You Know, Our Situation
I just noticed that the word ‘Canon’ looks a lot like ‘Qanon’. Am I reading into this too deeply?
Jordan, yes. You are certainly reading too deeply if you don’t have our premium membership. But if you do . . . then everything starts to come into focus, doesn’t it?
Rope, but, but . . . salt and light . . .
Would you consider switching your bookseller to Books a Million or ABE Booksellers or some other purveyor. There aren’t very many ways to send messages to Big Tech that we see what they’re doing, but pursuing alternatives is one way. I’m sure there are a million reasons that a smarter person like you will argue that’s a bad idea, but they’re complicit in the suppression of free speech, and I’m currently seeking to avoid them rather than reward them.
Michelle, I certainly sympathize with what you are doing, and I do think you can continue that with our materials. I would encourage you to shop for our stuff at Canon Press directly.
Re: Aphorisms for a Tedious Week,
The last three or so lines of this were some of the first encouraging ones I’ve seen this year so far—beyond our excellent pastor on Sunday and my own Bible reading plan, in which I’m midway through Exodus (there’s been plenty to go on). I think Christians need a more robust understanding of “encouragement,” and you’re always good for it. Encouragement that gives courage and doesn’t just make us feel jolly.
Amanda, thank you, and thank the Lord.
Thanks for the wisdom in your latest post, “Tell it not in Gath.” I have a very real heart conflict that I don’t know how to resolve and I need some counsel.
I have a very difficult time with going to the Communion Table with people who are dyed-in-wool Democrats; these people are not ignorant of the issues—they say they are pro-life yet are avid supporters of the Dems (not just Trump haters) and buy into all CRT nonsense, etc. How do I share the Table with people who would willingly support those who would fine, jail, or otherwise persecute the other people at the Table including me? This really troubles me. I don’t want to draw a line that the Lord has not drawn.
Craig, several things. They are the ones who should feel uncomfortable coming to the Table with you, not the other way. The ones who should be distraught that they are coming to the Table should be your eldership. I would start by praying for your pastor and elders, giving them literature, with the goal that the preaching would start addressing such things, with repentance in view. Failing repentance, that they would leave the church. And if the leadership of your church doesn’t show an inclination to address this in an efficacious way, then you should start making preparations to leave the church.
I have just discovered your blog and it’s a revelation – thank you for providing me with what I have been looking for.
Regarding your post “The Gods of Civil Unrest and Jesus Mobs”, you have some clear and great advice as to how to go about living my life. My question is about making others aware of the gas lighting and lies from our mainstream press and politicos. How exactly do you recommend helping others to see the light?
Thank you and I apologize if you have other posts that address my question. I haven’t yet scratched the surface of your blog!
Len, yes, I have addressed the subject of gas lighting a number of times. Try hunting for that with our search feature. In the meantime, the short version is that the best way to reveal that gas lighting is going on is by not having it work on you.
Masks at Church
I’ve been so thankful for your clear thinking and writing, especially on matters relating to COVID lock downs and masks. I’ll get right to the point. I need some advice. The elders at my church are convictional about obeying all of the health orders of our government. We are doing virtual services on Sunday mornings and care groups on Sunday night. The elders have been very clear that we must follow all of the COVID protocols—contact tracing, social distancing, and masks to enter, leave and move about. (You can take them off at your seat).
Anyways, I took the stand that I would not join those meetings due to the onerous rules. I encouraged them before this to consider giving room for conscientious objection or less than perfect obedience to these rules. They made it clear that because masks and social distancing aren’t “gospel issues,” or causing the believer to sin they need to be obeyed.
I presented my arguments regarding Romans 13 and sphere sovereignty, arguing that the government has overstepped their jurisdiction and are an illegitimate authority in these matters. This was dismissed as philosophical and not biblical.
I spoke of it as a conscience issue but was quickly dismissed as once again not being a strong biblical argument and too subjective.
Anyways, I’m kind of at a standstill here. It seems to them that I am stuck on this mask thing and therefore I am forsaking fellowship. I see it the opposite way, that they are being fastidious about these rules and not allowing any dissent.
In principle these brothers would agree to wear masks all service long, social distance indefinitely, and even wear a jester’s hat if the government told them to. (Unfortunately that is not misconstruing their position, I asked that question and they answered “yes, I would wear the hat”). It’s like they haven’t considered tyranny as a real category.
