What do you think?
Rate this book
The Great Return
Nominal Christianity is not enough. We can't sustain the ethics and norms we take for granted in societies that have been formed through a Christian worldview, for the long term, without Christianity itself - this book calls for a full-blooded, believing 'return' to Christianity on that basis.
Fear not, however, this is not an evangelical screed about 'revival' -- it is a solid case, methodically set out in order to argue from a philosophical and historical perspective why a return to Christian belief is the only way in which we can build a moral framework that will help to guide our future ethical decisions, because all of our assumptions - on which our decisions rest - arebased in the theology and understanding of humanity handed down to us by the Church.
Working his way, in successive chapters, through History, Science, Aesthetics, Politics, Ethics and then, finally, the Church, Franklin argues that the West is in decline because it has unmoored itself from its foundational Christian basis. As our metaphysical commitment to Christianity declines, so does our commitment to the benefits that came to us from Christianity. Franklin demonstrates how this plays out in the scientific realm, which has abandoned objectivity for dogmatism; in the ethical realm, which is eliminating humanity from its own formulations; and in the political scene, which is moving away from the democratic principle towards a neo-marxist influenced, nihilistic technocracy that threatens to eliminate human culture, distinctiveness and agency in the pursuit of a globalist utopia.
In so doing, he touches on contemporary political conversations that are exercising the public imagination and occupying much of our discourse. His podcast, of course, is geared towards analysing the news stories of the day through a Christian lens.
Franklin shows that a return to Christianity would have the potential to reverse the damaging trends he observes,whether that is transhumanism/the rise of AI or other ethical decisions about contemporary morality. He insists, first and foremost, the Church must take seriously its own commitment to belief in order for us to have a chance of seeing progress. But in doing so, he seeks to argue that a great return would have a positive impact intellectually, societally, politically and ethically - his hope for the book is that readers may at least see this great return as something desirable for the reasons he sets out.
Fear not, however, this is not an evangelical screed about 'revival' -- it is a solid case, methodically set out in order to argue from a philosophical and historical perspective why a return to Christian belief is the only way in which we can build a moral framework that will help to guide our future ethical decisions, because all of our assumptions - on which our decisions rest - arebased in the theology and understanding of humanity handed down to us by the Church.
Working his way, in successive chapters, through History, Science, Aesthetics, Politics, Ethics and then, finally, the Church, Franklin argues that the West is in decline because it has unmoored itself from its foundational Christian basis. As our metaphysical commitment to Christianity declines, so does our commitment to the benefits that came to us from Christianity. Franklin demonstrates how this plays out in the scientific realm, which has abandoned objectivity for dogmatism; in the ethical realm, which is eliminating humanity from its own formulations; and in the political scene, which is moving away from the democratic principle towards a neo-marxist influenced, nihilistic technocracy that threatens to eliminate human culture, distinctiveness and agency in the pursuit of a globalist utopia.
In so doing, he touches on contemporary political conversations that are exercising the public imagination and occupying much of our discourse. His podcast, of course, is geared towards analysing the news stories of the day through a Christian lens.
Franklin shows that a return to Christianity would have the potential to reverse the damaging trends he observes,whether that is transhumanism/the rise of AI or other ethical decisions about contemporary morality. He insists, first and foremost, the Church must take seriously its own commitment to belief in order for us to have a chance of seeing progress. But in doing so, he seeks to argue that a great return would have a positive impact intellectually, societally, politically and ethically - his hope for the book is that readers may at least see this great return as something desirable for the reasons he sets out.
- GenresChristian
329 pages, Kindle Edition
Published March 13, 2025
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
April 13, 2025
JF makes a solid case here - do you want your world framed by Christianity, or not? If not, be prepared for anything, since in a world not united under a single Mind and a single Law literally anything goes.
My own objection I suppose is that Christianity failed in synchrony with the failure of the landed aristocracy, which makes a restoration of one a thin affair without restoring the other, in some way. I accept that’s a paradox: to build is to build in one place, blood and soil. Religions are always of a particular people: I don’t see how you can begin with the universal, no matter what the scriptures say.
(Not only the aristocracy, but the whole great chain of being, the entire hierarchy, and all the fixed social statuses within it.. and what does that say about the imago dei?)
‘We shall build (universal) Jerusalem..’
So JF perhaps has his eyes set too high. He wants to retain the universality because (for one thing) he believes that the world is so, and universality is in any case a given because we seem doomed to endure global governance.
And now I’m wondering whether I haven’t set my own eyes even higher, because the argument with which he begins the book (‘You like science? You’d better stay monotheist’) has a lot going for it. We need the entire social/religious package back, with all its internal tensions.
My own objection I suppose is that Christianity failed in synchrony with the failure of the landed aristocracy, which makes a restoration of one a thin affair without restoring the other, in some way. I accept that’s a paradox: to build is to build in one place, blood and soil. Religions are always of a particular people: I don’t see how you can begin with the universal, no matter what the scriptures say.
(Not only the aristocracy, but the whole great chain of being, the entire hierarchy, and all the fixed social statuses within it.. and what does that say about the imago dei?)
‘We shall build (universal) Jerusalem..’
So JF perhaps has his eyes set too high. He wants to retain the universality because (for one thing) he believes that the world is so, and universality is in any case a given because we seem doomed to endure global governance.
And now I’m wondering whether I haven’t set my own eyes even higher, because the argument with which he begins the book (‘You like science? You’d better stay monotheist’) has a lot going for it. We need the entire social/religious package back, with all its internal tensions.
Displaying 1 of 1 review