Truce - History of the Christian Church

Give to help Chris make Truce

Homeschooling is a controversial subject. It began as something done by counter-culture folks and morphed into a beloved practice by fundamentalists and evangelicals. It has yielded students who excel over their public school peers... but also a good many people who are woefully undereducated. There have been legal fights over this method of education for decades, including some that RJ Rushdoony championed.

As we wrap up season 6 and ask, "What is the legacy of the Religious Right?" we must include homeschooling. It has become almost a litmus test in evangelical circles. If you don't homeschool your children, it can even cause some members of your church to question your parenting.

Our special guest today is Shawn Peters, who co-wrote the book Homeschooling: The History and Philosophy of a Controversial Practice with James G. Dwyer.

Sources:

Questions:

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce

How do we interpret the Constitution? It seems like an easy question, right? It turns out, it's quite difficult. As we wrap up season 6 of Truce, we're exploring some of the things that conservative evangelicals got out of their partnership with the GOP. One of the things they got was constitutional originalism.

Constitutional originalism is a theory of interpretation that holds the Constitution should be understood according to its original public meaning at the time it was adopted. Originalists argue that this approach anchors constitutional law in objective historical meaning, rather than in the personal values or policy preferences of modern judges. By tying interpretation to the text as it was originally understood, originalism aims to preserve democratic legitimacy: changes in constitutional meaning should come from amendments passed by the people, not from judicial reinterpretation. Supporters also claim that originalism promotes stability and predictability in the law by constraining judicial discretion.

Critics of originalism counter that the Constitution was written in broad, open-ended language precisely to allow adaptation to changing social and technological conditions. They argue that strict adherence to historical meanings can freeze outdated norms into modern law and fail to address contemporary realities the framers could not have foreseen. In practice, critics also contend that historical evidence is often ambiguous, allowing judges to selectively invoke history to reach preferred outcomes. As a result, the debate over originalism reflects a deeper tension between constitutional stability and constitutional flexibility in a living society.

Our special guest is Austin Steelman, historian at Clemson University.

Sources:

Discussion:

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce

Kristin Kobes Du Mez is best known for her book Jesus and John Wayne, which looked at masculinity in American evangelicalism. Her new book, out now, does the same for femininity and positivity. Women today are often told to "live, laugh, love" and focus on the positive. They are to put mind over matter, even though that concept is not explicitly stated in the Bible. This attitude can make women susceptible to abusive relationships, scams, and multi-level marketing schemes.

The book covers a wide swath of history, from Love Comes Softly to The Total Woman and the Little House books. Kristin and I had a lot of fun geeking out over history. I'm excited for you to hear it!

Discussion Questions:

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce

Can you believe it? The Truce podcast has crossed the 200-episode mark! Actually, this is something like the 203rd episode... but we still need to celebrate!

In this special bonus episode, Nick Staron joins Chris to answer listener questions like:

Thank you SO MUCH for your help in making this show. I really appreciate your prayers and that you're sharing this project with your friends. God willing, there will be a new episode in two weeks.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce

Richard Vigueries. What can be written about him? His nickname was "the founding father of the Religious Right". He founded RAVCO, which was a fundraising organization that raised money for... well, who didn't it raise money for?

In his book, Takeover, Viguerie laid out a detailed plan of how the far right could take over the Republican Party. It is a fascinating book, one that may not have had an overwhelming impact, but the idea within the book has.

In this special epsiode, Chris walks listeners through the book and the impact of the ideas inside.

Sources:

Discussion Questions:

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce

Our season has spent a lot of time looking at how some evangelicals tied themselves to the GOP as the party became more conservative. But not every evangelical Republican was taken in by the conservative swing. In this episode, we're taking a look at Senator Mark Hatfield, an evangelical Republican who didn't follow the pack.

Senator Mark Hatfield had a long and influential career in public service spanning nearly five decades. After serving in the U.S. Navy during World War II and earning degrees from Willamette University and Stanford University, Hatfield began his political journey in the Oregon Legislature, winning election to the Oregon House of Representatives in 1950 and then to the Oregon State Senate in 1954. He went on to become Oregon’s youngest Secretary of State at age 34 and was elected Governor of Oregon in 1958, where he served two terms and oversaw the expansion of the state’s infrastructure and environmental programs. In 1966, Hatfield was elected to the U.S. Senate, beginning a 30-year tenure that made him the longest-serving senator in Oregon’s history at the time.

