INSIDER: A Bold Stance Against Nazi Popsicle Stands
I would say that if you’re aware of the No Quarter November Kerfuffle of 2024, you’re living under a rock. But in real truth, few in the vast swath of Christendom are aware because nobody in the controversy I’m about to describe for you is nearly as important as they think, or as close to the precipice of changing the world as they might surmise. Don’t tell them that; they all have optimistic eschatologies and I don’t want to pop their bubble.
The gist is this, and forgive the incredibly technical explanation:
Christian Nationalism is run by Nazis, who incidentally, can’t run popsicle stands. A pastor named Joel is harboring fugitives of the Third Reich in his church. Another fellow, surnamed Wolfe, believes in the pseudo-science of phenotypes, and another fellow – also surnamed Wolfe (no relation) – is in on a scheme to radicalize young Christians, similar to Cameron in American History X. Pastor Joel, who is basically Corrie ten Boom but in reverse (instead of hiding Jews in the attic, he’s hiding Nazis in his basement) ran a very elaborate conspiracy to entrap another fellow named Tobias Remeinscheimer into first trying to entrap him, who has subsequently been lost somewhere in the streets of Germany. He’s not been seen since. An apologist in Phoenix and a pirate in Moscow (not the Russian one) have joined forces to dispel Naziism from American shores.
I believed I’ve covered all the bases, in as accurate terms as possible to be fair to both sides. I’ve withheld full names to protect the innocent.
If all this seems patently ridiculous, please rest assured that it is only slightly less so than I have made it out to be. I have opined more seriously at Insight to Incite, which you can see here. And if you find any of this lacking interest, please peruse the rest of today’s article selections from Protestia to find out which charismatic faith healer just died of cancer, of whatever else the boys might be writing about.
The reason my description is coy, is precisely because I believe the entire controversy to be coy. It’s also largely manufactured.
In reality, the movement known as Christian Nationalism has some very good qualities and is promoted by some very good people, who happen to have some very good intentions. It also has attracted some very bad people, who happen to have some very bad intentions. In other words, it is quite similar to any doctrinal novelty or niche ever invented in the course of the Christian church. For example, it is not unlike Theonomy 1.0, which attracted Paul Jennings Hill, who credited Theonomy 1.0 (the non-general equity variety) with his reasoning to lead-poison an abortion doctor.
Protestia has been very careful to not castigate either the proponents or critics, which I think is a testament to their commitment to reserve their harshest criticisms for preachers who sparkle in the stage lighting and whose trail of their smoke machines flood the temple. I, only the other hand, perhaps less so, encouraging the Christian Nationalists to listen respectfully to the concerns of Michael O’Fallon (while ducking for cover behind my barn, because that ticks them off) and also pointing out that most critics of Christian Nationalism are effeminate (because Protestia doesn’t want me calling them gay).
I am not, for the record, a Christian Nationalist for three primary reasons.
The first (1) is that I agree with Calvin that sitting around arguing about the best kinds of laws is “false and foolish.” The point is simply, the Scripture is not as dogmatic when it comes to magisterial laws as we are, and it should suffice to argue that our laws should employ Biblical concepts of good and evil. The second (2) is that the concept of growing the size of government and increasing its authority, which would be necessary to enforce First Table commands, appears nuts to me when considering how dumb and evil most government officials are. And third (3) is that when our new regime eventually changes back to the Kingdom of Darkness (the Democrat Party), any new power we enumerate them with is going to be used to imprison or slaughter us. But then again, my eschatology is categorized as pessimistic, so I can see it now, President Gavin Newsom appointing David French as Chancellor of Religious Enforcement. No thanks.
And it’s on this third point that I’m very sympathetic with the aforementioned Theonomy Tzar of Moscow, who has grown concerned (as of late…very late) that the movement has attracted some folks with racisty tendencies.
Mind you, I’m not that concerned about people with racisty tendencies, because most of them are DEI proponents on the political left, so it’s only fair we get some of those folks, too. Neither am I that concerned about antisemites, as the left defines it, which is anybody, anywhere, and any time who criticizes those who identify as Abraham’s physical lineage (I was called an antisemite by a Baptist newspaper for criticizing George Soros). It is simply not possible to police every ideological or theological movement to keep crazy people out, especially when there’s no initiation, catechism graduation, or chrismation to the club.
