as thoughtful and just as interrogating of what do we share, what do we care about and what do the steps in the right direction look like. Because I value this relationship, it's hard for me to envision my life without this person, and so I'm willing to invest in the very slow work of, I think, bringing them into a life-giving, truth-seeking form of faith that is going to make the world a better place. And so, in terms of that, that's like the quick distinction sometimes that I make is like is this a politically strategic conversation? Very, looks very different for me, or is this?

Speaker 4: 1:10:35

you know a relationally important conversation about politics that I'm going to come into that space very different. Yeah.

Speaker 1: 1:10:41

Yeah, that's good. That's good Now. I appreciate you answering that.

Speaker 5: 1:10:47

I'm happy to talk about like the routes and what does it look like to actually talk Like cause? I mean, ultimately, all this stuff is about relationships and how you do it.

Speaker 3: 1:10:56

Yeah, yeah, so so you mentioned, you mentioned, you mentioned something we got, we got. I think we got a little. We still got a little bit of time, right?

Speaker 1: 1:11:04

We got a little time. We also. We we missed what he might've mentioned. We we our what he might have mentioned. Our audio cut out for like 20 seconds.

Speaker 3: 1:11:10

Oh no.

Speaker 1: 1:11:11

But we got majority of what you just said. It was the very beginning.

Speaker 3: 1:11:15

Okay Well, so I want to circle back to something that you said a little bit earlier. Out of that you hinted at when you referred to yourself as a Christian socialist and that you've been a Christian socialist for a while. This was, oh God.

Speaker 1: 1:11:35

Things are going to get intense.

Speaker 2: 1:11:37

That was a fun one for an ominous horror, I know. That was an ominous horror.

Speaker 1: 1:11:40

This podcast is about to get canceled. I know no it's fine, look, look.

Speaker 3: 1:11:45

Well, this was one of the first elements of our interaction was around some of these lines, and Adam has been a very good friend and brother in arms. But what was the question? There was a question I wanted to ask about Christian socialism. Besides it being right, what was it? It was that, oh, so okay.

Speaker 1: 1:12:14

So then, the views stated are not reflective of this podcast. I've yet to investigate it. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 3: 1:12:25

In this podcast, Slim and I are speaking as individuals, not as representatives of the varying institutions of which we are part anyway. Right, exactly right um, okay, so, but, but, but one of the things that has, I think, under been on the, on the underside of a lot of our, of a lot of our conversation today, is that, um, is that the very specific nature of our political economy leads to a number of these assumptions.

Speaker 3: 1:12:58

So for, so, for so, for example, the, the, the individualism that allows us to think that what is most important about my political, about my kind of political engagement, is whether or not, like, I feel good about it um yeah, or or like, like, like, like those kinds of things that I, when I, when I asked that question about kind of where this, where this, comes from, before I was wondering kind of where your, where your mind, where your mind would go, because one of the things where now my mind always and and it's this is this is a weird thing for me, because this would not have been the case five or six years ago, but now my mind always goes to.

Speaker 3: 1:13:44

Well, one of the most powerful elements of our culture is our economy and chances are, and because you know, the primary cosmic battle that we're enmeshed in is the battle between god and mammon, I was like there's probably some of that in there too, um, but, um, but over. But over the course of your years, as you said, as a, uh, uh, as a, as a christian socialist, has that, has that been a? Has that been a journey of, uh, of despair, a journey of hope, a journey of like what? How would you, how would you characterize you know, how would you, how would you, how would you characterize the ways, the ways in which kind of living and thinking in that way has, has, has affected, kind of, your outlook, your, your, your political outlook?

Speaker 5: 1:14:33

I mean it probably depends on what time of day you ask the question might change um or what, like the latest headline is. But no, seriously, um, that's a great question. I think I mean I can narrate the what brought me to it, which I think is a core piece of the structures of perfection. I think we've given it life. I mean, after I graduated from seminary I got very invested in the question of what difference does Christ make? Like what actual material difference? Not in my life, but in everything what difference does christ make um?

Speaker 5: 1:15:18

and that led me to the I mean I don't know if it's the whole life discipleship conversation, the faith and work conversation um a number of these, at least in that at that point, like it's basically conservative evangelical conversations um in terms of what does it look like for christ to make a difference in everything? Um?

