Is the Culture War a "Just War"?
Differentiating between terms and tactics
When addressing the Christian’s engagement with the surrounding culture, there are two extremes. On one end are those who act like they’re in a perpetual and congenial pillow fight, where any deviation from “niceness” is inappropriately antagonistic. For these folks, gentlemanly gloves are not only expected—they’re demanded.
On the opposite extreme are those who act like they’re involved in guerrilla warfare, where worldly weapons—arrogance, judgmentalism, spiteful mockery, etc.—are considered legitimate tactics against a hostile culture. For these folks, the gloves are off—and if your hands aren’t bloody (metaphorically speaking), you’re a limp-wristed compromiser.
It is this second extreme which I attempted to address in my 2020 Gospel Coalition article, “If You’re Fighting the Culture War, You’re Losing.” Looking back, I could’ve strengthened this piece by avoiding some needless ambiguity.
First, I should have more adequately defined my terms, making clear exactly what I was critiquing. Yes, the elements of my critique were included in the piece, which careful readers could discern, but the internet doesn’t exactly encourage careful reading. As such, I should have practiced more rigorous and careful writing. For instance, even a small alteration to the title would have been helpful—something like “If You’re Fighting the Culture War, You Might be Losing.” That would have more clearly communicated that the real problem isn’t the term “culture war” per se, but rather how that term is understood and applied.
Second, I began the article by critiquing an unnamed Christian consortium. I wished to avoid distracting my readers by specifically mentioning this controversial organization.1 But by remaining vague, I inadvertently insinuated that any Christian organization which utilizes terms like “battle,” “fighters,” and “war” is inherently “losing.” That is most certainly not the case. Even the Apostle Paul describes the life of faith as a “fight” (1 Tim. 6:12a) and a “war” (2 Cor. 10:3-4), and Christians as soldiers (Phil. 2:25; 2 Tim. 2:3; Philem. 1:2).
Anti-Social Culture Warriors
Ultimately, what matters is not so much the terms we use, but rather the tactics we employ. It would have benefitted me to include that distinction in my Gospel Coalition piece. The tactics I sought to critique included the following:
Being easily angered
Giving in to outrage culture, cancel culture, and victim culture
Demonstrating a quarrelsome spirit
Using contemptuous language
Showing a hostile attitude toward others
In short, excusing unchristian behavior because “all’s fair in love and war”
These tactics are what I consider losing. In contrast, Christians are winning in their cultural engagement when they practice the following:
Rightly discerning opposition from the world
Confronting cultural evils when appropriate (rather than ignoring them)2
Being slow to anger
Refusing to fight the world on its own terms
Being kind, gentle, and patient (i.e., demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit)—even when others do not reciprocate
Seeking to “win the person, not to win the argument”3
It might also be helpful to point out that mockery (including satire) isn’t necessarily off limits for the Christian. As the late Tim Keller once noted,
…some ideas and people deserve to be scoffed at or mocked. It is not a sin to do so—even God sometimes mocks (Ps 2:4). But to mock regularly, as a pattern of life, is to ‘sit in the seat’ of mockers (Ps 1:1). By playing to the prejudices of the crowd, by belittling and demonizing the opposition one does not have to do the hard work of coming up with actual counter arguments. It tries to win with eye-rolls, dismissive sighs, clever jokes, and arched eyebrows.4
The Proper Correction to “Niceness” is not Meanness
On a recent podcast, my friend E. Stephen Burnett addressed the culture war debate, albeit with a more narrow focus.5 In a related text conversation with me, he listed his fourfold thesis:
We are never called to unjust “culture war.”
It’s absurd to focus on just “culture war.”
But we must not be “culture war” pacifists.
What we need is “culture just war.”
I have yet to listen to the podcast myself, but I can get behind those four tenets. Rejecting the wiles and weapons used by those opposed to Christ (whether in the extremes of niceness or meanness), we wrestle in a spiritual battle (Eph. 6:12; John 18:36) with spiritual weapons: “For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds” (2 Cor. 10:4).
And what does it look like to wield these weapons? Jonathan Edwards provides a countercultural answer to that question in his book Charity and Its Fruits:
[The Christian] may reprove his neighbor; but if he does, it will be with politeness and without bitterness, which still shows the design to be only to exasperate.
It may be with strength of reason and argument and serious expostulation, but without angry reflections or contemptuous language.
He may show a dislike of what is done, but it will not be with an appearance of high resentment; but
as a man would reprove another that has fallen into sin against God, rather than against him; and
as lamenting his calamity more than resenting his injury, and
as seeking his good rather than his hurt;
more to deliver him from the calamity into which he has fallen than to be even with him for the injury he has brought on him.
It is right to say that the Christian is in a war. We just need to make sure we define—and apply—that idea according to genuinely Christian principles.
The consortium in question was The Falkirk Center, the political brainchild of Jerry Falwell Jr. and Charlie Kirk. Falwell’s immoral hypocrisy has since been exposed to the world, and Kirk has been criticized by conservatives for his combative nature and Hooters-inspired activism. (Both Falwell and Kirk have left The Falkirk Center, which has been rebranded as the Standing for Freedom Center.)
“When appropriate” would include confronting the evils of our culture out of right motives—i.e., charity rather than self-interest (to borrow language from a recent piece by
on the subject).This quote comes from a 2011 interview with Doug Wilson. Whether or not one believes Wilson still adheres to his own advice, the advice itself is sound.
Some might argue that Keller was too squeamish about the use of mockery, satire, and sarcasm. Whether or not one believes that, Keller’s point is still astute.
The podcast episode is entitled “Should We Weaponize Fantastical Stories To ‘Own the Libs’?”
I can't think of a single time Wilson has adhered to his own advice on that subject, actually.