A Brief Analysis on Rev. Suave’s Video Explaining The Fracture Between Moscow & Ogden

Rev. Brian Suave, in the first half of the video explaining Ogden’s warfare with Moscow,

does a really grand job of giving the deep contextual background for the reason for the kerfuffle. The long and the short of it is that this battle is shaped by the century long percolating and simmering fight between the neo-cons (Trotskyites) and the paleo-cons as to the definition of “conservative.” This becomes important in relation to Christianity because Christianity is by it’s very nature a conserving and conservative faith.

The battle here has always been as between the moderate left (the Girondists of the French Revolution) who were viewed as “conservative” as compared to the hard left (Montagnards) and those few who genuinely belonged to the Ancien Regime — the old line conservatives. The neo-cons were referred to as “Trotskyites” because they believed that the Revolution should be ceaseless. The neo-cons today then are those who are on the right side of the left but who also believe that social revolution should be ongoing and continuous. There is no desire on the part of the neo-cons to return to the theology of the Ancien Regime, characterized as it is by a unique love of one’s own people, King, and country. The neo-cons have a Democratic impulse and Democracy has always been the hand-maiden for leftism. Neo-cons will never want to see any of the gains made by their continuous Revolutions rolled back. For the Moscow gang this most immediately means a absolute resolve to never see a return to a time when Bagels were seen as the enemy of the Church and of Christianity, as well as never countenancing the vanilla doctrine of Kinism that was held everywhere by all people at all times until the latest major expression of the perpetual revolution that was World War II. When folks like me and others advocate for an older Christianity that was Bagel wise and familialist in practice the cry that arises from Moscow and from James White, Joel Boot, Andrew Sandlin and their ilk is “FASCISTS,” or “NAZIS.” This libel on their part is confirmation that they are indeed Trotskyists and Girondists …. as well as garden variety idiots.

If you want to understand this bubbling war completely you have to start doing the heavy work of reading. You have to read Sam Francis, and Joe Sobran, and Garet Garett and Wimoore Kendall and Frank Meyer and Albert Jay Nock, and H. L. Mencken and M. Stanton Evans, R. J. Rushdoony and others. These men did not always agree with one another but I am fairly sure they all would have disagreed with the “new Christendom” that Doug Wilson is trying to fashion. It is the attempted fashioning of Doug’s “New Christendom” that is driving all the drama from his side. You see, the Ogden chaps just do not agree with Wilson’s vision of “New Christendom.” It strikes me that they prefer the older Christendom.

Upon viewing the Suave video on can say the following;

1.) Short of a remarkable providence the Kerfuffle is not going to end with Wilson repenting. Doug’s whole “Christian” world and life view is informed by the world that Wm. F. Buckley created. Doug has reinterpreted all of his Christianity through that lens. Buckleyism is Christianity for Doug and the Ogden boys, being anti-Buckley are, to Doug, anti-Christ.

2.) This contest is monumentally important to the future of both Christianity and the broader culture. If it is true that “as goes the church so goes the culture,” (and I believe it is) then whoever wins out in this contest (and oddly enough R2K is on the side of Moscow here in the broad contours of the matter) will define the church and the culture for another generation.

3.) Doug and James White and Boot and Sandlin etc are doing the work of the devil here. Because they have no ability to know who the enemy is they have no ability to resist the enemy. This necessarily means redefining Christianity per the worldview of the enemy.

4.) If you really support the cause of Christ you have to quit supporting all things Doug Wilson, White, Sandlin, Boot, etc. They are the enemy.

5.) Keep in mind that which is driving all of this is different theologies and so different understandings of Christianity. One might think upon reading this post that this is all political and doesn’t have anything to do with religion at all. That would a mistaken reading. Theology drives everything and the differences between Ogden and Moscow are being ultimately driven by considerably different theologies.

A Few Words On Greatness

I’ve spent my life reading great men and so, though I can only appraise greatness from that habit and distance, I thought I would offer some thoughts on becoming a great man. Not because I know personally, but rather because I think I have seen something of it in all my reading.

