Didn’t check facts

Watch out for liars. When a man lies in the course of a church conflict (which needs to be distinguished from being simply mistaken), you know that you are dealing with a seared conscience. Douglas Wilson

I have received a couple of response to the question I posed to Joan Opyr about the age of consent. One question was from someone wondering if I have any trouble with our current age of consent laws. And the answer to that one is simple . . . no, I don’t. . . .But at the same time, Joan’s responses were generally reasonable, and I would answer just about all the questions she posed the same way that she did. “Was that 14-year old psychologically ready to engage in consensual sex with a man ten years her senior? In my opinion, no.” And so Joan and I agree completely. (Age of Consent, June 15, 2006)²

“Prohibiting the defendant from offering evidence of or arguing either express or implied consent of the victim or her parents. It is well settled in the State of Idaho that consent is not a defense to the crimes of Sexual Abuse of a Child Under the Age of Sixteen (Idaho Code 18-1506) or Lewd and Lascivious Conduct with a Child Under Sixteen Years of Age (Idaho Code 18-1508). State v. Oar, 129 Idaho 337 (1996).” (State’s Motions in Limine and 404(b) Notice)

• Debbie Chambers
• Keith Dimeler
• Peter Leithart⁴
• Erin Lystad
• Kimberly Lystad
• Patrice Lystad
• Jim Miller
• Toby Sumpter
• Douglas Wilson
• Mark Wintz

*  *  *

Shaming and blaming

*  *  *

“In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” 2 Corinthians 13:1

• Mr. Wight wrote the confession in February 2005
• Mr. Wight wrote it with a word processor
• The confession is 3 pages at 2,157 words
• Mr. Wight corroborates every point of Natalie’s complaint (past & present)
• Mr. Wight does not deny any of Natalie’s complaint
• Mr. Wight contradicts Doug Wilson at three key points: (1) the reason he boarded at the Greenfield’s, (2) the nature of the so-called “secret courtship,” and (3) they were not allowed to hold hands.
• The Moscow Police Department entered the confession into evidence on August 31, 2005

OBSERVATIONS

1. Jamin Wight states that he “was asked to move in with the Greenfields (February 2001) and have his room and board paid for in trade for working around the home”; whereas Doug Wilson claims the Greenfields “had bizarrely brought Jamin into the house as a boarder so that he could conduct a secret courtship with Natalie.” (Doug Wilson’s ‘Reluctant Response’)

2. Jamin Wight states that the Greenfields forbade him from holding hands with Natalie: “the first time they ‘broke the rules’ . . . they held hands. . .”; whereas Doug Wilson claims “her parents permitted a certain measure of physical affection to exist between them (e.g. hand-holding).” (Doug Wilson’s ‘Reluctant Response’)

1. Boarding: Both men agreed that Jamin Wight boarded at the Greenfields, though neither man agrees on the reason he boarded there.
2. Courtship: Only two persons refer to the so-called “courtship” in the 31-page report: Jamin Wight and Pastor Doug Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow. Mr. Wight never describes it as a “secret.” We redacted all of Jamin Wight’s references to this courtship.
3. “mature”: Jamin Wight and Douglas Wilson dismissed the gravity of Mr. Wight’s crimes because of Natalie’s appearance and her maturity. The police narrative states:

   “Wight told me he did not feel Natalie was 14 because she did not look or act 14, she was very advanced and mature for her age.”

   Doug Wilson echoed Mr. Wight, telling Rod Dreher:

   “The reason we did not want it treated as pedophilia is that her parents had bizarrely brought Jamin into the house as a boarder so that he could conduct a secret courtship with Natalie. So Jamin was in a romantic relationship with a young girl, her parents knew of the relationship and encouraged it, her parents permitted a certain measure of physical affection to exist between them (e.g. hand-holding), Natalie was a beautiful and striking young woman, and at the time was about eight inches taller than Jamin was. Her parents believed that she was mature enough to be in that relationship, and the standards they set for the relationship would have been reasonable if she had in fact been of age and if the two had not been living under the same roof.” (Doug Wilson’s ‘Reluctant Response’)

   Please note that the report contains written statements from each of Natalie’s parents to the MPD; neither corroborates Mr. Wilson’s representations.

