May the truth come to light.

Looks like this website has been going for at least 10 years, Dee. The earliest electronic timestamped entry in the Court Documents section goes back to March 11, 2005. Providential timing on it gaining notice, though …

http://sitler.moscowid.net/2005/03/11/

I’d like to point everyone to this document. I was concerned that the locals in Moscow, ID/Pullman, WA were being kept in the dark. It’s an editorial from the local paper.

http://sitler.moscowid.net/2015/09/05/moscow-pullman-daily-news-our-view-evidence-shows-sitler-is-a-clear-danger-to-his-own-child/

All, take a look at this web page…. We’re there is smoke…..
http://dougsplotch.net/dougspeak.htm

The site also has the wedding video!!

@ dee:
I like “discernment Divas”…. That is actually a compliment…

Oh & P.S> Cautiously optimistic about my little Darcey dog whose colour is better. Results of more blood tests on Weds. Pray for new red cells, & for me to just get better at dealing with the health uncertainties of having older animals.

@ Beakerj:
Prayers for Darcey.

@ dee:
Gee, I’m glad I’m not on twitter. I could make an incredible parody account, but I’d get myself in trouble. Oh well.

dee wrote:

@ Mae:
You know what bugged me, Katie was nervous when meeting Steven’s mother. Little does she realize that she was their supposed ticket out of trouble. I believe that she was used.

Yes she was. The mother I law, came off (even to Katie) as going after what she wanted, and determined at that.
I checked out the MIL’s ETSY page too. Wouldn’t hurt if people knew Not to buy jewelry from this women.

XianJaneway wrote:

The site also has the wedding video!!

I started watching it, but fast forwarded to Wilson’s prayer after the ceremony. I didn’t hear him pray for the union to produce children, but it may have been somewhere else in the ceremony. I skipped over a lot. Just couldn’t stomach it.

@ dee:

“Poo Fighters”

This is typical, given his view (and the view of many, many Calvinistas) that satiric polemics is justifiable conversation and debate tactic: see “A Serrated Edge: A Brief Defense of Biblical Satire and Trinitarian Skylarking,” tragically sold on Amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591280109/ref=s9_psimh_gw_p14_d0_i1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=desktop-1&pf_rd_r=01WPY1NWJCBVEFAJH2D8&pf_rd_t=36701&pf_rd_p=2079475242&pf_rd_i=desktop

@ BeenThereDoneThat:
I don’t have the stomach to watch, but I’ve been told it’s the opening prayer.

@ GovPappy:

I really liked your replies to Dougalicious. It looks as though he didn’t reply back to those tweets of yours.

@ Daisy:
He probably won’t. He doesn’t have to. He is Douglas Effing Wilson, of Christ Kirk. I’m simply a Meadow Muffin.

@ dee:

You have one more name that I say with compassion. I call you My East Coast Mom!!!

I also noted two things from the wedding video a propos of …nothing too important.

1. There aren’t that many guests – the church isn’t even half full.
2. What’s with the hymns? Entire congregation singing in four part harmony which they clearly have learned by heart (and are they even using words or do they know them by heart too). Is this corporate worship CC-style?

So that would be 3 things

dee wrote:

Pedophile Hustler

At this point, the average bystander discerns that Doug would have no need to resort to derogatory epithets if he were not complicit in the matter

May wrote:

2. What’s with the hymns? Entire congregation singing in four part harmony which they clearly have learned by heart (and are they even using words or do they know them by heart too). Is this corporate worship CC-style?

While less common nowadays, I find classic hymns sung in multi-part harmony to really add to the act of worship (of which singing is just one expression). This would not be out of place in some old Baptist churches. Now, if it looked like the congregation of Doug’s church had rehearsed beforehand – that would be weird.

dee wrote:

Doug Wilson just called us *poo fighters* on twitter.

When I lived in Pullman and Moscow, we’d sometimes have conversations about the multiple evangelical “leaders” who seemed they vying to become the “Pope of the Palouse.” [The farming region around those towns is often called “the Palouse,” pronounced approximately puh-LEWSS.]

Seems like Mr Wilson is now the “Pope of Letting Poo Loose.”

Maybe it all has to do with not getting enough of a power-o-phile fix … one ends up going all scatalogical in one’s utterances, eh?

What a revelation.

@ Nick Bulbeck:

Perhaps it’s self-incriminating . . . they’re fighting the Poo of Doug Wilson.

Elizabeth Lee wrote:

It looks to me like the website has been going since January 2014. I looked up the domain registration for moscowid.net. I think the website owner just used the dates for when actual documents were created or published. It’s not that hard to do.

I also wondered if it had been in “private” mode until ready for launch, but it seems a well-planned site to have prepared it with timelines and timestamps that way.

May wrote:

What’s with the hymns?

Churches affiliated with Federal Vision have Psalm sings where they sing like this out of a metrical Psalter. I think that certain hymns in the Trinity hymnal are also considered kosher, IIRC. Actually, this is one of the things I like, but I like old-fashioned hymn singing, and especially singing the scripture.

dee wrote:

Doug Wilson just called us *poo fighters* on twitter.

If it’s of any comfort to you, Dee, I’ve been called worse names than that where I work.

dee wrote:

Making it up to JA’s and driving down to Moscow to catch a *kirk* service when Meadow Muffin is in residence

You are one brave woman for wanting to attend that church.

@ dee:
None of those sound Gospel™ enough, Dee – You have no career as a pastor.

@ dee:

That would be a nice trip.

dee wrote:

@ Sarah Roorda:
I have listened to it. It was in an opening prayer by another older man who appeared to read the words. Doug is in charge of that church and anything that goes on in the service is approved by him. If he claims he had nothing to do with it, I would ask him point blank-does he or does he not agree with the prayer?

Having one of his Elders(TM) do it gives him Plausible Deniability.

Chemie wrote:

While less common nowadays, I find classic hymns sung in multi-part harmony to really add to the act of worship (of which singing is just one expression). This would not be out of place in some old Baptist churches. Now, if it looked like the congregation of Doug’s church had rehearsed beforehand – that would be weird.

Churches in my part of rural Kentucky still sing hymns in 4 part harmony (soprano, alto, Britons, and bass). But, church hymns are almost never sung at weddings. Music for weddings are usually from the more secular arena.

dee wrote:

Thank you for the laugh. I now have a goal of a West Coast trip. Making it up to JA’s and driving down to Moscow to catch a *kirk* service when Meadow Muffin is in residence. Ann come?

I wanna go, too! My hair is so short it will give DW a seizure!

dee wrote:

He has theorized that 6 inches ought to do it to stay biblical.
http://dougwils.com/s8-expository/what-nature-teaches.html
It should not surprised him that folks think that odd. I would love to sit down and talk with him face to face.

I think people like this take the Bible the wrong way, or apply it the wrong way, and so it looks ridiculous.

I do feel that some of the principles in the Bible were meant for all time, like loving your neighbor as yourself and so on.

However, I don’t think things like hair length, which is bound by culture, and which may be mentioned in some letter in the New Testament to some church 2,000 years ago, is necessarily meant to be binding on all people in every local church in every nation.

I’m guessing most of these instructions by Paul were only addressed at all to start with because churches at the time had specific questions and concerns they were wondering about, and hair length may have been a big to-do in some ancient city back then.

It’s not really an issue for us in 2015 United States.

On that same page, Wilson says this about men:

If a man has short hair, and prays in church with a baseball cap on, he is violating the intent of this passage—even though he has short hair.

After reading that, I am reminded of this comment by Jesus (from Matthew 23):

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law:
justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others.

24 “You blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!

I think hair length on men and women is likely of a low concern for God, as compared to other things in life. Possibly, I’m just guessing.

@ GovPappy:
There’s another man named Wilson who treats sex offenders. Pretty sure now that the Wilson mentioned in the Progress Report is NOT Doug Wilson. Nevertheless, IMO, the letter is important to understand that the court had Sitler’s own disclosures in evidence, not just, as Doug Wilson claims, the prosecutor’s characterization of the polygraph.

@ BeenThereDoneThat:
The proper phrase, especially in this context, is: “Bless his little heart . . ..” or “Bless his itty bitty heart . . ..” The latter may be more appropriate. An alternative would be “Bless his little bitty black heart!” And that is not a racial comment, but a sin condition comment.

Dee, he has admitted that you are fighting the BS that is his theology and endorsement of a naive young person marrying a pedophile. A “Poo Fighter” fights the poo from DW and the Kirk, as in poo meaning bull puckeys.

“Seems like Mr Wilson is now the “Pope of Letting Poo Loose.”

I’ve always thought of him as the Mullah of Moscow.

@ An Attorney:
Well, I just have to admire Wilson’s stick-to-it-ness. God love him. 🙂

Sometimes we just need a laugh (not the the topic is always funny but the way it is visualized can be). Stop by https://crecmemes.wordpress.com/2015/09/07/and-by-the-way/
to see the Kirk portrayed accurately. It is one of my favorite places to visit.
Rose Huskey

@ William:

Does he really think “poo fighters” qualifies as satire? I have no problem with Christians using satire, but…”poo fighters”? That’s not satire. It’s just an insult. And a really lame one at that.

Velour wrote:

I could not find that DW’s church is part of larger Presbyterian organization that has oversight over them. Why are they claiming “Presbyterian denomination”?

Doug Wilson founded the Confederation of Reformed Evangelical Churches which is now known as the *Communion* of Reformed Evangelical Churches. He is the head of the denomination, and there is no oversight body as in the PCA or OPC or EPC or ECO or PCUSA. Doug Wilson is the Pope. He has various Cardinals, including Peter Leithart who was not disciplined by the PCA and remains, AFAIK, a teaching elder in the PCA. Another Cardinal is James Jordan, and I do not know if he is affiliated with a Presbyterian denomination. I doubt it. Their College of Cardinals is in Birmingham is called Trinity House or somesuch. My information is several years old, and they have a habit of renaming their associations as well as reworking Reformed theology. There is quite a cast of interesting characters of whom Wilson is only one.

