Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative [Paperback]

Carl R. Trueman (Author), Peter A. Lillback (Foreword)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 1, 2010

It is time to think before we vote. No more knee-jerk, soundbite un-thinking but a witty, engaging and challenging discussion about stewardship - as children of the kingdom and of this world.

Product Details

• Paperback: 128 pages
• Publisher: P & R Publishing (September 1, 2010)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1596381833
• ISBN-13: 978-1596381834
• Product Dimensions: 8.4 x 5.4 x 0.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 4.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (19 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #561,452 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Carl R. Trueman is Professor of Historical Theology and Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary (PA). He is the author of a number of books, including John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man (Ashgate, 2007) and Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative (P and R, 2010).

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

22 of 24 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Needed Corrective, October 6, 2010

By 

Paul Manata (Grand Rapids, MI) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative (Paperback)

Books on Christ and culture or Christianity and politics are all the rage these days. While some publishing houses are churning out New Atheist book after New Atheist book, other houses are getting who's who in Christian circles to write on Christ and culture or politics and religion. Both are hot ticket items these days. Thankfully, the former's popularity seems to be waning (too boorish), while interest in the latter is rising. But, there's more to be thankful of. The latest author to enter this ever-growing market is Carl R. Trueman. As a Professor of Historical Theology and Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia), Trueman is qualified to write on this topic; not only that, he brings a fresh and unique perspective to the American debate, writing as a Englishman who has lived in America for the past several years. He describes himself as a British round peg jammed into an American square hole.

I have developed a keen interest in Christ and culture/politics issues over the past couple of years. I am still reading in the field and trying to put those aspects I have found persuasive into a more coherent picture---though I know it will remain fuzzy in places, and puzzle pieces will also be missing. I have been positively influenced by several contemporary thinkers (though not agreeing with them on all points, even strongly disagreeing on some), here are some of the influences: Greg Boyd, D.A. Carson, Oliver O' Donovan, John Frame, Os Guinness, Timothy Keller, Darryl Hart, Michael Horton, Ken Meyers, David VanDrunen, and David Wells. With the publication of Republocrat, I am pleased to add Carl Trueman to this list.

Trueman's basic thesis is that being theologically conservative does not entail being unconditionally politically conservative (or liberal). His main motivation for writing the book is that he fears Christianity is in danger of alienating members of its population, especially the younger members, by drawing too close a connection between the essentials of the faith and our current American expression of political conservatism. Though he did not say this, I can safely assume that he feels the same way about any connection between Christianity and liberal politics too. While I applaud this motivation, it is noteworthy that similar motivations drive the publication of books like Peter Enns's Inspiration and Incarnation, as well as the current surge in books seeing to show the harmony of Christianity with Adam-denying evolutionary theory. I am not trying to poison the well here, and I am not sure there is anything of interest in pointing out the similarities in motivation, but I wonder if there's a slippery slope somewhere nearby? Are we in danger of alienating members for teaching that man has an immaterial soul? How about teaching eternal retributive punishment in hell for the reprobate? Same with inerrancy and evolution. Are these "essentials" that make up "Christian fidelity" (xx)?

In Chapter one, "Left behind," Trueman begins by critiquing the "New Left," wisely softening the blows he will later deal to conservatives. The basic criticism given to the "New Left" is that it in leaving behind the "Old Left" it has become preachy and has opened the door for "everyone to become a victim and for anyone with a lobby group to make his or her issue the Big One for this generation." Whereas the "Old Left" was concerned with oppression, it limited this oppression to "material, empirical issues--hunger, thirst, nakedness, poverty, disease . . ." The "New Left" expanded the category of oppression to "psychological categories," where this category is conceived in terms of "'Authenticity' and 'inauthenticity'" which is an entirely subjective way to categorize (p.17). For example, homosexuals have been oppressed and thus not allowed to live a lifestyle that is "authentic" (p.12). Another example is to consider the women who have been "oppressed" and not allowed to live "authentic" lives because they have to be bogged down by a child. Thus, abortion allows women to be "authentic," and the "New Left," ironically, fails to give a voice the voiceless, which is the origin of the left (p.12-13).

