The Benedict Option or the Jeremiah Mandate

Babylon is a town on Long Island in New York. What were these people thinking when they named their town after a dissolute, pagan, ancient Near Eastern imperial capital. But in light of recent cultural developments, it makes sense. Perhaps they were not celebrating sin but recognizing themselves as God’s people sojourning in a modern Babylon. That is indeed where we are.

As I have been writing recently, Rod Dreher at The American Conservative advocates the “Benedict Option” for dealing with this, a withdrawal from the culture wars to a re-deepening in the Christian life, personally and corporately, not only for our own sakes and for the sake of God’s glory, but also so we have something substantial and holy to offer a misguided world.

A Christian turn inward is no guarantee the secular revolutionaries will not chase us into our schools, colleges, ministries, and other institutions, even our families, where we preserve and cultivate our covenant communities. For this reason, Dreher stresses the need for a politically and legally defensive repositioning to protect these institutions.

It explains much of our present condition that we can speak of this proposal as a radical departure from ordinary Christian practice. Much of this is nothing other than a full-orbed, consistent Christian life. But most churchgoers are only faintly aware of this culture clash, this conflict of kingdoms, and what it should cost them in their discipleship.

But what does the defensive cultural and political stance of the Benedict Option look like in practice? I teach at The King’s College, where our goal is to prepare students to help shape and perhaps lead strategic institutions. We have alumni at National Review and The Blaze, the Manhattan Institute, major publishing and investment firms, and Harvard and Yale law schools. If they can, why should they not? A bird must fly and a racehorse has to run. These are legitimate callings and great privileges. In these settings, grads will conduct themselves Christianly and bring the mind of Christ to bear on their governing responsibilities with, God willing, transformative effects.

Should we dissuade Christians from seeking elective office? If they succeed, should they not advocate godly policies as best they can? As voters, should we not make God’s voice heard in the public square—His square, after all—as we have learned it in His Word? God gave His people a Jeremiah Mandate for their exile in Babylon, “Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile [in our case, internal cultural exile], and pray to the LORD on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare” (Jeremiah 29:7, ESV).

Dreher is right that we have entered a new phrase of Western history and there is no going back anytime soon. We should labor faithfully in our callings and labor in hope, “for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Philippians 2:13, ESV). But at this point, especially given the last 35 years, we can have no reasonable hope of “taking back America” for Christian culture. But there is always hope in the gospel itself and the cultural fruits that follow.