@ dee:

Pedophile Hustler

He’s done it again. I know I’ve said this before, but almost every time I read anything by Wilson, there’s at least one sentence where I honestly have no idea what he’s talking about. What is “pedophile hustler” even supposed to mean?

@ Hester:

Agree entirely!

Gram3 wrote:

Doug Wilson founded the Confederation of Reformed Evangelical Churches which is now known as the *Communion* of Reformed Evangelical Churches. He is the head of the denomination, and there is no oversight body as in the PCA or OPC or EPC or ECO or PCUSA

Thanks, Gram3, for explaining the history of Wilson’s church.

My first tip-off that they couldn’t possibly belong to the Presbyterian denomination/organization is that the national organizations have child sexual abuse prevention policies and trainings and wouldn’t handle a case of this seriousness the way Wilson has done.

dee wrote:

William wrote:
And now, the brand new name unveiling. From Doug Wilson himself.
Pedophile Hustler

I think that title belongs completely to Doug Wilson.

@ mirele:
Thanks. I believe Sitler’s dad is an elder at Holy Trinity CREC. So, Sitler gets kicked out of Emanuel OPC in 2005 and Holy Trinity Kirk starts up in 2007 with Steve Sitler’s dad as an elder. Ed Iverson was in Fallon, NV until he moved to Moscow about 2004. I wonder if Iverson had anything to do with launching Holy Trinity CREC in Colville after Steve Sitler got kicked out of Emanuel OPC? Was Iverson an apostle sent out from Moscow to “plant” Holy Trinity CREC? I wonder.

Gram3 wrote:

a young woman was used to “cure” a young man of pedophilia

Plainly stated.

@ The Deebs & others who blog:

Keep the heat turned up. You women of valor (Eishet Chayil) are making it increasingly difficult for these guys to operate with impunity.

Nancy2 wrote:

Jared Moore was also one of the nominees for SBC president last year. IIRC, he finished third in a field of three.

How depressing is that? I wonder how many pewpeons in the SBC know that there are men in leadership who think it is perfectly fine for a pastor to officiate at the wedding of a convicted pedophile? How many pewpeons know that there are men in leadership who think that people who are outraged by this are deniers of the Gospel and the power of the Resurrection? What kind of theology are they teaching at SBTS? Jesus rising from the dead cures pedophilia? This sounds like Word Faith teaching more than Southern Baptist Evangelical teaching.

A frequent complaint here is the failure of pastors to report paedophiles when they are discovered. I don’t know a great deal about Wilson except he was an articulate opponent of Christopher Hitchens (where are the British Christians capable of this?!!). (I’ve read him from time to time – interesting but sometimes opinionated, sometimes I agree, sometimes not, culturally he is very distant.) Having quickly perused the relevant parts of Wilson’s blog, at least he ensured Sitler was reported immediately when his crimes came to light. Shouldn’t credit be given where credit is due?

It also would appear that 10 years ago some internet commentators and reporters were gunning for him over his overall theology (probably patriarchy) and were using Sitler as a means to this end, regardless of the damage this did to the families of the victims. I can’t altogether blame Wilson in the light of this for being against ‘trial by internet’. It looks as though some people want to portray Wilson in the worst possible light, for example, by using truncated quotations. This is hardly objective.

Now Wilson may have been crassly naive in presiding over Sitler’s marriage. He may have been party to something that was unwise (understatement of the year) from the beginning. But to the extent that this was wrong, it is down primarily to those who got married and the parents. If Wilson started laying down who could or could not get married, would he then be accused of authoritarianism? My overall point is I get the impression that Wilson could never do anything right.

I don’t think though he is ever likely to realise he may have taken in or change his views if the criticism this time round lacks the objectivity it did last time round.

This is obviously an issue where feelings run high, but the anger of man does not work the righteousness of God (a verse that has blessed me many a time in my Christian experience of necessity). Like Wilson’s mates at TeamPyro with whom I have fallen out of sympathy (by and large), criticism must be fair criticism. It’s not fair if it is a distortion of what they actually say, but more to the point it won’t do any good, it will never effect change where this is necessary.

I’m glad I’m not a pastor. Just what should a church do with a repentant paedophile? Somehow balance the continued protection of children as the top priority with not making this sin the unforgivable sin. Avoid gullibility, but not treat them as lepers. Who said the Christian life is easy.

(Strange–for months this website has been assigning me an Australian flag, but finally I get a Taiwan one. I’ve never been to Oz.)

I also have to say that ‘Pedophile Hustler ‘ & ‘poo fighter’ are the worst insults I’ve ever heard, worst meaning, obviously, the most useless. If you cannot come up with a decent insult your thinking skills are self-proclaimed as limited.

dee wrote:

If you would carefully read my posts on Doug Wilson, you will find that there is much to be concerned about when it comes to Wilson.

Ken –

You don’t have to read very much of Doug Wilson to learn he’s off the rails with regard to his theology. It only took me one book and his smug little blog.

Even if he was, at best, simply being naive in marrying a young woman to a paedophile, why isn’t he now owning up to his massive error of judgement? Instead of a contrite ‘I did the wrong thing’, we are getting excuses, fudges, re-writing the narrative, half-truths, blaming the critics and infantile bickering over Twitter.

Wouldn’t a godly pastor be more honest and actually accept that he had some responsibility for this – a role in overseeing a marriage that has resulted in horrific sin and crime? Forget godly pastor, wouldn’t any normal person be simply horrified at what has happened and be showing some concern for the victim? Yet we have had zero acknowledgement from Douglas that an innocent baby has been violated by his own father.

I confess that I spent way too much time over the weekend reading and commenting at dougwils.com. Here are my not surprising conclusions re: Doug Wilson, Christ Church/Moscow ID, Blog and Mablog, and his handling of the sordid Sitler affair.

1. Mr. Wilson is an insecure cult leader who revels in stirring up controversy so he can engender sympathy and support from his followers. That’s what a cult leaders does.
2. Christ Church, exhibits the characteristics of a cult. Small. Isolated. Ingrown. Inflated sense of importance. Us vs. Them mentality. True defenders of the the true faith.
3. Blog and Mablog is a horrendous piece of pseudo intellectual blather. It exists solely for the purpose of glorifying Mr. Wilson, easing his insecurities, and selling his and his family’s books. There is no useful dialogue with his followers.
4. In the grown up world of church and church leadership, a pastor who would condone and bless the marriage of a 23 year old woman who accepted a proposal on her 2nd date from a convicted serial pedophile on probation for life, would lose his pulpit, and rightfully so.
5. Finally, I will not return to dougwils.com. For me, It is an exercise in futility and not good for my blood pressure.

dee wrote:

And he is roped you into his excuse for his encouragement and endorsement of this marriage

Hardly. But from what I have read, he does field some of the accusations made against him quite well, which means for him to actually listen, criticism needs to be accurate, which sometime it isn’t. PCCC is not my type of language, and I had assumed from the fuss made about it it was something grossly insulting. On reading his piece about it, it was mundane and hardly worth bothering with.

One thing I don’t agree with him is his tendency to equate a free market capitalist system with ‘biblical Christianity’. This has done immense harm imo to the church in the UK (e.g. Victorian Britain). But this is not relevant to the current issue that has arisen, as PCCC is also hardly relevant.

If he has done something morally wrong, he deserves criticism for this, but the focus needs to be on this and not on his other views which may or may not be worth discussing.

Patrice wrote:

servant leader

I’m afraid I think this term is a load of sanctimonious hogwash. I heard stuff about being willing to submit to ‘wise, mature, accountable, godly eldership entrusted with the care of the flock’ in the UK. You could hardly refuse to do that, could you, except behind the well-meant words was a system that robbed you of too much of your Christian liberty, made you dependent on other men, and meant more of a yoke than anything else. Blest be the bind that ties, as it were.

The commitment was all one way, too. You supported them (££££) in return for hour-long sermons in which you had to fight to keep awake. That’s about the closest you would ever get to being the church militant.

The saddest thing of all was that for all the talk of pastoral care, far too many sheep didn’t actually get any. That’s all it was – talk.

Whilst I would admit Douglas Wilson can be interesting and make you think, some of his output is also little more than hot air. A lot of verbiage, not always so much content. Well sometimes it does remind me of the hour-long sermons!

Ken wrote:

Now Wilson may have been crassly naive in presiding over Sitler’s marriage. He may have been party to something that was unwise (understatement of the year) from the beginning. But to the extent that this was wrong, it is down primarily to those who got married and the parents. If Wilson started laying down who could or could not get married, would he then be accused of authoritarianism? My overall point is I get the impression that Wilson could never do anything right.

I agree that the responsibility lies with Katie, her parents, Steven, and his parents. But that does not absolve Wilson of his responsibility in this debacle. To let him off the hook for pastoral malpractice simply is not reasonable. A failure of duty by one person doesn’t make the other person’s actions OK.

Read up on Federal Vision and Reconstructionism before that. Do you realize that Wilson teaches salvation by church membership? 9Marks is nothing compared to Wilson and his cronies. Do you think that marital intimacy is best characterized by “penetrate, conquer, colonize, plant” and that marital intimacy cannot be “an egalitarian pleasuring party?” Those are just the ones that capture Wilsons perverted view of men and women. Are you willing to defend this man just because you agree about patriarchy? These people have split churches, divided families, and have attempted to infiltrate Presbyterian churches. There is nothing commendable in that or their theology.

Please read more about Wilson. The fact that he debated Christopher Hitchens does not make him a hero nor does it erase the other things he has done and continues to do. I really wish you would stop and look at things without your patriarchy lens, because you are parroting the talking points of his allies.

