Breakpoint

Recently, author Christopher Rufo tweeted an excerpt from a 2018 publication of the American Psychological Association citing a litany of outlandish terms, including "gender smoothies," "gender prius," "gender minotaur," and more.

In its typical cyber-censorship fashion, Twitter quickly attached a "fact-check" note that states these labels are only a list of "descriptions" offered by young patients, not actual diagnoses. However, the social media giant wrongly obscured Rufo's legitimate concern, which is that the APA's publication supports unquestioningly submitting to a child's self-diagnosis and description. The authors write, "children will lead the way in carving out their own self-descriptions, categorizations, and assignations of gender."

Of course, anyone struggling with any mental health issue needs the space to describe his or her experiences and feelings. However, the goal of therapy is to bring their understanding of the world in line with reality. On no other issue are patients–especially children–allowed to self-diagnose. Twitter should have noted this. Denying reality is wrong and dangerous.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

When I was a college student in eastern Tennessee, classmates who felt called to teach in inner-city schools would take on student teaching practicums in the small town of Graysville. On the surface, a big city like Detroit could not seem more different than the tiny mountain town that was racially not diverse and overwhelmingly white. However, the issues that afflicted both were largely the same: a lack of upward mobility, extraordinary rates of fatherless homes, poorly performing schools, high rates of addiction, health problems, and an outsized dependence on welfare.

These issues, as conservative pundits are often quick to note when talking about inner cities, are a culture-wide problem. It's not just the economics and politics that keep people down. Individual choices matter, as does the way people perceive their situation. Social scientists have long noted how what they call a strong "locus of control," or the view that your choices have a real impact on your life, tends to predict socioeconomic success. The opposite is also true: When someone views themselves as mainly a victim of things beyond their control, it often becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

All of this came to mind last month when a country-folk song from out of nowhere became an anthem for populist outrage. In "Rich Men North of Richmond," previously obscure Virginia songwriter Oliver Anthony rails against Washington elites for creating a world in which hardworking Americans can barely make ends meet and are dying of despair.

The song really struck a chord online, particularly with listeners on the political right, and shot to number one on the Billboard Singles chart. Days later, it was used as an opener at the first Republican presidential debate—a move Anthony himself slammed, saying "I wrote this song about those people." For many listeners, the song's message reinforced the belief held by many: that elites of both parties have ruined America and are keeping ordinary working people down, and outrage is an appropriate response.

Because of Anthony's roots and the song's lyrics, listeners linked it with the plight of rural Appalachian communities, places like Graysville. In these mostly white regions, poverty, drug use, and dependence on welfare have become the subject of documentaries and books like J. D. Vance's Hillbilly Elegy. However, as Mark Antonio Wright pointed out at National Review, Hillbilly Elegy also identified and addressed subtler, cultural factors at work in the Coal Belt, such as opioid abuse, "young men immune to hard work," and "a lack of agency—a feeling that you have little control over your life and a willingness to blame everyone but yourself."

While "Rich Men North of Richmond" laments real problems that can rightly be laid at the feet of corrupt politicians and government overreach, such as inflation, unemployment, and "deaths of despair," fans of the song seem determined to blame these problems only on outsiders. There are, as Wright points out, reasons to doubt that framing. For instance, there are millions more job openings in the U.S. right now than there are unemployed workers, though the same opportunities are not available everywhere. And many of those jobs, contrary to the song, are well-paid blue-collar positions. Yet labor force participation is low even after Covid. When you consider also the personal agency involved in drug addiction and obesity—two scourges on rural America—the simple victim narrative gets even more complicated.

Wright's National Review article provoked quite a social media backlash. That's because a lot of Americans are angry. "Rich Men North of Richmond" gave them an outlet to express that anger. However, outrage anthems can only express so much and often obscure complex truths, including some that conservatives are happy to point out. Perhaps the most important of those complex truths is that cultures themselves can become toxic when built upon bad ideas and thus can create victims. In many cases, the problem is not as much the "rich men" in a faraway town but the lack of dads in ours. As Wright suggests, "We the People" have adopted plenty of self-destructive beliefs and habits.

