The Briefing with Albert Mohler - Thursday, September 17, 2026

Episode Date: September 17, 2026

This is The Briefing, a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview.On today’s edition of The Briefing, Dr. Mohler discusses the culture war flashpoint at The Smithsonian, the confirmation that the U.S. air force has an orbital defense system in space, and America’s educational failure.Part I (00:14 – 12:50)The Smithsonian Has Become a Culture War Flashpoint: Museums Tell Stories, and There Are Big Fights Over What Story Will Be ToldPart II (12:50 – 20:30)Weapons in Space: The U.S. Confirms New Military Advances of ‘Orbital Defense System’ – This Marks a New Era of Modern WarfareUS says for 1st time it now has weapons in space. What we know (so far) by USA Today (Eric Lagatta)Part III (20:30 – 26:58)America’s Educational Failure: This Should Sound the Alarm for Parents and Society at Large For the Future of American Children and Our NationChinese Students Are Lapping U.S. Children by The Wall Street Journal (The Editorial Board)Sign up to receive The Briefing in your inbox every weekday morning.Follow Dr. Mohler:X | Instagram | Facebook | YouTubeFor more information on The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to sbts.edu.For more information on Boyce College, just go to BoyceCollege.com.To write Dr. Mohler or submit a question for The Mailbox, go here.

It's Thursday, September 17, 2006. I'm Albert Mueller, and this is the briefing, a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview. It used to be that museums were, they were museums. Now they're flashpoints and cultural controversy. It has to do with the fact that in this particular period where the cultural conflict is now so hot and the divide is so wide, when you talk about a museum, you're talking about an argument, and that's an argument that is now spreading through the culture and through American politics, Now, you just think of the last several decades. You think of art controversies. You think about the current controversies over museums all over the United States. And it's not just here.

It's also in Europe. It's elsewhere. But right now, right here, one of the big arguments about the role of a museum and the role of museums in American culture is at the most famous museum in the United States of all. It's actually a system of museums known as the Smithsonian Institution. That takes us back to James Smithson. And he was honored after his gift. with the naming of a museum that's turned into an entire network of museums.

That really takes us back to the year 1846, but you fast forward now in history. And it's about 180 years. You go fast forward in history, and this is what we're looking at. We're looking at museums being flashpoints in this cultural controversy. And we're talking about the Smithsonian being at the heart of this, and that's why there been so many headlines of late about the Smithsonian Institution. In decades past, if you saw a reference to the Smithsonian Institution, it was probably on a travel. page or on a history page. Now it's on the front page or it's in the front section of the newspaper

because of the controversy. All of this came down after Lonnie G. Bunch the Third announced just days ago that he was going to resign as the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. Now, when it comes to this particular secretary, Lonnie G. Bunch the Third, he's been working for the Smithsonian Institution for the better part of 40 years. He had also headed the Museum of African American History and in its most formative stage. He was selected as the secretary, that's the top office, the top executive in the Smithsonian Institution system. After he had served for years in that other museum, that was unusual. The Smithsonian hasn't usually hired from within, but it did in this case. But now you have the resignation of Lonnie G. Bunch, the third. And he resigned under pressure from the Trump administration

and over controversy that has to do with the Smithsonian Institution. Okay, so what is that controversy. Well, when you look at the Trump administration, looking at the Smithsonian Institution, you saw the White House and others, and this has been a particular issue for conservatives in the United States for some time. You look at museums and at the Smithsonian Institution, which is, after all, servant to the American people. And there have been messages sent that are very much in keeping with some of the leftward tendencies and ideologies in American academic life. Okay, you also look at some other developments, and this is something Christians need to note. When you have institutions like museums and those who head museums, when you have the executives

and museums defined as a new profession, and that profession turns inward and self-regulating, you will see how it becomes an elite, and that elite almost always moves to the left, almost always. One of the reasons is because of its very tight connections with the academic left. And so the academic left and the museum left very much in sync. You also have the cultural movements that have so reshaped the American landscape over the course of the last several decades. Just think of D-E-I-E-S-G, just go down the initials. And there have been particular arguments which have come from the left about how the American story needs to be retold. And, of course, it's not just the American story, but when you look at the Smithsonian Institution,

and it's not just the Museum of American History, it's the entire system. It really is very much an American government project for the American people, and thus, guess what? It's now a flashpoint in controversy. Now, in the first Trump administration, there had been very clear protests from conservatives about some of what was being messaged. And by the way, that comes right down to what's even chosen for an exhibition. What deserves an exhibition and what does not? Then how the exhibition is going to be arranged. You know, Christians need to understand that there's no way to have a museum without a narrative.

