The New York Times Wants Mothers To Bow To The Fear Of Regret. Christ Has Something Better

There is no freedom in constantly questioning your existence, wondering if your achievements are good enough by some vague feminist standard.

Black pastors are at a crossroads as faith bends to politics



Donald Trump’s return to the White House must have been a bitter pill for black pastors who vocally supported Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. They likely would have preferred to spend Black History Month celebrating Harris rather than bracing for another four years of the "Orange Menace."

But many black clergy now face an even more sobering reality.

Black pastors and churches now stand at a crossroads. 'Authentic' blackness has been tied to a political ideology that opposes biblical truth.

The black church is on life support, and its decline stems from the same sins that plagued Israel in the Old Testament and every wayward church throughout history.

Millions of black Christians in the United States still attend majority-black churches that preach the gospel and believe the Bible. But the term “black church” serves more as a sociopolitical descriptor than a spiritual qualifier.

Many churches that have lost their spiritual power view poverty, racism, and inequality as the greatest sources of oppression. To them, the sins that “marginalized” people need salvation from are those committed by those in power.

The preachers leading these churches are learning a painful lesson — there is a heavy price for chasing false gods. No greater form of idolatry exists in America today than Christians who force the unchangeable truth of God's word to conform to the shifting positions of their preferred political party.

Politicians set tax rates, allocate funding for schools and roads, negotiate trade agreements, and craft immigration policy. Some may even promote healthy eating or discourage drug use. But politics should never take precedence over faith.

No one has the authority to declare that a man can become a woman or that two men can form a marriage. Political leaders who reject Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 should be challenged by pastors who boldly declare biblical truth and warn of the consequences of abusing political power. Any Christian, pastor, church, or denomination that justifies rebellion against the Bible by appealing to political consensus engages in spiritual adultery.

Kamala Harris visited New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Atlanta, led by Rev. Jamal Bryant, just days before the election. Bryant, a charismatic speaker, leads one of the most influential black churches in America. In 2022, he condemned the overturning of Roe v. Wade shortly before performing a baby dedication and declaring, “Children are our future.” Nearly 70% of all babies aborted in Georgia are black, yet preachers like Bryant refuse to acknowledge the Democratic Party’s abortion extremism as a form of systemic racism.

Sen. Raphael Warnock represents Georgia in Washington and leads Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, following in the footsteps of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The debates over King’s theology are well-documented. But while King used the Bible to challenge racial divisions, Warnock invokes his faith to reject the biblical view of sex and gender.

These men are not isolated cases of theological drift. The most politically engaged black pastors in America have become surrogates for the Democratic Party. They claim to be bold prophets denouncing injustice, but in reality, they serve as cupbearers — protecting, not challenging, those in power.

Warnock may seem like a direct spiritual heir to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., but the truth is that today’s most influential black preachers follow a different tradition — one rooted in the teachings of Dr. James Cone, the father of black liberation theology. Cone’s open embrace of Marxism led to the ultimate devil’s bargain. His theology sacrifices biblical fidelity for the illusion of social justice:

First, in a revolutionary situation there can never be just theology. It is always theology identified with a particular community. It is either identified with those who inflict oppression or with those who are its victims. A theology of the latter is authentic Christian theology, and a theology of the former is a theology of the Antichrist.

The men and women who consider themselves heirs to Cone’s theology have continued down the same path. The clearest sign of the black church’s declining cultural influence was the rise of Black Lives Matter. A movement that openly touted its “queerness” and pledged to “disrupt” the nuclear family would never have gained national prominence in previous generations. But rather than rebuke BLM’s leaders, many black preachers followed their lead.

Black pastors and churches now stand at a crossroads. “Authentic” blackness has been tied to a political ideology that opposes biblical truth. Black pastors who frame “gender-affirming care” for their “trans brothers and sisters” as the next civil rights cause have allowed the twin idols of race and politics to pull their hearts — and pulpits — away from God.

Thankfully, the Lord is merciful and willing to forgive all who repent and follow Jesus. Christians should always remember that what happens in God’s households is of far greater eternal value than who occupies the White House.

Commentary: A workers' conservatism against the neoliberals' idols



America, like the rest of the Western world, is sick.

To fight an illness with any hope of success, it is necessary to first identify what ails you. This is as true of nations as it is of men. Just as true: different diagnoses will necessitate different therapies, and an incorrect diagnosis could prove both costly and deadly.

Sohrab Ahmari, the founding editor of Compact, indicates in his new book, "Tyranny, Inc.," that the right's past diagnoses have largely neglected the extent to which the private sector has originated some of the top cancers now eating away at the body politic.

This neglect has partly been a consequence of Cold War-era fusionism, whereby traditional conservatives and libertarians joined forces with the intention of countering the red menace abroad and the pinkos at home.

The libertarian outlook, largely shaped by Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek, Milton Friedman, and others, predominated in this timely alliance. Consequently, the right tended over time to worship hyper-individualism and the unregulated market above all else.

Gruesome facts drawn from over two centuries of statist nightmares, particularly from the other side of the Iron Curtain, made easy work of defending this idolatry, even among those Abrahamic conservatives whose past religious reservations about modernism, liberalism, and unbridled capitalism might otherwise have given them pause.

With idols come taboos and sacrifices.

