In the first place, I would like to draw your attention to this chart helpfully supplied at the web site of one Rachel Held Evans. I will give you a second to go take a gander. As you do so, I would invite you to remember that what is sauce for the gander is sauce for the gaze. Or something like that.
Now that you are back, two quick points on the merits, and then I would like to move on to the aspect of this that really is wheeze-worthy.
First, persecution is defined by the Scriptures, and not by theological liberals who are in the process of shifting their loyalties over to the other side. The Lord Jesus defines persecution to include verbal abuse (Matt. 5:11). And Paul says Isaac was persecuted by Ishmael because he was laughed at (Gal. 4:29). So we are not limited to an entirely arbitrary list on a chart of false alternatives.
But second, I quite agree that conservative Christians ought not to be whining about any of this. There is nothing here to surprise us, and subbing in Winter Holiday for Christmas is not exactly a fiery trial yet.
I have discussed these points more thoroughly here.
So now, here is the fun part. Rachel Held Evans is lecturing us all on how we ought to be grown ups, and not get an owie on our feelings when a cashier neglects to acknowledge that Jesus is the reason for the season. Okay, but she is the same person who quoted from my book Fidelity last year. Before doing so, she cordoned off the offensive quote with a bright yellow “trigger warning: rape, sexual abuse.” Her post was written in a high dudgeon, for had I not said that the sexual act — when not performed by non-Euclideans — was not an egalitarian pleasuring party? I had done so, I confess it, and would be willing to say it again, if anybody would just ask.
On that occasion, she led the charge of a brigade of church ladies of both sexes, and they were apparently in search of a swooning couch, crying out as they went for the smelling salts of public apologies from those who differed with them, and in a number of other ways they all displayed the firm independence of the modern woman.
So I will conclude with a paraphrase and modification of an exhortation that she delivered to us at that time.
When your brother in Christ tells you that your words trigger upsetting images of it being always winter and never Christmas, and all those poor animals turned to stone, especially the baby squirrel, you should listen to him, not dismiss him.
But in order to do that, you will have to drop the Turkish Delight of your boxed egalitarianism, and get off the sled.
It still bugs me that nobody ever went back and rescued the baby squirrel. It comes of that British reluctance to get too personal. If Edmund had ever been made to give his testimony, he might have gotten to, “And I finally started thinking about others when . . . Oh, crap! We never unstoned those poor critters at their Christmas party! Hey, Luce, do ya think your cordial would work for that? No? Well, somebody jot it down on a list of stuff to ask Aslan to fix next time anybody sees him.”
Perhaps if RHE ever tried living biblically for a year or so, she might know what persecution feels like. And I really think you should have titled this post “church ladies of both sexes.”
I remember when I was a kid, hearing Billy Graham telling kids from the pulpit that if they are getting a hard time for becoming a Christian, that is a form of persecution
Yah know, with RHE I have kind of passed over to the other side. I am no longer outraged, merely amused. She is truly the gift that keeps on giving.
Besides, such a loose canon is sooner or later bound to blow herself up. What she has going is not a formula for lasting success.
It is interesting and useful to be reminded that abuse, vilification and mockery are part of persecution. I think one of the reasons many Christians are not awake to this reality is because the abuse, vilification and mockery is, in this day and age, largely not directed at them personally or even at individual Christians so much, but at the church, ‘evangelicals’, ‘creationists’, etc. Because of our individualism we tend to assume that they are not talking about us, but as part of the body of Christ, of course they are talking about us. I suspect we should take offence,… Read more »
It was the noise of all that squawking over the quote that so offended RHE and some others that attracted my attention to these parts in the first place.
Thursday, I can’t help but wonder whether “loose canon” was a Chestertonian slip :)
“church ladies of both sexes” howls of derisive laughter.
“…drop the Turkish Delight…and get off the sled.” Good show :-)
Didn’t RHE just loudly claim persecution of women last week when she was not invited to speak at “The Nines” Seminar? She refers to their response to her complaint as ‘patronization’. You can read the conversation here: http://storify.com/RachelHeldEvans/this-is-what-patronization-looks-like
Dear Pastor Wilson,
Thank you. I have wrestled for a long time (years) with this question (How can I consider “minor” things persecution, even though they sure seem like more than an “owie”?) and had never had a satisfactory answer. Two days ago I brought it to God and now he has spoken through your posts. (And, I have learned I should have read the persecution Bible verses more attentively to find my answers!)
