Last week, my daughter wrote about the problem of theological cone bras, which is, as we all acknowledge, a very real problem. Well, the comments section erupted and a common theme in many of them is what I briefly want to address here. Let me assemble my own version of this objection as registered.
“I certainly don’t agree with everything RHE writes, but I have been blessed and encouraged by much of it. I have been on the brink of leaving the Christian faith several times, and each time have been brought back by her encouraging words. What discourages me is when Christians explode against one another like this — why can’t we engage in constructive dialog? Would that be so hard?”
In short, the accusation is that this kind of critique of RHE is mean-spirited, and that we ought to quit it. Here are a quick series of responses to various elements of this concern:
First, the Bible does prohibit being mean-spirited. “Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:” (Eph. 4:31). “Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings . . .” (1 Pet. 2:1). It doesn’t say that we get to use malicious wit, provided the cause is good. It says to put it all away.
That being the case, that is precisely what we ought to do. I oppose malice in public discourse for the same reason I oppose the Annual March for Tranny Justice in the public square. God says not to do it. This might be a theology that is a little too old-fashioned for these evolving times, but I think that when God says not to do things, we ought not to do them.
But second, there is a difference between mean-spiritedness and claimed perceptions of it. The progressive mindset is one that coddles itself in nurtured perceptions of imagined slights and grievances. So malice is one thing, and claims of malice quite another. Consequently, we ought not agree to play a game of pickup basketball with another team — let us call them the Crybabies — where they are allowed to call all fouls they think they might have received, while if we imagine something untoward was done to us, we are allowed to register a complaint, after the season, with a filing fee of 500 dollars, registered with the Department of Checked White Privilege, staffed entirely by surly feminists. And I stand by the phrase surly feminists, despite the redundancy.
So Bekah’s post was not an example of malicious fouling in that game, but was rather a refusal to play in their game at all. When they call fouls, when they trifle with trigger warnings, when they extend the metaphor of rape culture allegations down to grabby husbands taking more than their share of the popcorn on movie nights, when they furrow the brow and talk about the plague of “micro-aggressions,” the only appropriate response is that of the horse laugh. You can’t major in Petty, and then be surprised when your diploma somehow does not say Serious on it.
Feminism is not anything like what it pretends to be. Feminism is the movement that began by demanding that women be allowed into the rough and tumble of public discourse, and then, having discovered that the rough and tumble is kind of rough and tumbly, is suddenly all about smelling salts, swooning couches, bonnets and petticoats. On a related front, as one comedian put it, if women can do anything men can do, how come they have never successfully oppressed an entire gender?
Third, perceptions of mean-spiritedness are greatly affected by the framework established by a person’s worldview. After Bekah’s article began circulating, RHE tweeted, “When people criticize cruelly, it only drives me to more prayer, discipline, meditation & love. I refuse to be dragged into that darkness.” That was at 9:20 am. Less than an hour later, at 10:07 am, she wrote, Wilson’s “long been a racist. Claims slavery in Amer. South was good for slaves.” Somehow she managed to be dragged into the darkness pretty darn quick, and it was even mid-morning.
In RHE’s world, cruelty is not really a sin, but rather an ideological characteristic of her opponents. It is something that can only come from the forces of reaction. She is not of the forces of reaction, and so whatever she said cannot be a sample of that problem. By definition, her false accusations of racism are well-intentioned because, well, racism is bad. Nice people are here, and mean people are there. She has a very effective, self-affirming feedback loop going, and if she ever wants to break out of it, we would be most happy to schedule a debate.
It’s high time we get together “a very effective, self-affirming feedback loop” for Doug & family.
I, for one, apologize for my previous nonconformities.
All in favor of forming the Blog & Mablog Toadiest Society, say Aye.
