Blind Leading the Blind
Two days ago, I wrote about Doug Wilson’s interview on CNN, and predicted that it would be the subject of the conservative Christian social media debate of the week.
I was right.
Though, within that predictable conversation, beyond the normal back and forth between parties who see Wilson as either the church’s greatest threat or greatest vanguard, there was a notable aspect of the discussion that, when placed in its proper context, gives a clear view of how ridiculous the bubble of conservative Reformed media is. In the interview, Wilson and his associates, Toby Sumpter and Jared Longshore, promoted the notion of repealing the 19th Amendment, which granted women the right to vote. If it’s not obvious to you, that will never happen. Even proposing it, one hundred years into female enfranchisement, is evidence of how out to lunch the “patriarchalist” world is.
Yet, nothing shows how detached from reality all of Christian media is, and why extremists like Wilson get as far as they do within it, than how that online bubble treated his view not as the absolutely laughable notion that it is, but as a serious point of debate. It seemed as if nearly every pastor and theologian with a podcast or book to promote weighed in, trying to put forth some “biblical” argument for or against the proposal, as if it has any more realistic merit than arguing over who would win in a fight between Batman and Iron Man.
Conservative Christianity (especially the Reformed end), as it is represented in media, is not a serious movement; it’s a pathetic political front riding the gravitas of the real faith. I have grown to have nothing but contempt for it, especially as I have come to see that its most prominent personalities reach their theological conclusions via the same lack of intellectual rigor that they give to their endless political obsessions.
You call the position laughable that they think society could change, yet in the same sentence you also say that it's been this way for "100 years." What was the position before this? And what were the base assumptions of the roles of men on women for most of history, including in the church? In the whole of history, what we have is novel, and they atrocities that exist in our society don't vindicate the idea that our morality has "progressed" in any sense. Evils were exchanged for other evils by a society that rejects God.
Christians don't believe in progressive morality, we believe it is rooted in God and the revelation he has given us.
The laughable assumption is that because something is done right now that it is the best way to do it. How could we assume that our short 100 year history of growing egalitarianism is of course the most natural and biblical? How was this missed by all of our forefathers in the faith? What chronological snobbery to think we are simply better or more enlightened than they.
As they stated, they don't see this changing overnight, or next year. They know these kind of societal changes take time. The only true progress is that toward a biblical society that loves and serves God in every aspect of life. Anything outside of that is true regress.
God help us.
It doesn't matter how stupid conservative reformed Christianity may or may not be. It's never intrinsically a waste of time to evaluate any issue against the Bible simply because it seems a settled matter in society. Slaver Christendom likewise mocked abolitionists as impractical. If you were in a tiny minority about your anti nationalist crusade, you'd be likewise mocked as impractical.
Surely you don't want others to mock any biblical argument you might make against nationalism as the work of a silly dreamer?
Never lose sight of the prize and never drop biblicism, even if your opponents do it badly.