So . . . what would you say to pastor’s holding this kind of a position? I feel convicted to hold the line and to not put the mask on and air high five the brethren from six feet away . . . what do you think of that stand? If this goes on for months I will need to find a different church. However, I don’t believe there is a single church open here . . . pray for me.
Any advice for this brother in a tight spot would be gracious of you and welcomed by me!
Thankful for all you do!
Ross, very sorry for your trouble. If the problem doesn’t resolve soon, you probably should starting praying about another church. But even if it does resolve, the whole episode has revealed a gaping hole in your church’s theology of resistance. I would start giving books away, starting with Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos.
My family has been tremendously blessed by what you all are doing in Moscow: from podcasts, to books, to tv shows, to home school curriculum and countless other endeavors. Thank you.
In the post about the Jesus Mobs, you admonished us to, among other things, buy and read the kinds of books that are likely to be banished. Do you have any recommendations about where to start with this? Particularly as a young homeschooling family? We have many books already but we are always looking for great books, especially ones that will be important for us to have in years to come.
Ben, I would start with Idols for Destruction. I would read That Hideous Strength and The Abolition of Man by Lewis. Make sure to include Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos, which Canon just released. And The Politics of Guilt and Pity by Rushdoony.
Doug, been very blessed by everything God is doing through you. I’m a recently married young man and God has woken me up to a lot of things I was unaware of in the world and the church, through you, so thank you brother. I was particularly blessed by your book Fidelity. I will be working on Reforming Marriage next as you suggested in the previous mentioned book. We have got the state cracking down on our churches remaining open in Canada right now, the fines are high but we are holding fast.
Was very encourage by your exhortation on how to build immunity at the end of your post: “Gods of civil unrest” and had a question on it:
What books do you recommend buying that might be banned soon?
And a further question is when is the call/appropriate time for the church to go underground? We are not there yet but it feels like it’s something to think about as the police are hammering the churches all around us.
The techs can take our freedom of speech, the government can take our money by force for practicing our religious freedoms, how long before the culture that murders unwanted children begins to shed blood of those they disagree with? When’s the proper time as believers to “duck”?
Russ, it is too soon to go underground, but it is not too soon to be thinking about it, or making plans. As for the books, see the previous letter.
Back to the Situation
Response to The Gods of Civil Unrest and Jesus Mobs:
Pastor Wilson, I loved this blog post. You’re right, it was a beast but I listened to it while I was washing dishes so that made it go a little more quickly. I am a mother of three and a teacher’s assistant at a Christian School. Your writing is so helpful and so clear exegeting the Scriptures . . .
I’d also like to address this passage in tour article: “And remember, whenever you have any doubts about whether this election was stolen in the middle of the night, just look at what these people are doing to free speech in the middle of the day. If they won’t allow your so-called “hate speech,” why on earth would Dominion allow you to get out there with your “hate vote”? What principle of theirs would they be violating if they stole the election and then lied their heads off about it?”
Just because it’s logically consistent that the election may have been stolen does not mean the election in fact was stolen. My husband is in law school and from everything he has read in the news and from various opinions of judges, there is no evidence of election fraud that holds up in court. As I understand it, many of the judge’s ruling on these lawsuits by Trump were also appointed by Trump. They’re conservative judges and from what I’ve learned from my husband, the lower courts are not anywhere near as corrupt as the Supreme Court. They work as they should work; as our nation’s Founders intended them to work. This does not mean that there is no corruption or room for improvement in the criminal justice system, but in these particular lawsuits, there is no hard evidence. I agree with you on many points Pastor Wilson but not on that one. We can still seek justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with our God while still admitting that there is no evidence for election fraud in 2020. We can let go of that one.
Thank you for your ministry, your writing and you’re preaching! In Christ.
Rachel, thank you for a gracious letter. And you are quite right that just because they are suppressing free speech doesn’t necessarily mean that they are stealing the election. The most that means by itself is that they have the kind of character that could steal it if they had the opportunity. The point I was making is not that they were suppressing free speech generally (although that would be bad enough), but rather that they are suppressing free speech about the election. In other words, if I had slam dunk evidence of electoral fraud, would Twitter or Facebook let me present it? My point about free speech was that they are actively suppressing evidence.
Are we going to be concerned about precedent after they STOLE an election? It is thought by many with knowledge of the matter, and the Constitution, that the VP could have rejected those slate of electors from the States that asked that they be sent back, since they were illegitimate to begin with. What further harm would that have done? Besides, what is the law of the land?
