From a liberal Augustinian perspective, Christians should affirm several liberal institutions, such as the separation of church and state, religious tolerance, and a number of individual rights. Beyond that, it’s over to the considerations of wisdom. And democracy, best I can tell, remains the best of the worst.

Drag queen story hour (DQSH) occupied the debate between David French and Sohrab Ahmari. So how should Christians respond?

I am grateful that the post-liberal, nationalist right has grown more explicit about its antipathy to core tenets of classical…

For now, let us cling to liberal democracy as a common grace of God. If God in his providence gave us modernity, let Christians be the stewards who use the freedoms of liberal democracy for the sake of the gospel.

There are two different conversations going on simultaneously from the right. One is an argument directed outward, toward the progressive left and “globalists.” The other is an argument directed inward, within the right, between nationalists and conservatives.

We would benefit from the unique and particular blend of the Greek and Roman inheritance with the dawn of the Christian age found in the work of Augustine of Hippo.

Orthodox Christianity does not demand liberalism, but it can provide an alternative grounding for a form of liberalism that respects religious beliefs and institutions more than the early twenty-first-century version does.

Liberalism, at least some version of it, remains the best option for organizing modern society. The real question is which version of liberalism is best. In this symposium, a variety of authors take up the idea of Augustinian liberalism.

While there are many nuances and side issues in the debate between David French and Sohrab Ahmari, the crux of the disagreement appears to be a general clash between two opposing political philosophies adopted by religious believers: Catholic integralism and classical liberalism.