It is legitimately my contention that the greatest threat posed by Christian Nationalism is that nut jobs (the real kind, not the type that want to read more about World War II) are posting their schemes on YouTube that the NSA is storing away in a sub-basement somewhere in Utah for prosecutorial exhibits which they’ll eventually use to put all in the gulag. And it’s not as though they should impugn us all because of what the loonies say, it’s that they will regardless.
And so, when the fellow from Moscow and fellow from Phoenix – who happened to also be the defenders of Tobias Rammsteinschlacher (a coincidence, I’m sure) joined forces to draft the Antioch Statement deriding the antisemitic tag-alongs, I get it. To be fair, I don’t agree that those they’re clearly impugning are guilty of antisemitism, but I do agree there are a few people to sign up for an evangelical Nuremberg mock trial.
But, I saw a clip from Douglas Wilson that made me raise an eyebrow for the harshness. Describing his motivation for the statement…
Okay, I somewhat agree. Back to the first reason I’m not a Christian Nationalist, regarding the Calvin quote, I don’t think any of our efforts to usher in the millennial reign of Christ by legislative fiat is going to work. But I’m a (historic) pre-millennialist, so I’m biased. And to be fair, I don’t think that Douglas Wilson’s camp can run a popsicle stand either, but mostly because Douglas Wilson walks around with a literal flamethrower.
But this is incredibly harsh language. And it also fails to acknowledge that this “controversy” is mostly to his making.
Hear me out on that. It’s nothing new that in the far-right corners of political ideology (where Wilson has always been) there are Jew-haters. There are, in fact, almost as many Jew-haters there as there are in the far-left corners of political ideology. What suddenly has made this the controversy of the hour?
…
I typed that ellipses so you have time to think about it. Look, I’ll do it again. Take a minute.
…
I guessed what made it the controversy of the hour over at Insight to Incite, but I’m not here to plug my substack (which you can find at www.insight2incite.com). I surmised that it was to benefit the political appointment and upcoming senate confirmation hearings of Pete Hegseth for the Secretary of Defense. Hegseth, after all, is a known Wilsonite (sounds ominous) and his association is bound to come up.
And then, I read this quotation from Wilson and I wished I had not been correct.
If you’re using a reader-app because you’re visually impaired, I’ll summarize it. Wilson acknowledges that this issue is a big deal to him because of Pete Hegseth’s political appointment and upcoming senate confirmation hearing.
Guys, this is not okay. It just isn’t.
The harshest of possible terms and the strongest possible language has been used to impugn Christian Nationalists by those who, until at some point yesterday, were all presumed to be Christian Nationalists marching in lockstep. Consider what has been said. Pastor so-and-so should resign, person such-and-such should be cast from the church, and worst of all is this; our brothers are Nazis.
I’ll admit that at a certain point, if someone is legitimately vindicating Hitler for having gassed the Jews or they are ascribing to the actual tenets of the leftwing ideology known as National Socialism, it’s fair game to call them Nazis. And then, it’s fair game to give them the left boot of fellowship. That’s not called into question.
What I’m calling into question is using the harshest preemptive language, presuming the worst possible motives, of men who until very recently have not received the slightest spoken word of criticism from those who drafted the Antioch Statement. And I would add that this has been done with suspect timing, but the timing is not suspect. The timing has explicitly been said to be for political purposes.
Christian Nationalists have been given a bad rap by leftists for “selling their soul for politics.” But when some of them chose to post their ballots with write-ins for not Donald Trump they proved two things. The first is that some of them are kind of silly, and the second is that they’ve not sold their soul for politics.
I would not dare accuse the drafters of the Antioch Statement of selling their soul. I would accuse them, perhaps, of selling their brothers.
And finally, I’m not the type to clutch pearls over the marital infidelity of Pete Hegseth, presuming he’s up to the challenge of killing people and breaking things, which is the military’s job. And if he can remove the Corporal Klingers from the army, even better. But to consider who was sold out by the Antioch Statement – chiefly, elders of the church – on account of who they were sold out for, it makes the whole ordeal seem that much worse.
About Author