Trueman also applies this criticism to many evangelical liberals who vote Democrat "in a kind of schoolboyish 'Aren't I naughty?' kind of way." The psychologizing of oppression allows them to self-righteously critique others in a way that doesn't cost anything. He cites, as a recent example, how many left leaning evangelicals criticized Wheaton College's appointment of Philip Ryken to college president. Trueman notes that while evangelical liberals complained "about how dreadful it was that the job had been given to a middle-class white male intellectual rather than a representative of a minority," none of these middle-class white male intellectuals "gave up their own job to make way for a minority candidate and to help with the ending of oppression." Trueman notes that these kind of complaints make the evangelical left "look ridiculously sanctimonious and self-important." It is the type of complaint that, "costs the whiners nothing and [is] therefore worth nothing" (p.15-17).

Conservatives might rightly scratch their head at what Trueman takes to be the "Old Left." Conservatives (and capitalists) have long tried to point out that they are "concerned with oppression . . . limited to material, empirical issues---hunger, thirst, nakedness, poverty, disease . . .", or at least that they can be so concerned (cf. Thomas Sowell, The Quest for Cosmic Justice). Indeed, many have pointed out that the numbers seem to suggest that when government taxes less and gets out-of-the-way, charitable giving goes up. Plenty of conservatives have been charitable; very charitable. So, some might claim that Trueman is not playing fair. That is what I was thinking while reading this chapter. However, I believe Trueman sets himself apart from those conservatives at the end of the chapter when he writes that he believes "society and government . . . has a role to play in health care and helping the poor" (p.18, emphasis mine). Now, it should be admitted that "has a role" is vague, but I think Trueman thinks the role should be more involved than most conservatives would want to grant. Trueman does not get specific here---that's not the point of his book---and so there is nothing to critique. It should be pointed out that for what this chapter intends to do---critique the "New Left"---it succeeds.

Chapter two is titled, "The Slipperiness of Secularization." In this chapter Trueman looks at the issue of "secularization" and wonders whether America has escaped it as much as some on the religious Right seem to think. Mind you, Trueman admits that there is a difference between the secularization that happened, and continues to happen, in Europe, and what is going on in America. America is definitely more "religious." Trueman reports the lament of a pastor in Grand Rapids who said that only half of the local population would be in church on Sunday. "Wow, Trueman thought to himself, "that's a tragedy? Back home we'd call that a revival beyond our wildest dreams." Still, Trueman wonders if a secularization hasn't happened in American churches. The main question he asks in the chapter is to wonder whether the "American church has maintained the loyalty of the population by essentially becoming a secular institution" (p. 26-27). Trueman's answer is: sure looks like it.

While he begins by picking on soft targets like Hinn and Osteen, he claims that many of the more conservative churches have bought into a more sophisticated version of the prosperity gospel. Trueman agrees with David Wells's critiques of Evangelical mega and emergent churches, but wonders if similar critiques could be offered of protestant churches Wells might favor. Trueman thinks so. He begins by pointing out that the secular idea of "rights" spills over into church membership, such that church vows are not taken seriously at all. We're individuals with rights and we have no problem ditching a church if it offends our rights, perhaps even in ways that are theological counterparts to those who sue fast food restaurants for not telling them the coffee is hot (p. 28-32). Another indication of secular values is that celebrity syndrome, a "preoccupation with superstars" (p.37). Secular society has Access Hollywood, "the church has---well, insert your name here" (p.39).

"Not-so-Fantasic Mr. Fox," is the title of chapter three. I have to admit, this chapter was a little weird for me. Not because I like Fox news---far from it---but because not only did it seem like Trueman was settling a personal score (Rupert Murdoch is blamed for Trueman's exiting the conservative party, xxiii), I'm not sure the intended targets of his critique will read this book. Much of this chapter reads like a gossip column. Rupert Murdoch does not come out looking good. The gist is that those who think Fox news is a bastion of family values need to recognize that it is owned by a guy three times divorced and who had nude images published in one of his British newspapers. But most who think this read more Colson than Trueman.