Ron, my understanding is that individual state legislators asked that the vote be rejected, not the legislatures themselves. Had the legislatures recalled their slate of electors, that would have been different.
Re Aphorisms… “And by the way, if the election wasn’t stolen, then why are they handling it like it was stolen goods?”
Doug, that duck doesn’t fly no matter how many times you hurl it in the air, and no readers not already smoking MAGA weed are going to imagine it does. Even if your Exhibit A was not a figment it would hardly amount to compelling evidence for the thing you claim. If the election *was* stolen why can’t somebody come up with a better argument for the case? Apparently nobody who could have made a practical difference was able to either, but still, if you feel obliged to maintain the allegation then it is incumbent upon you to present a cogent brief, or else drop the subject. Actually, you just need to stop. As it is you are doing harm. You need to move on to where you can do some good. For the sake of the church, for the sake of the country, please.
John, sorry, we just have to disagree. Let us limit ourselves to things that no one disputes—that people with no authority to do so changed election laws and procedures, that seventeen states petitioned the Supreme Court to take the matter up, and the Supreme Court said no. They said no because of the issue of “standing.” This election stinks to high heaven, and Twitter and Facebook are acting like they know it. But please know that I am quite willing to be proven wrong—I really am. But I am unwilling to be dismissed as crazy for wanting that case to be made.
Hi, I loved reading this article of yours:
I forwarded it to a friend of mine. Now he’s Jewish, and is a little sensitive to certain issues, and something caught his eye that I barely noticed:
You spoke of the ‘handlers of the left’ and he thinks you might mean Jews. I think you simply meant left-wing politicians. But can you clarify?
Thanks, and have a great week either way!
Chris, the thought of Jews as the “handlers of the left” did not enter my head, and had nothing to do with that phrase.
Question about a comment in : Aphorisms for a Tedious Week
I have spent the last month listening to lectures on the Canon app regarding the War for Independence, the Civil War, etc. Before I get to my question I wanted to say that I have been helped a 1000x over by these lectures and thus, the question I am about to ask is one where I am truly looking for your expertise in the area.
Regarding Pence’s decision last Wednesday, I agree that he should not have rejected the vote, but, some, including Mark Levin, argued that what he should have done was hand the power back to the states to sort things out and then re-certify. Levin argued that this was not only constitutional, but also the most ethical decision to make. The foundation for this position was that governors, judges, or election officials in PA, GA, WI, AZ, all supplanted their legislatures and changed election law before the election. This was in violation of the state constitutions but also the federal Constitution; article 2 clause 2, I believe. Thus, putting all allegations of fraud aside, the elections in these states were unconstitutional and void before any vote was even cast. Levin argued that Pence was aware of this and even admitted so in his letter to Trump on the day of the Capitol fiasco,. However, Pence saw his position that day as purely ceremonial, and Levin argued that this is not so. In Levin’s mind, to allow unconstitutional votes from admitted corrupted elections to go through was unethical. He contested that Pence has the moral duty to hand these soiled votes back to the states. So, the argument was all about the states rights to decertify and re-certify after some thorough discussion was had. I believe that that is what many congressmen and Senators such as Ted Cruz came to argue that day. That being said, I am just curious what your thoughts are on all of this; am I missing anything, am I off, do you think that this is the direction that Pence should have taken?
B, I would have had no problem if Pence had returned those slates to their respective states to review. What I did not want was Pence making the determination himself, all by himself.
Big fan. Thankful for your insights. It’s my understanding from Trump lawyers (Giuliani and John Eastman), that President Trump merely wanted Pence to adjourn the joint session of Congress for a 10-day pause for Pennsylvania state legislature and perhaps another one or two to review their respective electoral-college certifications.
An aspirational nod to Article 2 of the Constitution, albeit an atypical one in these atypical times.
Reagan, had that been done, and explicitly stated, then I don’t think Pence would have been taking too much on himself. See my response to the previous question.
Well you really shocked me when you said you thought Pence was right not to refuse any of the electoral votes. Did you know that numerous state legislators from those cheating states ASKED for those electoral votes to be refused? Are you saying that once any state administration has accepted the electoral votes that disputing them is off the table? So even if evidence was allowed in a court (which never happened this time) and it was shown to be fraudulent that nothing can be done at that point, so the true endpoint of fighting is the state’s acceptance (corrupt or otherwise) of the apparent results? That the true electors who also voted in December in those States don’t count?
