Doug Wilson

Doug Wilson & Christian Nationalism make the news in Australia

/ MurrayCampbell

The cat is out of the hat! A prominent Australian newspaper is reporting a story about Doug Wilson and Christian Nationalism. The Age yesterday published this AP piece, ‘Hegseth reposts video of pastors saying women shouldn’t be allowed to vote’.

The reporter’s focus is on US Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth and his association with CREC (a new church association in the United States headed up by Doug Wilson). If it were not for Mr Hegseth reposting a video on X about Doug Wilson, Wilson and his Moscow movement might have remained in the cold, as far as Australian media is concerned. 

The word is now out, and no doubt a large number of Australians are scratching their heads and wondering, what on earth is going on here? Is Doug Wilson a legit Christian voice? Do his views reflect what Australian Churches are teaching and practising? 

Let me bring assurance and a note of caution. First up, no, Melbourne isn’t Moscow, but like a cold Russian winter, the chill can cross borders.

Doug Wilson and Christian Nationalism are not anonymous in the Aussie Christian scene. Thankfully, they are only a tiny voice, and yet it is more prominent than it was 5 years ago. There are now conferences and websites and some churches that regularly appeal to Wilson and Moscow, and invite speakers from their broad tribe to Australia. 

As a quick aside, the Doug Wilson who was preaching and teaching some useful and valuable ideas a decade ago is quite different from the problematic man and his movement today. Whether he always held the positions he is now propagating and kept them quiet, or whether he’s shifted over the decade, I don’t know which is the case. Either way, the Moscow vibe, as I call it (Wilson lives in Moscow, Idaho) brings a chill that we do not need in our churches or country.

The presenting story that led to the AP piece is a view promoted by Wilson’s church, whereby women should lose the right to vote. I wasn’t shocked to read this, as it fits into their view of men and family life. In the last week, I have also heard the scenario where some (a tiny, tiny number) of Christians now advocate that women should not have voting privileges in a church! The idea is preposterous as it conflicts with one of the Bible’s wonderful teachings:  the priesthood of all believers, and therefore the value of all members of the church and their contributions. And what of single women? In the world of Moscow, single women are frowned upon and offered and often derided. More of this in a moment.

It doesn’t need saying (although perhaps it does) that Christianity never fits neatly into any culture; for the Christian message is transcultural. This is one of the stunning truths of Christianity, that whether Korean or Ugandan or Bolivian, the Bible and the Christ of Scripture cross time and place and ethnicity.  Part of that means, though, that there will always be some element of pushback, disagreement, and confusion as to how people understand and respond to Christianity. After all, if Christianity was nothing more than a mirror to Australia 2025, there would be little incentive and reason for anyone to become a follower of Jesus Christ and join a local church. And yet, not every idea preached by every religious leader is an accurate reflection of the Christian Gospel, and hence, when the unbelieving public are perplexed by and even finds a view repellent, they are right to do so. 

There are evangelical leaders in the United States expressing concern over the normalisation of ‘Christian nationalism’ in some circles. Similarly, in Australia, there are voices raising concerns about Doug Wilson and his Moscow crowd.

Stephen McAlpine and myself are among a number of Australian pastors who have been sending up flares to warn Aussie Christians about the rise of Christian Nationalism. Again, while their influence is small,  the Moscow flu is catching on in some more conservative churches in Australia, and it’s an ailment that inevitably makes people sick. Symptoms include public rage, thinking ‘normal’ evangelical churches and leaders have lost the gospel, one-sided politically, anti-authority, and demeaning toward various minority groups. 

Let me observe 2 examples here, one in relation to how women are viewed and one that articulates concerns about Christian Nationalism. 

Christian Nationalists love to talk tough love. Their men are vocal and grow long beards and know how to skin a beaver with their bare hands. These blokey males also have a way of using their strength to demean women. 

A few years ago, Sydney theologian, Dani Treweek challenged Doug Wilson and another American pastor, Michael Foster, for how they speak about single women in churches. 