The previous article by your daughter was a rhetorical mistake. A long article telling people not to engage with Evans was ridiculous, however understandable given Evans’ past attacks on you, Bekah’s father. Given that Evans has endorsed (monogamous) gay sex and distanced herself from the Evangelical label, there is nothing to be gained from extended engagement with her. You should only use three rhetorical strategies: mock, dismiss, ignore. Dismissal is always quick, but any mockery should be brief too. Whenever, Evans is brought up, she should be dealt with thus: “Evans, you mean the person who said X?” or “You… Read more »
BTW Bekah’s article seems to borrow liberally from my and Alastair Roberts’ discussion of how to properly engage with Evans, beginning here. Interested readers may want to check it out.
Accusations of meanness just mean that a leftist is losing an argument. Christians are especially vulnerable to this type of shaming. It’s an easy slight of hand to move from Christian virtue to social justice counterfeit virtue. There is no discourse so mean as forcing these people to lay out their actual premises and political objectives. They would have us always operate in a world of hazy jargon and victim status jockeying. Let’s by all means have a Biblical standard, but just remember that “I wish those who unsettle you would emasculate themselves!” is fair game.
Doug, I would love to see a debate between you and RHE. Has a formal request for one been extended?
“Political correctness is fascism disguised as manners,” or as godly piety in this case.
“…if women can do anything men can do, how come they have never successfully oppressed an entire gender?” Well, the mythical Amazon women did. But it is just mean, nasty and totally unChristian for you to say such a thing. In the words of the great peacemaker, Rodney King, “Why can’t we all just get along?” I can’t remember if he said that before or after his wife obtained a restraining order against him.
Doug,
I would pay good money to see that.
With respect, however, it would be bad optics. Mucho bad optics. I’d much rather see the beautiful and talented Mrs. Merkle go toe-to-toe with Mrs. Evans.
As Denver is neutral territory and something like halfway between Dayton and Moscow, May I offer to help find a venue?
We all know that RHE would never take on an opponent outside of the safe confines of the internet. Emotion looks good on paper, pretty lousy as a debate approach. Kamilla makes a good point, though… the optics would be better served having Mrs. Merkle send her crying back to Dayton.
if women can do anything men can do, how come they have never successfully oppressed an entire gender?
How ’bout hen-pecked husbands?
I confess that I read too much of the referenced “animal love” article. Your “the only appropriate response is that of the horse laugh” line brought several comments immediately to mind. But, I’m pretty sure they are all legitimately mean. So, I’ll just say thank you.
A debate with Evans by either Doug or his daughter would be a mistake. Since Evans exiled herself from the Evangelical community, why draw attention to her withing Evangelicalism? Why invite her back into the conversation? It would be far more productive to debate somebody like Scot McKnight, who may be wrong on a lot of stuff, but with whom you actually have something genuinely in common. Take the fight to the genuine Evangelical fringes, rather than conferring legitimacy back on someone outside the group.
With Evand, mock*, dismiss, ignore.
*Briefly.
I think she deleted the tweet Mr. Wilson.
A debate between one of the Wilsons and Evans would give her a megaphone within Evangelicalism. A debate with Scot McKnight, on the other hand, would tick her off to no end. I can just see her now, fuming on the sidelines, “What is that nice Scot McKnight doing talking to that nasty Doug Wilson?” When you’re closer to the theological centre of Evangelicalism you can use that. McKnight, closer to the fringes of Evangelicalism, has something to lose by attacking Wilson, Evans does not. A further note, Evans is not Christopher Hitchens, a world famous journalist. She’s not bringing… Read more »
So, let me get this straight. When RHE criticizes you, it’s “sin” and “cruelty” and when you criticize her, it’s just part of the rough and tumble game she is agreeing to play by criticizing you, so you (or your daughter) get a free pass to be as rude as you like, because only you get to decide if you were being malicious or not? Interesting. What happened to turning the other cheek I wonder?
Jennifer: You made Doug’s last paragraph try to say the exact opposite of what it actually says.
Hi Jennifer,
I believe Doug’s tactic is more along the lines of “answering a fool according to her folly, lest she seem wise in her own eyes”.
And nope, RHE didn’t delete the tweet referenced above. It was a reply to someone else, so didn’t show in her regular feed. But it’s public and was meant to be so.