I offer this because I am convinced that we need more great men and that there has been a dearth of great men for a very long time now. It is difficult to be great unless there is greatness in your midst to emulate. Maybe every generation believes that they are living during a shortage of greatness but greatness started dying out when I was a much younger man, and there hasn’t been much to replace the likes of Bahnsen, Van Til, Rushdoony, Clark, Conquest, Nisbet, Berman, etc. — men who have all died in my lifetime.

It strikes me that the first thing to be said about greatness is the desire to be found faithful to the Lord Christ and His cause. If a man has that desire and pursues it then he will be great whether he is acknowledged as such or not by his contemporaries and his times. The reality of being faithful to one’s creator and redeemer pushes one increasingly out of selfishness, pride, and self-centeredness. One begins to realize how little one is and how awful it is to think of oneself as the pivot upon which everything turns. This, by necessity, means that genuine humility is part of what it means to great. Great men don’t think they are great. They have seen how big God is and seeing how big God is they have a proper appraisal of self.

Of course, humility is something that comes from the outside in — the school of hard knocks, pain and disappointment, dreams unrealized and all that. God must give the gift of humility and the giving of that gift is often painfully received. It is as if greatness is only achieved by being familiar and friendly with failure and conversant with hurt while at the same time not allowing all that making one bitter and angry. Greatness typically comes through a back door unexpected. Read the biographies of truly great men and note how often they failed.

After this humility there is the necessity for wisdom and wisdom is different than knowledge and is, like humility, a God given gift. Scripture in the book of James tells us to ask God for wisdom and He will give to the man who is not double-minded. Who do you view as great? Chances are you also see them as being wise. Perhaps we have such a paucity of great men today because there is so few who have heaven sent wisdom as combined with heaven given humility. If you want to be great, therefore, be much in prayer that God would give you wisdom. I read once, years ago, (I think it was from D. Martyn Lloyd Jones) that when a man wants wisdom the way a drowning man wants air then he will know he longs for wisdom. I think you will agree that if there was ever a need for a generation of wise men, as God counts wise, it is this generation. Will we avoid subjugation without it?

Greatness also requires countless hours of practicing and refining whatever gift it is that one has been given. Greatness doesn’t typically come by natural ability alone. I have seen numerous people with natural ability who, because they didn’t practice and refine that natural ability never became great. In some ways natural ability gets in the way of greatness as people rely on their natural ability and so do not hone it and grow it. Consider R. J. Rushdoony. Rush clearly had natural ability. He came from a long line of clerics himself. However, Rush read and studied like a starving man eats. The knowledge he had at his fingertips was astounding. If you listen to his lectures though you realize he was forever honing and expanding his natural ability. He didn’t rest on his laurel or his past learning. The man was forever reading and studying. Rush’s greatness then wasn’t only from natural ability. If you want to move to the field of athletics it is much the same. Those who are considered great in their sport, no doubt had natural ability, but that natural ability could only take them so far. If they did not practice, hone, and sweat, they would have never become the GOAT. So, if you want to be great you have to put the time in. You have to deny yourself the play time (the me-time) that others might pursue.

Perhaps oddly enough, if one desires to be great one has to also develop other interests. Michael Polanyi points this out in his book “Tacit Knowledge.” Polanyi wrote that the mind has to find a way to rest from its pursuits and so it has to find a way to disengage. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. As such, greatness must work, but it also must know how to disengage with profit. Polanyi suggests that many insights have been gained into one’s discipline by greats while their mind was disengaged and so distracted from its particular expertise.

Greatness is achieved when it is achieved in the context of peers. The peers may be who one is competing against. The peers may be those who are aiding and abetting in a mutual pursuit. Peers/friends makes one better and draws out from the well of one’s talents and giftedness even more ability. It is good to be pushed and peers and friends can do that. Sometimes the pushing is collegial, sometimes the pushing can be competitive but it is unlikely that a man will be great who is not himself surrounded by other great men. Edison had his Tesla. Graham Bell had his Marconi. Brady had his Manning. Clark had his Van Til. Patton had his Rommel.