@ Patrice:

If he is going to wield the power of his authoritarian position, he also has to take responsibility for the failures, as he does for the successes. He cannot decide others’ lives for them and blame them only when things go wrong.

After being in an authoritarian cult for 23 years, I never once saw them take responsibility for a failure. Not once. After we parted ways with them, my father recited to me, “Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan.”

Rose Huskey wrote:

“This kind of controversy gives fuller meaning to the communion of opprobrium that faithful ministers of every age share. Jesus says that we are to rejoice when people revile us, in part because of the company it puts us in.
…
And Jesus doesn’t say we are to be a little bit glad. He says exceedinHg glad. He says that we are to go around the corner, get out of their sight, and do a little jig. In this case, Nancy — a Puritan jewel — celebrated by buying me a nice bottle of Laphroaig.”

Where’s my barf bag?

I gotta get to bed before this stuff drives me nuts…

@ Rose Huskey:
Because whenever we’re criticized, we get to claim Jesus’ promise of blessing for being persecuted.

BS.

Ken wrote:

It also would appear that 10 years ago some internet commentators and reporters were gunning for him over his overall theology (probably patriarchy) and were using Sitler as a means to this end, regardless of the damage this did to the families of the victims.

FWIW, I was “gunning” for Wilson when I still had “complementarian” views. And that was the time when I had the most jaw-dropping exchanges with people over his aberrant theology of which patriarchy is merely a part. The excuses you are making for Wilson are right out of his playbook. The man is a professional victim who recruits allies by painting himself as being persecuted for righteousness’ sake and/or being the hero in the battle against “the world” and “debauched culture.” He does not preach the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ but rather salvation by baptism. Please do some more research about Wilson and his cronies. Start with Peter Leithart or James Jordan. Or the Theopolis Institute in Birmingham, AL. I was correct when I said before that they might have changed the name of their think tank, Trinity House. The name Theopolis should give you some idea of how they view the church.

Serving Kids In Japan wrote:

Closing ranks, are we? Shockeroo…

Read it and the comments supporting Bayly and Wilson. It appears to me that these people will protect one another with absolutely no concern, or even recognition, for those who are hurt or destroyed by their teachings. Forgive the sinner, blame those who have been sinned against.

@ Rose Huskey:

The hubris of that most recent blog post by Wilson is breath-taking.

Mara wrote:

I think he knows he’s wearing out terms like ‘shrill’, ‘female-dog goddess of ________’ (fill in the blank), and other negative terms for females, etc

Regarding Wilson:

Pastors: Stop Disrespecting Women With Your Chauvinistic Name-Calling
https://timfall.wordpress.com/2015/02/26/pastors-stop-disrespecting-women-with-your-chauvinistic-name-calling/

Wilson quote:

and the clueless women who blindly liked Wilkin’s article on Facebook, but who are themselves pushy broads, twinkies in tight tops, or waifs with manga eyes.

Patrice wrote (quoting Ken):

If Wilson started laying down who could or could not get married, would he then be accused of authoritarianism?

How many people honestly think a 23 year old woman marrying a known pedophile is a good idea?

How many people honestly would want their 23 year old daughter (if they had one) marrying a known pedophile?

Some of the only people defending this are Doug Wilson supporters.

If another pastor, especially one not of their church or favored theology, had supported this, how many of the guys defending Wilson would be defending this other person?

If Rev Andy Stanley or liberal-ish Christian Rob Bell had encouraged or officiated at a wedding of a woman marrying a known pedo, would these same guys defending Wilson defend Stanley or Bell? My guess if most likely no, they wouldn’t.

It’s more about defending their pet preacher or favorite brand of theology/ doctrine than it is being honest about things, or caring about what happens to people (such as Katie and her infant son).

@ NJ:

I liked this comment on his blog post:

“Well, it’s just wonderful to know you’re doing okay.

However, some of us are a little more concerned about how Sitler’s infant son is doing.

You know, the actual victim here.”

Daisy wrote:

Wilson quote:
and the clueless women who blindly liked Wilkin’s article on Facebook, but who are themselves pushy broads, twinkies in tight tops, or waifs with manga eyes.

Or we could talk about those ignorant men who blindly suck every word from Wilson, but who are themselves aggressive f**ks, Mr Marshmallows, or stringy metro-sexuals with beady little eyes and soul patches.

It’s easy to be nasty. Every school-yard bully does it.

Gram3 wrote:

The fact that he debated Christopher Hitchens does not make him a hero nor does it erase the other things he has done and continues to do.

I’ve not read or listened to those debates myself.

I read conflicting reports on this by people who have heard the debates. The Christian sites I’ve been to, the Christians say that Wilson mopped the floor with the atheist.

I was on an atheist site a couple of days ago where the atheists say Wilson failed and the atheist (Hitchens) beat Wilson.

Both sides (Christian v. atheist) have widely diverging views of who the debate winner was, which I found kind of funny.

Velour wrote:

One has to wonder what happened in Katie’s background where she would agree to marry a guy on the second date and a that a pedophile sounded like the *best she could do*. Why didn’t she think she was worthy of better?

Pastor of the Kirk ordered her to under pain of Hellfire?

(It’s like the women who marry guys in prison. There is something seriously damaged in them as women that they are not willing to sit with and look at.)

I don’t know what the actual psych name of that is, but the most descriptive non-psych term is “Harley Quinn Syndrome”.

JYJames wrote:

Gram3 wrote:

a young woman was used to “cure” a young man of pedophilia

Plainly stated.

Well, in the Victorian era sex with a virgin was supposed to cure syphilis; that’s why child prostitutes were so popular among Proper Respectable Victorian Men.

And in Africa during the AIDS epidemic, sex with a virgin (the younger the better) was supposed to cure AIDS…

Nancy2 wrote:

Read it and the comments supporting Bayly and Wilson.

They have a bromance.

Wilson and Bayly
https://crecmemes.wordpress.com/2015/01/27/wilson-and-bayly/

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Rose Huskey wrote:
Not a word about the baby. Not a word about taking responsibility for his part in this mess. Not a word of contrition.
Because “IT’S ALL ABOUT MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!”

I completely agree.. It is all about him…. It is also clear that he is trying to distance himself from his actions… What is shocking is all the people that still support and follow Douglas Wilson.
Hey Mr. Wilson, I agree with the overall effort of this blog (WW), to look out for the victims of Spiritual and physical abuse, for which you are a clear perpetrate.. And guess what, I am a 55 year old, professional man ( and you can not bully, or put me down like the weaker ones you prey on….. I am not a “pushy broad, twinkies in tight tops, or waifs with manga eyes” And unlike you that is celebrating with a bottle of whiskey (or what ever spirit you are referring to), I am grieving for that male infant and damage that has been done to the name of Christ….

Daisy wrote:

I think he enjoys playing the role of wordsmith.

Patrice wrote:

When he thinks he’s intelligent, then every word drips depth. When he declares something beautiful, then yessiree it’s not only that but the bestest most beautifulest in all the land.

Jeffrey wrote:

And unlike you that is celebrating with a bottle of whiskey

How much whiskey does it take to make an “intelligent” “wordsmith” like Doug Wilson? I know I’m being snarky, but I couldn’t help but make the connection.

I wonder what Wilson and Bayly would say if you asked them to answer simply yes or no — with no qualifications — to the following question.

Would you gladly encourage your daughter to marry a convicted pedophile?

I’ll bet you they either would refuse to answer, or obfuscate entirely.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Just like Josef Stalin and Elron Hubbard…

Yep! Exactly.

Daisy wrote:

Wilson’s writing style bothers me.
Aside from the fact he doesn’t apologize, take responsibility, or own up to his part in the Sitler situation, he comes across as liking to hear the sound of his own voice. He seems to think of himself as being very clever.
I think he enjoys playing the role of wordsmith.

Oh, Daisy, you’re giving me a flashback to this one infamous local fanboy and wannabe writer. Locally infamous as a pathological motormouth in passionate love with his own voice and words, to the point his name got used as a verb meaning “to be cornered by a pathological nonstop talker”.

I once had the misfortune of trying to edit his writing. Every sentence oozed “See How Clever I Am?”, every paragraph (often literally) ending in “…” (as in “But Little Did They Know…”) and the screaming rage of a three-year-old if your “editing” dared to change a single word.

The guy ended up a Legend in His Own Mind and a total laughingstock to everyone else.

Sarah Roorda wrote:

Tell me the Jamin Wight case and DW’s involvement there (sitting with the accused when the victim was also in the courtroom, trying to get the victim to repent of her “sin”) will be next.

I have not read about the J Wight case, just seen the mention in comments. I can only manage so much at a time… but the bolded part of the comment really stuck out. He tried to get her to repent of “sin” — the “sin” of being the victim of abuse, or the “sin” of somehow being to blame for, or the cause of the abuse? The comment is brief, and implies that his presence in the courtroom was intimidating to the victim, as well as implying support for the abuser. Did I read the comment right, or read more into the comment than was there?

Gram3 wrote:

It is important to remember that purity culture is a shame culture.

You need only one for Guilt but two for Shame — one to commit the sin, the other to find out about it.

Axioms of a Shame Culture:
1) If Nobody finds out about my sin, I Am Not Shamed.
2) Dead Men Tell No Tales.

@ Daisy:

Both sides (Christian v. atheist) have widely diverging views of who the debate winner was

I think that’s usually what happens with debates, which is why I usually don’t watch them. They seem to be of limited usefulness, except maybe to people on the fence. People who’ve already made up their minds only watch them for football purposes (“Go Team [Republican, Democrat, Atheist, Christian, etc.]!”).

dee wrote:

Doug Wilson just called us *poo fighters* on twitter. I am taking screen shots. Proving that I, a low level intelligence in his firmament of brilliance looked up *poo* in a Thesaurus and fond my newest, absolutely favorite insult in the whole wide world
Meadow Muffin!!!!!!