I entirely agree with everything in this post, but I think she DOES have a point with the Happy Holidays thing. “Minor” forms of opposition and ridicule can certainly qualify as forms of persecution, but does someone saying Happy Holidays, even out of a conscious desire to avoid Merry Christmas, even meet that test? I’m not sure “not going along with Christian conventions” quite adds up to “persecution,” even though it might be associated with it sometimes. I think RHE has a tendency to mock the concerns of Christians if she does not share those concerns, and this would be… Read more »
Wow, absolutely chilling. You folks are welcome to practice this kind of thuggish patriarchy as long as it’s 100% voluntary on the part of all involved, men and women.
But thank God for the separation of church and state, where under the law, men and women are equal, and all offices of secular authority are open to all.
I have to confess at snorting in laughter a bit when I read “Trigger Alert.” I knew RHE would be mentioned.
Doug. There is a WORLD of difference between taking offense at a holiday phraseology (from the world) that edits Christ’s name, intentionally or unintentionally, and asking a fellow Christian to consider that their words/approach might be offensive and traumatic to a significant percentage of their sisters. Do you NOT see how your comparison minimizes sexual abuse???? No, apparently you don’t. My 14 yr old son could discern that easily. Shame on you.
It is interesting and useful to be reminded that abuse, vilification and mockery are part of persecution. Actually, no-one needs to be reminded of this, because everyone already knows it. The professionally-offended class knows that abuse, vilification and mockery are part of persecution and takes full advantage of that fact when listing their grievances against any who dare criticise them. ……………….. It’s only when Christians start getting offended that the professionally-offended types start complaining about how sensitive people can be, and why don’t they try growing a thicker skin? …………. That said, Jane’s point about picking one’s battles is well… Read more »
Happy Holidays and the surrounding furor illustrates one of the strangest aspects of social life, which is that groups often end up effectively taking a position more extreme than that which is held by any of the members. I highly doubt that any significant number of Christians complaining about Happy Holidays literally think it is persecution, but nevertheless that is somehow the message sent and received.
Matt: The issue for me is language control. Because of where I work, I could (possibly) get fired if I tell someone Merry Christmas and they get offended enough. THAT is persecution. It isn’t the words themselves it’s the coercion involved. If I didn’t get fired I am quite certain I would get “talked to” about not using the phrase with customers.
SarahS, I agree with Jane’s point made above about levels of seriousness. But the thrust of this post was an illustration that RHE is using unequal weights and measures. Someone writing a book of straight talk to men cannot in any way be construed as a threat to “life, safety, civil liberty, or right to worship.” And thus, on her showing, it wasn’t that big a deal.
Seth, I agree with you — but that’s an example of YOU getting in trouble for saying “Merry Christmas.” Rachel was specifically talking about people who think that someone else saying TO YOU “Happy Holidays” is a form of persecution, and they are out there. I just can’t call that persecution — but also, with Matt, I tend to think that there are very few actual people who think that is persecution, but somehow that position has become identified with evangelicals. So I suppose I would say that Rachel’s graphic is absolutely unassailable on its own merits, but it’s her… Read more »
Seth, I’m having trouble even understanding how it’s persecution for your employer to decide that it’s good customer relations (and therefore good business) to create as few opportunities for controversy as possible. You’re there to serve the interests of your employer. Suppose your customer base were mostly Jewish and your boss told you to wish everyone a Happy Hannukah; would you consider that persecution? On your own time, you can wish people whatever you like.
Jane: Ah. Noted. =)
Eric: If there’s any aspect of my religion that I get told is officially unacceptable and can’t be practiced that is by definition religion persecution. I understand *why* my company does what it does, but my point still stands.
Mr. Wilson, I’ve read your thoughts on “trigger alerts” before. As a rape survivor, I find them very helpful. I was sad to read the sarcasm in the title of your post.
