As I mentioned in last week’s excerpt on patriarchy, purity culture, and Christian nationalism, the collective topic1 has been the hottest part of conversation since Church Camp released last April.
Early conversations may have been focused on the book as a whole, but as time goes by, as often happens in the life of a book, certain topics in the book take on a life of their own. The siloed trifecta of a topic is often what seminars and other teachings have become focused on — and, as it goes, I am seen as an expert in turn.
That last part is still a little weird and wild, if you ask me, but then I remember that I have thoughts and opinions. I know things. I want to nerd out and talk about it, because doesn’t everyone want to nerd out and talk about Doug Wilson and his desire to repeal the 19th Amendment and growing influence of the CREC?
As you may well know, an NPR interview with Wilson went viral last week — and for good reason: we can’t dismiss his influence on country and culture today, not when the patriarchal dominance he promotes continually oppresses women, people of color, and the LGBTQ+ community.
Otherwise, I thought I’d take my cues from Cait, who provided her readers with a behind-the-scenes transcript of the email interview.3 I choose to do the same with you.
What do you think of Doug Wilson’s views, especially regarding the 19th amendment, single household voting and the role of women?
Suffice it to say, I have not been a fan of Doug Wilson for a long time. While I was never a part of his denomination, during the height of my evangelical days (early 2000s), I had several friends who went to some of his churches — who were effectively indoctrinated by his teachings. Men and women, they ascribed to the teachings, beliefs, and practices of the CREC (Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches). To them, marriage was the highest office a man could achieve and a woman could compliment; dating was for the sole purpose of finding your future mate, to then fall in love and procreate and raise a family. Under this biblical umbrella, God was the head, man fell under the head, and women fell under man.
Although I found a home in white evangelicalism for a good portion of my life, I also always pushed back against complementarian beliefs that believed a women’s role was only in the home, as a “helpmeet” and in submission to her husband (who received authority from God).
Even though the CREC has continued to grow and expand, especially in the last decade (literally, it started with 3 churches in 1998, grew to nearly 130 congregations by 2020, and then expanded another 150% following the pandemic), I truly believe the influence of the former and current President has contributed to its surge in popularity.
As someone who still finds a home in the Christian tradition, albeit not within the confines of white evangelicalism and certainly not within a denomination that looks anything like the CREC, I think Doug Wilson’s views are a bunch of hogwash — and I also equally, if not even more passionately believe that we need to take him (and his influence on Washington) more seriously now than ever before.
To Wilson, it’s pure rhetoric to frame the repeal of the 19th amendment as an issue that has nothing to do with XX v. XY chromosomes. We already know that to Wilson, gender is entirely binary (and therefore, within this realm, nothing that is apart from the two gender distinctions can exist). Just as there is no room for an expansive, inclusive world that promotes the healing and well-being of our LGBTQ+ family, for instance, there is also no room for anything outside of Christian heteronormativity.
Wilson may say that he doesn’t want men or women voting as a single household, that it’s about the combined power of the collective household vote (and that an astonishing 7 percent of his congregants are women who cast a vote!), but Wilson isn’t lying when he jokes, “Because it’s a good idea.” To Doug Wilson, household voting is a good idea, not because it promotes a man and a woman who are married to each other being on the same page, but because it further silences the one he most wants to silence: women.
Doug Wilson wants to repeal the 19th Amendment because he doesn’t believe women deserve the right to vote. To him, women are always secondary, always the helpmeet, always the one who walks alongside the man (her man) because this is the way God designed it to be.
What do you think people should know about this religious movement, which has gained influence a the highest ranks of government?
I believe that’s answered above.
What should Americans understand about the real-world and policy implications of this worldview?
No longer is Doug Wilson a fringe believer of a small Christian movement. His beliefs are infiltrating Washington — and the country — at exceeding rates, growing in popularity amongst both men and women. It’s a little nutty to think that it’s been four years since the Supreme Court overturned the federal constitutional right to an abortion, thereby returning authority to the states. So many people were in shock over the decision: How could this happen in 2022, in America, here, now? They asked. And, those who have been fighting for the last 50 years to see Roe v. Wade overturned weren’t surprised in the least.
This is what they’d planned for, prayed for, hoped for, worked for. Wilson may not have been on the front of that fight (although he most certainly expresses conservative values over a woman’s right to choose), but in the same way, I do not think we can take lightly the work that is happening behind the scenes now — that began over a hundred years ago, in 1919 when the amendment was repealed, even if it’s not been on the front page of the news — to repeal the 19th Amendment.
The movement has already begun and their fight and their stance, their hope and their position is clear.
Is there a biblical basis for Wilson’s position on women, voting and a Christian theocracy, or do you see it as a misreading of scripture?
Oh, I see it as a complete misreading of Scripture. Here’s the thing I think a lot of folks don’t necessarily understand: when it comes to interpreting the bible, you can get a thousand different theologians in a room and have a thousand different interpretations. Perhaps I am exaggerating a little bit, but within the Christian tradition, Wilson and I could open up the exact same bible, comb through each of the 66 books, and come up with a different interpretation of each verse that exists within each of those books.
I imagine we agree on the God who is love, the God whose son Jesus came to earth as a man to be love, and on the Spirit who continues to shows up in our lives, but I imagine that’s about it.
To say that the lens through which Wilson views women, voting, and even interpretations of Christian theocracy, is through a conservative lens of biblical orthodoxy. Here, traditional interpretations of theology are accepted (interpretations that would, for instance, believe marriage is only between a man and a woman, or believe that homosexuality — their words, not mine — is wrong). This understanding would cling to literal interpretations of scripture and believe in enduring moral truths that desire, for example, America be made great again by returning to the values of an earlier era.
When we, or I should then say, the Wilsons of this world, adhere to views of theocracy or even theonomy, we’re disregarding the very foundation our country was built on — a foundation that values the plurality of religions, beliefs, and persons. In a theocracy (where “theo” means “God” and “crazy” means government), it’s all about who holds the power. Here, the state (and ultimately, the country) is governed by God, who governs man in turn.
Women, once again, are silenced, because this is how those in charge want it to be, this is how they believe it should be — saying nothing of those who have equally if not more so been marginalized, including people of color and the LGBTQ+ community, just to name two.
That’s it for today.
c.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.