He Believes America Should Be a Theocracy. He Says His Influence Is Growing.

“Do you think I’m going to hell?”

Roman Catholic, New York Times opinion writer Ross Douthat pointedly questions Reformed Presbyterian pastor Douglas Wilson, known for his controversial public engagement on Christian nationalism. In a recent episode of Douthat’s “Interesting Times” podcast, (a transcript of which posted at The New York Times) Douthat presses Wilson on his Calvinist convictions on politics, his ideal Christian republic and his growing public influence.

Wilson skirts around the issue of Douthat’s salvation, pointing, as all good Calvinists do, to the sovereignty of God. It is in view of God’s sovereignty that He defends Christian nationalism, which he defines as “the conviction that secularism is a failed experiment, that societies require a transcendent grounding, in order to be able to function at all. And as a Christian, I believe that transcendent ground should be the living God…”

Wilson continues with a few clarificatory remarks, specifically in response to the Christian nationalist critique that they get “[their] tentacles in everything.” To this, Wilson qualifies that “[he] actually [thinks] we need limited government. The government should be significantly smaller than it is…that’s why I would call myself a theocrat libertarian. There is a true libertarian element in this.”

To Wilson, part of acknowledging God’s sovereignty and society’s corporate returning to God involves laws. He expresses how he believes that “the only way out is for us to repent and turn to Christ; would be things like no more pride parades, no more drag queen story hours, no more abortion on demand, no more legalized same sex unions…”

Douthat presses Wilson on what seems to be a discrepancy between two modes of public engagement. On the one hand, Wilson aligns with mainstream religious conservatism, which laments society’s turn away from Christian values and seeks to retrieve a soft, cultural consensus on morality. On the other, Douthat articulates that Wilson supports a view of politics that more closely with theocracy, with laws against sodomy and the government’s declaration of Jesus as Lord.

He presses Wilson on what this political framework would specifically look like in practice, to which Wilson cites King Alfred of England as a historical model: “He didn’t just bring the content of mosaic law over. He brought the system of precedent and case law, and what I would much prefer to see an Alfred approach where you take the principles of the law, you apply them, you stand by the principles, and then using Christian prudence and wisdom, you push in that direction until you get the results that you want.”

Historically, Western governments like King Alfred’s, however, were not exactly known for their stellar treatment of religious minorities. Douthat asks Wilson about religious liberty, and specifically how a “moderate Christian theocracy” would treat “unregenerate” citizens. Wilson refers to early U.S. history as a model, where according to him, “America kept her Protestant ethos and incorporated successfully Catholics and Jews…this is I want to go back to where…we were doing okay.”

Perhaps we were “doing okay. But, as Douthat notes, it was not until the 20^th century that we see a societal shift towards treating women with dignity. Douthat notes that some Christians have had some lousy, far-reaching justifications for treating women as second-class citizens. When questioned about some ancient, unjust Christian practices against women, Wilson strongly affirms that a husband may not physically mistreat or threaten his wife in any way. Douthat proposes that perhaps Christian culture can learn from secular society regarding what is permissible, since in the past many Christians would have supported the husband’s right to corporeal punishment of his wife. Wilson responds that “he [wants] a Christendom that learns lessons from history.” He articulates that while the Christian may learn these lessons from a liberal or feminist, “what’s important is whether [the lesson] is just and prudent…and it aligns with the Bible.”

Wilson’s views on women are not the only thing he has been criticized on. Another controversy Wilson has gotten tangled in is the topic of slavery, and whether it is absolutely forbidden by the Bible. Wilson argues that the logic of scripture “not only leads to [the abolition of slavery] but necessarily leads to it.” However, Douthat does not let Wilson off that easy, and expresses his concern that Wilson wants to “regulate sin through the law”, something which has historically been problematic. Wilson argues that he does not want an intrusive administration but instead desires that nothing is “based on the false doctrines that [feminists and secular liberals are] espousing. [He wants] everything that [he teaches] to be consistent with the Bible and to be derived from the Bible.”

Douthat questions Wilson on how publicly influential he is, to which Wilson claims that he is, “more influential than I used to be, and at significantly higher levels. “Wilson discusses how we now live in a “clown world”, and therefore his platform “doesn’t sound nearly as radical.” Furthermore, given his public writing on Classical Christian schools, he has connected with major political figures including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Russ Vought, the head of the Office of Management and Budget.

Ultimately, Wilson affirms that he is not just fighting against progressive liberalism, but those on the “dank right” — white nationalists and antisemites. He states (in proper Calvinist fashion) that God is in control of all these forces, “down to the minutiae.” In response, Douthat asks, “Why would you bother trying to use the state to punish adulterers or anybody else, when God decided whether they were going to commit adultery in the first place?” Wilson responds in affirmation of biblical teaches on helping the poor and making disciples. He argues that this and the Calvinist entrenchment in Old Testament thinking leads him to infer that the Bible points to Christian nationalism.

Doug Wilson generates controversy.  But his theological conversation with Ross Douthat, on the pages of a prominent secular publication, evinces that society is not nearly as secular as commonly imagined.