The Strong Gods Are Those of the Copybook Headings

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

From time to time, I like to stop into the various antique or thrift stores in the area to browse their current collection of books. Most of the time, I find nothing of any particular interest, but, every so often, I do manage to find something worth purchasing. Recently, I acquired a copy of The Practical Handbook of Better English from 1944. On page two-hundred and sixty-three, the following advice with regard to capitalization appears:

“9. Capitalize adjectives of race, religion, or language.”

All this is to say that I take issue with the failure of the author (or First Things, if the decision was editorial) to capitalize “White”, which is, quite clearly, an adjective of race referring to the European or Japhethitic race. (Similarly, I am the cohost of the Stone Choir podcast, as I am not the sole host.)

That aside, there are a number of other issues with Dr. Wood’s article of 18 February. I will address them in no particular order. In fact, we will start with the end of Dr. Wood’s article, where he orders his readers to “get to work”. I do not know what Dr. Wood believes we on the Right (and I do mean the actual Right) have been doing for the last handful of years, but, had he been paying closer attention, perhaps he would have noticed that we have been busy constructing a parallel economy and a great deal of the foundational work necessary to launch future endeavors. While Dr. Wood has been reading Dietrich Bonhoeffer and writing about “a Post-Christian World”, we have been endeavoring to rebuild Christendom.

Moving to his penultimate paragraph, I would like to take this opportunity to break down his recommendations for what men should be doing, and then pair them with specific episodes of Stone Choir in which we address precisely those topics:

The kingdom of God advances through the faithful labors of those who look to Christ and labor hard to love their neighbors.

Seek God.

Get involved in a church.

Build good things.

Start with your family.

Love your wife and children.

Lead your household in faith.

Then look outward—serve your neighbors,

pursue excellence in your vocation, and

build institutions that honor God and bless others.

Personally, if I am going to critique a man’s worldview, then I endeavor to, at the very least, have a passing familiarity with what precisely that worldview is. Apparently Dr. Wood is not burdened by such niceties (something that comes as no surprise, given his academic credentials). It would have been a trivial matter for Dr. Wood to — at the very least — search the episode titles (I have created an episode list after all). Many more episodes could, of course, have been added under each of his supposed points.

Turning to the thesis, as it were, of Dr. Wood’s article, I find it not only laughable, but openly heretical. His thesis:

While claiming to lead a resurgence of Christian masculinity, they have embraced a posture that is un-Christian and, frankly, unmanly. Instead of calling men to rise above hardship with courage and faith, they wallow in grievance, blame-shifting, and victimhood.

Far from “wallow[ing] in grievance, blame-shifting, and victimhood”, as the aforementioned episode list should make abundantly clear (particularly when paired with the episode descriptions), we routinely and forcefully encourage men to stand up under trials and to face the challenges and the adversity of this world as befits Christian men. Our last few episodes, in reverse order, have been on: how to find purpose and maintain motivation in life, how to handle living under a hostile and anti-Christian State, how to distinguish friends and enemies, and how to deal with conflicted interests. These are hardly topics that could be characterized as “wallow[ing] in grievance, blame-shifting, and victimhood”. In fact, we have routinely addressed topics from which other men flee, and this is, in no small part, why our audience continues to grow and those of our adversaries continue to decline. Christian men — and particularly young Christian men — want to hear the unabashed and unfiltered truth — something First Things once pretended to cherish.

In expounding on his thesis, Dr. Wood, later in the article, states: “But it is unmanly to obsess over the external source of one’s problems.” Given that Dr. Wood appears to be a Presbyterian, I would presume that he is familiar with the Lord’s Prayer. As a Lutheran, I pray the Lord’s Prayer at least a few times each day (when I wake, before meals, when I record the daily devotions, before I retire to bed). I do not know with which languages Dr. Wood is familiar, but I should hope he has at least a passing knowledge of Greek, and, thus, should be aware that the Greek of the Lord’s Prayer (ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ) can be interpreted both as ‘from evil’ and as ‘from the Evil One’. This is, of course, the same in a number of other languages (e.g, German: Sondern erlöse uns von dem Übel.). Given this, I find it odd that Dr. Wood could call it “unmanly” to focus on the external. Certainly, a man must direct some of his focus inward to improve himself, but there is also the matter of the other two parts of the classical formulation of our enemies as “the world, the flesh, and the devil” — the world and the devil being very much external to man. The devil prowls about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may consume. Quite the opposite of what Dr. Wood contends, it is precisely the duty of men to focus on the outward or external world in order to defend those entrusted to their care from harm. I can only hope that Dr. Wood would defend his wife and daughters from physical threat instead of simply telling them ‘that’s an external matter’ before fleeing the scene.