Brings a whole new meaning to the term “Prairie Muffin” which, if I remember right, used to be a term of pride for SAHMs. Maybe I’m remembering wrong. I know it started as a joke, and became a banner, with its own Manifesto, even.

But seeing poo = meadow muffin and making the jump to prairie muffin… in other words, ironically, the Titus 2 movement was all a crock of merde (it’s what we say instead of the ‘s’ word or ‘c’ word to get around the squickiness of the thought of the actual stuff. Did you ever have to deal with a toddler gleefully playing with handfuls of the stuff? That’s the image that comes to mind when I read about this kind of tweet insult, a toddler with Doug Wilson’s face, hands full of poo from an overnight diaper, painting the bedroom wall while waiting to be lifted out of the crib in the morning…).

Or you can go to the German “mist” — which brings a whole new meaning to the phrase “misty meadows”.

@ Hester:

I did listen to one debate several years ago, between two fairly well known personalities, an atheist and a Christian, debating about theism.

I can’t remember who either guy was – the Christian may have been W L Craig? – but anyway, in this particular debate, the atheist did so poorly, I did see atheists on atheists sites admit the Christian was the winner.

The atheists were like, “Wow, our guy did really, really bad.” They seemed pretty embarrassed and felt that particular atheist should not be representing their side anymore. 🙂

So how that works out can be funny too, when one side gets really honest about it and is like, “Our guy blows at debating!!”

I will listen to debates or read transcripts of them with an open mind.

But sometimes, it does seem people have a predisposed view of who they think won in a debate depending on who they favor.

Sara wrote:

IMO, once an “enemy” of Doug’s, always an enemy. And because he’s an enemy who seems to play by his own set of rules, he’s not the kind of enemy most people want to make.

*shrug* He can do that with my name all he wants. Seriously, go ahead, Doug. Be my guest. Scientology did the same thing and 15 years later, that site’s still up but I look prescient in telling people that Scientology is a cult.

mirele wrote:

Seriously, go ahead, Doug. Be my guest. Scientology did the same thing and 15 years later, that site’s still up but I look prescient in telling people that Scientology is a cult.

“Just like Scientology, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”

When your Kirk(TM) and its antics remind people of Scientology, that’s NOT a good sign.

dee wrote:

Let me also say something loud and clear. I am NOT a Doug Wilson hater.

I address my concerns about his actions and how his words appear. I deeply disagree with a number of his beliefs which include silly things like a wife’s hair should be longer than her husband’s hair. He has theorized that 6 inches ought to do it to stay biblical.

http://dougwils.com/s8-expository/what-nature-teaches.html

It should not surprised him that folks think that odd. I would love to sit down and talk with him face to face.

You remind me of the early original Star Trek episode, where something was causing the entire crew to go crazy. The ship, engines turned off, was falling into a star (I think — in any event, facing immanent destruction) and the crew member in control of the engines was musing aloud on issuing regulations regarding how female crew members should style their hair.

refugee wrote:

the responses I’m seeing in defense of the Duggars and Wilson indicate a belief that if you don’t claim that God can and will heal any ill, including the urges of a pedophile, you are a denier of the power of the gospel, and therefore an unbeliever or someone believing a false gospel

I believe every person with any kind of “besetting sin” and/or brokenness can find transformation toward wholeness and godliness in Jesus Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit and the Word of God and the love of the Father. That is a trajectory and a journey, the end state of which finds completion when we are in the presence of Jesus.

Even so, I don’t recall Scripture granting permission (or requirement) to run the equivalent of a theological social experiment on people just to prove that point, especially when full healing in this life is not guaranteed by Scripture — though it is in some toxic theologies — and especially when it is highly likely that others will be directly harmed as a result of our experimenting with their life.

refugee wrote:

hat’s right. I don’t know about SBTS, but the responses I’m seeing in defense of the Duggars and Wilson indicate a belief that if you don’t claim that God can and will heal any ill, including the urges of a pedophile, you are a denier of the power of the gospel, and therefore an unbeliever or someone believing a false gospel.

The Apostle Paul was never healed of his thorn in the flesh . . . maybe that doesn’t count.

dee wrote:

Leila wrote:
Would you gladly encourage your daughter to marry a convicted pedophile?
I’ll bet you they either would refuse to answer, or obfuscate entirely.
————-
(Dee replied):
you ought to write this question on his website. His response would be interesting.

I hate to say it, but some of them might say “yes,” at least under certain conditions (but I’d think the more honest ones would say “well, no”).

As for the “yes” ones.
There was one thread I was following on social media about this story where a Wilson-ite kept referring to Sitler (and guys like him) as a “repented” pedophile.

They wouldn’t advocate a “regular” pedophile marry a young lady, but it’s all good if the pedo is a repented pedo, because hey, aren’t all Christians repented ____ (fill in the blank with whatever other sin).

It’s very frustrating they don’t grasp the seriousness of this. I do understand the Bible teaches all people are sinners, and that God will and can forgive and extends grace.

However, that does not mean you do things such as run around minimizing people’s problems (sins), nor does it mean you let your guard down and let a pedophile marry a woman and have kids with her.

Also, God forgiving folks and granting grace, or folks repenting, does not mean they will not relapse.
(Even the Apostle Paul said in one letter he still sometimes did wrong, and knowing that it was wrong.)

Some Christians are so naive. You can get away with any sin with them, no matter how heinous, and just slap the word “repented” in front of it, and they will give you free pass after free pass.

I think Jesus was addressing this issue in part (the believer’s tendency to be naive) when he said,

“…And his master praised the unrighteous manager because he had acted shrewdly; for the sons of this age are more shrewd in relation to their own kind than the sons of light.” (Luke 16:8)

Sometimes the Non-Christians of the world (the unrepentant) are more wise than Christians. They see people and situations for what they really are, not what they want for them to be.

Daisy wrote:

Sometimes the Non-Christians of the world (the unrepentant) are more wise than Christians. They see people and situations for what they really are, not what they want for them to be.

Isn’t that the original meaning of “Discernment”?

Some years ago in an Internet Monk comment thread regarding Christians and the Arts (and the predominance of Jesus Junk), one commenter related a private revelation that Christians had dropped the ball so bad, He was removing his mantle from them and placing it upon secular creative types; henceforth, secular artists/writers/moviemakers would begin to say what God wanted said.

Could something similar be happening with Discernment?

refugee wrote:

I don’t know about SBTS, but the responses I’m seeing in defense of the Duggars and Wilson indicate a belief that if you don’t claim that God can and will heal any ill, including the urges of a pedophile, you are a denier of the power of the gospel, and therefore an unbeliever or someone believing a false gospel.

And what happens if after going on record with that, YOU don’t get healed? What do you do then? Fake it?

dee wrote:

refugee wrote:

the crew member in control of the engines was musing aloud on issuing regulations regarding how female crew members should style their hair.

I forget that episode . I will have to locate it.

I think it’s titled “Naked Time”.

Dee, feel free to remove this if it isn’t allowed, but I wrote a blog post this past summer on how flabbergasted I was at the hypocrisy of demanding that God heal all marriages, but not heal cancer/car wrecks/Alzheimer’s/paralysis etc: http://iprefercaptain.com/2015/04/physical-healing-vs-marital-healing/

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

As did Elron Hubbard and David Miscavage.

Sometimes I wonder if psychology is too frightening for idealists——looking at “what is” about us humans, a full-length mirror without the warm soft lighting of “how we could be if…”

Or maybe it’s mostly the narcissistic types who can’t bear it. I don’t know.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

And what happens if after going on record with that, YOU don’t get healed? What do you do then? Fake it?

Yes, that is exactly what you do if you can. In the case of addiction of various sorts, people can probably hide that for awhile. What they forget is that God does not make guarantees like that, and when God does heal people, he generally uses means to do that. Like doctors, nurses, psychologists, etc.

Toby Sumpter is the pastor of Trinity Reformed Church.
T.R. was originally a daughter church plant of Christ Church pastored by Peter Leithardt. Pastor Leithardt actually has academic training in a recognized seminary. He was kicked to the curb a couple of years ago and Toby took his place.

(Trinity Reform grew out of from Christ Church following the “casino scandal” which involved a number of New Saint Andrews boys, their version of a gambling den with alcohol, drugs, and yes some girls. Doug’s fear that Christ Church would lose a significant number of the congregation which to the planing of a daughter church in town. T.R. is a clone of Christ Church – and don’t think for a moment they are autonomous. Toby is a graduate of Greyfriars Hall and Erskine Theological Seminary.

If anyone would like further information on the Jamin Wight story (another sexual predator) it is best heard through the survivor herself.
http://natalierose-livewithpassion.blogspot.com/
She is brave, honest, and strong.
Jamin Wight is a nasty piece of work. You can learn all you would ever want to know about him through the Idaho Court Repository where criminal records are kept. the site is free and has simple-to-follow directions.
https://www.idcourts.us/repository/start.do
when you get to the name search fill in; last name Wight
first name; Jamin
Chose Latah from the downward scrolling tab (that’s our county)
and click on ROA when the new page opens up.
You can do the same routine for Steve Sitler.
hope this helps.
Rose

@ Rose Huskey:

This was considered a scandal?! Hello–have these guys even BEEN to Scotland?

Gram3 wrote:

It is totally a Word Faith notion that repentance means automatic healing, whether the problem is sin, emotional issues or mental issues or physical issues. Name It and Claim It. The fact is that God does not make guarantees like that, and that is not what the orthodox view of salvation and sanctification is.

I collected as many Christian books as I could on recovery from spiritual abuse and toxic ministry, then did an informal “content analysis” on several topics. This was a few years ago, but the three most frequently mentioned core non-orthodox (i.e., heretical) beliefs and practices in Christian “cults” and high-demand religious systems were:

* Authoritarian leadership and some variation on the Shepherding Movement where leaders act as a mediator between disciples and God, and also dictate to them actions that should be within the believer’s own discernment and decision making.

