The assassination of Charlie Kirk one year ago (Sept. 10) brought to the fore a long-simmering debate among Evangelicals about how Christians engage with politics — one that isn't going away anytime soon. Many sincere, theologically orthodox Evangelicals have grown enormously frustrated in recent years with a certain swath of religious elites who argue from their perches that the Gospel is neither left nor right but transcends politics.
To be sure, there's some vitally important truth in that assertion. But the frustration stems from the unmistakable ideological asymmetry in major culture-shaping institutions, which have been dominated for decades by the progressive Left.
Many socio-political and theological layers could be explored here, but suffice it to say: the perception has been that elite leaders effectively counsel churches to rise above the fray, exhibit charity and winsomeness above all, and recognize the complexity of political systems. In practice, though, this has often looked like avoiding politically incorrect truths that social conservatives emphasize, to appeal to and ingratiate themselves with a largely secular tastemaker class that resolutely opposes those values.
This approach is sometimes called “third wayism.” Proponents insist that this "third" (neither left nor right) way is a healthier, more distinctly Christian approach to engage matters of public concern. Critics say that in practice, third wayism punches hard at Right-wing sins while staying relatively muted on — or even coddling — Left-wing sins, while technically claiming to oppose both.
Elsewhere, it sometimes manifests as a more truncated approach: we don't need to fight social injustices; we just need to believe and proclaim the Gospel. Whatever you thought of his methods, a largely self-taught Kirk — with no university degrees — dove headlong into college campuses and unapologetically challenged the spirit of the age on issue after issue, from an unapologetically conservative posture,