“If a policeman is gentle with the rapist, he is harsh with the rapist’s victim. If a shepherd is gentle with wolves, he is being harsh with the sheep. We must learn when and how we are to be gentle (for we are to be gentle people), and we must also learn when and how we are to be hard (and as pointed) as nails.” Douglas Wilson

Accountability

“I then told him Natalie had made a confession to us and that I now wanted a written statement from him regarding his activity with my daughter during the time he lived with us. . . . After receiving the statement my wife had our daughter read it for accuracy. She stated it was not accurate and that activities were left out. I contacted Jamin again and asked him to rewrite his statement not leaving out any details whatever. . . He delivered the statement to my house and again met with myself and . . .”

“Blame-shifting on his part would be utterly inappropriate, and we had Jamin acknowledge that he was in no position to absolve himself by pointing fingers at others. Having said this, I can observe what Jamin should not. . . They did this by inviting Jamin to move in with them, encouraging and permitting a relationship between Jamin and Natalie, while keeping that relationship secret from the broader community. . . but they did know it was a relationship between a man in his mid-twenties and their fourteen-year-old daughter, and they helped to create the climate of secrecy. . . In all my years as a pastor, I don’t believe that I have ever seen such a level of parental foolishness as what the Greenfields did in this.”

Terminology

• “sexual acts”
• “lewd and lascivious behavior with a minor”
• “sexual activities”
• “brazen crimes committed against my daughter”
• “injuries incurred against our daughter”
• “lewd and lascivious conduct with minor”
• “crimes against our daughter”

Remedial Efforts

“I chose not to take any action until we talked through and contemplated our options and the effect those decisions would have on our daughter and our family. . . . I have endeavored to create an environment in our home that would promote healing and also provide us with the courage we would need to take further legal action against Jamin.”

Jury Trial

“It was during this meeting that Jamin gave his word that if charges were filed against him, he would plead guilty and not contest the charges.”¹

“Doug explained that Jamin has pled not guilty for the purpose of telling the whole story, but he is owning and confessing his sin in this situation.”

Threat

“Our hope is that this man will be punished for his crimes against our daughter and also that he could become a responsible citizen who is not a menace to society.”²

“I do not believe that this situation in any way paints Jamin as a sexual predator.”

Proactive Measures

“To protect his [Jamin Wight’s] then fiancée, Gary drove to the Tri Cities to tell the parents of his bride-to-be just what kind of man they were about to allow their daughter to marry — and they immediately broke off the engagement for good.”

“I also believe that it requires that I labor to see that justice really is done to Jamin (at the same time excluding injustice through severe penalties). . .”

Conclusion

Epilogue

For he is the minister of God to you for good. But if you do that which is evil, be afraid; for he bears not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath on him that does evil. Romans 13:4

Guys who defend the way Douglas Wilson talks to me & other women: Would you be okay with someone talking to your wife or daughter that way?

— Rachel Held Evans (@rachelheldevans) July 28, 2016

Many men adamantly defend Doug Wilson when he blames me for my own childhood rape. What if the table was turned? https://t.co/66hGw1Q8WB

— Natalie Greenfield (@NatalieGfield) July 29, 2016

*   *   *

I’m sharing this again because I want to add that I stand with this girl! Natalie Rose Greenfield. Nobody, I mean Nobody disputes the fact that she was abused by a seminary student in the CREC denomination when she was 13. As for the rest of the details, I DON’T CARE what they are. I do not freaking care! Some say she’s lying about this detail or that. . . . I DON’T CARE IF SHE IS! The fact is, the girl was abused and was a victim and the church MUST learn how to avoid abuse and when it does happen, to LOVE the victim so much that their pain and hurt and confusion are all lessened and they can see Jesus through the love of the people around them. Quit defending the leadership. LOVE HER! Shut the hell up and love her!

I was Thirteen, He was a Seminary Student It Happened. . . In 2000. That’s the year I met him. He started grooming me right away. I was thirteen years old. I loved music, swimming, being with my friends. . . .