“…life, safety, civil liberty, or right to worship.” Was this actual wording RHE used? B/c if so I missed it. I think the thrust of this post was to mock women who are triggered, or concerned about those who are triggered, by hearing their Christian brothers using language that promotes domination, aggression, and force towards them in their sexual relationships. “In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts. This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, **and so our culture… Read more »
Sarah, the “life, civil liberties, or right to worship” reference is coming from the original post, which is about Rachel’s chart. See the link in the first sentence of the post.
and I should add, that your continuing “Who, me??” posture is reminiscent of Mike and Debi Pearl in regards to their ill-conceived advice in the child training manual they produced in the ’80s which has been implicated now in several deaths. “Oh, but we always said parents should discipline in love, not in anger, etc etc.” Regardless, there were passages which instructed ‘complete dominance’ over rebellious children to the point of sitting on them, hosing them down in cold weather stripped of clothing, withholding food *until they child complied in eating it, (which caused several very young children to… Read more »
Seth, respectfully, that sounds like a huge sense of entitlement to me. Your employer isn’t telling you not to practice your religion; they’re telling you that while you’re on duty at your place of employment is not the time and place to practice your religion.
Also, Seth, is the same principle true in reverse? Suppose you owned a business, and you had an employee who was an atheist, and that atheist employee took to telling customers to have a godless day. Would you consider him persecuted if you told him to knock it off? Or would you in that case recognize the principle that one’s place of employment is not the appropriate place to raise one’s doctrinal flag?
SarahS, the problem is that you compare what we teach with what the Pearls teach, and compare a “who, me?” demeanor from each. But you overlook the fact that we have (vehemently) taught against all such abusive practices for many years.
@eric: Out of curiosity, are you advocating that someone in Seth’s hypothetical position should, as it were, “go along to get along”?
“Happy Holidays” is not persecution. It is, however, somewhat pathetic, and serves as a minor but representative example of post- Enlightment and Romantic society’s desire to maintain the out-workings of a partially Christianised society while rejecting the world-view that produced it in favour of individualist and sentimental mush. They want houses without foundations and table settings without tables, while blaming the consequential failures on the traditionalists who in lamenting the missing foundations and tables display their lack of commitment to the new reality. …. Note that I’m not claiming that “traditional” is ever good nor that “change” is ever bad.… Read more »
Ok thanks Jane. He doesn’t get off that easily though b/c civil liberties, safety, right to worship, and life have ALL been threatened under the guise of Christian patriarchal teaching. Mr. Wilson (understandably, but unfortunately) doesn’t see any connection between that and what he promulgates, which although carefully worded for deniability (again, I’m not attributing malice here, only caution) carry a tone which allows for and enables the demeaning and abuse of women. I make the Pearl analogy, only b/c they say essentially what Mr. Wilson says here. “I never said to abuse your children!! I only said ‘here’s the… Read more »
Seth, when the state tells you that you can’t stand in the street and say Merry Christmas, that will be a genuine violation of your rights to practice your faith. But employers have a right to set rules about what you can say to customers and coworkers while you are on the clock. A store owner who allowed a Muslim employee to say God is Great in Arabic to his predominantly Christian and Jewish customers would be the one suffering persecution in his pocketbook. I have many Jewish friends who deal with this issue every year. Some respond to Merry… Read more »
I’m looking for someone to slightly re-work the chart for me. I’d like to change that middle box on the right to read: Were you denied ordination because you are a woman?
P.S. don’t you think fainting couches are a bit, well, passsake now it’s called a “Pouting Chair”:
http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/10-tips-online-criticism
(See item #9)
Not to hog the comment thread or anything, but I left that as is. Can anyone tell me how passé (which was there, because I saw the clever autocorrect add the accent mark) got changed?
Ssrah, that’s an awfully long response to a brief explanation of what you missed. You asked where the reference came from, I answered. Sometime you’re going to have distinguish between factual responses on particular matters and general defenses of men in all their actions. I’m mostly willing to defend Doug Wilson and mostly not very interested in defending Doug Phlilips (though neither am I interested in a round condemnation) but in both cases I’m interested above all in factual readings of the situation over emotional responses to things completely outside of either situation.
Arwen, I’m saying that apparently there is a fundamental disagreement between Seth and his employer as to why Seth has a job. Seth’s employer apparently believes, and how silly, that while Seth is on duty, his time, words and deeds belong to his employer. Seth, on the other hand, apparently believes that the employer has graciously provided Seth with an opportunity to practice his religion for pay. And Seth is no more being told to go along to get along, than would an orthodox Jew who takes a job at a deli and is then expected to make ham sandwiches.… Read more »
Jill, the fact that an employer has the right to act in certain ways doesn’t necessarily not make it persecution. If persecution is acting against someone because of actions done out of their faith, it might be wholly within another’s rights to do so, but it’s still persecution. Whether this qualifies is a separate point.