This next one is not universal but in my reading great men are often characterized as having great wives and family. In my reading there seems to be something about the stability of a strong family life that allows those with ability to develop their embryonic greatness. There is a proverb that supports this. “Behind every great man stands a great woman.” My mother-in-law used to morph that by saying; “Behind every great man stands a surprised mother-in-law. I will say this. A man whose family is in shambles can never be a great man. If a man is great that will bleed into his family life in some way and often will be seen in his own children.

Finally, for our purpose, greatness is often a matter of “the man meeting the moment,” which is to say that men should pursue greatness but it is up to God to ordain it so that the prepared man meets the moment he was prepared for. I suppose many great men have lived and died that have remained completely unknown because that moment that their greatness was best suited for, in God’s sovereignty, never came to pass.

It should be the prayer of all men that God would make them great in His service while at the same time praying for contentment with what God has and does not have for them in the way of achievement. It should be our prayer that we would once again live among a people characterized by the number of great men in their midst.

Doug Wilson as “Chief I Speak With Forked Tongue” Strikes Again

“As some of you are aware, Refuge Church in Ogden, Utah has a growing voice in our cultural melee (especially on X), and they are aligned with us in many ways. However, much like Revoice attempted to keep the door of flamer sympathy cracked open in the PCA, the leadership in Ogden continues to conduct a sympathetic bromance with the cancers of racial spite, malice, vainglory, and pagan, tribal hate. They are doing exactly what the Feds want men on the right to do in this regard, standing politely on the dots painted for them by the left, sharing and platforming folly, sin, and self-owns whenever Federal Agent Trainee Samuel Holden drops another white boy vid laced with poo. (All to the great acclaim of Feds, spite bots, and anons.)”

Doug Wilson

Every wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish plucketh it down with her hands.  Proverbs 14:1

1.) Of course a good deal of what I see here above is a classic example of malice, vainglory, and pagan tribal hate radiating from Doug. Doug belongs to the tribe of Oswald Spengler who once said that “Christianity is the grandmother of Bolshevism.” DW is lighting out here, as the head of his tribe after a tribe that is four square against Spenglerian Christianity … and boy howdy is there ever malice, vainglory and pagan tribal hate oozing out of Doug and the members of his tribe.

2.) If Oswald Spengler was correct (and he is not) that Christianity is the grandmother of Bolshevism then the contest going on right now between the Ogden / Wolfe chaps and Doug Wilson / James White is a contest between an older Christianity vs. a Spenglerian Christianity. Wilson/White/Boot/Sandlin and company, intentionally or not, desire a Christianity that is rootless, and cosmopolitan in its social order theory while being Capitalistic in its worse sense economically. The Moscow tribe are practitioners of Enlightenment “Christianity” and they are doing their utmost to halt the return of a pre-Enlightenment Christianity where rootedness, family, and belonging are the signposts pointed at by the few who retain ecclesial sanity.

3.) The nub of the matter in all this is the issue of Christian Nationalism and the nub of the matter of Christian Nationalism that finds the Moscow Tribal warriors so on the war path is Kinism. Now, the Ogden Tribe themselves are not yet fully consistent on this matter of Kinism – a consistency that avoids both the Stone Choir tribe and the Moscow tribe. Ogden continues to dance around a full throated embrace of ethno-nationalism but I suspect Doug may eventually force their hand to come out and admit that, “why, yes, as a general rule, nations should be comprised, in their majority, of the descendents of a common ancestor.” I mean, after all that is what the word “nation” means in its etymological origin.

4.) Of course as the chieftain of his tribe DW seeks to inflame his painted up Braves with all kinds of war talk about “cancers of racial spite,” and “tribal hate,” but the problem here is that Chief “I Speak With  Forked Tongue” Wilson  never gives us any receipts. I mean, I know that in Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongues’ ” mind he sees racial spite covering the whole city of Ogden but these accusations are as vacuous as Churchill’s claim that war was forced upon him.

5.) I can’t help but delight in the irony that while R2K and Doug Wilson have the affections for one another the same as Carthage and Rome had for one another during the Punic wars, still they are on the same page in opposition to a return to a Christianity that is anti-Enlightenment liberal. Politics make for strange bedfellows, I reckon.