Lance, no, I don’t believe that disputing questionable votes should be off the table. See my responses above. What I did not want was the vice-president settling anything by fiat.
Post: Gods of Civil Unrest and the Jesus Mobs
Thank you for both the “Gods of Civil Unrest and the Jesus Mobs” and your “State of the Church 2021” messages. Both helped me tremendously.
In a church climate of effeminate men (those who avoid conflict at all costs), how do I avoid being quarrelsome while standing against the oncoming tyranny? How does the Bible define quarrelsome? Is the key avoiding sinful anger mentioned in James and Proverbs? I’d rather be slandered by my church for taking a stand and exhorting others to join me than being legitimately quarrelsome. I hope to join you again for Grace Agenda and the FLF Rally. You and Christ Church are in my prayers especially in light of the Moscow City Council’s agenda to remove constitutional protections from their emergency decree. Take care and God bless. Sincerely,
Brent, thank you. And whether you are being quarrelsome or not in these larger battles can be measured by how you get along with everyone in your household. A quarrelsome man is going to be a quarrelsome man everywhere he goes.
I cheered out loud while reading “Aphorisms for a Tedious Week”. In it, you said, “These events have not been an assault on democracy. They have been an assault on the republic by democracy.” I have been saying that exact thing almost since the event happened. People are so confused about the difference between a republic and a democracy that they can look right at democracy in action and claim it as an affront to democracy. Truly a sad state of affairs.
On a semi-related note, I recently listened to the January 8 episode of Dan Crenshaw’s podcast. Mr. Crenshaw has taken a lot of heat for allegedly “betraying” Trump on January 6. In the podcast, he explains the reasons for his decision using the Constitution (oh, gasp!) and the Federalist Papers. The fundamental reason was that the founders did not want the election of a president to be a watershed event concentrated in one time and place. Therefore, the Congress has no power to approve/deny the submitted votes. In the founders’ opinions, that was too much like a democracy and would cause large uprisings just like we saw on January 6. It’s well worth a listen as there is much more to his explanation.
Craig, thanks. In the midst of a tangle like this, good men can have different takes.
Quite a Reasonable Request
May you please make the Canon App also for Macs and PCs and not just phones and tablets? That would be so super amazing.
Sam, I believe that is in the works. Pray for us, as we have an “hours in the day” problem out here.
Thank you for your writing. I frequently find your perspective to be very helpful and refreshingly funny. This question doesn’t pertain to a specific post, and perhaps falls under the “just for fun” category. I’m reading Metaxas’s biography of Martin Luther. Not surprisingly, I’m finding it to be very good. One thing that shows up in the book on multiple occasions is historical commentary on what exactly it was that Luther was challenging. There are times when Metaxas makes somewhat sweeping statements regarding the “Middle Ages”, and it seems as if he sort of pits Luther against the entirety of the Middle Ages and the corruption therein. He makes it sound like Luther had no time for Aquinas (I’m not familiar enough with Luther’s own writings to know if this is a fair assessment), and he often categorizes the centuries preceding Luther as a time marked by corruption. Of course there was great corruption in Luther’s day, and I always enjoy learning about Reformation history and thought. My question is this: How do you reconcile the Middle Ages, and the millennium worth of Church history within the Middle ages, with the Reformation? Was the Reformation a complete diversion from the historical, cultural stream, or does it have more continuity with the Middle Ages than is often thought?
Kyle, I would start by referring you to Angels in the Architecture for our take on “medieval Protestantism.” It is quite true that Luther had little use for “the schoolmen,” but you also have to keep in mind that the Reformation happened when the medieval corruptions were in full bloom. The way it was then, was not representative of the entire medieval period, although the corruptions were the fruit of the entire medieval period. But we also have to remember that the Reformation was also the fruit of it. I would want to argue that the Reformation was the high point of the middle ages.
I read this article (7 Reasons Young Men Should Marry Before Their 23rd Birthday) when it was first published (back when I was 22) and here recently now that I’m 27. Though I wholeheartedly agree with much of what you wrote, circumstances did not permit me to seal the marriage deal in the few months after you wrote this article before I hit the big 2-3.