Having said that, I should add that Trueman rightly points out that all news organizations are biased, and all trade in offering substanceless soundbites masquerading as sophisticated and rigorous analysis of current events. Trueman also disabuse people of the notion that Fox is the paragon of religious virtue some seem to bestow on it. Furthermore, Trueman is also correct in pointing out that those like Beck and O'Reilly make wild claims and poor arguments, not to mention employing conspiracy theories to scare viewers.

Trueman then goes off on a little conspiracy theory of his own, where he concludes that maybe "Fox's political posturing as the brave... Read more ›

10 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Republocrat, October 10, 2010

By 

Benjamin P. Glaser (Pittsburgh, PA United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative (Paperback)

Got this new book by Carl Trueman of Westminster Seminary Philadelphia as a throw-in to get my recent purchase from WTS over the magical $40 mark to get shipping for a buck. Really glad I did. Excellent little book that only took me two hours to read. Including the intro and forward it is about 125 pages.

Now I of course disagree with Dr. Trueman on some of his thoughts on free-market capitalism and gun-control and universal healthcare. Though I agree wholeheartedly with the negative side that he notes on this and believe that only through a Christian worldview can it be kept in check. Even more to the point Biblical Law looks a lot more like a "nanny-state" than most conservatives would like to think and or believe.

On another front his description of politics in America is spot-on (to use a British colloquialism). He does a good job I think in describing the many contradictions on the Left and the Right when it comes to ideology. He takes a not-so-veiled shot at Fox News and its commentators that are featured at 5:00pm and 8:00pm. His criticism of Fox comes from two angles. First its founder Rupert Murdoch hardly espouses the policies that the news network's idealogical mouthpieces preach. Secondly is the irony of the "family values" network's use of highly attractive and scantily clad anchor babes (to use a Limbaugh phrase) as well as the need for Fox News to belittle the intelligence of its watchers by reducing every issue to a Manichean "liberal = evil" and "conservative = good". For those of you wondering he does take full aim at MSNBC and Olberman/Maddow as well.

Overall an excellent book and well worth the money and effort.

10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Gripping Read on a Controversial Topic, October 11, 2010

By 

R. Hayton "Bob the book-nut" (St. Paul, MN USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative (Paperback)

Sacred cows die hard. And tipping them is not just anyone's game. When it comes to conservative American evangelicalism, there may be no cherished belief that needs to die more than its explicit allegiance to one political party.

An evangelical attachment to the history of America and to patriotism has colored its views on how the church should interact with the political sphere. And in the past few decades, with the meteoric rise of "the religious right", the result has been an American version of Christianity which mixes zeal for conservative politics and Christian virtues. Along the way, a popular misconception has arisen on the part of secular and non-evangelical alike: the evangelical gospel is confused with a moralistic concern for "family values".

Carl Trueman, a witty and winsome Brit, tackles this problem in a new book recently released by P & R Publishing. In "Republocrat: Confessions of a Liberal Conservative", Trueman speaks from an outsider's perspective on the political landscape facing American Christians today. He understands that some of his views will be frowned on from both sides of the American aisle, but he pushes forth in an effort to challenge the tendency toward a one-sided approach and overly simplistic view of politics which he sees as so prevalent in the conservative circles in which he ministers today (as dean of Westminster Theological Seminary).

Written in a witty and personal fashion, with a Brit's sense and control of the English language, the book draws one into the discussion even as it disarms the would-be critic. I found it a quick and engrossing read, even if the argument seemed to overreach on some points. He offers pertinent and sometimes disturbing examples from recent political history to drive home his points, and in the end is quite convincing.

He starts out with a criticism of today's "left". He shows how originally the liberal concern for the marginalized and the poor spurred British Christians to political involvement and an embrace of classic liberalism. Since then, liberalism has grown to treat any perceived marginalization and threat to be equivalent with the real economic and physical problems, for example, that were caused by industrialization in the late 1800s. So the mother of an unwanted child is facing undue pressure to keep her child, and she along with a gay person who wants full acceptance by society both deserve the protection of modern liberals. Meanwhile, the true problems of poverty and economic marginalization which continue to plague our world get left behind in the posturing and the fuss over the more visible, concerns of today's liberals.