None of this absolves politicians of what's been done to make Americans' lives worse. Ronald Reagan's adage that government is usually the problem rather than the solution is even more true than when he said it. However, I also believe that outrage is not a strategy, nor are outrage anthems.

Blaming our country's issues on shadowy oppressors "out there," which political parties do whenever they assure their voters that they are victims, encourages the mindset that only perpetuates poverty, relational brokenness, and addictions. It's based on an impoverished worldview that replaces agency with anger and treats people as less than fully human, refusing them the dignity of being responsible moral actors whose fate and whose communities are at least partially within their purview and control. In fact, the victim worldview is the thing most likely to empower those "rich men north of Richmond" at the expense of everyone else.

This Breakpoint was co-authored by Shane Morris.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

According to pro-life group Live Action, British authorities have arrested a Canadian man for selling hundreds of "suicide kits" online. Kenneth Law was implicated in the deaths of at least 88 people, one only 17 years old. When interviewed, Law explained, "I need a source of income—I hope you can understand that—I need to feed myself."

It's horrifying enough that this happened at all, but thinking that helping people end their lives is a way to make a living should shock us all. Something like this is only imaginable when we see life as a commodity to be bought and sold. Anytime a price tag is put on something priceless, it is cheapened.

This is true when done by a person, like this Canadian, or by the state, like how Canada now does by pushing so-called "Medical Assistance in Dying" on their sick and vulnerable.

Loving our neighbor today means not only saving souls, but also saving lives.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

As a thank-you for a gift of any amount to the Colson Center this month, we'll send you a copy of Street Smarts: Using Questions to Answer Christianity's Toughest Challenges. The book is a guide through the hot-button issues with wise responses to arguments against Christianity. Give today at colsoncenter.org/September.

__

It can be intimidating to engage our neighbors on cultural issues these days. It seems that every conversation is a potential minefield where the slightest wrong word can get you banished from polite society as a bigot or "hater." This is where we can take a lesson from two of the greatest teachers of all time, Jesus and Socrates. Both were masters of their craft, and both used questions to lead their listeners to the answers they sought.

Here are six questions I've found extremely helpful to create the sort of dialogue we should desire about issues of faith and culture.

First: What do you mean by that? The battle of ideas is always tied up in the battle over the definition of words. Thus, it's vital in any conversation to clarify the terms being used. For example, the most important thing to clarify about "same-sex marriage" is the definition of marriage. When the topic comes up, it's best to say, "Hold on, before we go too far into what kind of unions should be considered marriage, what do you mean by marriage?" Often, when it comes to these crucial issues, we're all using the same vocabulary, but rarely the same dictionary.

Here's a second question: How do you know that is true? Too often, assertions are mistaken for arguments, and there's a vast difference between the two. An assertion is a definitive statement made about the nature of reality. An argument is presented to back up an assertion. By asking "how do you know that's true?" we'll move the conversation beyond dueling assertions to why those assertions should be taken seriously.

For example, it's a common assertion that the Church has always been an obstacle to education and science, but this is just a legend. In reality, not only did schools pop up everywhere churches went, but a host of scientists, past and present, have been devout believers.

Here's a third question: Where did you get this information? Once arguments are offered, it's important to ensure the arguments are valid. For example, news reports love to shout headlines about some study that shows same-sex couples are better parents than straight couples.

However, this quickly repeated talking point is based on limited studies that are flawed. More and broader-based studies suggest the exact opposite.

The fourth question: How did you come to this conclusion? Behind the individuals you are talking with and their convictions, is a story ... a personal story. If you know that story, it may make more sense why they don't find your views plausible. Plus, it will help you remember that the person you're talking with is a real, image-of-God bearing person.