* Word of Faith, with its magical mantras of Name-It-And-Claim-It — pray it, say it, don’t delay it — or conceive it, believe it, receive it.

* Prosperity gospel, where God’s blessing on you/your ministry is supposedly validated with wealth.

And, advocates of such false doctrines may try to label them as “biblical,” what often happens is just “biblicizing” — citing Bible words and esoteric theological theories to make it sound biblical and therefore legitimate.

If nothing else, this particular situation offers a sort of “master class” in manipulation of theology and God’s people.

If you’re interested in a relatively comprehensive chronological list of Christian books on spiritual abuse recovery from 1975-2012, check out this link:

https://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/chronology-of-books-on-spiritual-abuse-and-recovery/

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
You are a Suppressive Person!

Daisy wrote:

Also, have you heard of the new Christian movie “War Room”?

Only recently. Just the fact it’s plugged as a CHRISTIAN(TM) movie is enough for me to stay far, far away.

Some are criticizing it because it sends the dangerous message that women in abusive marriages can just pray the abuse away.

Not surprised.

@Daisy and Headless Unicorn Guy – I thought I was one of the few who can’t stand all the cheese in Christian movies. I was bored over the weekend so I watched “God’s Not Dead” on Amazon Prime, and was in such a bad mood afterwards because of all the cliches and trite things in the movie (e.g. a guy from China becomes a Christian and the first thing he does is attend a Newsboys concert? Guess the film was funded by the Newsboys?)

Former CLC’er wrote:

I thought I was one of the few who can’t stand all the cheese in Christian movies.

I LOVE the cheese in Christian movies. But if you want a serious Christian film, try Robert Duvall’s “The Apostle.”

The writers of “God’s not Dead” had obviously never darkened the door of a real-world philosophy class, which gave the whole thing the feel of a Jack Chick tract. Which I loved. Can’t wait for the sequel, and am only sorry they’re not titling it “God’s 2 Dead”!

refugee wrote:

That’s the tone of Credenda Agenda (a magazine), and a number of students I’ve met from NSA. Self-congratulatory. Liking the sound of their own voices. (My dad used to call it “liking the smell of their own farts”.)

South Park called it “madly in love with the smell of their own farts”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMTkedIUX8U

Nancy2 wrote:

Daisy wrote:

Also, have you heard of the new Christian movie “War Room”?

Check out the article on pathos.com evangelical channel: “Genie Jesus and the War Room Problem”, by John Mark N. Reynolds.

Can you provide a link/URL?

@ brad/futuristguy:
I have family members who are the “name it and claim it” group. They always tell me that God can heal my health problems. I just have to pray enough. They are missing the point here. Yes, God can heal my health problems, but on the other hand, I have learned so much because of what I have gone through physically. I wouldn’t be the person I am today if I had not gone through these health problems. God gives me the grace to go through each and every one of them and to be able to share with others what God has done for me.

Then if you want the prosperity message, look no further than Joel Osteen. His dad was a great man of faith, good Christian and had a good church. But it all changed when Joel Osteen took it over.

@ brad/futuristguy:
Interesting to me that the guys defending the idea that marriage is a “cure” for lust of any kind do not seem to take into account the possibility that part of mortifying the flesh for a pedophile might look like staying unmarried so as not to bring grief to someone else. I just don’t see how bringing someone else into the problem makes the problem any smaller but rather ISTM that would compound the problem itself. Unless there is a copious amount of magical thinking on the part of these self-professed Reformed pastors.

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
The director also made “Fireproof.” Makes me want to move to a galaxy far, far away, or something like.

Here are a couple of screenshots from a long defunct blog, first from page 85 of Doug Wilson’s book ‘Fidelity’:

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/_f-dp6o9IOmo/SHyn3Rmrj-I/AAAAAAAAAwE/KZAAPfA92W4/85.jpg

Second from the letter to the judge where he urges him to apply ‘measured and limited’ sanctions:

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_f-dp6o9IOmo/SHyn83SjfGI/AAAAAAAAAwM/Cp09Zl8MUSk/Urge.jpg

Former CLC’er wrote:

@Daisy and Headless Unicorn Guy – I thought I was one of the few who can’t stand all the cheese in Christian movies. I was bored over the weekend so I watched “God’s Not Dead” on Amazon Prime, and was in such a bad mood afterwards because of all the cliches and trite things in the movie (e.g. a guy from China becomes a Christian and the first thing he does is attend a Newsboys concert? Guess the film was funded by the Newsboys?)

Thankfully, I’ve never seen any of these movies.
We have a local Christian group that promotes viewing these movies, once a month, for FREE, at a local community college. Makes me cringe….I actually kind of hope no one shows up for it.

@ Rose Huskey:
This part by Natalie Rose caught my eye, because we’ve discussed misuse of “church discipline” quite a bit:
“Years ago, I received letters from the church after I left telling me I was under church discipline and could no longer take communion there, meanwhile my abuser was welcomed back into the fold with open, loving arms…And people wonder why I left.”
So they disciplined and excommunicated the “woman” who was 13-16 y.o. and welcomed the “boy” who was 23-26, because he seemed penitent and she seemed “bitter”?
Is there any documentation about the “discipline” aspect? (just in case the Kirk claims she’s just a lying, slandering gossip)

harley wrote:

I wouldn’t be the person I am today if I had not gone through these health problems. God gives me the grace to go through each and every one of them and to be able to share with others what God has done for me.

Lack of empathy is one of the major problems demonstrated by people in legalistic systems and especially by authoritarian leaders. And the “spiritual DNA” in Word of Faith teachings inherently leads to having no compassion for those who are afflicted by suffering. How much less Christlike can one get than having no compassion … other than having no conscience?

The name-it-and-claim-it heresy assumes that all effects of the Fall are eradicated, so if we have illness, “besetting sins,” any kind of grievous suffering or brokenness, it *must* be because we just don’t believe God at His Word literally enough or hard enough or long enough. Easier to fake wellness than to jump over the impossible high bar they set for everyone.

And I think this goes to what Gram3 was commenting on with marriage being seen as the cure to any/all forms of sexual lust — another form of “magical thinking” with “fix-it formulas.”

Daisy wrote:

They think if an abused wife just prays more or submit more to the abusive husband, the marriage will be restored.

This is part of the message I got from the movie War Room this past weekend.

@ Dave A A:
I wrote this hastily, as well, and ended up gossiping I don’t know what the Kirk’s reasons for disciplining the victim were, and for all I know they’ve already apologized. Likely it’s all been clarified on the Mablog, if I do some research.

Dave A A wrote:

So they disciplined and excommunicated the “woman” who was 13-16 y.o. and welcomed the “boy” who was 23-26, because he seemed penitent and she seemed “bitter”?

Not only that, but in on one page I read that quoted her, she said her sexual abuse by the older guy was characterized by the church as being “fornication.”

@ Gram3:
I’m just curious what chapter and verse they’ve found that promises us New testament folks physical healing if we just __________. I keep seeing all this talk of redemption and repentance and forgiveness, but what do these actually have to do with salvation from the physical thorns in the flesh? I know some get around that by claiming addictions, etc are spiritual, but I’ve seen folks that clearly believe in the existence of mental health championing this Forgiveness™ talk.

I don’t understand.

GovPappy wrote:

Dee says DW is playing both sides.

Yeah, Dee’s correct. I saw it most clearly when I read the brou-haha over Wilson’s partially-plagiarized booklet on slavery. What struck me was how he’d write one thing, then later write something that wasn’t quite contradictory but could be construed so.

By doing that, some young men are convinced that he is deeply nuanced, but nah, he’s merely playing both sides against the middle.

In my experience, people who play this game usually hold to the most extreme view, but are being “diplomatic” to garner political influence. :eyeroll:

Gram3 wrote:

9Marks is nothing compared to Wilson and his cronies.

I agree that Wilson’s stuff makes the 9 Marks stuff look tame. And he has influence across this country. If I am not mistaken logos, which does a lot of home school publishing, is run by his outfit. On the other hand, since the 9 Marks, guys are so concerned about protecting the name of the church, where are they when Wilson does what he does? Where are they when he makes his outrageous comments? Where are Piper, De Young, etc.?

Ken wrote:

The commitment was all one way, too. You supported them (££££) in return for hour-long sermons in which you had to fight to keep awake.

Wilson doesn’t seem to be enchanted by money as much as by fame, esp the infamous sort. People pay into that too, offering up their intellectual integrity in return for the illusion of belonging to a spiritual elite.

It’s all hogwash, but whatever one chooses, at least practice consistency. Unfortunately Douglas Wilson can’t even do that.

But yeah, like you, I’d rather be entertained by an a** than put to sleep by a bore.

It is interesting how 9Marks et al is, and has been quite about DW all these years… Not like DW hides what He says…. Especially the Southern Slave “reconstruction”. I would think that 9Marks et al would try to stay away from the racial quicksand that DW is spewing..

Will M wrote:

Gram3 wrote:
9Marks is nothing compared to Wilson and his cronies.
I agree that Wilson’s stuff makes the 9 Marks stuff look tame. And he has influence across this country. If I am not mistaken logos, which does a lot of home school publishing, is run by his outfit. On the other hand, since the 9 Marks, guys are so concerned about protecting the name of the church, where are they when Wilson does what he does? Where are they when he makes his outrageous comments? Where are Piper, De Young, etc.?

Will M wrote:

Gram3 wrote:

9Marks is nothing compared to Wilson and his cronies.

