What Is The Sign?

No.267: August 19, 2025

Welcome to The Square Inch, a (Monday this week!) newsletter on Christianity, culture, and all of the many-varied “square inches” of God’s domain. This is normally a paid subscription feature with a preview before the paywall, so please consider subscribing to enjoy this weekly missive along with a frequent Pipe & Dram feature of little monologues/conversations in my study, and Wednesday’s “The Quarter Inch,” a quick(er) commentary on current events.

Dear Friends,

The New Testament lectionary reading for today’s Morning Prayer comes from the opening chapter of Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians. There he mentions that some preach the gospel of Christ out of envy and rivalry and with motives of “selfish ambition.” What then? he asks. Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice. That is magnanimity beyond human comprehension.

Paul goes on to exhort the Philippians:

Let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel, and not frightened in anything by your opponents. This is a clear sign to them of their destruction, but of your salvation, and that from God.

Let us now set this aside and return to it later.

Last week I mentioned a “brouhaha” that erupted when CNN aired a segment on Douglas Wilson and his various ministries and institutions in Moscow, Idaho. Sadly, the brushfires have not abated. The “sides” have been formed and the politicking is in full swing. You all know that I was not impressed with the segment; others are not content to judiciously criticize things that need criticizing. Instead, they seize upon the moment not to criticize, but to banish forever to the outer darkness. Not “rebuke,” but “anathema.” To accomplish this, they exaggerate with the most ridiculous hyperbole and, in fact, invent accusations out of whole cloth.

These can fall into a few categories: those that throw around the sweeping and dismissive label of “heresy,” of which they usually have in mind something called the “Federal Vision.” This is so lazy that I can hardly pay attention to anyone who says this sort of thing. One can make the argument that the “Federal Vision” (inchoate and variegated as it is) is outside of the bounds of this or that particular church confession of faith, but in no way is it possibly outside the boundaries of broad, creedal Christian orthodoxy.

Others point to various scandals that have occurred within Moscow’s institutions—usually without anything remotely like adequate knowledge of events—and pin upon Pastor Wilson whatever one likes. Like, say, he’s friendly to pedophiles or encourages spousal abuse or what have you. I’m pretty open to the idea—actually, pretty confident—that the leadership of Christ Church in Moscow mishandled more than a few things over the years (I just wish they’d admit to it and repent from time to time), but willful lovers and encouragers of evil they do not appear to be. This segment of the pitchfork-wielding mob really ought to take the words of C.S. Lewis to heart:

Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out. Is one's first feeling, 'Thank God, even they aren't quite so bad as that,' or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies are as bad as possible? If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which, if followed to the end, will make us into devils. You see, one is beginning to wish that black was a little blacker. If we give that wish its head, later on we shall wish to see grey as black, and then to see white itself as black. Finally we shall insist on seeing everything -- God and our friends and ourselves included -- as bad, and not be able to stop doing it: we shall be fixed for ever in a universe of pure hatred.

That brings me to Russell Moore, who represents the apotheosis of this sort of hyperbolic rhetoric. On a Christianity Today podcast he said that he was “enraged” that people watching the CNN segment would think that “this is Christianity.” Wilson has a “dark and non-Christian view of who God is.” Moore used words like “enraging and tragic,” “insidious,” “Satanic,” and “the spirit of anti-Christ.”

Oh, is that all? Look: I don’t know why people feel the need to invent things about Douglas Wilson or Christ Church or the other various ministries in Moscow. There is plenty of legitimate material to criticize and even oppose, if necessary. I am not a fan of patriarchalism or making it some kind of worldview “grid” by which to see everything else (e.g., even if it were true it has little, if anything to do with voting rights in the civil sphere). Their bombastic rhetoric (i.e., “serrated edge”) and theological justifications for it I find unbiblical and lame. Their recent assault on “empathy” is just wrong-headed and misguided, and even then if I squint I can see a real and important point being made very badly. Their platforming of Stephen Wolfe and his brand of “Christian Nationalism” remains appalling. And, of course, the overall business model of bomb-throwing and controversy-courting to gain popularity and followers is very cringe. I think the “Moscow Mood” is fair game to criticize.

But Satanic? It is best for me to decline comment.

Douglas Wilson, of course, replied to all this. And it is … okay in many respects. But when you read it (as you should) I would like you to notice just how much emphasis is placed on who is getting followers and who is losing followers. In Wilson’s telling, Christianity Today is a sell-out, loser publication that has failed God’s people and he is offering a robust alternative. He is winning; they are losing. And, of course, his opponents are only mad because he is winning and they are losing.

Rivalry, my friends. Good, old-fashioned rivalry. That is at the rock-bottom of this entire skirmish. Russell Moore is “enraged” that Wilson’s brand of Christianity might be seen as legitimate. Douglas Wilson is piqued that people might think Christianity Today is what its name claims to be. Right before our eyes the pageant of First Christian Church of Corinth is being played out, only it isn’t people politicking for Cephas and Apollo. “I am of Wilson!” “I am of Moore!”

The instruction and lessons from today’s lectionary reading write themselves.

For Russell Moore and his “tribe,” you ought to follow Paul’s example of magnanimity and rejoice that Douglas Wilson and his church are in fact (yes: in fact) preaching and teaching the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, a personal relationship with God, the forgiveness of sins and newness of life. Are they doing it out of pretense or selfish ambition? Even if it sometimes actually looks like it, rejoice.

For Douglas Wilson, the same lesson. Go back and read your rejoinder and see the time you spent piling on Christianity Today as a pathetic gospel witness. Try rejoicing.

But there is a more subtle and important lesson from this passage that doesn’t just write itself. This is a tribal skirmish (and a grossly performative one, at that) over who is properly and legitimately leading the fight against the world in its fallen and evil dimensions. And Paul has something very profound to say about this very thing, and I’ll quote it again:

Let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel, and not frightened in anything by your opponents. This is a clear sign to them of their destruction, but of your salvation, and that from God.

What does Paul want to hear about the Philippians? That they are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind, striving side by side for the faith of the gospel and are not frightened in anything by their opponents. “This,” he says, is a “clear sign to them” of their destruction.

What is the “this”? What is the sign? How will the world know and clearly see their coming destruction? How shall the “libs” be at long last “owned”? How shall the mouths of the smug cultured despisers be shut? Is it only the lack of fearfulness? Or is it Paul’s entire description of the battle plan? It is surely the latter. One can be fearless and yet give the enemy mixed signals instead of a “clear sign,” particularly if one is a fearless Lone Ranger. Fearlessness combined with unity—one spirit, one mind—is what sends a clear message.

This might mean going back to the drawing board about the business—er, I mean, battle—plan. Maybe it means scrapping the “let’s taunt all the other weak Christians in order to gain market share” gambit. Maybe it means not calling other Christian leaders “Satanic” when they are nothing of the kind.

By all means, let’s have conversation and debate about the theological and cultural and social matters. But it will be forever fruitless while it is rooted in, sullied, and weighed down by plain old sinful rivalry.

---

Thanks for reading The Square Inch Newsletter. Have a wonderful week ahead!