The final two questions: What if you're wrong? and What if you're right? It's easy to sit back and make claims about the world, but what happens when those claims get out into that world? Ideas have consequences that are always worth considering. For example, what happens if marijuana isn't as harmless as people say it is, or what if we tell kids that they're born in the wrong body? That's a big risk to play with the next generation.

A new book by Greg Koukl was written to equip Christians to dialogue from a confident and informed faith. As a thank-you for a gift of any amount to the Colson Center this month, we'll send you a copy of Street Smarts: Using Questions to Answer Christianity's Toughest Challenges. The book is a guide through the hot-button issues with wise responses to arguments against Christianity. Give today at colsoncenter.org/September.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

This Breakpoint was revised from one originally published on May 17, 2016.

Before you fire up the grill one last time for the summer on this Labor Day, here is Chuck Colson describing the dignity of work.

Work embraced as a calling expresses the glory of God, and it's part of—very literally—following Jesus. Through our work God provides for us and for our families, contributes to the common good, and also gives us a sense of fulfillment and satisfaction. He has given us work as the way to fulfill His mandate to us … to take dominion over the world he has created.

Chuck also went on to point out that in the pagan world, manual labor was seen as just for the lower classes. But Christianity saw it differently—work was understood to be edifying, part of being made in God's image, something we could and should do to God's glory.

So please, have a good day off. And then head back to the construction site, to the office, to school, wherever, refreshed and ready to work as unto the Lord.

This commentary first aired on September 4, 2017.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

Physical labor was devalued in the ancient world. The exception, in classical Greece and the early days of the Roman republic, was farming, which was considered the proper pursuit of citizens. All other labor was viewed as demeaning. In the later days of the republic, as plantation agriculture replaced small farms, the work of farming was also seen as demeaning and relegated to slaves.

By the time of the Roman Empire, all physical labor was only thought proper for slaves and lower classes. Though the foundation of the empire's wealth, the upper classes believed that production was beneath them. Their attention, or so they thought, belonged in the more "refined" areas of life, such as the arts and philosophy.

Of course, the biblical view of work is completely different. Scripture frames work as a good thing, an essential part of what it means to be human. Because God created us to work, at least in part, it's inherently connected to our worship and dignity.

Put differently, work is not the result of the fall. It was, however, tainted by Adam's sin. God's created purposes for humanity, to fill and form His world through work, would now feature pain and frustration. Aspects of human work were twisted from dignity to drudgery. Human efforts to cultivate the earth, designed by God to be part of the joy of imaging Him, became sources of frustration, pain, sweat, and sorrow.

Because of the uniqueness of the biblical framework, even the early Christians approached work with a very different view than their pagan neighbors did. They thought of work as good but marred by sin. So, for example, in monastic communities, monks were expected to do physical labor, if for no other reason than to grow their food. In his Rule for Monastic Life, St. Benedict of Nursia (480-547) insisted that monks should work both to fulfill the biblical mandate that God gave Adam, and to encourage humility in a world that thought of work as demeaning.

Within a full understanding of the biblical story, from creation to new creation, Christians came to understand the Gospel as Christ redeeming us of sin as well as all its effects. In addition to forgiveness of

sin and security of eternity, salvation also included the redemption of anything infected by sin. This included work, which led Christians to attempt to restore work away from "toil" and back to the kind of meaningful labor God intended.

So, in the Middle Ages, many monasteries became centers of technological innovation, focused on making work more significant. A prime example is the waterwheel. Although the Romans knew about waterwheels, they rarely made use of them. After all, why invest in an expensive machine when you have unlimited slave labor? The monks had a different view of human value and the value of work, which inspired them to develop ways of using the waterwheel to mechanize production.

Initially, waterwheels were likely used for grinding grain. This required converting the vertical rotation of the wheel into horizontal rotation for the millstones, which the monks accomplished through a system of wooden gears and wheels. Later, the waterwheel was adapted for a wide range of other applications including powering bellows in forges, operating trip hammers in smithies, sawing lumber, and fulling cloth.