Treweek said, 

“Wilson and Foster embark on a shared lament about the impending crisis facing churches whose pews are soon to be filled with lonely, unlikeable, tubby spinsters who have nothing in their lives and so spend their days endlessly seeking the benevolent attention of their ever-patient but extremely busy and very important senior pastor.”

She sums up Foster and Wilson’s views on single women as:

  • the reason women are single is because “Baby […] You can do better than this. You’re not likeable” or because they are too “tubby” to be considered of marital value to the men around them (at least the ones they haven’t driven into the arms of Islam);
  • single women are derogatorily dismissed as a “bunch of old spinsters”
  • anyone not married by the time they are 40 are issued the dire warning that they ‘will be lonely’
  • elderly widowed women are depicted as a tiresome burden upon the senior pastor’s time and energy
  • the only valuable and valid expression of love in action is if it is directed towards someone’s own offspring and then their offspring
  • single women are the harbingers of “chaos”
  • unmarried women don’t “have anything” in their lives”

With the surprise of an AFL team beating the local u12 boys team, they responded with a tirade of personal attacks on Dani Treweek’s singleness and theological credentials!.

Then there is this issue with ‘Christian Nationalism’, which readers of The Age may be wondering about. At this point, allow me to repeat a few paragraphs from an article I wrote on the subject in 2023, following up a series of pieces written by Stephen McAlpine as he reviewed Stephen Wolfe’s ‘The Case For Christian Nationalism’. McAlpine eventually gave up reading Wolfe after several bouts of diarrhoea!

“The tectonic plates of belief and hope are moving and causing major disruptions to every sphere of life. One of the answers being proposed by Christians (in some circles) is one gaining some traction in some areas of American and European Christianity, and it’s finding its way onto Australian shores as well: Christian Nationalism. 

It’s not as though Christian Nationalism is brand new; iterations have existed at different points in history, often with long-term disappointment, bloodshed, and Gospel compromise.

I understand why Christians across the United States are concerned and even angry at some of the values and views that have captured hearts. I appreciate why Aussie believers are troubled by various moral agendas that have been normalised in our political and educational institutions. However,  frustration and concern with politicians and the political process is not a reason for reactionary theology and poor exegesis.

We don’t fix one problem by adding another one; that way, we end up with a bigger mess!

Christian Nationalism ends up making the State into the church and the church into a political party and turning the Gospel of grace into a weapon to beat down political opponents. Instead of being God’s message of reconciliation, it distorts the gospel into a message of social conservatism and one that sees political progressivism as the great Satan. Social and moral conservatism can be as dangerous to spiritual health in its intentions to create new forms of legalism and allegiances.  

I’m not saying that Christians in Australia walk away from the public square and sit tight on uncomfortable pews behind stained glass windows. It’s not that Christians shouldn’t participate in the political process. It’s not that we should ignore social issues and cultural debates. Such things are part of common grace and ways we can love our neighbours. Christianity influencing the public square isn’t Christian Nationalism, it is a wonderful byproduct of the goodness and sensibility of Christianity.” 

Australia is one of numerous countries where governments are getting bigger, and the people are looking increasingly to government to be the saviour of all their issues and hopes and fears. This has the unfortunate effect of giving more authority and responsibility to the State and, negatively, it diminishes the role of the community to take responsibility. That critique aside, in the eyes of Scripture, the State is not the main game, but it is the church. In this sense, Christian Nationalism makes a similar error to other heresies, like the prosperity gospel and social justice gospel. They all aim at changing society (and controlling society) through policy and behaviour. 

The problem with that mindset is that it contradicts the nature of the Gospel and the purpose of the church (aka Ephesians ch.2). The halls of Parliament and legislative offices are not the places where God is working out his redemptive plans. It is in the church and by the Gospel of Christ that God is achieving his purposes.

Christian Nationalists may well identify some sins of America (or Australia), and yet the answer according to Scripture isn’t to make America great again or Australia, but to present the Gospel of Christ and make disciples of all nations. Christianity is international and multi ethnic, and any attempt to contract the gospel to a particular nation-state is enormously problematic. 