He then moves on into the conservative kitchen, and tackles American exceptionalism, and the patriotic flavor of American Christianity responsible for such absurdities as "The Patriot's Bible". Where he really scored points with me was in his treatment of the Fox News channel. He drives home his point that no news media outlet can be completely unbiased. He also shows how the founders of Fox were moved by the almighty dollar, like anyone else in the secular world. His cautions on this point deserve notice:

"When it comes to listening to the news, Christians should be eclectic in their approach and not depend merely on those pundits who simply confirm their view of the world while self-evidently using terminology, logic, and standard rules of evidence and argumentation in sloppy, tendentious, and sometimes frankly dishonest ways...." (pg. 56)

That the free market, capitalist system was a Christian concept derived from studying Scripture was one of the high points of my own Christian education. And Trueman takes aim at that whole idea. The system runs on good old fashioned, greed (which is actually sinful, mind you). And not just greed -- discontent and dissatisfaction are built into the structure of our American economic system. The solution to economic hard times is for us consumers to show more confidence and fork out more money. And exactly how is this is a Christian concept, again? Let me allow Trueman himself to speak to this point more directly:

"...we have no basis for absolutizing the social organization and the attendant institutions, practices, and values of our passing present than anybody in ages past. Feudalism seemed like the wave of the future when it was at its zenith, yet it has passed away, at least in the West. European imperialism seemed set to dominate the world forever and a day at the end of the nineteenth century, but along came two world wars that put an end to that notion...." (pg. 67)

Viewing our system as the best there ever was, is also a bit evolutionary in nature, Trueman contends. Somehow man has figured everything out now and our system is the best hope for the world. We need to liberate the world from their a-capitalism, and bring salvation by means of the free market.

He rounds out the book by discussing how democratic politics in our modern age are positioned such that every difference between the parties has to be emphasized and enlarged so that they can gain power. Careful, nuanced political debate is not served by today's sound bites and smiling photo ops, either. Trueman's postscript argues that the abortion issue doesn't have to be the be-all, end-all political issue for Christians in a fallen society like ours. He says, "It seems clear that the democratic legislative path to reducing or even outlawing abortions is proving remarkably unfruitful.... following from this... is there any point in allowing the matter to be the make-or-break issue on which individuals make their voting decisions at election time?" (pg. 106). He argues that incremental change can be pursued within either party, and before abortion will be outlawed a majority of Americans need to view it with distaste.

You won't appreciate, or agree with, all Trueman's concerns, but you will be challenged to think about what role the church should have in the political sphere. Should a church side with the conservative agenda so explicitly that non-conservatives are unwelcome, even if they also believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ? I think not. And if you pick up Trueman's short book (only 110 pages), I suspect you'll at least admit this much by the time you've read it. The Church of Jesus Christ should be wide enough to accept Christians of various political persuasions. The gospel, not politics or national pride, should unite us.

I want to close with an extended excerpt from Trueman's conclusion. I don't want to steal his thunder, but I feel this is the best way to give Trueman the hearing he may need for you to actually pick up his work and give it a listen.

"Christians are to be good citizens, to take their civic responsibilities seriously, and to respect the civil magistrates appointed over us. We also need to acknowledge that the world is a lot more complicated than the pundits of Fox News (or MSNBC) tell us.... Christian politics, so often associated now with loudmouthed aggression, needs rather to be an example of thoughtful, informed engagement with the issues and appropriate involvement with the democratic process. And that requires a culture change. We need to read and watch more widely, be as critical of our own favored pundits and narratives as we are of those cherished by our opponents, and seek to be good stewards of the world and of the opportunities therein that God has given us.

"It is my belief that the identification of Christianity, in its practical essence, with very conservative politics will, if left unchallenged and unchecked, drive away a generation of people who are concerned for the poor, for the environment, for foreign-policy issues.... We need to... [realize] the limits of politics and the legitimacy of Christians, disagreeing on a host of actual policies, and [earn] a reputation for thoughtful, informed, and measured political involvement. A good reputation with outsiders is, after all, a basic New Testament requirement of church leadership, and that general principle should surely shape the attitude of all Christians in whatever sphere they find themselves. Indeed, I look forward to the day when intelligence and civility, not tiresome cliches, character assassinations, and Manichean noise, are the hallmarks of Christians as they engage the political process." (pg. 108-110)

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.