Soon, even secular communities began to invest in building mills. While some might say secular communities adopted water wheels for economic impact, the economy in Rome was very specialized. Therefore, the Romans did not deploy waterwheels. What made communities adopt these and other technologies was likely the influence of the Christian idea of work, as it moved out from the monasteries to penetrate and shape the culture.

Many more inventions were developed during the Roman and Middle Ages, stimulating economic activity and making work more efficient and meaningful. These developments were inspired by the idea that Jesus' work in redemption meant restoration was possible in all areas of life, including reversing the curse of the Garden.

Though other countries had innovative technologies, some far more advanced than the West, the West's use and employment of technology was unique. According to Indian philosopher Vishal Mangalwadi, the West used technologies to make the work of the common person easier and to aid in production, rather than to cater to the elites.

In our current cultural moment, many see work as frustrating, unrewarding, and not worth it (that is, as toil). Christians have an incredible, better vision of work to offer the larger world. We've also got a history to tell, of how a vision of human dignity and innovation became a blessing across economic and class lines. Just as in the past, the Christian view can move our imaginations about work beyond drudgery to a renewed and redeemed way of thinking and living.

This vision shaped the work of men like Johannes Gutenberg, whose motive for inventing printing with moveable metal type was to produce Bibles that were "no longer written at great expense by hands easily palsied but multiplied like the wind by an untiring machine." The same vision can find traction today, in a culture that doesn't know what work is for and needs an example of redeemed human labor, production, and meaning.

This Breakpoint was co-authored by Dr. Glenn Sunshine.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

This Breakpoint originally aired October 27, 2021.

John Stonestreet and Maria Baer remember the lives and legacies of two remarkable people of faith. They also discuss new information regarding the alleged mass graves at Canadian boarding schools and how the Church should view singlehood.

— Recommendations —

"Fresh off a Supreme Court Win, the Praying Coach Takes the Field"

Lighthouse Voices Event: Dr. Matthew Sleeth

Section 1 - Remembering the Legacies of People of Faith

"Former Minnesota Gov. Al Quie Dies at 99"

Alice K. Noebel Obituary

Section 2 - The The "Mass Graves" Hoax in Canada

"No Human Remains Found Two Years After Claims of 'Mass Graves' in Canada"

"Colorado Student Can Keep "Don't Tread on Me" Flag"

Section 3 - Stories of the Week

"The Church, Singles, and Calling"

"Don't Blame Your Sins on Montana"

"Jane Goodall, Avengers-Level Threat"

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

According to an article in The Daily Chatter, government officials decided to alter academic standards to be more in line with "decolonization" to offer a more favorable view of leftist ideas, and to fit better with the latest sexual ideologies. In response, conservative parents in southern states took the government to court and destroyed some of the proposed new schoolbooks.

Politicians then claimed it was all about partisanship.

But this wasn't America: It was Mexico. The parents protesting were indigenous people out of the state of Chiapas, whose traditional culture and centuries-old Christian heritage drove them to protect their children and protest the ivory tower fads that threaten them.

The most obvious form of colonization today is ideological colonization, and it is being conducted, not by Christians or traditional religious institutions, but by Western progressives who are committed to sexual values and lifestyles found only in the modern West. If parents from Chiapas can resist, so can we.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

Fifty years ago on September 2, one of the most important authors of the twentieth century passed away. While most today know his amazing works of fantasy and fiction, J.R.R. Tolkien was long recognized in academic circles as a brilliant philologist and scholar of medieval literature. For example, his essay on Beowulf, written in 1936, reshaped scholarship around the poem and remains highly influential today.

It was in the following year that the world was first introduced to Middle Earth. The Hobbit was quickly recognized as a wonderful children's book. But The Lord of the Rings series that followed initially earned a mixed reception. C.S. Lewis and W.H. Auden, among others, quickly saw its genius, but many critics dismissed it as an overblown fairy tale, a contribution to a literary genre out of favor among modernist critics who favored "realistic" literature that dealt with the angst of the mid-twentieth century. Tolkien, however, believed that the world, and Britain in particular, needed something else.