*   *   *

*   *   *

Abstract

In 2005, New Saint Andrews (NSA) student Steven Sitler was discovered to have been molesting the children of the family he boarded with while attending school as well as numerous other children, including many in other states. Also in 2005, Greyfriars Hall (GH) seminary student Jamin Wight was discovered to have been sexually abusing Natalie Greenfield, the young teenaged daughter of Gary and Patricia Greenfield, in whose home he boarded. The victim families in both cases were members of Christ Church (CC) in Moscow, ID, and the perpetrators each attended sister churches Christ Church and the nearby Trinity Reformed Church (TRC). In both cases, Douglas Wilson was the primary pastoral contact, and the church handling of the two cases continues to have ongoing direct effects or significant ripple effects today. Douglas Wilson’s response and handling of the two molestation/sex abuse cases are the subject of this document. To a lesser extent, the response from Christ Church/Trinity Reformed Church is included as well. This paper is intended as a reference for those who wish to have a clearer understanding of what occurred; it will aid readers in cutting through the spin and formulating their own opinions. This document includes:

• a synopsis of each case
• an explanation and analyses of Mr. Wilson’s response to each
• a lengthy email discussion between Rachel Shubin and Mr. Wilson about the two cases
• questions and answers regarding each case from Prosecuting Attorney Bill Thompson, who prosecuted both cases
• an extensive primary source documentation section.

 

Introduction

My name is Rachel Shubin, and I have been a member in good standing at Reformation Covenant Church in Portland, OR (a Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches [CREC] member church) for the past 17 years. When the whole Sitler/Wight mess came up in September, I began watching very closely. My husband and I have six children, four of whom are girls between ages 10 and 15, so this issue concerns me. I have watched with increasing alarm at the escalating attacks Doug Wilson has levied toward both Natalie Greenfield, who was the victim in the Wight case (now an adult), and her family (including her father and, inexplicably, her husband Wesley) as well as at the insults directed toward several other Christians, even prominent ones, who have criticized his handling of either or both cases (Rod Dreher, Andrew Sandlin, Boz Tchividjian, etc.). To date, I have put in 400+ hours over the last nine months researching the whole situation, read mountains of court and other primary source documents, spoken on the phone and emailed with Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson who prosecuted both the Sitler and Wight cases, spent two months emailing back and forth with Mr. Wilson himself trying to clarify several things that still didn’t make sense to me (he answered a total of 77 questions), emailed with John Bradbury who was the judge in the Wight case, emailed with Christine Jensen who is Mr. Sitler’s parole officer, and spoken with innumerable people, many of whom were quite concerned that they remain anonymous after seeing Wilson’s public responses to criticism. Yes, that is a lot of time. However, the issue seemed and still seems grave enough to me to warrant that time; and after a monster amount of research, the problem seems even larger than it initially appeared rather than smaller. (pages vii–viii)

*   *   *

“A corrupt witness scorns judgment: and the mouth of the wicked devours iniquity.” Proverbs 19:28

From: douglas.dougwils@gmail.com Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 3:25 PM To: Rachel Shubin Subject: Re: FW: Maybe You Can Help Rachel, It is possible that I saw some back in the day, but don’t recall distinctly. I said that I had access to them because Jamin’s attorney has copies, and I thought the review committee might ask to see them. After I said that I discovered that the court seal applies not only to the copies at the courthouse, but also to any copies that Jamin’s attorney has (I presume because they were part of the plea arrangement). If we had had copies from back in the day, I don’t think the court seal would apply, but I don’t believe we do. (Shubin Report, page 162)

“I said that I had access to them because Jamin’s attorney has copies, and I thought the review committee might ask to see them. . .”

1. A Letter from Valley Treatment Specialties LLC to Judge Stegner (July 28, 2015) The money quote: “There is no indication that Steven needs to have ‘line of sight’ supervision to parent his son.”
2. Order Sealing Documents dated August 4, 2015 Readers will recognize these words from Doug Wilson’s threat to Natalie Greenfield:

   This Court finds that the documents listed below “contain highly intimate facts or statements, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person.” I.C.A.R. 32(i)(1). Further, in weighing the interests of the public against the defendant’s privacy interest, the documents listed below should be sealed to reasonable preserve defendant’s privacy.