There is no way to have a museum without the presentation of some story. Okay, who gets to tell that story? Well, the fact is that the academic left has said that that story was often told in museums and cultural institutions in ways that were basically showing an American patriotic bias. Okay, so that's one of their accusations. And so they said that means that there are marginalized voices and all the rest, even how something is contextualized, how it is explained, how it is laid, that now becomes an issue of political controversy.

Now, I enjoy museums. I often find myself in an argument with museum exhibits, but I have looked at exhibits and at museums all over the world. And let me tell you, there are some phenomenal institutions. But, you know, it is a matter of interpretation. That is to say, you put this big exhibition on, how are you going to explain this? You go to the British Museum.

You go to other famous European museums. you go to major American museums, they are not only exhibits, they are arguments. Even how things are labeled comes down to what amounts to an argument. Now, let's just take the argument from the left seriously for a moment. The argument from the left is that the story has been told by the majority group at the expense of minority groups. Now, in a fallen world, that's one of the things that easily can happen. And as a matter of fact, anytime you look at, well, you read a history book, or you look at

an art book, or you go to a museum. we as Christians need to understand, we are in every single case seeing just part of the story. But we also need to understand that the story is coming with moral force. It's telling us something. Now, this means that conservatives have been increasingly aggravated going in major cultural institutions. It means that conservative Christians have felt maybe particularly concerned going in many of these cultural institutions. One of the reasons why is because the professionalism of these different organizational titles, and that includes, most importantly, those at the top of the exhibits, but also those who create the exhibits and do the staffing and all the rest, that world has moved leftward at the same time

so many of the other leadership intellectual ideological policy groups in the U.S. have moved left. And that means that they have begun telling the story in a different way. Now, when you hear President Trump's comments on this, you'll notice one of the things he says is that they are basically anti-American. In other words, you go to these museums and instead of seeing a, an exhibit about the achievements of American civilization. What you see is a monument to the sins of the American civilization.

Well, you know, as Christians, we need to understand that both of those told rightly and accurately are a part of the story. But there is nonetheless a very important worldview issue in understanding that a piece of art or a piece of literature or, in this case, a museum is going to tell a story and some main story is going to shine through. Some main way of interpreting these things is going to show. shine through. So I want to be very clear and honest. Intellectual honesty means we need to admit that somebody's telling the story and thus the story is going to come from someone's perspective. It is the

case that if you look at the history of the Smithsonian Institution throughout most of its decades, it was really about telling the American story the way Americans want the story told. And we as Christians would have to say, you know, there are things left out and there may be things that are said wrongly that need to be corrected. But at the same time, it should be about telling the American story in a way that leads Americans to have an honest appreciation for their society, for their culture, for this country, and for the country's history. Now, as Christians, they understand, there are other issues, too. You go into the natural history museums, and guess what? You are looking at a story about humanity, a story about the cosmos. And in many cases,

indeed, almost all cases, it is told at the expense of biblical Christianity. In other words, you look at modern secular ideologies, and you look at the rise of Darwinism and evolution, and all the rest, the story that is told in so many of these museums is directly at odds with what Christians believe to be profoundly and non-negotiably true about God's work of creation. It's also clear at times that Christians looking at the same object, say a fossil, will understand a very different story than what the museum is trying to tell. But it is still interesting, and frankly, it is still very much a truth that there are only certain institutions that can afford to collect and to maintain and to display this kind of thing. That's why the federal money,

the federal government behind the Smithsonian Institution makes such a difference in why it is such a flashpoint and just automatically so. So in recent years, particularly in the second Trump administration, President Trump and his staff have been very, very clear they won't change at the Smithsonian Institution. And now that change is going to be accelerated by the retirement of Lonnie G. Buntz III as the secretary. Now, who will be the new secretary while you are looking at a big argument? And you have President Trump and the administration. They intend very much to be a part of that argument. As a matter of fact, it will be difficult for the Smithsonian Institution's board process

to elect a new leader that will be totally unacceptable to the White House. That's part of it right now. That's why the timing is crucial. President Trump wanted this to happen so that he would have the time to get in a more conservative worldview in terms of the Office of secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. Now, at the same time, there's a very interesting congressional setup here, and that is that there is a chancellor of the board of the Smithsonian Institution, and guess who by the legislation serves as the chairman, that is to say, the chancellor of that board. That is none other than the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, John G. Roberts,

