Wilson’s book “Mere Christendom” is really a collection of articles, so it doesn’t offer a systemic outline or blueprint for Christian Nationalism, or to use his term, Christendom 2.0. However, as you spend a bit of time working through it, you can begin to get a feel for his vision. It is also possible to look at what he has written elsewhere to get more of a flavour of his worldview.
The second chapter of Mere Christendom takes a look at taxation and the state.
“One of the central techniques that is used by despots for divesting themselves of moral legitimacy is the technique of governing through arbitrary administrative law. A free people live under laws passed by legislatures in which they have freely chosen representatives. The prerogative of passing such laws may not be transferred. So if you chafe under rules and regs that spew forth from all the alphabet agencies, then you are not free. It doesn’t matter that you are currently not being harassed. No despot can torment all his slaves simultaneously.”[1]
This places Wilson on the political right and towards a libertarian understanding of government. It is worth observing a couple of things here. First, that there has been a long running debate away from Christian philosophical musings about the role of the State and the art that administrative law through directives and regulations as opposed to direct legislation has to play. Wilson claims that:
“When there is no standard above the state, then the state becomes the standard. If there is no God above the system, then the system becomes god.”[2]
This is a repeat of the kind of claim that we engaged with above and it is helpful to highlight here that the reality is more nuanced for administrative law than Wilson’s broad brush comments imply. Specifically in western, liberal democracies, the rule of law means that administrative law is challengeable through the courts via Judicial Review. Whilst from one perspective, judges might be seen as part of the State, the judiciary is meant to be independent from the legislature and executive both organisationally and in terms of interference.
That the role of administrative law is a debating point away from Christian theological and philosophical thought and that the arguments advanced by Wilson would be familiar to small state libertarians with no faith is perhaps another reminder that there are other gods available as alternatives to Yahweh, other than the state.
Wilson’s main concern about a large state is that:
“And because the state is always ravenous for tax money, the tax burden gradually becomes a monstrosity. The people carrying this burden have gotten gradually used to it and don’t even notice anymore how radically unscriptural it all is.[3]
How does Wilson reach the conclusion that this is unscriptural? His starting point is the sin of stealing. He says:
“Obviously it is a sin to steal, and it is not a sin to be stolen from. The first part is flat prohibited in Scripture (Exod. 20:15; Eph. 4:28), and the second part is intuitively obvious. Better to be wronged than to do wrong. But when making this point that it is not a sin to be stolen from, we are talking about someone sneaking into your garage at two in the morning and taking your bicycle. It is not wrong to be wronged in this way.”[4]
However, Wilson believes that there is a context in which we can say that it is a sin to be stolen from. He writes:
“Our current sin is found in the way we are being stolen from. When God prohibits stealing, this assumes the institution of private property. When God prohibits adultery, what is in the background? Unless there is such a thing as marriage, you cannot have adultery. Adultery is defined as violation of marriage vows. In the same manner, stealing is a violation of someone’s right to remain in possession of their own property. So the requirement here is to learn a little blunt force honesty with yourself. It is not a sin to write a big check to the government. It is not a sin to be stolen from. It is a sin to write that check and tell yourself that you are just “doing your share.” That is the sin of being delusional when God has required us to be clear-headed. It is a sin to believe that our government is anything other than a pirate ship of the thieves, by the thieves, and for the thieves. It is a sin to go on believing the lies when we have no good reason to.”[5]
We are sinning by our complicity in something that is wrong, we are apparently believing lies and thus turning to a form of idolatry but what makes government taxation theft, or piracy to pick up on another term that Wilson applies?
Wilson basis his argument on two parts of Scripture. First, he takes us to 1 Samuel 8:14-18 where Samuel warns the people that if they appoint a king then:
“14 He can take your best fields, vineyards, and olive orchards and give them to his servants. 15 He can take a tenth of your grain and your vineyards and give them to his officials and servants. 16 He can take your male servants, your female servants, your best young men,[a] and your donkeys and use them for his work. 17 He can take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves can become his servants. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out because of the king you’ve chosen for yourselves, but the Lord won’t answer you on that day.”