   Mr. Wilson illegally threatened Natalie Greenfield with publishing documents that the Court sealed because they “contain highly intimate facts or statements, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person.” Mr. Wilson hoped his threat would silence Natalie. It didn’t. And while he threatened to publish her sealed records, he ignored, and continues to ignore, a baby in his congregation whose father wants to molest him. That man has sealed records that should concern Mr. Wilson.
3. Exhibit A: IDOC Offender Family Contact Rules List This is a list of restrictions placed upon Mr. Sitler as terms of his probation. All of them restrict his access to children.
4. Defense Memorandum (July 30, 2015) This memo advances bold arguments in favor of allowing Steven Sitler to have unhindered contact with his child, citing four experts who, within two weeks, would look like fools. And whores. Team Sitler specifically asked the Court to remove the following terms from Sitler’s probation (Exhibit A above):

   General Rules:

   1. Never be alone with children.
   2. Never be responsible for supervising or disciplining children.
   3. Never initiate physical contact with children. . . .

   Rules for family visits outside the home:

   1. The offender is to never be alone with children. A chaperone approved by the Probation/Parole officer is to be present at all times.
   2. The offender is not to discipline children. The chaperone is responsible for determining appropriate disciplining of the children. The chaperone is responsible for administering rewards or punishment.
   3. Any discussions of the abuse between the offender and the children will take place in the treatment setting.
   4. The offender will minimize physical contact with children and will not initiate physical contact with children (ie, hugs, hand holding, etc.). The offender will not sit next to children in a car, a restaurant, etc. . . .

   Visits home:

   1. The offender will never enter the children’s bedrooms.
   2. The offender should be within eyesight of the chaperone at all times during home visits.
   3. The offender is not to control or dictate children’s activities. . . .

   5. The offender is not to sit next to children or have a child sit on his or her lap.
   6. The offender is not to be involved in the physical hygiene of the children.
   7. The offender is not to criticize or compliment children’s physical appearance (ie, hair, clothes, makeup, etc.), unless specifically asked for his or her opinion by the child.
   8. The offender is not to engage in horseplay or tickling with the children.

*   *   *

From: announcements@christkirk.lumen.co Date: February 27, 2017 at 4:55:22 PM PST Subject: Awaken Idaho conference Reply-To: office@christkirk.com General Awaken Idaho conference Dear Kirkers, As many of you know, Real Life is hosting a conference this coming weekend called Awaken Idaho. Although we have done a number of things jointly with Real Life in the past, and appreciate much of what they have done, this conference is really problematic. Unless there is a pressing reason why you need to be there, we would like to encourage you to stay away for the sake of maintaining peace in the larger body. There are several reasons for this. A couple of the speakers have been openly and deceptively hostile to our church and church community, and this last week one of the speakers even went to the length of attacking private members of our church, posting their pictures online, etc. The other reason is that resources for the conference include material from Lundy Bancroft, author of *Why Does He Do That?* — a man who is obviously and openly heretical. An example of his dicey theology can be found here: http://lundybancroft.com/a-new-spiritual-community/ We are not saying there is nothing of value in the conference or materials, and we are certainly not trying to start a controversy about this. Rather, we are simply urging you to steer clear. Thanks much. Cordially in Christ, Douglas Wilson, on behalf of the elders

*   *   *

These are the faces of men who defend abuse. In the name of victims everywhere, I say #EnoughIsEnough. Let's #SmashThePatriarchy pic.twitter.com/WKwwxsUx6q

— Natalie Greenfield (@NatalieGfield) February 26, 2017

*   *   *

I was abused by a Christian man and shunned by a Christian church. They used their faith to justify the abuse. The church has work to do.

