Jeff Wright On Brother Wars

Jeff Wright joined Evangelical Dark Web’s Thursday night stream to give his take on Evangelical infighting that on social media proved to be full of wisdom and worth further expounding. 

Been thinking about The Brother Wars & may have figured something out. Hear me out. I think it is a conflict at root over differing visions of the primary component of masculinity. I’ll sketch it out.

1. Moscow’s primary vision is building structures & institutions that reach into the future. The picture would be a wise architect-general directing the corp of engineers.

2. CN’s primary vision is doing battle with the enemy at the gate (or on the march heading our way). The picture would be The Cid, mounted on horseback & swinging a sword with arrows sticking out of his back. Or Vlad. Very possibly Vlad (The Impaler).

3. Apologia’s primary vision is direct engagement with the ideas & affections of a lost world. The picture is a street evangelist, preaching and debating all comers.

4. G3s primary vision is doctrinaire precision. The picture is basically Calvin in his study in Geneva, revising and expanding The Institutes.

Ogden is a bit newer to me so I’m more hesitant here but I generally think of them as like the CN camp, albeit with much more of a bard component or troop-signaling bugler. AmRef is its own thing, too – definitely doing the architect thing broadly but with strong battle readiness.

Wolfe is also his own thing, too; scholarly as all get out but also willing to scrap but also playing the jokester in bard fashion. Isker & Engle are distinct as well; Isker cuts down the idol-tree & Engle turns it into lumber as he builds a church-village with it.

It comes out in the way each group argues with the others. Moscow talks about (and acts to) both build and (as in the latest NQN vid) burn bridges as needed for the overall success of the long term project. None of that description is an insult, tbc.

Durbin joined Twitter & immediately sounded like Doc regarding how evangelism and debate is the primary metric for evaluating faithfulness. That description isn’t an insult either.

The CN guys are constantly trying to get to a direct fight; “be forthright” (i.e. don’t be effeminate by fighting indirectly). G3 guys issue important statements (with specific fonts!) then head back into the study. Still not insulting, although offering a fraternal laugh.

And here’s the thing – all of those *are* good, important, and right. Also, as far as I know, none of those groups *don’t* do what the others are doing as their primary vision (although each group is pretty sure the other isn’t doing it enough).

Or maybe isn’t doing it appropriately, too. This is why I’m long-term optimistic on the end of The Brother Wars. The commonalities are very common. It’s also why I think real engagement, face to face, is an important step to get to (maybe because of my own CN perspective).

Still, this is what I think is the core issue – an aesthetic vision of what good men do with the days of their lives. And each of these groups is distinct from the TGC Bois, whose project is an insular, narrow gospel-exclusivity that is, at best, agnostic toward masculinity.

This is a very early draft of my analysis, which may not be worth much. And it isn’t comprehensive – Jon Harris, William Wolfe, J. Spurgeon, and many more all have distinct footprints & even move in and out of the visions I’ve identified. WBS is in there somewhere too, throwing a party.

Take away? I’m hopeful thinking in this framework might (a) provide an avenue of mutual understanding for the members of one group when they talk to members of the other and (b) get brighter minds thinking how those distinctions can be reconciled.

Jeff Wright expounds in further detail on the stream.