So I still have the same strong desire as I did back in 2016 to get married, but one thing I’ve noticed with some of the women I’ve gotten to know is that if I discover they’ve had sex outside of the realm of marriage, I find it very difficult to want to pursue them any further. I’ve never had sex outside of marriage, and the thought of being with someone who has is very hard for me. On the other hand, I’ve gotten to know many godly, faithful women, who I know would take back what they did in an instant if they could, and I’m starting to wonder if I’m making too big of a deal out of this or not. Should I just get over it and push through, or am I being too judgmental?
Gabe, the short answer is that I think you need to work through this. Coming to marriage as a virgin is a very great blessing, and not to be despised. At the same time, God takes us from where we are, not from where we should have been. Start with the question of her character now.
A Practical Question
Thank you for being a faithful and prophetic voice in the culture. I have been blessed immensely by your work, and you have helped to convince me of post-millennialism (just in time for the apocalypse! Perfect timing!).
Thank you for this post. The final encouragement has helped to confirm a recent decision I made. After being confused as to where God wants me to serve the body, I think He has shown me where I must focus my efforts—my own home. I had been teaching the Bible to kids and young people at my current church until this year when they shut down the Wednesday night programming. So the opportunities I had for serving have been gone all year. This weekend I came to realize that if I can’t teach the children at church, I can (and am commanded to) always teach my own.
However, the other part of my life that’s producing a lot of inner turmoil is my job. I am a civilian researcher with a digital graphics background working for the military at a government research institution in California.
The work itself is fine. I work with a small team that I really like, and I have a lot of creative freedom in my job—a plus for a visual designer. Also, I haven’t been forced to adopt any woke ideology . . . yet (I do feel that’s coming however—we already have a diversity and inclusion council).
My question is: should I even be working here? Am I part of the problem of a bloated and likely corrupted state? Is it a sin to take a paycheck from the federal government?
Lately I’m thinking that this is not where I’m supposed to be. But maybe it’s simply the frustration of living in Soviet California or the byproduct of these tumultuous times. Plus, we’re attending a church that, while it hasn’t sold out to the culture, is a little “squishy.”
But even leaving my job poses some problems. First, a couple years ago I accepted a student loan repayment offer they were giving to employees as a retention perk—my department paid off a portion of my student loan, and I agreed to work here for three years (ending September 2022). So if I left early I’d have to pay back $10K. However, it’s a small price to pay if it’s the right thing to do.
The second thing, and the main issue, is where would I even go? I’m a digital media artist. Just about anywhere I go would be more in league with the wicked culture than here. That’s the problem with being in this industry—it’s dominated by the woke mob. So either I stick around and benefit directly from a greedy state or leave a job and move my family to a media company with a diversity director and “no tolerance for bigotry,” if you catch my drift.
And in case you’re wondering, I have little to no organizational influence. I don’t create policy, I am not a supervisor, any decisions I’m involved in our recommendations for software or hardware purchases.
Any thoughts on this? Should I just skip town and move my family to South Dakota and learn how to become a blacksmith?
Ryan, from the way you describe it, it strikes me that you should stay put for the moment, but move the idea of moving on to the top of your prayer list.
One of Our Commenters
Jonathan is getting out of control—again. On this thread alone (as of this writing), he is responsible for 23 out of 57 comments (40%), and has posted the same YouTube link three times, which is spam. He is sucking all the oxygen out of the room, and has been doing so the last few Tuesday posts. Other commenters are getting fed up with him as well.
If Twitter, Facebook, et al, all think it’s perfectly OK to ban those with whom they disagree, then perhaps it’s time people like Jonathan were made to live under the rules their leftist masters are forcing on everyone else.
Thank you for your blog and for the chance to interact with other people who like to frequent this place. Please don’t let Jonathan ruin it for everyone else.
Commenter Formerly Known As . . .
CFKA, I know that Jonathan can be tedious, and I believe I have removed a few of his comments. As you no doubt have guessed, I am reluctant to censor my critics in this space, but I will try to keep an eye on it. I don’t want this space to turn into Troll Town.
A Few Cheery Notes to End With
What a time. What opportunities there are now and are ahead for the gospel . Acts 5:39-42.
Richard, yes. It is an honor to be dishonored, a grace to be disgraced.
Thank you for this post. It is a tedious week . . .Your last four paragraphs greatly encouraged me as I watch the Democrats throw as much gasoline on the simmering fire. I think they will live to regret their decisions. It will be interesting to see how our Lord will use this time to further His gospel. It is a great time to be a postmillennialist . . .
John, the very best of times to be postmill . . .