Context for the Chaos
Author: Andrew Comiskey
February 25, 2021
‘The task of the Christian
is not to whine about the moment in which he or she lives but to understand its
problems and to respond appropriately to them.’
Carl R. Trueman
Why do we nod
sympathetically at the woman who claims to be trapped in the wrong body? Why no
wince at the man on TV or next door addressing his ‘husband’? Why does the US
House of Representatives dare to vote on a ‘Gender Equality’ Bill this week
that mandates dangerous, untested medical services for persons demanding them in
vain attempts to destroy their biological sex?
Furthermore, why are
persons who lovingly disagree with ‘transgender’ solutions and ‘gay marriage’
deemed stupid, immoral, phobic, and dangerous to others?

Carl Trueman knows why.
And he makes the rather complex layers of thought over the last 500 years on
which gender-bending ‘justice’ rests lucid in his recent book The Rise and
Triumph of the Modern Self (Crossways: 2020). A church historian and
biblical scholar, Trueman is unsurpassed in making intellectual history plain
for the non-intellectual—orthodox Christians like you and me who are far more
modern in our thinking than we might think.
Parsing this book with our
staff, Annette and I marveled at how enculterated we are, for example, our
inclination to lend more credence to a person’s suffering and ‘right’ to
resolve that pain any way he or she sees fit than to weigh how such choice
damages the surrounding community.
Trueman writes
(commentary, mine): ‘The intuitive moral structure of our modern social
imaginary {how everyday people imagine society to be} prioritizes victimhood,
sees selfhood in psychological terms {rather than divine purpose/design},
regards traditional moral codes as oppressive and life-denying, and places a
premium on the individual’s right to define his or her existence. All these
things play into legitimizing those groups that can define themselves in such
terms. {The LGBTQ+ juggernaut, anyone?} They capture, one might say, the spirit
of the age’ (p. 63).
Trueman doesn’t moralize;
he explains. He sees clearly, for example, why sexual identity politics differ
radically from racial equality but explains how the two have evolved into flip
sides of the same coin. He helps us to understand how we got there. His task as
an historian is to ‘explain an idea in context’ (p. 31) so that our often
incredulous, ‘I can’t take this anymore’ response can become seasoned with
wisdom and (I hope) measured, truthful compassion for persons who don’t think
through the issues.
We are all heirs of the
modern era; we have all contributed to concepts of ‘self’ and personal liberty
that fuel the gender chaos at hand. Becoming aware is the first step in the right
direction. We who claim an inspired vision of humanity need all the clarity we
can get as to reach persons who wither without such a vision.
BACK