— Natalie Greenfield (@NatalieGfield) March 6, 2017

Nate Wilson said the controversy has less to do with slavery and everything to do with different world views. “If you believe that the Bible is true in a literal way, you’re not compatible with the secular left.” He said members of Christ Church, despite their claims of having no political agenda, continue to be accused of trying to establish a theocratic society. “There’s this underlying assumption we want to have a dictatorship and start executing people,” said Nate Wilson. (Lewiston Morning Tribune, February 6, 2004)

*  *  *

Magistralis

Your Eye Shall Not Pity

Greg Dickison The civil magistrate is the minister of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer (Rom. 13:4). God has not left his civil minister without guidance on how to exercise his office. The Scriptures set forth clear standards of judgment for many offenses. Capital crimes, for example, include premeditated killing (murder), kidnapping, sorcery, bestiality, adultery, homosexuality, and cursing one’s parents (Ex. 21:14; 21:16; 22:18; 22:19; Lev. 20:10; 20:13; Ex. 21:17). In contemporary American jurisprudence, none of these offenses is punishable by death, with the occasional exception of murder. The magistrates have dispensed with God’s standards of justice. Some Christians believe this is an improvement. They would be horrified to think that the “harsh” penalties of the law should still be applied. Sometimes this is the result of the mistaken belief that the Old Testament has no further application after the advent of Christ. This is an exegetical problem. Too often, it is the result of a sinful view of the criminal. This sin is called pity. Pity is a compassionate and sympathetic response to another’s distress. It manifests itself by some action deemed to be beneficent to the one who is the object of the pity. It is characterized by the thought, “There, but for the grace of God, go I.” So what is wrong with that? Why is pity a sin? First, pity is not always a sin. But neither is it always good. The Bible teaches that the moral character of pity depends on the context in which it is exercised. He who has pity on the poor lends to the Lord, and He will pay back what he has given (Prov. 19:17). Pity toward the poor is good. David was condemned by God when he did not take pity on Uriah, a poor man (2 Sam. 12:110). David sought pity when he was under the reproach of his enemies (Ps. 69:20). It would have been a comfort to him in his adversity. If God had not taken pity on His people, we would all be lost in our sins (Is. 63:9). There are also examples of God’s refusal to have pity, as when Jerusalem defiled His sanctuary (Ez. 5:11). Likewise, God included in the law specific prohibitions against the exercise of pity in meting out punishment.

If your brother, the son of your mother, your son or your daughter, the wife of your bosom, or your friend who is as your own soul, secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and serve other gods,”. . . you shall not consent to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him or conceal him; but you shall surely kill him . . . (Deut. 13:6–9). But if anyone hates his neighbor, lies in wait for him, rises against him and strikes him mortally, so that he dies, and he flees to one of these cities, then the elders of his city shall send and bring him from there, and deliver him over to the hand of the avenger of blood, that he may die. Your eye shall not pity him, but you shall put away the guilt of innocent blood from Israel, that it may go well with you (Deut. 19:11–13). If a false witness rises against any man to testify against him of wrongdoing, then both men in the controversy shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges who serve in those days. And the judges shall make diligent inquiry, and indeed, if the witness is a false witness, who has testified falsely against his brother, then you shall do to him as he thought to have done to his brother, so you shall put away the evil person from among you. Your eye shall not pity . . . (Deut. 19.16–19, 21). If two men fight together, and the wife of one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of the one attacking him, and puts out the hand and seizes him by the genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall not pity her (Deut. 25:11, 12).

The tendency of modern American law is to look at whether the particular criminal deserves the penalty involved. Witnesses are brought in (usually the defendant’s mother) to say that Johnny is really a good boy who just got in with the wrong crowd and deserves another chance. Or the judge considers whether the accused is sorry for what he did. Those who side with the victim can go to the other extreme; the prosecutor is allowed to bring in witnesses to testify to what a great guy the victim was, or to the impact of the crime on the victim’s family. Justice becomes a contest to see which side can generate the most pity. God commands the judge to evaluate the crime rather than the criminal. If the crime is one for which God requires death, then death must be the punishment. Your eye shall not pity. Neither is the repentance of the accused relevant to the imposition of the sentence. When it was discovered that Achan had kept some of the spoil of Jericho, Joshua beseeched him to repent. And Achan answered Joshua and said, ‘Indeed, I have sinned against the Lord God of Israel, and this is what I have done . . . (Josh. 7:19–20). After Achan confessed, he was still stoned to death. Thus, the Bible teaches that pity is not an option where God has decided the matter. The magistrate, God’s minister, is to faithfully execute justice according to God’s standard, not man’s. What the Bible does not teach is that the preaching of the gospel and repentance have no place on death row. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a place where there is a more immediate need of grace, and a presentation of the gospel should be the first response of Christians to those who are condemned. But condemnation still must come if we are to be obedient to God’s Word. We must respond to the wrongdoer biblically in both judgment and grace. This means that we must return to an obedience which confines pity within the bounds which God has established for us.