Over the last few decades, Tolkien studies have blossomed into an important field. His popularity soared with Peter Jackson's film adaptation of The Lord of the Rings, and more significantly, people have been exploring the philosophical ideas behind Tolkien's legendarium. The full scope of Tolkien's vision has been made available thanks to the indefatigable work of his son Christopher, who analyzed and edited the many manuscripts Tolkien left behind. We now have a fuller picture of his writing process and the creative vision behind Middle Earth, as well as the intellectual influences that informed Tolkien.

Some of these influences are well known, including Beowulf and Norse and Germanic mythology. A linguist, Tolkien invented entire languages based on Finnish and Welsh, as well as several writing systems to go along with them. A philologist, he studied language as a window into culture, which led him to develop both history and culture to go with his newly invented languages. From this effort came the amazing world of Middle Earth.

Tolkien also drew on his own life story in crafting his stories. His description of the Dead Marshes and Mordor were inspired by his experience in the trenches in World War I. Also, Sam and Frodo's relationship was based on Tolkien's experience as an officer with his batman, an enlisted man who served as a personal assistant.

As a boy, Tolkien spent several years in the Birmingham area where he grew to love the English countryside and to hate industrialization. This obviously shaped his descriptions of the Shire and the ecological concerns in the legendarium. On a literary level, this connected him with British romanticism, a movement that emphasized beauty, imagination, and God. In fact, as Austin Freeman pointed out in a recent interview on the Upstream podcast, Tolkien explained that to understand his writing, one had to remember he was a British romantic and a Christian.

The significance of Christianity to Middle Earth is a matter of some controversy. Tolkien himself wrote, "'The Lord of the Rings' is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work." Critics have scoffed at this, pointing out that there is little hint of religious practice in The Lord of the Rings nor any of the distinctive doctrines of Christianity. In some Tolkien fandoms, discussion of Tolkien's faith is forbidden, as if his work can be understood apart from the author.

However, there are clear Christian influences on the story, even if not intentional. When someone pointed out that the three offices of Christ—prophet, priest, and king—were embodied by Gandalf, Frodo, and Aragorn, Tolkien responded that though it was not intentional, his Christian beliefs would inevitably come out in his writing.

More recent scholarship, such as Bradley Birzer's J.R.R. Tolkien's Sanctifying Myth, has revealed the profound Christian ideas at the root of Tolkien's work. Jonathan McIntosh's The Flame Imperishable argues that Tolkien's creation myth was shaped by the metaphysical ideas of Thomas Aquinas. Austin Freeman's Tolkien Dogmatics looks at Middle Earth through the lens of systematic theology and identifies important elements of Christian belief embodied there.

Tolkien, of course, was never preachy, which is why his Christianity is so easily and often missed. However, as he explained in a letter, "[The] religious element is absorbed into the story and symbolism." Still, Tolkien's stories speak to profound truths about the world, and thus, can, in C.S. Lewis's words, "steal past those watchful dragons" of modernity.

This Breakpoint was co-authored by Dr. Glenn Sunshine.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

How many faces do you have?

Atheist comedian Stephen Fry once said (quite ironically) that you are who you are when nobody's watching. When social restraints are removed, when the cameras aren't rolling, what sort of person are you? What sort of choices do you make?

All of us—especially men—need to ask these questions of ourselves in the wake of the daily flurry of scandals from Hollywood and Washington. This isn't a problem "out there" in someone else's sound studio, office, or home. It's a problem "in here," at the depths of the sinful human heart.

Is the person we portray to others the same person we are when we're by ourselves—or more importantly—when we believe there'll be no consequences for our actions?

This is sometimes called "living on your face," in other words, making sure that what you present in public is the character you demonstrate in private. Only as Christians, we know that there's nowhere we can flee from the presence of God, who sees all, and who's always with us, and who promises that "our sins will find us out."

This Point was originally published on January 1, 2018.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org