I think SarahS just shifted her argument.
I agree with Eric that being instructed not to say “Merry Christmas” by your employer is not persecution. However, it may well be the result of persecution. The employer, in Eric’s example, has no personal convictions on the matter, but is seeking to “create as few opportunities for controversy.” But the only reason for controversy would be religious persecution. If people erupt in rage and boycott the Jewish deli because they wish their customers “Happy Hanukkah” so that the employer has to silence the workers, we’d call that persecution, right?
Jonathan, I’m an atheist, and I don’t get all bent out of shape if someone says “God bless you” to me when I sneeze, because I understand they’re trying to be nice. Some atheists do, and I think they’re silly. If someone says “Merry Christmas” to me, I smile and say “you too” because, again, I understand they’re trying to be nice. I try to save my outrage for stuff that is truly outrageous (like, I don’t know, patriarchy, for example). That said, we live in a culture in which people can be trusted to take offense over anything and… Read more »
By the way, I have an acquaintance who is both an atheist and a critical care nurse. On occasion, he’s had a patient in discomfort ask to be prayed with. He takes that patient’s hands and prays beautiful prayers that would bring tears to the eyes of everyone here. He thinks it’s complete nonsense, but he understands that it’s about the patient, not about him, and if it makes the patient feel better, it may even have a placebo affect. I myself am not a good enough actor to pull that off; if I were a nurse and someone asked… Read more »
Is Christmas a federally mandated national holiday or not? If so, why would any person in the USA find mention of this day offensive? If I were in Israel I would be plain stupid to be offended because someone wished me a ‘Happy Hanukkah’ and if I were in any other Middle Eastern Country I would be stupid and bizarre to be offended because someone wished me a peaceful ‘Ramadan’. People have been wishing others a “Merry Christmas” for over two hundred years in this country and nobody thought a thing of it nor did they find the greeting itself… Read more »
“Happy Holiday” is quite simply, the mark that proves jews rule over our people. It is just that simple. Resist.
Jane, I suppose it seems so but I was more responding to Doug’s last comment, just bundled it into yours. Thursday: How so? Eric: I like you.
so… Doug posts RHE’s chart. Makes a number of bizarre and convoluted insults. Then says he agrees. Then he says the reason he can be mad at her even though he agrees is that she said that when he said that “however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts.” it sounds like rape. Lets try a thought experiment. Since Mr. Wilson is talking about sex, and his words have us construct the image of a woman being conquered and colonized in a… Read more »
You were triggered, moderator, were’t you?
But its ok by you to talk about men treating women this way.
People curse the name of your god because of you.
Jane, of course you’re right. I did not think it all the way through as I can easily think of examples of employer-mandated behavior that could amount to religious persecution. I was once ordered to attend a political rally for a party I did not support; as it was on company time, I suppose the employer was technically within his rights. So yes. (I refused to go and nothing happened to me, so I can’t claim that actual persecution resulted!) I still think that happy winter holiday is not the hill we want to die on. I agree with Eric that… Read more »
Sarah, a lot of the classic love poetry that many normal, healthy people find erotic reflects the imagery used by Mr. Wilson. We will find imagery that is far more suggestive of conquest and submission in John Donne and Shakespeare. I was troubled by Mr. Wilson’s comments until I saw them as descriptive, not prescriptive. This is a traditional interpretation of the dynamics of the sexual act. When Donne calls his lady “My America, my new found land/Safeliest with one man manned,” or when he says “She is all states, all princes I,” he is saying the same thing as Wilson. … Read more »
Gah. The internetz can be so frustrating. Does or does not Wilson hold to the tenents of what he terms, ‘biblical patriarchy’? Then I oppose that and find it…unbiblical. I too hope and believe that he is using descriptive, not prescriptive language regarding the marriage bed. I agree that one does not find support of rape, brutality, or ‘self-indulgent complacence’ here. What I find, is a mindset that is like a gate-way drug to these things and ought to be roundly denounced from the pulipit instead of defended. (I have the same complaint about Mark Driscoll. Piper I think is… Read more »