@afreshmind @StanRockPatton @jollycalvinist @FannyDevo He’s long been a racist. Claims slavery in Amer. South was good for slaves.
I think a debate between Bekah and RHE would be productive because it would be an awesome opportunity to see some excellent principles of reform applied to a real-life enemy.l of Christ. I confess that I would love the opportunity to see that interchange. The drawback would be that it would give RHE a big scabby knee to coddle herself over some more, and tell her followers how much the white heteroracists are big meanies. But should that be our problem?
I happen to read this blog and Scot Mcknights blog Jesus Creed everyday. I highly respect both of them and a debate would be lovely. On a side note, the comments section of Jesus Creed are a completely different world than this site.
I think Doug Wilson and Scot McKnight could have a respectful and productive conversation. A debate with Evans would be pointless.
RHE boring, as in her book ‘The year of gathering material to mock Godly people I should love, by living by a straw-man position no one holds’? (OK, actually reading it is lower on my post-bucket list than reading the collected works of W. E. Johns; feel free to offer alternate retitles.)
I just finished reading this article by McKnight. http://www.foolishsage.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/McKnight%20-%20What%20is%20the%20Emerging%20Church.pdf
Without all the details, I was ordained in the UCC in the 80’s. After reading his article, it reminded me of Ecclesiastes “there is nothing new under the sun.”
you all keep saying RHE isn’t an evangelical, like she knows she’s not. If that is so, when did that happen? I thought she still claimed that title, which is the only reason I would commment or tweet back at her. If she has shed the title then it is safe to put her on my ignore list.
Jim,
I resonate with your daily reading of Doug and Scot. I read this blog and Tony Jones’ blog everyday. I also have deep respect for my 2 favorite bloggers. But very different worlds indeed.
Jeff,
I read some of the article you linked. If you’re suggesting that much of what comes out of the emerging/emergent movement is actually a re-emerging of old school liberalism, then I totally agree with you. I attend a traditional/orthodox UCC church (certainly not as traditional and orthodox as CREC or OPC, but I’m sure you get my point). I think much of the emerging/emergent movement is a lot of the same old stuff with a more hip twist.
And if we know anything about hip twists, we know that it’s hard to stand firmly when it happens.
@Drew: Yes, that is precisely what I was meaning. There was a meeting of the renewal groups and Dr. Paul Sherry, president of the UCC at the time. One person asked him who Jesus was. He responded he didn’t know who Jesus was and was skeptical that anyone could know who Jesus was. When I read McKnight, I was hearing a redux.
It is a rootless epistemology sounding very pious. But cast off from the pillars of true truth it drifts into heretical places quickly.
Zack,
“I think a lot of progressive Christians like myself … ”
http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/why-progressive-christians-should-care-about-abortion-gosnell?rq=Progressive
Mrs. Evans as an adept at re-defining herself according to whim. But since she has begun saying things like the above and has “come out” as an Episcopalian, well … I think she is beginning to recognize that identifying herself as a Evangelical is less and less credible, even among the most naive of her followers.
Yes, Zack, she’s has made quite a few tweets saying she is no longer an Evangelical. IIRC, it was after the Duck Dynasty and World Vision brouhahas. Sorry, I don’t have the links right handy.
I agree that ignoring her is usually the best course of action.
Jeff,
Out of curiosity, are you still a practicing ordained pastor in the UCC? I am ‘in care’, but I’ve had doubts (for the reasons we discussed above) about following through and pursuing a call.
@Drew: contact me through the rjhoney website and we can have a conversation about my experience.
This little post a little bit reminds me of those days gone by when my children were little and they might have had a friend who kinda went off- threw a little fit because they couldn’t keep playing, threw a fit because they couldn’t have the toy they wanted, threw a fit because no one was playing their game. And then the dad came along to save the day, to explain to all of us who were looking askance at the behavior, to explain that little Becky hadn’t had her nap that day, that little Becky had a little too… Read more »