In keeping with the libertarian outlook, any effort to temper individual ambition or regulate the market, even in the plain interest of the common good or at the behest of the public, was denounced as totalizing or authoritarian or collectivist or a revival of the spirit of this or that blood-soused leftist ideology from the last century. Pro-labor sentiments were likewise characterized as mileage down the road to serfdom.

Now, well over a saeculum into this idol worship, it has become glaringly clear that the devil-takes-the-hindmost attitude implicit in the neoliberal worldview has been in many ways ruinous for all but the ultra-elite. The center did not hold, and things have fallen apart.

Recent diagnoses point to this neoliberal state of play and the corresponding Randian state of mind as contributing causes of America's sickness.

Rusty Reno, the editor of First Things, has suggested that the postwar consensus that sought an open society, championed by libertarians and progressive liberals alike, effectively targeted the strong loves that bound us together and ordered society with a common or higher good in mind.

The liberal regime conflated the "dark gods" that brought about the totalitarianisms of the early 20th century with these and other "strong gods" (e.g., faith, family, tradition, and flag) necessary for a stable society, ultimately throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.

According to Reno, neoliberalism, the "economic and cultural regime of deregulation and disenchantment," seeks to "weaken and eventually dissolve the strong elements of traditional society that impede the free flow of commerce … as well as identity and desire."

As a consequence of the neoliberals' success, many Americans have been rendered not just "unmoored, adrift, and abandoned," but powerless and increasingly susceptible to exercises of raw power by the technocratic openers and other powers that be, both private and public.

The populism that has been gaining steam over the past decade has in large part been a response to this state of things — an effort to usher in a return of the "strong gods."

Patrick Deneen, a political science professor at the University of Notre Dame, appears certain that we have crossed the Rubicon; that the liberal regime comprising cultural deregulators (progressive liberals) and economic deregulators (classical liberals) is in its death throes; and that regime change is coming.

When recently discussing how the new order might ensure a balance of power that operates in the interest of the common good, Deneen wrote, "The answer is not the elimination of the elite (as Marx once envisioned), but its replacement with a better set of elites. ... Most needful is an alignment of the elite and the people, not the domination of one by the other."

In "Tyranny, Inc.," Sohrab Ahmari similarly denounces neoliberalism as a contributing cause of America's current malady and further stresses the importance of correcting asymmetries of power adversely affecting ordinary people. However, whereas Deneen figures widespread asymmetries could be corrected by regime change resulting in a better elite, Ahmari is betting on solidarity, regulation, and re-politicization.

Ahmari explains in the book how corporate leaders and their technocratic associates have faithfully made good on the promise of neoliberalism, depriving citizens of power, prioritizing uncommon wealth over the common good, reducing souls to cents on the dollar, and altogether sickening the body politic as much if not more than does the government whose functions the private sector continues to appropriate and/or compromise.

He summarized how this came about thusly: "The classically liberal state was mostly indifferent to private tyranny. The social democratic state sought to curb it by empowering workers and other weak market actors, winning their consent to the system in the bargain and thus stabilizing market and society. The neoliberal state, however, actively abets private tyranny."

"It does this by turning state and law into instruments for promoting market values everywhere," continued Ahmari, "and by rendering the power asymmetries generated by the market immune to political or legal challenge."

Ahmari underscored that this systematic process of depoliticization forecloses "the very possibility of ordinary people using political power and workplace pressure to get a fairer shake out of the economy."

What is needed, according to Ahmari, is the restoration of workers' countervailing power, "the indispensable lever for improving the lot of the asset-less and for stabilizing economics otherwise prone to turbulence and speculative chaos."

Stabilized economics and an empowered worker may greatly help in addressing our underlying societal illness, not only paving the way for a virtuous body politic but also for stable, bigger families, stronger communities, and a center that can weather whatever comes next.

To this end, Ahmari recommends more and stronger unionization efforts in most sectors and a "left-right consensus in favor of tackling the coercion inherent to the market."

Ahmari's pro-labor proposals may appear too pink for some and discomfiting for others on the right who saw fit to discard Christian social teaching during the fusionist decades. Nevertheless, his critique of the private sector and defense of workers — which appear to have already resonated with Republicans like Sens. Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley — are nevertheless worth considering, especially now that the dissolution of the Cold War fusion has freed traditional conservatives to once again differentiate themselves from the moribund liberal regime and to call out the coercive and "compensatory power of an asset-rich few."

If common good or working-class conservatism is to become something more than simply a politically expedient rhetorical ploy for the right to attract disaffected lefties, then it will be worthwhile knowing where we stand in the days to come when traditional values and "the free flow of commerce" conflict, not just when woke capital is involved, but across the board.

Whatever the outcome of that soul-searching, the resulting self-knowledge will likely help shape the political binary that emerges from the corpse of the liberal regime.

The service of Mammon and self has contributed much to the sickness of the West. Greater solidarity in the service of God, a bolstering of the working class, and a purposeful tempering of the powers that be, private and public alike, may contribute to its convalescence.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Suffering Infertility Is A Gracious Thing In The Sight Of God

When trying to discern if a doctor-recommended assisted reproductive technology is harmful instead of healing, it can be helpful to run the procedure through the litmus test of God’s Ten Commandments.

Russell Moore And Evangelical Elites Can’t Let Go Of Their Jeremiad Against Conservative Christians

If Russell Moore and Tim Keller fear idolatrous worship of politicians, they’d do better to address those concerns with the blue communities they serve.