Make Christianity weird again, not make Christianity skewed again! The message of Jesus Christ has this remarkable ability to weave and connect through every fabric of society. Christianity eventually revolutionised how the Roman Empire viewed women, babies, slaves, and more. Our modern equality sensibilities didn’t arrive by chance, but through Christianity. And yet it wasn’t through some militant takeover bid fueled with rage and demeaning the downtrodden, but with sacrifice and through persuasion, and the God of grace bringing forgiveness and newness of life. 

If there is a ‘sin of empathy’ (yes, Moscow is also responsible for the ‘sin of empathy’ vibe), it is to show empathy with this movement blowing its cold weather in a westerly direction over the Pacific Ocean. My advice I, avoid it like the plague. Instead, be captured by the Apostle Paul’s vision for the Christian Church in Ephesus. In that ancient metropolis of commercial and religious influence, Paul reminds the local church of God’s message of peace and being God’s people of peace. I’m convinced, we (churches) will do well to keep working hard at this: 

 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.

19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. (Ephesians 2:17-22)

For anyone who wishes to read further on Christian Nationalism, 9Marks published a journal on the subject which contains excellent and easy to read articles and reviews – https://www.9marks.org/journal/a-new-christian-authoritarianism/

Kaeley Triller Harms has written this recent summary piece of disclosed issues with the Moscow movement https://kaeleytrillerharms.substack.com/p/doug-wilsonjust-the-facts-maam

Mike Bird has written a series of helpful articles about Christian Nationalism, including reviewing Wiliam Wolfe’s book, ‘The Case for Christian Nationalism

https://michaelfbird.substack.com/p/review-of-stephen-wolfes-the-case

How we speak does matter

/ MurrayCampbell / 1 Comment

Kevin De Young has written an important critique of the Moscow crowd led by Doug Wilson. Kevin’s offering is both irenic and castigating.

Kevin’s stated purpose is less to address theological concerns coming from the Moscow of Idaho, but to explain the success of Moscow and why this ought to concern Christians.

Photo by freestocks.org on Pexels.com

A biting cold in  Moscow 

De Young explains,

“I’m convinced the appeal of Moscow is visceral more than intellectual…people come to those particular intellectual convictions because they were first attracted to the cultural aesthetic and the political posture that Wilson so skillfully embodies. In short, people are moving to Moscow—whether literally or spiritually—because of a mood.”

“My bigger concern is with the long-term spiritual effects of admiring and imitating the Moscow mood. For the mood that attracts people to Moscow is too often incompatible with Christian virtue, inconsiderate of other Christians, and ultimately inconsistent with the stated aims of Wilson’s Christendom project.” 

“The Moscow mood provides a non-stop adversarial stance toward the world and toward other Christians who are deemed (or caricatured to be) too afraid to “tell it like it is.” Moscow cannot become the American Redoubt for conservative Christians if it is too similar to other places, with basically the same kinds of churches, schools, and institutions found in hundreds of other cities. Differentiation is key, and this can only be sustained by a mood of antagonism and sharp antithesis…

“I fear that much of the appeal of Moscow is an appeal to what is worldly in us. As we’ve seen, the mood is often irreverent, rebellious, and full of devil-may-care playground taunts. That doesn’t make us better Christians.” 

It is worth reading Kevin De Young’s piece in its entirety. Behind this mood is a set of theological assumptions about the relationship between Church and State, Gospel and culture. These assumptions are often known as ‘Christian Nationalism’, a position that De Young thinks is problematic, as do I (as I’ve written earlier this year ).

Language really does matter

De Young is rightly concerned about the type of speech Wilson regularly employs to convey the mood. This includes, 

“Wilson’s deliberate decision to use uncouth (at best) and sinful (at worst) language, especially language of a sexual nature.”

Angry speech and coarse speech. As they say, the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. As the article was shared on social media the very issues Kevin highlighted were being played out in real cyber time. Supporters of Wilson were soon defending his use of vulgar language, as though the times require such vocabulary to come from the lips of pastors. As others expressed thankfulness for Kevin’s article, Moscovites were eager to zoom in and add their own filthy language and derogatory words, presumably as an instrument to silence people. 