I agree that Wilson’s stuff makes the 9 Marks stuff look tame. And he has influence across this country. If I am not mistaken logos, which does a lot of home school publishing, is run by his outfit. On the other hand, since the 9 Marks, guys are so concerned about protecting the name of the church, where are they when Wilson does what he does? Where are they when he makes his outrageous comments? Where are Piper, De Young, etc.?

He espouses patriarchy, the biblical (TM) get-out-of-jail card.

GovPappy wrote:

I’m just curious what chapter and verse they’ve found that promises us New testament folks physical healing if we just __________. I keep seeing all this talk of redemption and repentance and forgiveness, but what do these actually have to do with salvation from the physical thorns in the flesh?

Well, I think the Word Faith or Word of Faith people use it as their bait. In the case of SBC pastors defending Wilson, I think they are misapplying the effects of the Resurrection. And the Ascension, for that matter. Jared Moore, for example, should know that there is some “not yet” in any eschatological view. I don’t think he is some kind of weird full preterist who thinks Jesus has already returned and we are living in the Kingdom. So why is he so blind to the incoherence of his appeal to the Resurrection? I think he has become so accustomed to reacting first and never getting around to exegesis. So, I doubt if he could point you to a verse, just like they can’t point to a verse where God ordains Male Authority in Genesis.

They start with what they need to prove, which in this case is that Doug Wilson is not culpable for his Role as spiritual authority. The Jareds of the world want to have it both ways. They can claim the authority when they want it, but when the exercise of their precious authority goes kablooie, as in this instance and in The Village with Karen Hinkcley’s abuse by the ELDERS, then all of a sudden the Spiritual Authority has no responsibility. Win-Win for the guys with the power and Lose-Lose for the pewpeons.

@ Will M:
Logos is their proprietary Christian school brand. However, people should be aware that they are involved in many Christian schools. People need to listen and be aware of the leanings of the teachers and administrators.

I can almost guarantee that there will be total silence from the top tier of the Gospel Glitterati because they have gone all in for Patriarchy. See Russell Moore’s claims about Complementarian being too tame. See John Piper’s endorsement of Wilson at Desiring God. The top tier have made Patriarchy a gospel essential, for all practical purposes.

The second tier guys who want to advance will go to the mattresses about this and will be throwing all kinds of ridiculously transparent chaff. Again, their System has been exposed as a fraud. They claim to protect women and children, yet the women and children are repeatedly sacrificed on the altar of the System of Authoritarianism in general and, more specifically, Patriarchy.

Gram3 wrote:

GovPappy wrote:

I’m just curious what chapter and verse they’ve found that promises us New testament folks physical healing if we just __________. I keep seeing all this talk of redemption and repentance and forgiveness, but what do these actually have to do with salvation from the physical thorns in the flesh?

They start with what they need to prove, which in this case is that Doug Wilson is not culpable for his Role asThey can claim the authority when they want it, but when the exercise of their precious authority goes kablooie, as in this instance and in The Village with Karen Hinkcley’s abuse by the ELDERS, then all of a sudden the Spiritual Authority has no responsibility. Win-Win for the guys with the power and Lose-Lose for the pewpeons.

Gram3 wrote:

GovPappy wrote:

I’m just curious what chapter and verse they’ve found that promises us New testament folks physical healing if we just __________. I keep seeing all this talk of redemption and repentance and forgiveness, but what do these actually have to do with salvation from the physical thorns in the flesh?

They start with what they need to prove, which in this case is that Doug Wilson is not culpable for his Role as spiritual authority. The Jareds of the world want to have it both ways. They can claim the authority when they want it, but when the exercise of their precious authority goes kablooie, as in this instance and in The Village with Karen Hinkcley’s abuse by the ELDERS, then all of a sudden the Spiritual Authority has no responsibility. Win-Win for the guys with the power and Lose-Lose for the pewpeons.

Yes! My thoughts exactly. 9M, TGC, and these guys all seem to want to have all the authority, whether it’s denominational for TGC/9M or local church/college/etc for Dougy W, but want to take a step back and make statements about “regrettable happenings but we don’t feel it Gospel™ wise to step into local blah blah blah” when doctrine/protocol is followed and it hurts people. All the perks, none of the responsibility and ownership.

And there’s the nice little niche they’ve carved out. They can keep a safe distance, theorize, pontificate, rant about haters and bloggers – all the while keeping a squeaky clean public image, while the less circumspect apply their ideals at the local level and hurt people directly. Then local church autonomy takes over.

Wilson is just more brash and arrogant about his role in it all. He’s the less nice version.

@ muzjik:
Also this! It feels like a slap in the face to God to keep harping on how miserable we all are before him. He created us, with talents, we’re “fearfully and wonderfully made”! Sure, a healthy balance of realizing where we came from and what we’re capable of as sinners is necessary. But this groveling and constant focus on believers–Christ’s brothers and sisters–as miserable dumb sheep? How is that healthy?

@ Former CLC’er:

…a guy from China becomes a Christian and the first thing he does is attend a Newsboys concert? Guess the film was funded by the Newsboys?

I made the mistake of going to that film in theaters to see if it was any good…only to find that the whole thing was basically a big setup for a lame texting gimmick. Esp. cheesy, even by Christian cheese standards, IMO.

Gram3 wrote:

It is ironic, IMO, that a man who has experienced discrimination as a black man would want to uphold such a disgusting view of women. It makes no sense.

It does to me.
No matter how low I am in the heap, there’s always someone even lower that I can stomp on.

@ dee:
Road Apples?

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.” Matthew 23:15

“You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” John 8:44

  __

“Things Are Hopping In Moscow?”

hmmm…

A “sane world with clear-headed adults making decisions”?

huh?

…could have fooled me.

(…kinda like tossing a live grenade in a hurricane, huh?)    🙁

What?

There’s a pedophile in the church,
His brain is teaming with research, 
Take a long vacation,
Let your children play,
If ya give this man a pew
Sweet memory will die…
Rider of the religious storm..?[1]*

(sadface)

Sopy
__
[1] *parody adaptation; Jim Morrison, The Doors, “Riders Of The Storm”;
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7QHQRGZ78Xs

;~)

—

Tina wrote:

dee wrote: Meadow Muffin!!!!!!

This actually sounds like something out of Monty Python.

Actually, I remember that term best from the TV show “The Dukes of Hazzard”. Sheriff Rosco used it (as a term of endearment) towards his boss and brother-in-law J.D. Hogg. Hogg’s wife did too, as I remember. 🙂

Ah, nostalgia… Such a nice break from this whole disgusting affair.

GovPappy wrote:

Janeway laying some holy wood on this guy.

https://twitter.com/XianJaneway/status/641407364986486784

Thanks, Brother. I was near throwing up when I read about how he treated the abuse victim, & then realized the abuser was able to abuse again because DW intervened.

HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE TO BE ABUSED DUE TO DW’S NEGLIGENCE BEFORE THE CHURCH CRIES OUT FOR JUSTICE?

The idea that Wilson *had to* officiate the marriage or he would be too authoritarian is such nonsense. Pastors are forever turning couples down when they don’t think it meets their standards.

Ask him to marry a divorced person to a virgin.

Ask him to marry a Catholic to a church member.

Greaves wrote:

Ask him to marry a divorced person to a virgin.

Say what?!

Lane Roberts wrote:

The problem seems to be that as soon as new evidence comes to the surface about pedophiles in the church or any wrongdoing in any church that the website has covered in the past, that that information is posted in a new round of witch burnings commences.

Lane, it’s because the churches involved do absolutely nothing to change their toxic environments and, in fact, try to keep it hidden. It is silence in the face of the actions of Doug Wilson and his ilk that is sinful.

Doug Wilson’s Chuch of Pedophilia has harbored two unrepentant pedophiles and advocated to the courts on their behalf, all the while IGNORING the victims. So apparently it’s open season for pedophiles on the children of Doug Wilson’s ‘church’.

And calling out this despicable behavior is ‘witch hunting’? You’ve got to be kidding.

Looks like Tim Bayly was a bit unnerved by the blowback he was getting. He took down his post supporting Wilson and says he will post more about it later.
http://baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09/concerning-open-letter-session-christ-church-moscow-retraction

@ Lane Roberts:

Your entire comment comes across with lack of compassion and empathy toward those who have been harmed by Christian leaders. This article is about a new issue concerning a pedophile in a church. Have you read the article and supporting I formation?

mirele wrote:

Leila wrote:
Looks like Tim Bayly was a bit unnerved by the blowback he was getting. He took down his post supporting Wilson and says he will post more about it later.
http://baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09/concerning-open-letter-session-christ-church-moscow-retraction
Wow. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t something *I* said that provoked this action. Got to wonder what’s going on in the background.

Perhaps he actually read many of the primary documents instead of just taking Wilson’s word for it.

Leila wrote:

Looks like Tim Bayly was a bit unnerved by the blowback he was getting. He took down his post supporting Wilson and says he will post more about it later.

Hmm, I wondered about that. I posted a comment of my own on that article, in which Tim Bayly and his wife lauded Wilson’s open letter. A short while after posting, I refreshed the page and was denied access. Didn’t realize it was taken down entirely — I figured Bayly had just blocked me.

Let’s see if he gives us any explanation.

andrew wrote:

Kudos to him for retracting, on the other hand, why couldn’t he wait to write anything until he had all of the facts? What new could he have learned that wasn’t out there before? Makes you wonder how many times this has happened in the past in which there wasn’t a subsequent retraction.

That’s a big part of the problem. These guys are so insular within their own Boyz Club that coming to each others’ defense is a reflex action regardless of what the other has done or said. The only times they back off from their support is when the watchbloggers put their feet to the fire and don’t accept the lame defenses of their clubmember’s appalling actions. Even then, they don’t criticize a fellow member of the club, they just go silent.

