Jen Wilkin is so gone (and what is the ‘ordo amoris’ anyway?)
By Elizabeth Prata
Today on X (formerly Twitter), a theologian noted that Jen Wilkin made a nonsensical statement by twisting a biblical concept while on a Q&A Panel. He said,
I’ll have three points here:
1. In general, avoid Jen Wilkin,
2. Specifically, explaining the error of her statement that was posted yesterday,
3. Explaining what the ordo amoris is.
1. In general, avoid Jen Wilkin
I have written about Jen Wilkin several times here on my blog, once positively (long ago!) and then always negatively. Jen is a preacher and preacher out of Matt Chandler’s church, The Village Church in Flower Mound, TX. She has been the Director of Curriculum, she has been teaching pastors & missionaries, and she preaches as a guest in other churches. Of course, the Bible says a woman may not preach or teach men in the church. (1 Timothy 2:11-12). It is disgraceful for her to do so. (1 Corinthians 33-35).
She is an egalitarian, feminist, rebel, Bible twister, unhumble, unteachable, and in general, one to be avoided. She is false. Resources supporting my claims will be provided below.
2. Specifically, explaining why her statement today is error
The entire video from which this short clip is taken is available on Youtube. It is from a Gospel Coalition series titled Good Faith Debates, and the debate was “Should Christians Send their Children to Public School?” Wilkin’s stance is pro-public school. She believes in the “public school ideal” and thinks that Christian children, even kindergarteners, should be in public schools to be a witness and to be engaged in society. So that is her overall stance.
In this specific short clip Jen said, “The most common phrase I hear thrown out in these conversations is ‘well I just need to do what’s best for my family.’ I think that’s something that as Christians we have to push back on. Philippians tells us each of you should look not just to your own interest but to the interests of others.“
Something that dishonest debaters do is to make a generalization. Here, Jen said ‘conversations I’ve heard’. Normally, people have conversations with people who think and believe the same as they do. If she has heard conversations of people saying they should ONLY do for their family, then I am positive this is a biased view of the situation. It’s also too narrow. Her statement is not based on wide-ranging, unbiased fact.
Secondly, another dishonest debating trick is to restate the question as an either-or. She split what should not be split. Here, Jen subtly poses the question as ‘Christians either ONLY do what’s best for their family’ (and by implication, no one else). She makes it seem as if Christians in this debate are only concerned with their own family and are ignoring the needs of the rest of the world.
No one in their right mind is going to ‘push back on’ having a primary view of doing for one’s family. No one. In addition, most Christians are concerned with the needs of others. Philanthropy is alive and well among the brethren.
3. What is the ‘Ordo Amoris’?
The term originates from Augustine, if not the concept from the Bible. He wrote about it in the City of God. We know that we are supposed to love the right things; holiness, our spouse, His word, our neighbor, His name (Psalm 5:11), and so on. We also are not supposed to love certain things- we are not supposed to love violence Psalm 11:5, or worthless things (Psalm 119:37).
But in addition to knowing what to love, we are supposed to love in the right order. That’s where ordo comes from, it’s a Latin word. So is amoris. We love pizza, we love our football team, we love our home, our children, our spouse, Jesus. Not all of those loves are measured with the same weight. We don’t even love all the people in our lives the same amount.
“For whatever reason, Jesus had His Peter, James, and John, and He had His twelve, and He had His seventy. And so there are these concentric circles of intimacy, it seems, that mattered to Him.” ~John MacArthur
We love our family first, the nuclear family is the first priority. Our deep love and care goes to the people living under our roof. That is found in 1 Timothy 5:8. “But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.“
It doesn’t say not to provide for anyone else except your family, it says to be kind to all, but especially one’s family, indicating a hierarchy. There are circles of responsibility. As pastor John Michael LaRue said on X,
“To add to this, Paul’s recognition in 1 Corinthians 7:33-34 of the divided interest of the married man undergirds the reality that the husband and father has responsibilities of protection and care for his wife and children that a single man does not have.“
Then a close second in love are extended family members, then our neighbors, then love our community, then our country, and then consider the interests of the rest of the world. Of course these can overlap and even shift. The concentric circles are not in stone.
Galatians 6:10 says “So then, while we have opportunity, let’s do good to all people, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith“, again indicating a concentric circle of mindfulness when considering to whom we donate. Jesus said to love your neighbor and defined it as, well, anyone in whose proximity we can share God’s love with.
My view on this ordo amoris discussion is, I trust true Christians to do and to give wisely based on their good decisions, true Christians who are making unwise decisions will be dealt with by Jesus (not me), and if they are not true Christians, then when they face Jesus they will have worse things to worry about than who or what to whom they gave donations.
In an essay about the ordo amoris, not specifically commenting about Jen Wilkin’s either-or statement, Owen Strachan said not to be “confused by silly dichotomies. You can love your natural family AND love the global body of Christ AND seek the salvation of the lost among the nations.”
The point is to use wisely the means (money, expertise, energy) Jesus has given us. Being a wise shepherd means making wise decisions about how to deploy what Jesus has gifted us with. After settling one’s obligations for the month, there may be discretionary money to use to fulfill others’ needs. Even if there is no money leftover we can use our energy, time, expertise to help fulfill others’ needs. As Christians we DO help with needs, as Christians we do so wisely.
Conclusion
False teachers abound, and Jen Wilkin is one of them. False teachers use deceptive language to divide the brethren, to confuse them, and to advance their evil agenda. Third, the ordo amoris is just a fancy phrase for being wise in providing for the people in your circles and extending outward with care and attention, founded by prayer and biblical principles.
Further Resources
Jen Wilkin discernment article: If I ever meet him I’ll probably sock him in the face
Jen Wilkin discernment article: Boundary stones and slippery slopes
Cut to the chase, a shorter discernment article on Jen Wilkin
John MacArthur essay “Authentic Love“
JC Ryle essay: Christian Love