Jr. And so you talk about a very interesting situation. Let's just say that this morning's headlines include a conflict between the Chief Justice and the President. It's going to be very interesting to see how they work together in this new challenge. They need to find a new secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. As Christians, we just need to look at this and understand that in the culture around us, everybody's trying to make an argument. We need to understand that even in museums, these days, especially in museums, someone is making an argument. Now, who makes the argument has a great deal to do with what argument is being made. And at this point, Christians need to understand that we really do believe in truth. We want the true story to be told.

But we also understand that that true story has to include the achievements of American culture and the reason why Americans are proud of and involved in this culture and the reason why we understand the dignity of history and the importance of getting it right. President Trump is right. This needs to be understood as a civilization building mission rather than a civilization dismantling mission. And this is now a fight between the right and the left. But it is also true for Christians to understand that when we're talking about anything like this, what we want is the truth told. A history that lies either way is not helpful at all. It's devastating. We need to be very, very honest about this. And by the way, there are going to be arguments,

inevitable arguments. And this is where I think the fair approach to be taken by an institution like the Smithsonian Institution, is to honestly, fairly, and accurately even present the argument. I think Christians understand, there are arguments that are inevitable. The point is not just how the argument is one or lost, but how the argument is managed. The bottom line in the political picture is that there are people saying that President Trump has an agenda in trying to bring about change at the Smithsonian Institution. And I would say, yes, he undoubtedly does have an agenda to bring about change. And I'll say, I think change needs to happen.

But that change needs to happen in the right way. And it's going to be very interesting to see how this is going to turn out. And it's just a great reminder for Christians, in particular for Christian parents and Christian students and young people. You just need to understand that when you read a book, you're reading an argument. When you look at a painting, you're looking at an argument. When you go into a museum, you're confronted with an argument. Actually, in many cases, many arguments. You just need to be ready to understand what argument is being made and have the worldview tools to analyze it and evaluate it honestly.

The new secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, by the way, is either going to help in that process or hurt. That's why it matters. All right. Next, very interesting headline just out in the last, say, 48 hours, the United States has now confirmed the existence of U.S. weapons in space. Okay. Now, this had been like science fiction in terms of movies. This had been the suggestion of President Ronald Reagan when it came to what was called the Star Wars. initiative. This is something that evidently has taken years to put into place because it necessarily

would take years to put into place. And now all of a sudden, there is the admission, or at least the confirmation, that such weapons exist. As USA Today reported, the Air Force Secretary became the first U.S. official to publicly acknowledge the orbital defense capability in what is widely being interpreted as a clear message of deterrence to both China and Russia. The Air Force Secretary said, quote, today we continue to ensure we remain ready to meet the challenges of evolving threats wherever they exist. He made these remarks at the annual airspace and cyber conference. He went on to say, quote, this is why the United States now has on-orbit space control weapons capable of defending the joint force against hostile adversary action.

I wonder how many Americans looked at that. And remember that we're being told here not only that this is true, but that the Air Force Secretary has confirmed. confirmed it. And he confirmed it in comments about why this new force exists on orbit space control weapons capable of defending the joint force against hostile adversary action. Well, USA today is exactly right. This is the way that a government, an armed force like the United States military, makes an announcement that sets the record out there so that not only our friends can see it, but especially our enemies will know this. Now, most of our big enemies, such as say Russia and especially China, they probably have known about this for a long time.

But it's a different thing when the Secretary of the Air Force comes out and makes that announcement and it just lands. As a metaphor here, like a bomb. It just goes off to say, this is really, really big. Now, when you think about the worldview issues here, all right, let me tell you one of the big issues, and that is that there had been international agreements in place saying that offensive weapons were not to be put into space, that space was not to be militarized. Now, the problem is everybody has been working towards the militarization of space.