I could, naturally, continue to pick at Dr. Wood’s article, but I believe my point has been sufficiently made. However, there is one additional point with regard to manliness or unmanliness that I must address, lest I be remiss: One of the least manly — one of the most effeminate or womanly — things that a man can do is backbite[1]. Gossip is a sin that is particularly enticing to the female sex, and is particularly unbecoming of the male. A man is to address his adversaries directly. It is fine to write an article, but a man should have the fortitude to directly address the men against whom he writes. If I should have something to say to Dr. Wood, I wish to make abundantly clear that I will make certain he receives it directly from me. Thus, I have personally ensured he knows of the existence of this article.

Turning, then, to the broader issue of anti-Semitism, and what Dr. Wood recognizes correctly as the “Jewish Problem” (although I personally prefer the formulation of the “Jewish Question”), we are presented with essentially two questions:

  1. Can Christians oppose the Jews and Judaism?
  2. Should Christians oppose the Jews and Judaism?

Dr. Wood does not disclose to his audience why he holds the positions he does. It seems there are a number of motivating factors. One, of course, is that he received his M.Div. from a Dispensationalist (i.e., heretical) seminary; consequently, Dr. Wood would contend that Christians cannot oppose the Jews (for all the usual Dispensationalist reasons). This places Dr. Wood outside the traditional teachings of the Church and outside the plain teachings of Scripture. The Jews rejected Christ and chose Barabbas; in fact, they went further and called down Christ’s blood upon themselves and upon their children as a perpetual curse (Matthew 27:25). Judaism is a schismatic, anti-Christian religion that is based in the Talmud, not in Holy Scripture. To contend that Christians cannot oppose the Jews and Judaism would be to contend that Christians cannot oppose the worship of false gods (i.e., a violation of the First Commandment).

Perhaps Dr. Wood is not particularly familiar with the church fathers or other early Christian writers and teachers, but, by his proposed ‘standard’, they would have been ‘unmanly’ as many of them wrote explicitly against the Jews. John Chrysostom, for instance, wrote eight homilies (“Adversus Judaeos”) specifically against the Jews. We could turn also to the “Dialogue with Trypho” from Justin Martyr or “Adversus Judaeos” from Tertullian or “Contra Celsum” from Origen or “Three Books of Testimonies against the Jews” from Cyprian or the letters of Ambrose or “City of God” and “Against Faustus” from Augustine. And there are many more examples, and that without even delving into later writers (e.g., Gregory the Great, Martin Luther). It seems quite clear that not only can a Christian oppose the Jews and Judaism, but that a Christian should oppose the Jews and Judaism. Accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ are meant to stifle discussion and shield Jewish behavior from scrutiny, and — worse still —, in the Christian context, these accusations serve as an attempt to silence those who oppose the wicked and false religion that is Judaism (i.e., Talmudry). On many occasions, the Jews have sought to have parts of Scripture or the liturgy redacted or even outright edited in order to cleanse them of ‘anti-Semitism’. When a Christian looks over at the men whom he is joining in common cause and with whom he is holding hands and finds them to be idolators, demon-worshippers, and other miscreants, then it is his duty not only to re-examine his beliefs, but to flee from the wickedness to which he has joined himself — a failure to do this is tantamount to apostasy.

Far from anti-Semitism being morally wrongful or a sin within the Christian religion, it is, in fact, a duty of the Christian man. To oppose those who murdered Christ and are not only not penitent, but also go so far as to be proud of their wickedness and boast that they would do it again, is fealty to Christ. It is neither sin nor any sort of transgression to oppose those who oppose your King — and this would be true even of an earthly king. Accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ are anti-Christian, and, when not recanted, tantamount to public apostasy. Far from being unmanly, it is precisely those men who recognize the wickedness and impenitence of the Jews and address what Dr. Wood rightly called the Jewish Problem who are acting rightly and doing their duty as Christian men.

Not for nothing did we do a series of four episodes specifically on the Jews and the Jewish Question:

  1. “Hebrews, Israelites, and Jews”
  2. “Lies, Betrayal, and Murder — the Fruits of Another Spirit”
  3. “The Revolutionary Spirit””
  4. “The Big Lie”

Men (to stretch the term to the point of abuse) like Dr. Wood can tell you until they are blue in the face that there are certain topics you cannot investigate, certain questions you cannot ask, and certain people you cannot critique. We did an episode on “Truth and Lies” — Christians have an absolute duty to the truth, because God is Truth. The astute reader will have noticed that Dr. Wood uses the word “lies” just once in his article — in his concluding sentence —, but he never once says what the supposed lies are. The reason, of course, is simple: Our enemies can call us whatever they like, but even they know that we are not lying. They will defend their paymasters, their sinecures, and, in many cases, their own skin with whatever means they think necessary, but they certainly will not defend the truth. That, ultimately, is the difference between us and our adversaries or enemies: For them, it is whatever will protect their interests; for us, it is the truth at all costs.

And so I will end this article with one more episode, this one a recommendation specifically for Dr. Wood:

Episode 0062: “Slander”.

  1. Modernly, this most often takes the form of the subpost or the subtweet. ↩︎