Theonomy! Theonomy! Theonomy!
The only things certain in life are death and theonomy-kerfuffles. As is common in times of such tumult, wires get crossed long before any sort of meaningful communication can be had. This is my attempt to uncross a few of those wires before somebody gallops in and cuts the proverbial knot. This is not an attempt to untangle every issue. Typological distinctions are valid and should be studied. Ecclesiastical and soteriological discussions are muy importante and ought not be glossed over; however, it is not my goal to address these issues here, even though they remain relevant.
Every crowd consists of various factions. This is inevitable, expected, and even beneficial. Unfortunately it is reported that there is intellectual immorality among some of you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans. There are those who have genuine objections to the position. I addressed such above. There are those who don’t understand the discussion. Hopefully this will be an added pebble in your shoe as you study the topic. Then there are those who simply refuse to try. This latter crowd, who speak loudly and carry a big shtick, unfortunately possess very little by way of intellectual credibility. Distinctions can be made until we are blue in the face, yet they persist. Perhaps that is their strategy—replace all of the oxygen with hot air until we suffocate or see ourselves out. Allow me to say this clearly: we aren’t going anywhere. Perhaps we should attempt to have a charitable, and balanced dialogue.
Lest you hear compromise in my voice, allow me to clarify.
Balance does not mean we gloss over issues for the sake of peace. It means we plant ourselves firmly into the center of the truth and refuse to budge. We do so with a smile on our face and a spirit of charity in our hearts. This is the type of balance that is commanded of saints. Because balance demands truth and truth demands balance, the truth must be ascertained. So in this most recent flare-up, what is the truth?
The truth is that many people end up talking past one another because they will not allow the other side to define their own terms. As has been stated elsewhere, Theonomy (notice the large T) and theonomy (notice the small t) are not the same thing. As the words are commonly used, there is a categorical distinction between them. Meaning, of course, that we must distinguish! The large-letter variety is a particular movement, associated with a particular group of individuals, built largely upon a particular flavor of covenant theology and subscribing to a particular understanding of general equity. The tiny-letter version does not (necessarily) hold to any of these distinct positions. Although it may, and this is confusing for some. I get it. That is why I only define myself as a theonomist in very narrow terms, and when surrounded by a very narrow group of individuals. I guess this is my coming out party.
Nevertheless, truth remains. All apples are fruit, but not all fruit are apples. So too, all large-letter Theonomy is tiny-letter theonomy, but not all tiny-letter theonomy is large-letter Theonomy. I don’t make the rules, I’m just informing you. Like it or not, tiny-t’s simply mean that they acknowledge God’s standards are ultimate and they define all other standards by it. How they think the unchanging moral standards of God ought to be applied under the New Covenant is something that should be discussed. It is something that everybody in our little Calvinist enclave ought to do, but it can only be done well by giving our brothers and sisters the benefit of the doubt. We do so by seeking consistency in our own positions. We do so by making appropriate distinctions. We do not murmur Rushdoony’s name in hushed tones and cast his ghost upon the other side. Nor do we band together with pitchforks and go monster hunting. If you don’t like the term because you think it muddies the waters, that is one thing. But if you simply do not like the term because you have been drinking those muddy waters, that is something else entirely.