Wilson argues
“When Samuel warns the people against anointing a king like the other nations have, he warns them of the consequences to their property. In other words, it is reasonable to worry about the pickpockets in town, but wise men worry about another set of men, whose grasp of the distinction between meum and tuum is every bit as tenuous. These rulers will rise to the pinnacles of hubris, claiming to be equal to God, deserving of a tenth.”[6]
This also points us to the second place that Wilson will take us to. Wilson will argue from the Biblical laws on tithing that:
God claims a tithe, and if that is all God needs, and if God is a jealous God, then we ought to see any attempt on the part of the civil government to go past ten percent as an aspiration to Deity.[7]
Now, it is worth observing that in the case of Samuel’s warning and examples such as Ahab’s attempt to seize Naboth’s vineyard,[8] the concern is that the king will take wealth and property for his own personal needs and gratification. Even so, in the case of Samuel’s warning, the levying of customs and taxes is not condemned as sin, it is merely described as a coming burden. The issue with Naboth’s vineyard is that it is seized, stolen as an attack on an individual rather than as an accepted levy. Remember that godless, non-Christian cultures can distinguish between corrupt officials who take what is not theirs and legitimate but overbearing governments that impose a heavy burden.
Wilson however argues that taxation becomes theft first, when it exceeds the ten percent that goes to God in taxes. Second, it is theft when those taxes are used to do what the Government is not authorised to do.
“We know that taxation can be done right because the Bible talks about paying taxes to the one to whom it is due (Rom. 13:7). These are taxes that we owe, and they may not be considered theft at all. We should no more chafe at paying our legitimate taxes than we do paying our bill for satellite television. There are taxes we do not owe, but ought to pay anyway, having more important things to do. This is the meaning of what Jesus teaches Peter—we don’t owe it, but go ahead and pay it (Matt. 17:24–27).[9]
However:
“the taxes need to be levied, in the main, so that the rulers can perform the functions that God requires them to perform. Coercion is a big deal, and so the government must only be allowed to exercise it when they have express warrant from the Scriptures for what they are doing. If they have express warrant to hunt down murderers, and they do, then they have express warrant to collect money to pay for certain men to do this. They are God’s deacon of justice, and the deacon of justice needs to be paid just like the rest of us (Rom. 13:4). They are not allowed to collect fees to pay for activities that are prohibited to them. If they are not allowed to do it in the first place, they are not allowed to tax us to pay for it. To do so would be theft.”[10]
Here is a small government argument. The State from this perspective only has permission to protect people from foreign attack and to ensure the rule of law through a criminal code. There is an argument for this and it is particularly associated in Christian, reformed circles with the idea of Lex Rex, that under the rule of law, there are three distinct spheres of authority, state, church and family. However, Lex Rex is an artificial construct not found explicitly in Scripture and arguably, the modern state acts more like an extended family comparable to a clan and tribal system.
There may be good economic and political reasons for low taxation, it may indeed be an effective application of Biblical morality but this does not mean it is the only way to apply Biblical morality and so, I’m not convinced that low taxation and a small state is a Biblical principle. It is not the place here to debate the morality of low and high taxation, of big and small government. I happen to support low taxation and a smaller state. However, the critical point is that Wilson’s vision of Christendom and a Christian Nation is rooted in a particular political philosophy that is not necessarily Christian.
One could equally argue that the people of Israel were asked to provide much more than the tithe in offerings, that they were expected to provide for the poor and alleviate debt, that eventually the early church held everything in common. So, from a socialist perspective, a Christian Nation might legitimately be seen as authorised to raise much higher taxes and do far more than a non-Christian one.
[1] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (p. 31). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[2] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (p. 32). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[3] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (p. 32). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[4] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (p. 32). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[5] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (pp. 32-33). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[6] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (pp. 34-35). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[7] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (p. 37). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[8] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (p. 36). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[9] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (p. 37). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.
[10] Wilson, Douglas. Mere Christendom (p. 38). Canon Press. Kindle Edition. I’m sure that allies of Wilson will want to use his arguments to demonstrate why Donald Trump should not be levying punitive customs rates on trade, a taxation both on the citizens of other countries and on the citizens of the US.
Faithroots 