Doug Wilson posted the following yesterday in a “Blog and Mablog” article “Clean Rain.” His blog site tag-line is “Theology that bites back.” Directed evidently at watchbloggers and multiple others who disagree with his brand, he offers a following twist of theology that bites back:

““And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely” (Rev. 22:17).

Have you molested children? Then come. Have you vilified repentant pedophiles? Come. Have you stolen money? Come. Are you a slave to the bottle? Come. Do you despise drunks? Come. Do you hate people who preach the gospel? Come. Does racial animosity have you by the throat? Then come. Do you sell the message of grace for ready money? Come. Do you hate the idea of coming? Then come.”

If you grunt and strain enough, you can make selected Bible passages fit through your theological grid. But God will have the last word.

Leila wrote:

He took down his post supporting Wilson and says he will post more about it later.

Bayly stated that what he posted was wrong and therefore took it down. I think he should keep it up and then tell why it is wrong.

So often supporters caution us that we need to wait because we don’t know the whole story. This caution should apply to supporters also.

Just saw this very insightful comment at SSB which captures what I have observed for so many years from these men.
http://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2015/09/08/pastor-doug-wilson-has-been-involved-in-another-disturbing-pedophile-case-jamin-wight/comment-page-1/#comment-292522

Bill M wrote:
If the latter can you articulate some of it? Please take this not as a challenge but a request for information.

You can read the pamphlet ‘Southern Slavery as it Was’ which was authored by him, but let’s take a choice quote:

“Slavery as it existed in the South was not an adversarial relationship with pervasive racial animosity. Because of its dominantly patriarchal character, it was a relationship based upon mutual affection and confidence. There has never been a multi-racial society which has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world. “

Serving Kids In Japan wrote:

I am so, so, so glad that Wilson doesn’t have the power to do this on the scale that Hubbard did. Although, based on his attitude and his treatment of Natalie Rose, I’ve little doubt that if he could, he would.

Yes. It’s a good thing, to be able to be anonymous on these boards…

When I first signed up, I gave a valid but squirrelly email address, because the paranoia was so strong. I was afraid of these men. I was very careful, in the beginning, not to give any personal or anecdotal evidence. I have been a little less careful lately, though I am still not bold enough to go all out and post under my own name. It doesn’t make my pain any less real, to post under a pseudonym, even though it make my testimony unreliable, even false in their eyes.

I am so grateful for those like the Deebs, who are able to stand up for others, publicly. Maybe someday I’ll have that strength.

refugee wrote:

There is some sort of brain adjustment among those immersed in this movement. I remember hearing Tim Bayly on two occasions … under the spell and not in my right mind.

Mainline Christianity has not yet awakened to the fact that there is a spiritual battle for the mind raging in 21st century church. Every demon and his theology has infiltrated the ranks, some dressed as shepherds. If they can win the battle of the mind through stealth, deception, manipulation, intimidation, and indoctrination, they have you exactly where they want you.

refugee wrote:

Not all the meat in the dish is spoiled, but there is poison hidden amongst the choice bits for those who partake.

Indoctrination can be a subtle delivery of half-truth mixed with truth. After awhile, a little leaven leavens the whole lump. The problem with deception is that you don’t know you are deceived because you are deceived.

JeffT wrote:

Doug Wilson’s Chuch of Pedophilia has harbored two unrepentant pedophiles and advocated to the courts on their behalf, all the while IGNORING the victims. So apparently it’s open season for pedophiles on the children of Doug Wilson’s ‘church’.

What is worse to me, as a former parent of young children (they grow up, eventually), is that the parents of young children in the church were not informed for months!

That is unconscionably irresponsible.

Gram3 wrote:

Just saw this very insightful comment at SSB which captures what I have observed for so many years from these men.
http://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2015/09/08/pastor-doug-wilson-has-been-involved-in-another-disturbing-pedophile-case-jamin-wight/comment-page-1/#comment-292522

Ah, I have learned so much from “brian” and his comments. At first I found them difficult to read, because of the many disclaimer-sounding phrases thrown in, but once I caught on to his style of expression, I understood, and really appreciate the points he makes.

Bless you, brian, if you are reading here. Thank you for helping me to find clarity in my struggle to win free of the brainwashing.

Dave A A wrote:

@ Chris S:
So we must conclude that Wilson recommends “measured and limited” death for child molesters— rather than excessive death.

No, only for those child molesters who are not Pastor’s Court Favorites.

Max wrote:

Indoctrination can be a subtle delivery of half-truth mixed with truth. After awhile, a little leaven leavens the whole lump. The problem with deception is that you don’t know you are deceived because you are deceived.

In Intelligence Warfare, you pipeline Disinformation to an enemy by first building your credibility with minor true information. Once you have established yourself as a reliable source/informant, you then introduce PLAUSIBLE false information — nothing too blatant — as the deception. And if it’s a really high-value, war-winning opportunity, you then go all-or-nothing with the Big Lie. (Note that you can only do the last ONCE, as it will blow your credibility. But if it wins the war, who cares?)

Chris S wrote:

Bill M wrote:
If the latter can you articulate some of it? Please take this not as a challenge but a request for information.
You can read the pamphlet ‘Southern Slavery as it Was’ which was authored by him, but let’s take a choice quote:
“Slavery as it existed in the South was not an adversarial relationship with pervasive racial animosity. Because of its dominantly patriarchal character, it was a relationship based upon mutual affection and confidence. There has never been a multi-racial society which has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world. “

oh golly gee. (I really, really, want to say something offensive.)

I had the “privilege” of hearing Wilson and Wilkins teach in person about this stuff. Did you know that the slaves were actually better off as slaves than they would have been in the jungles of Dark Africa? They were cared for like children. They were introduced to the Gospel. Why, scads of slaveholder and slave accounts exist that talk about how the slaves were like family members, how they loved their owners and the children of their owners, and how they were well loved in return.

(Isn’t “loving well” one of the catch phrases of the YRR?)

It was all new and fascinating stuff, information I’d never heard, and exciting because we thought we were getting the real history that had been suppressed (you know, that proverb about history being written by the victors?).

Wilkins put out for homeschool consumption his own American history lecture series: America: the First 350 Years. It presents his own version of American history from the viewpoint being discussed here. I just checked and a cassette version is still available on Amazon, if you are a scholar and are interested in studying more of this aberration. (http://www.amazon.com/America-The-first-350-years/dp/B00072F2M2)

I used to own this set, but it was thrown in the trash with the rest of the unburnable materials when we cleaned house.

Because Patriarchy is the be-all and end-all of human existence, you know.

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
HUG, you have just described the strategy employed by SBC’s reformed elite in their Calvinization of the largest non-Calvinist denomination in America. Once a “quiet revolution”, they are now well-established and in-your-face.

Max wrote:

Have you molested children? Then come. Have you vilified repentant pedophiles? Come. Have you stolen money? Come. Are you a slave to the bottle? Come. Do you despise drunks?

That’s the afterlife. In the meantime, in the here and now, there are consequences for one’s actions, and precautions people need to take, like, I don’t know,

Not allowing pedophiles have access to children?, not minimizing the awfulness of pedophilia? and making excuses for pedos -and especially not under the guise of “but all deserve grace and all have sinned” theology?

Would Doug Wilson really allow a known pedophile to ‘Come, come into my home and have unrestricted and unsupervised time with my grandchildren.’ (I would hope not.)

Leila wrote:

Looks like Tim Bayly was a bit unnerved by the blowback he was getting. He took down his post supporting Wilson and says he will post more about it later.
http://baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09/concerning-open-letter-session-christ-church-moscow-retraction

This was well stated, actually:
We do not want to cause [the pastors, elders, and congregation of Christ Church] any pain, but in the particular instance of Steven Sitler, we are afraid our prior statement has rightly been interpreted as the endorsement of a particular approach in pastoral care of child sexual abusers that we do not, in fact, support.

That’s the problem I have with Tim Bayly! He can come off as so wise and reasonable, loving and trustworthy, caring and concerned; but there is terrible, destructive error mixed in with his gospel truth.

“Now if Tim Bayly had said the criticism of Wilson was coming from those who are prejudiced against him, he could make a case for this. Some of it clearly is. That was my point in saying it appears Wilson can never get anything right in the eyes of his detractors, and as a consequence, he won’t listen to them.”

Again, I think this is a somewhat ludicrous position – and to understand why you need to go back a decade or so, look at Wilson’s history – while he is clearly gifted in some ways there’s a clear pattern of being unable to work under anyone elses leadership – which is he has his OWN printing press, his OWN home schooling movement, his OWN denomination (with an associated idiosyncratic set of beliefs. Furthermore he seems to frequently stir up controversy for no good reason – often in church bodies outside his own – and the revel in the resulting publicity.

In this particular case aspects of his behaviour are clearly wrong – yet he prefers to double down rather than admit anything – again a characteristic of his throughout the FV controversy.

@ Gram3:

I don’t know a lot about Doug Wilson what I do think is that the reason why he is supported is for 2 reasons.

1. John Piper supports him
2. He has debated Christopher Hitchens. Given my faith crisis and what I endured that is what I am most familiar with about DW.

refugee wrote:

That’s the problem I have with Tim Bayly! He can come off as so wise and reasonable, loving and trustworthy, caring and concerned; but there is terrible, destructive error mixed in with his gospel truth.

Officers of Christ’s church make “precipitous” statements. Women who speak out against what Bayly supported in his now disappeared post are harpies, Jezebels, rebellious, deceived, etc. Being an “officer in Christ’s church” is an even more plenary indulgence than being male in their world.

Gram3 wrote:

There are cultures which promote human flourishing better than other cultures, and the same is true of certain subcultures within particular cultures.

Hah. And the hyper-reformed subculture we lived in up until recently would have prided themselves on promoting truth, beauty, and goodness (human flourishing, if you will), when what they were really best at was stifling and quenching.

