Although a majority of Americans continue to identify as Christian, many Christians have argued that American culture increasingly is becoming secular.Aaron M. Renn outlined three stages on the path to secularization in his 2022 First Things article, “The Three Worlds of Evangelicalism.” He expands on and deepens that analysis in his new book, Life in the Negative World. Additionally, he outlines strategies evangelical Christians can use to minister faithfully in an anti-Christian culture.Renn describes the three stages as positive, neutral, and negative worlds. He summarizes each as follows:• positive world (pre-1994): “Society at large retains a mostly positive view of Christianity. … Christian moral norms are still the basic norms of society, and violating them can lead to negative consequences.”• neutral world (1994–2014): “Society takes a neutral stance toward Christianity. … Christianity is one valid option among many within a pluralistic, multicultural public square. Christian moral norms retain residual effect.”• negative world (2014–present): “In this era, society has an overall negative view of Christianity. … Christian morality is expressly repudiated and now seen as a threat to the public good and new public moral order. Holding to Christian moral views, publicly affirming the teachings of the Bible, or violating the new secular moral order can lead to negative consequences.”These three worlds are frameworks of analysis rather than comprehensive descriptions. And the dates are impressionistic, though Renn offers reasons for them. Finally, the worlds are presented in chronological order, but they overlap somewhat at the present time, depending on where you are in America. A rural southern town might be positive, a midwestern suburb neutral, and a northeastern city negative, for example.Evangelicals developed strategies for dealing with the positive and neutral worlds. They developed the “cultural war” and “seeker sensitive” strategies for the positive world. Culture warring might seem an odd strategy for the positive world, but it assumed that Christian Americans constituted a “moral majority” that should guide public policy and cultural life. Similarly, seeker sensitivity assumed that most people were spiritually open to Christianity; they just needed a warm welcome and felt-needs introduction.By contrast, evangelicals developed the “cultural engagement” strategy as American society moved into the neutral world. This strategy, associated especially with Timothy Keller, “tended to downplay flashpoint social issues like abortion or homosexuality,” in Renn’s words. “Instead, they emphasized the gospel of ‘Jesus,’ often in a therapeutic register similar to seeker sensitive, and priorities like helping the poor and select forms of social justice.”One can still see these strategies at work in a variety of evangelical churches and ministries, but Renn doubts they will continue to work in the negative world, where Christian faith and life are viewed suspiciously.So, he outlines three strategies for living Christianly in the negative world. The first, “living personally,” pertains to “how we live and structure our individual lives and that of our households.” Renn focuses on developing three characteristics in particular: obedience to biblical teaching, excellence in our intellectual and professional pursuits, and resilience in the face of risk.The second strategy, “leading institutionally,” pertains to how we provide leadership for “our churches, as well as for other evangelical institutions, like parachurch ministries, Christian colleges, and Christian-owned businesses.” Renn recommends leaders to pursue “institutional integrity,” “community strength,” and “ownership.” These goods will help evangelicals develop in-group solidarity and make them less dependent on secular institutions.The third strategy, “engaging missionally,” pertains to how we accomplish “the Great Commission with evangelization and by loving our neighbors.” According to Renn, evangelicals can be a beacon of light to the negative world by presenting biblical truth clearly, modeling healthy community, and building trustworthy institutions.There is much to recommend in Renn’s analysis. Like him, I believe that evangelicals have not adjusted their strategies to the changing religious environment in America. I grew up in the positive world, started my ministry in the neutral world, and now wonder how to raise my children in an increasingly negative world. Many points of Renn’s advice make intuitive sense to me.By the same token, I wonder whether his recommended strategies are unique to the negative world. Shouldn’t evangelicals have been doing these things in the positive and neutral worlds too? Does the fact that we are only now starting to see their importance mean that our prior strategies failed because we relied too heavily on a shared cultural Christian commitment that was a continent wide but an inch deep?Renn closes Life in the Negative World by saying, “We have not been this way before. And the answers and strategies of the past aren’t guaranteed to work now, if they ever did.” True, Christianity has not experienced a post- or anti-Christian movement quite like the secularization being experienced in Europe and North America.But while the specific conditions of that secularization are new, the experience of a negative, even hostile, culture is not. The Church began in a culture that rejected it, has suffered throughout its history, and even now struggles against active persecution around the world. A deeper engagement with the New Testament, church history, and our global brothers and sisters might offer additional lines of analysis and cultural strategies.Still, Life in the Negative World is interesting, suggestive, and worth reading. I recommend it to pastors, church leaders, and interested laypeople who want the church to be both spiritually faithful and missionally effective. It is a beginning to an increasingly important conversation, not the final word.