And thus, it is simply true that the United States could not fail to move in this same direction because the safety and security, the future of the United States of America depends upon the ability to defend America against any kind of attack. It used to be very much a terrestrial issue. Now it is extraterrestrial. Now you're dealing not only on planet Earth, but you're dealing out in space. Okay, in one sense, this is just an extension of how warfare has moved into multiple dimensions over the course of the last two centuries. And by the way, it has only moved in this direction over the last two centuries.

It was impossible before. So what am I talking about? I'm talking about the fact that throughout most of human history, warfare was basically on the ground with people shooting, throwing, pointing weapons at one another. And then, of course, you had the development of explosives and you had the, the, the, the development of guns, such as we're present during, even you'd say as recent as World War I being a major issue. But the big change that came in World War I is that you all of a sudden had airplanes. You had airplanes developed and airplanes turned to military use. And so you go to the Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio, for example, or you go to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum.

You can look at these World War I airplanes, you know, just propeller airplanes, often by planes. And you look at their open cockpits. and then you look at perhaps a seat behind with a machine gun, and then you look at the possibility of having bombs. By the way, I think it's just a very interesting footnote that the earliest bombs dropped from these planes were literally dropped. In other words, the pilot held them out and dropped them. That just tells you something about how all this has developed. By the time you get to World War II, you had figures such as Winston Churchill, who were very, very clear that a great deal of warfare was. now moving into the skies. So just to review, in the 20th century, there were basically three

different dimensions of warfare, land, sea. All that was true of some previous centuries, but now sky, the air. But now towards the end of the 20th century, you have the rise of the space age, and thus you have the possibility of a fourth dimension, not only land and sea and sky, but now land and sea and sky and space. By the way, there is now a fifth dimension, which is digital warfare. So this is not so much physically marked as it is a part of that digital world. And frankly, that may be a world more dangerous than the other of the dimensions we think about in terms of land and sea and air and space. But now we're talking about space being militarized in a clear way. Now, the United States is acknowledging that these weapons exist, but it clearly implies that the

weapons are defensive. In other words, the United States didn't say, look out, we're going to take over the world, we pose a danger to you and to your welfare because of these weapons in space. It is more or less a direct warning to China and to Russia and to anyone else. And maybe that's North Korea. You know, maybe that's a challenge that we don't even know of yet. But there is a reason behind the fact that the Air Force Secretary made this announcement this week. There is a reason that the government decided this was the time to acknowledge what our enemies no doubt knew to be true, but we had not ever acknowledged it publicly. This is one of those moments that went by, and, you know, the story made the front page of some

papers. It just, it made inside coverage at others. It was, you know, something that led stories in very few for just a short amount of time, and then it kind of shifted off of the headlines and off the public attention. I want to tell you, this is a very big development. This is one of those moments when there's a before and after. The before means that many of us suspected that the United States was very much involved in increasing American defense abilities capacities in space. Now we know that it's true. But you know there's something else here we need to note, and that is this is not just a warning. Don't take on the United States. Don't launch an attack against the United States. It is also a reminder to the rest of us that if the U.S. is doing this,

it is almost assuredly true that others are doing this too. That in a fallen world is the other part of the equation. We always have to keep in mind. Now, political, one of the big questions is going to be, you know, how will groups such as the United Nations and others respond to this announcement? I will simply tell you that this is another reminder of the limitations of those groups. The United Nations or members of the United Nations may say whatever they want to say, but when developments like this come and you have this announcement or acknowledgement coming from the United States government, this has been true for some time. And the international organizations are not only slow on the pickup, it's just virtually impossible,

to imagine how they can say anything very meaningful at all. It does also remind us of the morality of every single technology. And thus, this is an acknowledgement that the United States, having made this announcement, now bears moral responsibility for the existence and the use of these weapons. Others do too. And again, that's a part of the equation. But it's important that Christians understand to develop a technology, to own a technology, and to deploy a technology, all of those are moral decisions. Okay, finally for today, we now have data coming in from what is known as the program for international student assessment PISA. That is an international educational assessment of 15-year-olds. Now, the big headlines are really two.