Speaker 5: 1:15:41

and I resonated with that fundamental question spaces, um, but at ultimately, I think I started to ask the question OK, you know, like not cheating in my life or something, yeah, um, those sort of like personal elements of sanctification that have some overall connection with everybody else. Um, and I think that I started to ask questions like what does it look like for price to make a difference for everybody? Um, and not just me, but like, what does it actually look like to love? What does it look like to actually be invested in? Um, like goodness and truth and beauty to become more manifest, like through the reality of, I think, god's kingdom coming to earth?

Speaker 5: 1:16:36

Um, and that led me in the direction, ultimately, through, I think you know authors like james cone, um, um, for now west, and started to give me an answer of oh, this actually requires, like, a specific politics that is invested in life and flourishing for all. Um, for everyone to have basically a say over what their workplace and life looks like. Um, and that was actually a moment of joy, um, because I think it saved my faith. Um, because, at a certain point, um, the, the structures of like, or the, the frames of insularity. I think that can often mark certain types of american christianity that the individualism and the, the continual um just kind of like boundary marking what, where you think your um spiritual life actually exists.

Speaker 5: 1:17:30

That this was a helpful moment of taking those boundaries down.

Speaker 5: 1:17:33

I think, in recognizing that, it does allow me to say like this is what I want to work for for myself, for my children and also for my neighbors, and I think it did, I mean, I say it saved my faith, and that is, I think, a moment of like deep, open joy for me. And I mean mean, another huge element too of that was like I had a bunch of bad bosses in a row and that, like talking about like specific experiences, um, like very like structures of, like moments of life changing how I think and like understood things, like if experiencing workplaces that I think were not set up for the flourishing of the people who were part of them, it led me to ask questions of, okay, like what does it look like for this to be a different sort of space? And again led me towards like, oh, christian socialists, what's this? What does that mean? Um, all that sort of stuff, I don't know. Is that, I think, hopefully?

Speaker 5: 1:18:31

yeah I mean there's a lot of like, I think, at this point, at the beginning, I think there was a lot that socialism was gifting to my faith in a way um in terms of how to see the world, um, which I think is a very holy task, like seeing the world rightly for what it is I think it's hard and holy work or even imagining what I think the world should be Like. Another, I think, huge element that socialism can actually gift your faith, like, what are the material transformations that are necessary for this, for God's kingdom to come more to earth, even in small and meaningful ways? This to for god's kingdom to come more to earth, even in small and meaningful ways? Um, like you know, how do we anyways, no more, no more egypt's, basically in terms of, you know, labor relations. But like I think now also, I see a lot of the ways my faith has also gifted my socialism too, um, and I think it's there are so many ways.

Speaker 5: 1:19:34

I think, um, that sort of like christological heart, um, that has given it extra levels, I think of, hopefully, of grace and of kindness. Um, and again, like, just what does it look like to be patient? Um, even in the midst, I think, some things that are horrible and horrifying. I think that sort of that patience is not something that I would, it's not something I naturally have as a person and also not something that oftentimes socialists naturally have either Socialists naturally have either, but that sort of wholly strategic patience of what does the slogan work look like, um in around me and here, but also in the long term.

Speaker 1: 1:20:18

Yeah Well, I think that's a, that's a good place to stop Um and because I think it, I think, reveals your heart for um, for humanity here, and so there might be some of our listeners here who are listening and might be on the fence, kind of how I was listening reading your article about centrism being like what, what do you have against that?

Speaker 1: 1:20:40

um and you're for polarization, um, but they, but hearing your heart for for humanity kind of then cuts through some of that, um, that skepticism. And the same same with this question on uh Christian socialism where, um, I have honestly have not gone into it to investigate myself I've seen the holes in our current economic system of saying, yes, that, that, but what? But I know that right now the the polarization around uh socialism is now it's this crazy thing that you know, know is going to end in the destruction of our country and our economy. Um, but from what you're describing it sounds like a very kind uh compassion thing. So, uh. So if you were to, if you were to recommend uh one book around around uh christian socialism and maybe one book around kind of kind of maybe pushing back against this Christian centrism, If you, if you can have one on top of your head, what would you recommend? Oh man?

Speaker 5: 1:21:43

Great question, I'll be, I think he's top of mind, I think, at this point. But Gustavo Gutierrez's theology of liberation, I think, is a great I will. This is going to sound maybe a little ridiculous. You should definitely read the first or publish the first version of it. Um, not, is not the later edited versions after um, I think the catholic church came down on him for some of the elements okay not to sound like I'm in a record store recommending like nobody knows about this thing, but I do there.