6.) Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue” accuses the Ogden chaps of standing on the of the left as pointed out by the FEDS, or something like that. My question for Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue” is “what is leftist about where the Ogden chaps are standing?” This strikes me as a case where for Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue,” being the hammer that he is, all the world now looks like a nail, which is to say that since he believes himself the very definition of what it means to be on the right it must be the case that if someone isn’t standing with him then by necessity that means that person not standing with Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue” is standing on dots outlined by the left. It’s either that or Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue” is so full of vainglory that he hates someone stealing his market share.

7.) I don’t know Samuel Holden from Adam but Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue” has some receipts proving Holden is a FED I’d sure like to see them. Until I see them it’s just another case that Holden is a nail for a man who is a hammer.

8.) Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue” must use the word “poo” because being a nice Evangelical he dare not say “shit.”  I suppose if that word is used it would prove the user of said word would be “on the left.”

9.) Touching the Bagel issue (which is a HUGE driver for Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue,” it might be asked if the Chief, being the reader that he is, has ever read the book of Acts, the writings of Augustine, Chrysostom, Luther, or Calvin on the subject of the Bagels. Are we to believe that our Church Fathers and our Church history is all wrong on the Bagels but only Chief “I Speak With Forked Tongue” is correct? Is there no room for discussion here or is it the case that to agree with Bagels Finkelstein, Freedman, and Cole puts one on the left?

Doug sees himself as the ancient Narnians resisting the resurrection of the White Witch. I see Doug as a “Johhny come lately” Calormen who has successfully taken over Narnia and now refuses to give it back while claiming squatter rights.

Andy Sandlin on Racial Identity …. McAtee on Andy Sandlin

“Racial identity is incompatible w/ the Christian Gospel. The Gospel was created partly to overcome racial identity. The Gospel was created to forge religious identity.”

Andy Sandlin
Really Bad “Theologian”
 

1.) The Gospel was created to partly overcome racial identity? So, as creator God created races and racial identity but in a move wherein grace destroys nature the Gospel is created to partly overcome racial identity? I mean, does this mean that the Gospel was not intended to completely overcome racial identity and if it means that how much of racial identity was the Gospel not supposed to overcome?

2.) Clearly Abraham, whom Scripture teaches was justified by faith alone, had no concept of the gospel when he sent his servant to find a wife of his own kindred for Isaac. Apparently good ole Doc Sandlin would have just recruited a local Canaanite girl who had recently attended a Billy Graham revival in order to get Isaac married off. 

3.) Certainly that first sentence in Andy’s quote above explains why Jesus had to be descended from David.  (Sarcasm off)

4.) Is Jesus, who is now at the Right hand of the Father, no longer to be referred to as “The Lion of the Tribe of JUDAH?,” or would that be a non Gospel sentiment Andy?

5.) The Gospel was created in order that the Ethiopian could no longer be used hypothetically as one who could not change his skin?

6.) How can it possibly be the case that given this view that Christianity is not pure on Gnosticism? Seems the Manicheans were correct after all.

7.) More of the modern Gospel that teaches that grace destroys nature. Once you love yourself some Jeebus you no longer are “Red or Yellow, Black or White, because after all you’re all the same in God’s sight.”

8.) Since the Gospel was forged to create religious identity clearly we can also do away with biological gender identity since it must be the case that if the Gospel was created to partly overcome racial identity it must also be the case whereupon the Gospel was created to partly over come gender identity.

Honestly, I am left absolutely gob-smacked that this man could have his own wife listening to him, never mind having scads of people hang on his every word.

And he, as well as his opinion, are not that uncommon among those reputed to be pillars in the Church.

Christ Has Come

After 2000 years the wait is done
The King is born, His reign begun
All Hail long-promised Mighty God
All Hail the Wielder of Father’s Rod

Competing Kingdoms are now over-run

Born sin’s penalty to assuage
Born to turn the Father’s rage
Born the Elect’s sin substitute
Born to tame the Dragon Brute

Kingdom come of God’s new Age

Fall and worship while you may
Kiss the Son or die in the way
Now is our time to repent
Our proper response to Christ’s Advent
Merry Christmas on this Festive Day