Take, for example, the abuse Karen Prior was subjected to when she tweeted, ‘thank you for speaking up’,

I wonder if the people pause long enough to realise that they simply reinforcing the very issues Kevin has outlined in his critique of Doug Wilson and Moscow?

One Aussie Pastor, defending Doug Wilson, summed up well the ‘mood’ concern De Young is highlighting. He said on a friend’s Facebook page, 

“We can lament the state of the church and culture all we want, and natter amongst ourselves about what the right tone to strike is. Maybe it’s just time for haymakers and door slamming.”

Over the last 5 years, I found that the ‘truth and freedom’ brigade is quick to fend off voices calling for considered speech and tone. They don’t see the times as one for making peace but waging war against the culture and against all those weak knee Christian groups who don’t buy into the angry mood. Failure to reach the same heated temperature is viewed upon with suspicions and probable complicity with all that is wrong with culture.

If Jesus overturned tables and made a whip that’s what we’re going to do. If Jesus can call Pharisees ‘vipers’, then let’s make sure we stick that in our rhetorical rifle and fire off a round every day. After all, if we do it often enough we will aim true at some point.  Friend, not every word is meant to sound as though we’re Elijah or Ezekiel in their boldest moments. 

There are many issues in our society that grieve Christians and that we understand are serious missteps that will lead to further harm to people in our suburbs and streets. There are occasions for godly anger. But surely this cannot be our only sustained note in public. We mustn’t gather around rage and all we find problematic, but around the Gospel of grace. If the moral and spiritual sitz im leben of our community is concerning, how much more therefore must we pay attention to the godliness within the church and how we speak with not only truth but also kindness and grace. Are we seeking to persuade people with the Gospel of Jesus Christ or whacking them with a rhetorical blitz?

Gruff doesn’t equal greater faithfulness to the gospel. Using strong language doesn’t equate to greater love or persuasive power?  And coarse language contravenes God’s message of grace and righteousness.

Tone does matter. Tone is about godliness. Tone chooses words. Tone is about conveying truthfulness in love. Our models for public speech shouldn’t be Donald Trump or the anti-semitic sloganees who are marching through the streets at the moment. Loud and brash may grab attention and win the cheers of devotees, and also betray the very Gospel we are claiming to represent. 

The Bible warns us about our tongues.

“Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. 2 We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check. 3 When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. 4 Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. 5 Likewise, the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. 6 The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole body, sets the whole course of one’s life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell… (James 3:6)

“Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving.” (Eph 5:4)

“But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken.” (Matt 12:36)

The Bible urges us to speak not only truthfully but with a tone of grace and respect and kindness. 

“Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.” (Eph 4:29)

 “Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” (Col 4:6)

 “Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith and in purity.” (1 Timothy 4:12)

“A gentle answer turns away wrath,
    but a harsh word stirs up anger.

The soothing tongue is a tree of life,
    but a perverse tongue crushes the spirit.” (Prob 15:1 & 4)

“My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry,” (James 1:9)

The Bible identifies a correlation between speech and the heart.

“A worthless man devises mischief. His speech is like a scorching fire.” (Prob 16:27)

Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly (2 Tim 3:16)

What is tone? It is the sound attuned to God’s melodic line. Paul wrote that one’s words amount to noise if not spoken in the right manner. When the music score says legato, do I play staccato instead? When the composer indicates pianissimo,  do I bash triple forte? When the composer asks forte, should I play in a whisper? 

Tone is more than a choice of which key to sing, it is a sound of godliness that we want to faithfully match God’s melodic line.  Our tone is a heart issue, and only the Gospel of grace can cure it.  Kevin De Young has sounded a warning, and it is one that has its roots in the pleas and corrections offered up by James the brother of Jesus. While I feel no gravitational pull toward Moscow, this is nonetheless an opportunity to consider the words I use and how. If that’s the takeaway, then I think Kevin has served us well.