*  *  *

*  *  *

HIS VIEW

Sex abuse and evangelical churches’ reactions

Some parents have long thought that the safest place for their children would be churches and their affiliated schools. Sadly, this has not been the case. In 2007 insurance companies that provide liability for Protestant churches reported they had received on average 260 reports of child sex abuse per year. The Catholic Church’s own figures are 228 “credible accusations” per year. Given that one in four girls are molested nationwide and less than half the states require pastors to report these crimes, the actual numbers in both camps are much higher. Most Protestant abuse is found among the evangelicals/fundamentalists, whose 280,000 decentralized churches and schools are much more difficult to monitor for these infractions. After years of denial and blaming the victims, administrators at ultra-fundamentalist Bob Jones University finally admitted they had serious problems. They had been forced to do so by student activists and alumni. In her in-depth article “By Grace Alone,” Kathryn Joyce tells the story of Bob Jones student Katie Landry, who had been raped by a co-worker just before she came to campus. She found herself confused, conflicted and acting out. Landry’s campus counselor told her that “under every sin is another sin; there is a sin in your life that caused your rape.” This is a typical evangelical diagnosis, which blames the victim for giving into her seducer and/or being flirtatious and wearing provocative clothing. Another evangelical group, the Association of Baptists for World Evangelism, has also been forced to confess its sins. The focus of the investigation was Dr. Donn Ketcham, a charismatic medical missionary in Bangladesh. His 40-year-long history of sexual misdeeds finally came to light in the case of Kim James. James and her family arrived at the Bangladesh mission in 1982. When James was 13, Ketcham cultivated an intimate relationship with her that led, he later admitted, to “a minimum of 10 to 15 sexual encounters.” James recalled saying to herself: “This is the most godly man here. He would not do anything that’s not right.” Back home in Indiana, James confessed to her local pastor that she had sex with Ketcham. Without her parent’s knowledge or permission, two church elders interrogated her. One of them concluded that James suffered from “lust in its most base form, uncontrolled in the body of a spiritually immature woman.” Ketcham was forced to leave the mission because of “immorality,” which was taken to mean adultery, not child sex abuse. Back in Michigan and still practicing medicine, Ketcham was accused of abusing a 6-year-old patient, and he is now serving a life sentence for first-degree sexual assault. Natalie Greenfield tells a frighteningly similar story about her abuse by Jamin Wight. Wright was a student at Greyfriars, the seminary for Moscow’s Christ Church led by my former student, Douglas Wilson. Wight was a boarder in Greenfield’s home, and when she was 13, he groomed her, as she described it, for a two-year sexual relationship. In 2005 the Greenfields finally went to the police and filed charges. Many people in Christ Church wrote character witness letters for Wight, and he served only four months of a two-year sentence. (He also did not have to register as a sex offender.) Wilson and Christ Church elders turned against Greenfield’s father saying he had failed to protect his daughter. Wilson sent Greenfield three successive emails warning her that she had to meet with church elders for repentance. After she refused to meet with them, she was disfellowshipped. Greenfield is now happily married and has four children. She speaks out regularly about child sexual abuse. She also sings her heart out as a blues soloist in various venues, including some of my Unitarian choir performances. Nick Gier taught religion and philosophy at the University of Idaho for 31 years. Read more on Wilson at www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/Wilson.htm.

*  *  *

There were clear indicators in the Ancient Hope report that [Wilson] had serious problems with authority and with treating women with proper respect. . . . Looking back, [Wilson] was clearly a hypocrite, and hypocrites, in the nature of the case, cannot always be detected, but Christ Church leadership overlooked some of the clues for longer than they should have. . . In the end, [Wilson] proved to have a long-standing pattern of evading responsibility, manipulating, and deceiving. . . .¹

“Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.” Philippians 3:2

So if someone with a long enough face to be a dowager from Human Resources tells me that I am no longer permitted, as a cis-white-male, to make any observations or comparisons, metaphorical or otherwise, about any aspect of the female anatomy, guess what I am going to do? Guess what my next blog post is going to be about? Go on, guess. (Blog & Mablog, A Tether Ball in a Tornado, September 18, 2017)

“So if someone with a long enough face to be a dowager from Human Resources tells me that I am no longer permitted, as a cis-white-male, to make any observations or comparisons, metaphorical or otherwise, about any aspect of the female anatomy. . .” (A Tether Ball in a Tornado)

“if . . . a dowager from Human Resources tells me that I am no longer permitted . . . to make any observations or comparisons . . . about any aspect of the female anatomy. . .”