Speaker 5: 1:22:17

There are meditations on politics and love in the first version that are not in the later like iterations of it I think are extremely um, and I think it also it it makes a number of connections, I think. Just it asks the fundamental questions of what does it look like for faith to be invested in liberation, which is ultimately what I think also drew me into Christian socialism itself.

Speaker 5: 1:22:41

Um, and then for Christian centrism um, that is a great. It's very, very funny, cause it's actually like I don't know if I've read any books actually critiquing Christian centrism. I've just read mostly like dozens of Christian centrist books.

Speaker 1: 1:22:57

Yeah, which is, I think, what made me appreciate your article, Cause I could just be like I'm feeling there, like there's something good about it, but I'm coming up empty. I'm like but, but let's actually talk about politics. Everybody should read adam's article that's one thing that everybody should read.

Speaker 5: 1:23:14

Adam's article um, you'll write the book like, okay, this is, this is going to be very um, but it's again. I'm just picking things that are like very near the top of my shelf at this point. So the abolition of white democracy by joel okay, by joel osteen that's a surprise.

Speaker 1: 1:23:35

He wrote that interesting shocker that's actually white worship it?

Speaker 5: 1:23:45

it asks. I think it gets to some of the questions about what is it? What type of democracy we actually live in.

Speaker 5: 1:23:50

So I think it gets to the heart of some of the matters, of seeing our country rightly and seeing elements of our political economy, our politics, even elements of partisanship in there, and he, I think, very thoughtfully frames out the different aspects of what type of. What does it look like for this actually to be a multiracial democracy? Um, and I think that kind of gets to some of the fundamental questions, because I think that a lot of christian centrists would say that's what they're invested in and I'd like I think pretty much across the board, they want this to be a place of justice and say but I think he has adds helpful complexity and also history to what does it mean for you to actually do that work?

Speaker 5: 1:24:32

um, and so I think that might be my other ad I'm sure, as soon as we get off I'm gonna think of, but anyways, those are the two that come oh that's great that's great.

Speaker 1: 1:24:42

Well, we are very, very grateful for you, uh, having the time to share with us on some of the uh topics here, on kind of sharing your your heart here, um, with the article, but also just kind of sharing your heart here with the article, but also just kind of just walking through all this. But if people are more interested in what you have to say, can they find you online? Are you on Twitter? Are you on?

Speaker 3: 1:25:00

Do you have a book? Do you have a book coming? Is there something?

Speaker 5: 1:25:03

Well. I'm not as I write very slow. If there's anything to be indicated, I do have a book coming out, let's say like 2028, maybe.

Speaker 1: 1:25:17

Okay, so we'll wait.

Speaker 5: 1:25:20

No more pharaohs, racial capitalism, socialism, christianity. Don't look for that I am on. Blue Sky is what I am on.

Speaker 1: 1:25:29

You're on what Blue Sky? I don't know where Blue Sky is on. Blue sky is what I am. You're on what blue sky? I don't know what blue sky is blue sky.

Speaker 5: 1:25:34

I know I'm in the is that tiktok I've left.

Speaker 1: 1:25:36

I've basically left twitter at this point okay what say again sorry I'm just making a joke. I I don't know what blue sky is, but I will find out after this it's a, it's another, it's a.

Speaker 3: 1:25:48

Lot of people left Twitter to join Blue Sky. Adam is one of these folks.

Speaker 1: 1:25:52

Okay, so it's probably like Newsmax or like OAN or something. Okay, yeah.

Speaker 5: 1:26:01

Thankfully it's not that it's a very, very small liberal group the opposite.

Speaker 1: 1:26:11

But you don't need to find me. There's no reason to come.

Speaker 5: 1:26:13

I don't know send me an email. That's probably the easiest email awesome.

Speaker 1: 1:26:21

Well, we will link your email in the show notes um.

Speaker 3: 1:26:24

And and adam also has a few other, few other really good, really good articles. He's got one on faith and work, he's got this, he's got this one, but there are some others too, and we can link those too.

Speaker 1: 1:26:35

Wonderful. Well y'all. Thank y'all for listening to this episode of Theology in Pieces. We are so grateful for all that you guys do when you listen and share it and review it. That does actually help us and help others find it. If you found any of this helpful, would you leave it a review? Would you share what you enjoyed about this discussion on some controversial things and be polarized? Oh? Dear, go out there and be polarizing. Say absurd things.

Speaker 3: 1:27:06

See, Adam. This is what I have to deal with on a regular basis. Bye y'all. Have a good one, do the.

Speaker 5: 1:27:11

Lord's work and increase the polarization.