Gram3 wrote:

Officers of Christ’s church make “precipitous” statements. Women who speak out against what Bayly supported in his now disappeared post are harpies, Jezebels, rebellious, deceived…

Traitors, Thought-Criminals, Goldsteinists, Cow-Headed Monsters…

refugee wrote:

Despite these teachers’ disdain for Darwin, their teachings on slavery and Western expansion (an aspect of Dominionism, maybe?) draw heavily on Darwin’s idea that the white race is the zenith of evolution, with the other races falling somewhere below them

Actually, that wasn’t Darwin. Darwin himself was an abolitionist, and while he thought (like all Victorians) that the white race was the zenith, descent from common ancestry meant that non-whites were NOT subhumans or animals — at least no more than whites were (again, common descent).

The White Race as the Zenith of Evolution was called Scientific Racism, and while it did claim Darwin’s works as justification, its predecessors quoted the Bible chapter-and-verse (Curse of Ham and all that). “Men of Sin” will glom onto any Cosmic-level Authority — Bible or Evolution — to justify what they wanted to do anyway. Steven Jay Gould wrote a lot of essays on the subject, about how bad science was used to prop up White Supremacy, sometimes with incredible convolutions of logic. Check out some of his essay collections sometime; you should be able to find them at a lot of used bookstores.

What IS 100% Darwinian is Quiverfull, i.e. “Outbreed the Heathen”. Darwin’s original definition of “Survival of the Fittest” meant reproductive success over long periods of time; those organisms able to produce more surviving descendants will end up dominating the gene pool, increasing their percentage with each generation.

P.S. According to Gould, Darwin himself did NOT like the term “Evolution”, as it already had secondary meanings not only of LINEAR Progress but Linear UPWARD Progression. (“The Victorians thought history ended well — because it ended with the Victorians.” — Chesterton) Darwin preferred the term “Descent with Modification”, implying no intrinsic directionality.

refugee wrote:

Because Patriarchy is the be-all and end-all of human existence, you know.

More generically, the Great Chain of Being, Who Holds The Whip and Who Feels The Whip, from God at the very top all the way down. Boots on faces, from top to bottom; everybody stamp harder. Master over Slave, Man over Woman, Pastor over Pewpeon.

“The only goal of Power is POWER. And POWER consists of inflicting maximum suffering among the Powerless.”
— Comrade O’Brian, Inner Party, Airstrip One, Oceania, Nineteen Eighty-Four
Just because you can.

“He has debated Christopher Hitchens. Given my faith crisis and what I endured that is what I am most familiar with about DW.”

I think that DW can be quite personable at times – and this is what comes strongest in the Chris Hitchens video, which makes the impact of the debate many times stronger of course.

In reality, DW leans heavily on pre-suppositional apologetics, something I’m no longer particular enamored with – it’s essentially a heavy dose of question begging and circular reasoning.

refugee wrote:

Read their favored history books, where native peoples are “savages” or listen to them expound on the superiority of slavery to leaving those poor, unenlightened Africans in their original state

Thanks for several replies. I’d put this in the category of European cultural supremacy.

To be clear, the attempt to justify the injustice of slavery by creating a false narrative of the antebellum South, minimizing murder and disruption of so many lives, and to justify it because some may now have more material opportunity displays a depraved view of existence not in keeping with Christ. There is a lack of compassion for the suffering of others.

As bad as this is, white supremacists are in another class of nuts cases. I was wondering if there is direct espousal of the superiority of the white race.

dee wrote:

…silly things like a wife’s hair should be longer than her husband’s hair. He has theorized that 6 inches ought to do it to stay biblical.
http://dougwils.com/s8-expository/what-nature-teaches.html

Here’s what I don’t get. Doug quotes, but not discusses, this verse: “But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.”

In KJV, but not the other translations, it looks to me in some places that in 1 Cor. Paul is quoting questions that the church had for him, or rules that they wanted to run by him, and answering. In this case, “if y’all want to fight about this, fine, but nobody else is doing this.” Later, in 1 Cor. 14, is the thing about women being silent in church, as the law says (What law? We have the Torah. Where does the law say one iota about women being silent in church?) KJV says: ” What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?” (and by “you” it’s clear that he is talking to men, as he is in the rest of this letter and all of his other writings.) Jesus talked to Mary and refused to send her to the kitchen as Martha wanted. He appeared first to women when he was resurrected. Clearly, the word of God did not come only to men. So there’s no reason for women to have to be silent. He goes on about everybody needing to prophesy and so forth.

Am I wrong here? How come the KJV is so different from the other translations?

“I believe that anonymity is justifiable in many circumstances in order to get information out without any undo negative influence or payback by power-brokers in the Gospel™ Industrial Complex.”

You mean kinda like a DIY witness protection program?

Daisy and Max,

Following up on your discussion about how the church should handle pedophiles, here’s an article about a Christian pastor who had to turn in his father a pastor for sexually abusing children at the church they have both pastored. The father is serving a long prison sentence. The son takes a strong stand about the boundaries that churches should have when ministering (separately) to sex offenders.
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/east/2015/03/22/Christian-minister-Jimmy-Hinton-teaches-churches-to-guard-against-pedophiles-like-his-father-John-Wayne-Hinton/stories/201503220056

@ numo:
Before the war. (Kind of ironic that PBS is running Ken Burns’ Civil War docu this week…)

Gram3 wrote:

This is not just about patriarchy, and even if it were, the question is whether what he has done is good and right to do, regardless of the motivations of his critics. Is the criticism true or not? We must not make truth a matter of persons whether the person we are making it about is the subject or the critic

I refer the hon. lady to the first comment on the Bayly’s blog regarding their retraction:

http://baylyblog.com/blog/2015/09/concerning-open-letter-session-christ-church-moscow-retraction#comments

Velour wrote:

Daisy and Max,

Following up on your discussion about how the church should handle pedophiles, here’s an article about a Christian pastor who had to turn in his father a pastor for sexually abusing children at the church they have both pastored. The father is serving a long prison sentence. The son takes a strong stand about the boundaries that churches should have when ministering (separately) to sex offenders.
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/east/2015/03/22/Christian-minister-Jimmy-Hinton-teaches-churches-to-guard-against-pedophiles-like-his-father-John-Wayne-Hinton/stories/201503220056

Must have really been rough to blow the whistle on his own father.

Double kick-in-the-head when you realize the pastor in question was not only the son of the pedo pastor, but inherited his pulpit & church from Daddy. When have you ever heard of a Pastor Junior(TM) doing something like that?

Here’s the opening four sentences of the article:

In his growing work of consulting with churches on matters of sexual abuse, Jimmy Hinton says he hears a common refrain.

If a devoted member of a congregation is accused, members will give all kinds of reasons “it just can’t be him,” he says.

The accused is so kind and nice. He’s a family man. He never cusses.

“At the end of that,” Mr. Hinton says, he tells them: “You just described in great detail my father.”

Again, successful pedos (like successful sociopaths everywhere) are masters of camouflaging what they really are. Experts at presenting themselves “Transformed into an Angel of Light”.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

What IS 100% Darwinian is Quiverfull, i.e. “Outbreed the Heathen”. Darwin’s original definition of “Survival of the Fittest” meant reproductive success over long periods of time; those organisms able to produce more surviving descendants will end up dominating the gene pool, increasing their percentage with each generation.

My own mother was a believer in eugenics. Hardly Quiverfull (she resented having a large family due to the unreliability of BC available to women during her bearing years), she was in favor of forced sterilization for various reasons (IQ and genetic disorders), and talked about how the intellectuals were limiting the numbers of their offspring, and the “dummies” were going to outbreed them.

@ refugee:

Hhm. That sounds like the setting for a movie.
Oh, wait.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzbWXgM0ygU

Mara wrote:

@ refugee:
Hhm. That sounds like the setting for a movie.
Oh, wait.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzbWXgM0ygU

My word.

refugee wrote:

My own mother was a believer in eugenics.

So were most of the Intellectuals and Right People of the early 20th.

Then this gang of pulp villains and their minions running Germany decided to act on Eugenic Theory and Scientific Racism and see how far they could push it. If it wasn’t for the example of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, Eugenics and Master Race Theory would still be respectable mainstream science.

Hardly Quiverfull (she resented having a large family due to the unreliability of BC available to women during her bearing years), she was in favor of forced sterilization for various reasons (IQ and genetic disorders), and talked about how the intellectuals were limiting the numbers of their offspring, and the “dummies” were going to outbreed them.

This is actually called “The Marching Morons Syndrome” after a particularly-nasty 1951 SF short by C.M.Kornbluth:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons
The movie “Idiocracy” is based on Marching Morons, but plays it for laughs.

@Beakerj

“Who defends that child like he deserves?”

EXACTLY!!!

People of Christ Church: Where are you?!!! What are you doing to defend this child?

Time is better spent organizing safety for this child — people being around him every minute of the day, at the very least — than taking issue with those who ARE standing up for the child’s welfare.

a H.U.G.

That’s a great idea. Wonder if there’s a group in Moscow. Probably have to have permission to be at the house though.

Maybe they could meet around the church on Sunday with banners on behalf of the baby.

Do bikers do banners?

cali_mari wrote:

This same elder had the inconvenient problem of what to do with that pedophile. 2 sad sick birds, one callous stone. I’m shocked he or Wilson didn’t have a blood relation to spare. Wilson has 16 grandkids between his 3 kids. Surely there’s a spare???

Kids and Grandkids of PASTOR and/or Elders are Too Important to risk with a pedo.

Like JMJ/Christian Monist’s recollection of a church in his youth that had a known pedo on staff; Pastor, Elders, and Pillars of the Church would steer newbies with kids to Pastor Short-Eyes so he’d molest THEIR kids, not MINE.
Pillars of the Church’s kids are Too Important to risk!
Elders’ kids are even more Important!
And PASTOR’s kids are Most Important of all!