“Credibility? None left. Not a shred of it, if ever there was.” Rod Dreher

107. What steps should one take to avoid plagiarism in ministry?
108. What steps would you take if you discovered that an 18-year old person or older in your congregation engaged in sexual activity with a person under 18 years old.

Question 107

Rachel Miller presents a lot of evidence that the controversial Calvinist pastor Doug Wilson has engaged in serious plagiarism in his new book. I looked at the side-by-side comparisons of pages from Wilson’s book, co-written with Randy Booth, and pages from the works of other writers. It’s astonishing. She’s nailed them. . . . In 2004, Wilson and a different co-author were busted in another plagiarism scandal, in which Canon Press (which is owned by Wilson’s church son) had to withdraw the book. Randy Booth, the co-author of A Justice Primer, is the man Wilson appointed to investigate the way he and his church handled accusations of sexual abuse within the church. Credibility? None left. Not a shred of it, if ever there was. (The American Conservative, Doug Wilson & Serial Plagiarism, December 10, 2015, strike original)

Question 108

“What steps would you take if you discovered that an 18-year old person or older in your congregation engaged in sexual activity with a person under 18 years old.”

“‘Who is like the beast, and who is able to wage war with him?’ There was given to him a mouth speaking arrogant words and blasphemies. . .” Revelation 13:4–6

• Engaging in online disputes with a person formerly under a pastor’s care, particularly when the person has been sexually abused in any way. . . .
• Discussing sensitive pastoral cases online. . . .
• Using unnecessarily provocative language, including derogatory or calloused language about women. Referring to certain women as “small breasted biddies” or “lumberjack dykes” is not likely to serve an edifying purpose in this context. We note that this language has caused a good deal of anguish among pastors and elders of CREC churches who would otherwise be supportive of Pastor Wilson’s ministry. Pastors should be careful not to give women reasons to avoid seeking help from the church. Instead, we should make it clear that the church is a place where all people are treated with honor and respect, and where victims can find grace. . . . (PMR 18, emphasis original)

So if someone with a long enough face to be a dowager from Human Resources tells me that I am no longer permitted, as a cis-white-male, to make any observations or comparisons, metaphorical or otherwise, about any aspect of the female anatomy, guess what I am going to do? Guess what my next blog post is going to be about? Go on, guess. And don’t bother trying to tell me that I am being a troubler of Israel. That is what Ahab said to Elijah. Right. The guy who imported all the idols and brought the wrath of Heaven down on his nation, he is the one who wanted to pretend that the man who opposed it all from the beginning should take responsibility. (Blog & Mablog, A Tether Ball in a Tornado, September 18, 2017)

Deweaponization of Gog

[caption id="attachment_33614" align="alignright" width="300"]Medieval mace (pic not in report).[/caption]But when it comes to matters such as the Sitler and Wight cases, especially when victims are involved, an entirely different voice needs to be heard — one clad not in battle regalia, but in a humble linen tunic. Not only is this glorifying to God and the right thing to do, it is a kindness to victims, as well as to internet onlookers, who may already be confused by the allegations, and who will likely become even more confused by pastoral responses made with sword and mace. Had biblical humility and prudence been placed more to the fore — and that is what our suggestions are trying to express — we believe it would have placed Pastor Wilson and the entire controversy on a higher road. (PMR 18)

So if someone with a long enough face to be a dowager from Human Resources tells me that I am no longer permitted, as a cis-white-male, to make any observations or comparisons, metaphorical or otherwise, about any aspect of the female anatomy, guess what I am going to do? Guess what my next blog post is going to be about? (A Tether Ball in a Tornado)

“O Gog”