Headline number one, China added 21 points in terms of the measurement for its 15-year-olds. 21 points up. The United States, it's a 15-point difference, but it's down, not up. So over the course of the last testing period, the last five years, this means a shift of 36 points. This is really devastating news. For the United States, this is a wake-up call. Now, when you look at educational systems, the U.S. system and the Chinese system are very different. The Chinese system lacks some of the human touch that you have in the American system, but the American system is now failing to educate 15-year-olds. That's the bottom line. Thankfully, this does not mean that all 15-year-olds in the United States are behind. Many of them are doing very well. It just means that the directional is not.

good. Now, there are all kinds of things that come up here, and there are people who are immediately going to say from the educational establishment, this is all to be blamed on COVID. It's all to be blamed on a shortage of money. But this is where the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal comes back and says that cumulative spending per student, that's 15-year-olds, and as a matter of fact, you could age the spectrum from 6 to 15, quote, exceeds roughly $85,000 per student. So in the United States, on average, you take six-year-old, to 15-year-olds in the public schools, they're backed up by $85,000 per student. Quote, higher spending per student does not automatically relate to higher performance scores.

And then the Wall Street Journal said maybe because more spending rewards educational failure rather than success. You know, this is really a national crisis. It really is. Now, sometimes you look at these things and you say, well, there could be some explanation for that. But these are patterns that began before COVID. COVID may have accelerated some of these issues, but the problem was, already there. We have widespread educational failure in the United States of America. And by the way,

when you look to the future of this country, that will make a big difference. China knows it will make a big difference. That's one of the reasons why they have put so much into increasing scores. Again, they're up 21 points. The U.S. now down 15 points, 36 point spread there. That could be devastating. Now, there's more to the picture, but at the same time, it is an alarm going off for parents in the United States and others. You know, parents need to understand very clearly that this is a structural problem. It's a structural problem. And parents also have to understand Christian parents should think about this especially.

You have one shot at being 15. That's all. You have one year when a child is 15. After that, the child is 16, 17, 18, 19. And before that, you just go down the list. You don't have the opportunity in today's culture to make up for a lot when there is a deficit, it when there is a need. And this is where Christian parents need to understand the stewardship of time.

I don't want to add panic, but there is a sense of urgency in this. One of the other issues brought up in the background to this is the breakdown of discipline in schools and in classes. Of course, there are security issues. There are all kinds of things that have come up. Reading performance fell in about three quarters of countries. That tells you something. Something is broken.

It's not just broken here. It's broken in many other countries as well. The point is that in a comparison, this puts the U.S. a great disadvantage. For Christian parents and for Christians is looking at this picture, it's not just about the comparative problem. It's about the fact that this is a stewardship issue. We have the mission, the responsibility to raise up this generation to educate the young. And then that's something that, well, let's put it this way. If we fail at that, how likely is it that we're going to succeed at much of anything else?

You look at what we're just talking about. the acknowledgement by the Secretary of the Air Force that there is now American military force in space. Okay. That requires math. That requires engineering. That requires scientific ability and all the rest. Thankfully, we have very clear traditions, institutions, and sources for that kind of mathematical, academic background in physics, chemistry.

You just go down the list and aerospace. But we also understand that it is not healthy for this country to be divided into an elite, that works in all those fields and the rest who don't even understand what we're talking about. There's something else that just really cries out at us here, and I want to thank the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal for getting to this. How is it that grades in the United States have been going up when performance has been going down? This gets to the fact that there is now a politicization of the entire grading process. Listen to this. Quote, grade inflation has become so endemic that 44% of students who scored below 1,000 on the SAT, roughly the bottom half,

reported receiving all or mostly A's. The college board in 2024 shortened SAT reading passages and the exam itself to help kids with short attention spans. End quote. The short attention span meant that the test itself has to be shorter and still the numbers plummet. By the way, next week we're going to be talking about another very important bit of research coming in saying that the average American teenagers now spending well over four hours a day on the smartphone. And by the way, they're not spending that time on the phone doing their homework. Now, there are other issues to discuss, and we'll do that next week. But it is important to look at this and realize, you know, if we're falling behind China, that is something of a national crisis. But for Christians,

it's not just about that comparison. It's about the stewardship of raising up the coming generation and doing so in a way that will lead to their flourishing, their ability to work, their ability to function as adults, their ability to help build this culture and this society. These numbers are a wake-up call. You just have to wonder if anyone out there is waking up. Thanks for listening to the briefing. For more information, go to my website at Albertmuller.com.

You could follow me on X or Twitter by going to X.com forward slash Albert Moller. For information on the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, go to sbtz.edu. For information on Boyce College, just go to voicecollege.com. I'll meet you again tomorrow for the briefing.