In the Senate, Hatfield was known as a moderate Republican who often put conscience ahead of party, particularly on issues of war and defense spending. Deeply shaped by his wartime experiences and Christian faith, he consistently opposed military authorization bills, including votes against the Vietnam War and the Persian Gulf War, and co-sponsored efforts like a nuclear freeze resolution. Hatfield twice chaired the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, using that position to direct federal funds to Oregon for health, transportation, and research projects, and to support biomedical research at institutions like the National Institutes of Health. His independent approach earned him respect across party lines, and although the GOP shifted rightward over time, he remained a distinctive figure in national politics until his retirement in 1997.

Sources:

Discussion Questions:

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce

Jimmy Swaggart was caught in a major controversy in the late 1980s. It involved the famous American televangelist, who was a leading figure in Pentecostal Christianity. In 1988, Swaggart publicly admitted to “moral failure” after reports surfaced that he had been involved with a prostitute, behavior that directly contradicted the strict moral standards he preached. The revelation led to his suspension by the Assemblies of God, his church denomination, and caused significant damage to his reputation and ministry. Swaggart delivered a widely televised, tearful confession, which became one of the most memorable moments in religious broadcasting, symbolizing broader concerns at the time about hypocrisy, accountability, and power among high-profile televangelists.

This proved to be a problem for Pat Robertson, who was running for president. Just as he needed his conservative brothers and sisters on his side... they disappeared or chose another politician.

When he lost the race, he continued his streak of being shelved by politicians. He and other evangelicals with large followings placed their hope in politicians to save them. Only to find disappointment.

Sources:

Discussion Questions

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce.

Pat Robertson’s bid for the 1988 Republican presidential nomination (often discussed in 1989 contexts because of its aftermath) marked a notable moment in American politics, as a prominent televangelist moved out of religious broadcasting and directly into the national political arena. After building a large following through his Christian Broadcasting Network and The 700 Club, Robertson formally entered the Republican primary race in late 1987, having first set an unusual condition for his candidacy: he would run only if three million Americans pledged support through petitions to pray, work and contribute to his campaign—an effort that succeeded and gave him a built-in grassroots base. His platform blended standard conservative Republican positions—such as lower taxes and strong defense—with a strong emphasis on social and moral issues informed by his evangelical Christian worldview.

During the 1988 primary season, Robertson surprised many political observers by finishing second in the Iowa caucuses, ahead of Vice President George H.W. Bush and indicating the mobilizing power of evangelical voters in early nominating contests. However, he struggled to maintain momentum as voting moved to later states: his support weakened in more diverse primary electorates, and he did not win a competitive share of delegates nationwide. Ultimately, Robertson suspended his campaign in 1988, later endorsing Bush, who went on to win the nomination and presidency. In the aftermath of his presidential run, Robertson organized the Christian Coalition in 1989, which became a significant force in mobilizing conservative Christian voters and shaping Republican politics in the 1990s and beyond.

His campaign was plagued by the public falls of other televangelists like Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker. Our special guest for this episode is John Wigger.

Sources

Discussion Questions

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris

Several months ago, Chris informed the audience that he was thinking about moving to Europe. Now, he's back to update everyone!

Chris went to Seville, Spain, for several weeks to take Spanish-language classes and see if he'd like to live there. It is an exciting, vibrant, clean city with a lot of fun attractions. He got to see Ferria and Semana Santa, as well as Cordoba, Granada, Cadiz, and more. The result is that he does not think he's quite ready to move to Europe. But he came back to the US with a lot of inspiration for future episodes!

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Give to help Chris make Truce.

The Iran-Contra Affair was a major political scandal in the United States during the second term of President Ronald Reagan in the mid-1980s. At its core, the affair involved the secret sale of arms to Iran—despite an arms embargo—in the hopes of securing the release of American hostages held by Hezbollah in Lebanon. These sales were initiated covertly by members of the U.S. government, who believed they could foster better relations with moderate elements in Iran while also achieving humanitarian aims. The operation violated official U.S. policy and Congressional restrictions, particularly the Boland Amendment, which explicitly prohibited aid to the Contra rebels in Nicaragua.

The second part of the scandal involved diverting profits from the Iranian arms sales to fund the Contras, a right-wing rebel group fighting the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua. The Reagan administration had viewed the Contras as essential to stopping the spread of communism in Central America. However, Congress had explicitly forbidden further military aid to the Contras, making the diversion of funds both illegal and secretive. Key figures in the affair included Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North of the National Security Council, who helped coordinate the operation, as well as senior officials like National Security Advisor John Poindexter.

When the operation was exposed in 1986, it triggered a political firestorm and led to multiple investigations by Congress and an independent counsel. While President Reagan claimed he had no knowledge of the diversion of funds, the scandal significantly damaged his administration’s credibility. Several officials were convicted of crimes related to the affair, though many were later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush. The Iran-Contra Affair remains a powerful example of executive overreach and the risks of conducting foreign policy outside the bounds of democratic oversight.

Sources:

Discussion Questions:

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices