Jezehellsbells

Update: Laura Turner has quietly corrected her article in line with at least one of my criticisms of it, but without acknowledging that she was doing so. Just so you know.

I do need to respond to this article, but I am also in two minds about it. In order to interact with this stuff at all, you have to make a distinction between different kinds of people involved. On the one hand you have people on the other side of the country who are just getting in their leftist licks, at places like Jezebel. On the other hand you have the hurting and lost people who, when the controversialists are done using them, will be left alone to count the fragments of what they thought they were supposed to get.

What it looks like when you are canonized by the bad guys.
What it looks like when you are canonized by the bad guys.

What I think I will do is simply walk through the timeline of what happened in the Greenfield/Wight situation, doing this in a similar way to how I responded to Rod Dreher’s attack on us. The Jezebel article addresses the Sitler situation also, which I already addressed here. With my earlier timeline response, I was dealing with Rod Dreher and The American Conservative, from whom I expected a lot more, and in this place, I am dealing with Laura Turner and Jezebel, from whom I expected a lot worse. Oh well.

Dreher emphasized Sitler, and included some of the Greenfield case, while Turner does the opposite. So what I intend to do here is simply walk through what actually happened in the Greenfield situation.

There are several key facts to remember as you read through the Jezebel narrative and also through what follows. First, what was done to Natalie by Jamin was atrocious, with long term consequences that are simply heartbreaking. This was one of those wounds that just won’t stop bleeding. My prayer for Natalie really is that she might find peace and true healing, and find it soon.

Second, Turner casts me as a big, bad patriarchalist, with her definitions of that word every bit as scary as the word sounds. But she left out of her account the glaring fact that we suspended Natalie’s father from the Lord’s Supper for his abusive mistreatment of his family, and for claiming that his authority over his family was virtually absolute. There was a patriarchalist in this tragic story who was much closer to Turner’s description, but we were the ones who disciplined him for it. And Turner is the one glossing over what he did to the women in his family. Why is that okay?

Third, there are many falsehoods throughout the story — incidentally, Turner did not interview me for the story, but did I need to say that? — and here is one of them. Turner says that all NSA students and Greyfriars live with families. I don’t know who made that up, but somebody did. It is not true at all. And there are many other things I could say about the article, but we don’t have all night. Update: she edited her article in response to this paragraph.

But one of the falsehoods is big enough that it needs to be flatly denied in its own paragraph. “The Greenfields and Wilson went back and forth on whether it was appropriate for a 23-year-old to court a young teenage girl, until Natalie’s father Gary finally said no to any sort of romantic relationship between Wight and his daughter.” Even on this (misleading and false) account, Turner ought to have said what position I was supposed to have been advocating back then. Was she trying to insinuate that I was trying to foist Jamin off on the Greenfields? Or was I saying that it was totally crazy? Hint: my views are that a secret relationship between a 23-year-old and a 14-year-old is beyond irresponsible. In real life, I found out what had transpired in the secretly-arranged courtship years after the fact in 2005, when the relationship and the attendant abuse became public. So the relationship began in 2002, the parents knew about it at that time, set boundaries for it at that time, boundaries that they thought were being honored, and the reality of what actually happened blew up a few years later.

So then, here is the timeline. In 2005, I received a phone call from a woman in the Tri-Cities whose daughter was engaged to Jamin. She told me that Natalie had called her daughter, Jamin’s fiance, and told her about what Jamin had previously done to her. That’s how I found out about this.

The Greenfield family filed a complaint against Jamin and I reported what had happened to our board of elders (8/18/05).

About a week later (8/22/05) I wrote a letter to the officer investigating the crime, a letter that followed up on a interview he had conducted with me earlier. In that letter I said:

“Jamin’s crime and sin in this was of a particularly egregious nature . . . and his behavior involved a great deal of calculated deception.”

“We have verbally instructed him (and have followed it up with a letter) that he is responsible to own his crime and take full responsibility for the consequences of it.”

In that same letter, I mentioned the foolish courtship set-up. I noted that the Greenfields had acted foolishly “by inviting Jamin to move in with them, encouraging and permitting a relationship between Jamin and Natalie, while keeping that relationship secret from the broader community.”

The same day I wrote Jamin a letter, in the course of which I said this. “We want your first thought in all your practical choices to be the protection of the Greenfields, and particularly Natalie” (8/22/05).

As the case against Jamin moved forward, we were concerned with the attitude and behavior of Gary Greenfield. He had shown great foolishness in the way he allowed the courtship in the first place, and we were concerned that he was not showing great wisdom in how he pursued Jamin. We did not want him to swing at Jamin and hit Natalie. So I said in a letter to Gary that “we remain very concerned about the possibility that this whole legal process could proceed in a way that continues to leave Natalie unprotected” (9/1/05).

For example, during the relationship Natalie had kept a journal of love letters to Jamin which are currently sealed by court order. If the case had gone to a full trial, then those letters would quite possibly have been used in the defense. That is the kind of thing we were wanting to head off for the sake of Natalie. The Greenfields agreed with wanting to protect her this way, and it was at their request that the journals were sealed. Now was wanting something like that a desire for real protection? I think so, but it was entirely possible that Gary could pursue the case in such a way that such protection would fail and fail big. This is the kind of thing we were talking about.

Two weeks later, I wrote another letter to Gary (9/15/05). Incidentally, such letters were not a substitute for personal conservation, but were a way of confirming what we had said personally in our conversations. I for one am very glad we used that procedure. I have letters I can quote from. In that letter, we said the following:

“Your sin did create a vulnerability for Natalie, a vulnerability that Jamin took sinful advantage of. What we are doing is exhorting you to make protection of Natalie your highest priority in the months to come, because we are convinced that she will need it.”

“The problem was that you had a young man in his twenties living in your home, in a relationship that you knew about with your fourteen-year-old daughter. You kept this relationship secret from others, which contributed to Natalie’s vulnerability.”

“Again, Jamin is in no way justified by any of this, and we have no problem with his prosecution.”

In the following months, Gary’s behavior became increasingly erratic and the family was increasingly worried. I sought to meet with Gary about it and he refused. I suspended him from the Lord’s Supper for four weeks over his refusal to be accountable for his treatment of his family. Our session of elders then sustained that suspension from the Supper (3/30/06). That suspension was made indefinite the next month (4/13/06).

Gary was demanding that his family move out of town with him, but his behavior was unsettling, erratic and scary. I reported to the elders that I had “counseled Pat to remain in Moscow until we have assurances of her safety, welfare and protection” (5/25/06).

I wrote to Gary about a week later. In that letter, I said:

“You have no right to treat your wife the way you are doing, and you do not belong to a church that will ever grant you that right” (6/3/06).

At this point, I want to stop and ask Laura Turner what I should have said to Gary in that letter instead of what I did say. Does Turner think that churches should grant men that kind of authority?

As already mentioned, Gary was suspended from the Supper, but we were by now involved in preparing to excommunicate him. (In our form of church government, excommunication is the final step of church discipline.) In the course of preparing for that trial, I was given a copy of a letter that Natalie had sent to her father. In this letter, she was explaining why his authority was not absolute, and why she did not need to move with him. She said:

“[Doug] is my pastor and I will seek counsel from him when I feel it necessary. God put him over me as my shepherd and he has been a great encouragement and help to me . . . I love my church and my community” (6/6/06).

It is crucial to note this was a year after Natalie had made her abuse at Jamin’s hands public, and it was a month after Jamin’s final sentencing trial.

She concluded the letter to her father this way:

“I have written this on my own accord using my own, adult, thinking mind. I have not been persuaded, manipulated or coerced into anything. I stand on my own two feet and my feet are planted on my rock, Christ the Lord.”

Now what Jezebel is in effect maintaining is that we had a responsibility to not believe the Greenfield women, and to believe Gary instead. But we did believe Natalie, and we did believe her mother. We had (and have) independent confirmation that they were speaking the truth to us. And now, ten years later, Jezebel is attacking us for our “patriarchalism,” when what we were actually doing was disciplining an out-of-control patriarchalist.

A week and a half later, Natalie wrote to me directly, a plea for help. This plea for help is one that Laura Turner is now saying that we should have coldly ignored. Natalie described her father’s treatment of her this way.

“He said I did this to us. He said I’m sick with ulcers because I’m rebellious and sinful. He called today to ‘chat’ and when I told him how sick I’ve been, he said, ‘oh, really, hmmm, that’s too bad, isn’t it? . . . Did I do this? He said I did this . . .” (6/15/06).

The blaming, and the shaming, which did in fact happen, and which is gut-wrenching even to think about, was terrible. But we didn’t do it. We were in the middle of disciplining the man who was doing it.

So here is a summary of the disciplinary proceedings against Gary Greenfield. He was suspended from the Supper in March of 2006 for his refusal to meet with the elders regarding questions of his treatment of his family. This was a four week suspension. The suspension was made indefinite in April because of his continued refusal to meet. His behavior was terrible, including toward Natalie. Charges were drawn up for an excommunication trial in July of 2006. Those charges included “unrepentant mistreatment,” “harsh and abusive language,” “vandalizing the family business,” “refusal to supply financial support,” and “claiming the authority of a husband and father [was] virtually absolute.” When he joined the Eastern Orthodox church, we set aside the formal trial (for the sake of the family), and considered his departure while under this suspension as tantamount to excommunication. The reason we did not go through the process of a full trial is that there was a concern that Gary would retaliate against his family (financially), something he had shown himself fully capable of doing.

So I know for a fact that Natalie was not lying to me back then about her father. I believed her account then, and I still believe it today. There were other witnesses to what Gary was doing, and a careful record of everything was kept.

In the years since, it is Natalie’s account that has shifted. I am very sorry for her, and ache over the grief she has gone through, but the documented reality is that at the time of her abuse — first one kind from Jamin, and another blaming kind from her father — she knew then that we were on her side. She says now that we were not, but at the time she said we were, and was telling us that her father was mistreating her. The only way for her to deny this now is for her to confess that she was falsely accusing her father to us. Was she? I don’t believe so.

I don’t know exactly what changed, but it wasn’t our attitude toward abuse. The reality is that we discipline men who treat women that way. We did then, and we do now.

A simplistic approach to this sorry story is to present it as a choice between believing Natalie or not. It is actually a choice between believing Natalie ten years ago, with corroborating evidence, or believing Natalie now with no corroborating evidence. Her story has changed, away from the documented facts, and as long as she persists in this, real healing will continue to elude her.

There are other things that could be said about the years since then, but I think the above provides a basic outline of what actually happened thus far.

So I would like to conclude this section with an honest set of questions for Laura Turner.

Why should we have left the Greenfield women unprotected from an abusive husband and father? Why should we have disbelieved their verbal and written reports to us? What evidence do you have that should have made us want to set those reports aside? And if we had left the women unprotected a decade ago, do you think it is at all possible that you might be persuaded to write an article attacking us for that? So what do you want? Do you want us to believe women who report mistreatment, or do you not? I know that feminists don’t like jokes, and that is really unfortunate, because your feminism is one.

I am very sorry, but one more thing needs to be added to the timeline. I said a moment ago that I don’t know the exact nature of what changed, but in 2007 Natalie was suspended from the Supper because she had gotten engaged to a non-Christian man (7/19/07). Natalie is now married to Wes Petersen, not a believer, and that is a big part of what has changed. I wish her well, and I wish him well, and want nothing but God’s blessing on the two of them. But despite my best wishes, they are not well now. Those who know their situation know they are lost and hurting people. Natalie has recently scrubbed her Facebook history and her blog to make her overall story more palatable to those Christians she has wanted to tell her story to, but certain unfortunate facts were missed.

Regular readers of this blog know that I am not a big fan of trigger warnings, but this next point really does require one. Please note that I am not making anything public. These videos were made public a couple years ago by Wes himself. They were public then and are public now. These are “performance art” videos of Natalie’s husband, entirely naked, that he filmed of himself. Don’t click if it concerns you because you can’t unsee them. Wes and Natalie wanted them public, and I am simply providing links to them — here and here.

Update: The first link above to their posting of “The Bridge” video has now been taken down by them. You can still see it here, but only if you need to. Caution still advised. The relevance and/or propriety of these links has been questioned in the comments below, but surely the relevance is obvious? This behavior is something that Natalie currently believes is normal.  Notice that they took down the first video, but not the second. That one must be okay then, one they are still prepared to defend. This is the worldview perspective that is criticizing our handling of sexual abuse cases. And this is what Boz T has identified his GRACE ministry with. This is what Ryan Sather has identified CRU with — that and his mocking dismissal of women who were abused. The whole thing is kind of a tawdry spectacle — evangelical leaders in bed with Jezebel. What would Elijah say?  Update concluded

So just ask yourself this: what would happen if videos like this had been made by anyone else around here — by Jamin, by one of our Greyfriars, by an NSA student, by anyone related to me? You get the picture.

Is this what it takes to have Boz Tchividjian have his ministry link arms with you? Would Boz recommend that any ministry hire any man who had filmed himself doing something like this as a youth minister? When we tried to tell Boz’s organization privately that this is the kind of thing they were dealing with, all we got back from GRACE was the threat of a lawsuit. Christians suing Christians before unbelievers, just like in the Bible.

Linking to these videos is not retaliation, and it is not provocative. It is not gasoline on the fire. This is the kind of thing I have been laboring to prevent, not for my own sake but for the sake of others. I told Natalie in an email a while ago that it was not possible to dig up half a corpse. But if you insist, if you demand, if you keep it up, if you finally get your story on Jezebel, the rest of the corpse comes too. So this is where we now are. You wanted the whole story, and we are almost there. Unfortunately, for all you angry Internet personnel out there, this is just one more instance of you swinging at one person like me and hitting Natalie instead.

One last thing. If someone wants to read some accounts from other women in Moscow who have also been victims, but who processed it in a way much more conducive to healing, I would like to recommend this web site. There are no comments, and the women involved are not debating with anyone, or answering anyone. They are simply telling their stories. Because they are not attacking anyone, but simply giving their testimonies, their names are withheld. The stories are compelling, just like the truth.

871
Leave a Reply

avatar
 
61 Comment threads
810 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
97 Comment authors
David TrounceRick HeidengertimothyDuells Quimbykatecho Recent comment authors

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Christopher
Member

Ouch. Retaliation and gas on the fire is exactly how your detractors will view this post.

wyclif
Guest
wyclif

It’s rather puzzling that they think recounting the timeline of events constitutes “retaliation.”

Christopher
Member

I don’t think it is retaliation but the anti-Doug crowd do.

Ilíon
Member

Read more carefully, please.

wyclif
Guest
wyclif

There’s nothing at all wrong with my reading ability, dear.

David
Guest
David

Sad. Everyone knows Jezebel is a joke but that article was hacktastic. I hope Natalie finds peace in the only truly innocent victim.

Bummer
Guest
Bummer

Heavy. The men in a woman’s life can cause incredible damage. I feel awful for Natalie. On Twitter she said “I was barred from communion for dating an ‘unbeliever’. I married him. Ironically, he’s the best man I’ve ever known.” A guy troubled enough to film himself doing that and post it publicly? The best? The church was clearly right to be worried…

Nate Wilson
Guest
Nate Wilson

I’ve known Natalie’s family forever. I know (and like) Wes. He’s worked in my home. He’s coached my son. I hate seeing Natalie lash out against those who cared and care for her, rejecting a place where she could find true rest. I hate (for many reasons) seeing Wes in something so bent as these videos. I really do hope that God brings them both a glorious and gracious resolution to the turmoil they clearly feel. The Gospel fears no darkness. Grace flinches from no wounds. As public as they have made their troubles, the Holy Spirit can bring them… Read more »

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

Thank you Nate. This was kind and gracious and a fitting comment for a servant of Christ.

Bonhoeffer1945
Guest
Bonhoeffer1945

Good words, Nate. As silly and, honestly, depraved as that video appears, I’m left thinking that the darkness in which I’ve stored much immorality and expressions of self-centeredness is just as bad. Come, Lord Jesus, come and save us all from ourselves and from your righteous indignation.

RandMan
Guest
RandMan

Natalie’s husband’s art is hardly relevant to Wilson’s handling of her case. Just more shame and blame, trying to make a tenuous connection. I like Katie Botkin’s excellent observation about this: “Is public nudity automatically sinful? Is a naked dude banging a bent piece of rebar against a wall until it begins to straighten an abominable piece of work that shows the inner evil of said naked dude? If you answered yes to these questions, and you’re a Calvinist Christian, then congratulations, you’ve just invalidated your own religion. If you’re a Calvinist, then you believe that Jesus is one and… Read more »

David Trounce
Guest

I think there is a diffeence beween stripping off for the camera and being stripped and beaten for the salvation of the world.

RandMan
Guest
RandMan

Of course you do. There is also a difference between ‘stripping off for the camera’ and using your body as metaphor and allegory to make an artistic statement. There may be a range of opinions as to the quality of the art in this case, but the honest intention behind it is clear to me. To completely misunderstand it or more accurately, misrepresent it as in Doug’s case as some kind of moral decay and use it to shame and tar Natalie is the worst kind of retaliation. Wilson is the one baring his ass here. Re the piece itself,… Read more »

duellsquimby
Member

Why do you kick against the goads? You are bent with sin as we all are, and if it pleases God He will beat you straight. It happened to Paul, and it happened to Jonah.

RandMan
Guest
RandMan

I doubt it.

duellsquimby
Member

Not for long.

David Trounce
Guest

It is moral decay. It’s base. It’s vulgar. It is indecent exposure. Please understand I am a Christian and so aim to define things according to the word of God. Art is not a biblical category. Shame is, and his conduct is shameful.

RandMan
Guest
RandMan

Let’s say (like Elvis’ early performances were received) that it is art in moral decay and vulgar. How is Natalie’s current husband’s work at all relevant to Wilson’s failure in the Wight case ten years ago and his blame and shame of Natalie’s family when she was younger?

David Trounce
Guest

It’s relevant as an example of the ongoing shame being dumped on Natalie. His video shames his entire family.

Rebecca
Guest
Rebecca

I’m not sure if you are defending the posting of the videos or not. Are you advocating for pastors to minister to victims of sexual abuse by posting examples “of ongoing shame being dumped on” them? For what purpose? How does this help Natalie?

David Trounce
Guest

What has been put on public display in this case does not help Natalie. That is my point. But who is the offender – the one who put it on public display or the one who pointed out that it was on public display? Doug is pointing out the train wreck.

Rebecca
Guest
Rebecca

And do you believe this to be pastoral or helpful behavior on Wilson’s part?

I doubt as if most of the people commenting or reading here would have known of the existence of these videos were it not for Wilson alerting us. How does that help her?

David Trounce
Guest

Rebecca, I don’t know how this will help her, I can only speculate. So, here’s my speculation. Put yourself entirely in her shoes regarding the faith. You were raised a believer and were looking to Jesus for your salvation. You fell away. You married an unbeliever. You then continued to fall away. Your husband does some things, which, when defined by your former Christian faith, is shameful. Everyone finds out about it. Putting myself in those shoes, I wonder if I might not now see how far I have fallen. I wonder if I might fall to my knees and… Read more »

Rebecca
Guest
Rebecca

I’m glad Douglas Wilson type tactics worked for you, and that you seem to view them as the goodness of the Lord that brought you to repentance. I would argue that this approach is perhaps more effective used against men than women. Perhaps a man in the same situation would be more likely to concede, “Yes, my wife is a warped floozy; thank you so much for pointing this out in the most public way possible; I will immediately repent!!” However, a woman who has felt shamed by sexual abuse, and felt shamed and wounded by what she viewed as… Read more »

David Trounce
Guest

I would have a problem with anyone who tried to “engineer a tactic” to bring about repentance.

Most of those who come to repentance have found that it occurred in the organic circumstances of life and that God used whatever rod he felt appropriate.

Oh, I should clarify that my repentance was not the result of anything my wife did. It was the result of having my own folly exposed.

Rick Heidenger
Guest
Rick Heidenger

yes. this is always the way it happens: God reveals our own utter emptiness and bent toward depravity to us. and please don’t take my responses as a personal attack. I am sure you are a good man who tries to do the right thing.

RandMan
Guest
RandMan

Well, that is your opinion. Let’s say your priggish notions of art are correct, and that making art featuring nudity is some how shameful, placing Wes in the pantheon of other shameful unrepentant sinners: (Michelangelo, Da VInci, Goya, Cezanne and one or two other reprobates in human history…)

it is utterly irrelevant to what is actually on the table here.

David Trounce
Guest

Who said nudity was shameful? What is shameful, Randman, is a father and husband publicly posting video’s of his naked self thrusting sky high for his mum to see….and then having people defend the indefensible by saying, “Oh, but it’s art”.

Matt Massingill
Guest
Matt Massingill

Exactly. And yet defenders will grasp at straws with the supposed “context” that is provided by either the genre of performance art itself, or the intended “meaning” or “context” of the particular performance itself. But this is foolish for a couple of reasons: First, the, the type or genre of the “art” is itself a medium, nothing more. Mediums in and of themselves don’t provide context. Performance art might tend to be rendered such that it is very subjective, just like book might be written to make very nebulous or murky point, or a song lyric might also. This doesn’t… Read more »

Rick Heidenger
Guest
Rick Heidenger

Even if performance art is predicated on a fallacious understanding–one that allows for or encourages some kinds of sin–for a person like Doug Wilson to drag a performance art video into the issue is a red herring. He (and you) can be 100 percent right in your criticisms of the content (or lack thereof) of that medium–it just doesn’t say much about the character of Natalie’s husband. And the character of Natalie’s husband is itself irrelevant to the issue!

duellsquimby
Member

As they would say to the Judge on ‘Law & Order’, “Your Honor, it goes to the character of the witness”. Art, nor the artist exist in a vacuum.

Rick Heidenger
Guest
Rick Heidenger

No, of course not. But judging character is difficult, yes?

Rick Heidenger
Guest
Rick Heidenger

In my opinion, all of this–the “controversy” as a whole, Doug Wilson’s response to it, the responses of some of his critics, his posting of these videos–is evidence of the distortions of tribalism. Rather than soberly confront the issues, we have people being turned into symbols and scapegoats–Wilson by some, some by Wilson. “Our kind of people” would never film themselves hitting a stick naked. These are signals–flags and markers that are being waved about to incite hatred and division. Satan thrives and gathers power in this environment.

Rick Heidenger
Guest
Rick Heidenger

So public nudity is shameful? Or nudity in film is shameful?
I understand that performance art courts shock value, sometimes. But art that shocks is not always sinful. You know this, David. Doug knows this. Wilson is leading people into the murky back-alley of a debate about propriety in art. And why? Even if he is right that the video is in some way objectionable (and he may be–I am a Catholic, and the Church has flagged nudity in art as a difficult issue), what on earth is the point?

Rick Heidenger
Guest
Rick Heidenger

Sin, not shame, would be the relevant category. And the sin–real or not–of Natalie’s current husband has little to do with the trustworthiness of Natalie. Do you think that people who sin are not to be trusted? Or believed? Do you presume to judge the hearts of men?

David Trounce
Guest

Rick, I am using shame in it’s biblical category here snd elsewhere. As in, a lazy son shames his mother. Proverbs.

Evan
Guest
Evan

“If you’re a Calvinist, then you believe that Jesus is one and the same with the all-knowing, all-powerful and sinless God who predestined Jesus to die a violent death completely naked. He was publicly flogged (with a whip) and then nailed up on cross nude. Taken out of context, this would apparently sound to Doug Wilson and his ilk like the worst torture porn the world has ever seen. If being naked in public by your own volition is a sin, then Jesus was not sinless, and thus could not have validly taken on your sins.” What an asinine statement.… Read more »

RandMan
Guest
RandMan

The point is intention Evan. Unlike scripture, the true and unequivocal word of god, some art, especially performance art requires context. The point in these pieces is clear, and the fact that him being naked is what is bothersome speaks to prudishness and lack of understanding about artistic expression. Notice I am not commenting on the success of the piece or the quality of the art itself. Which I do not care about. Wilson’s intention is clear here: to try and twist the existence of Natalie’s husband’s work into a kind of gotcha. Ridiculous, obvious and desperate. Stop shaking your… Read more »

duellsquimby
Member

That you thought blasphemy would get you anywhere here say a lot about you. smh

Rick Heidenger
Guest
Rick Heidenger

What blasphemy? What on earth are you talking about?

duellsquimby
Member

The profane and contemptuous way that RandMan characterizes the death of Jesus on the Cross is quite blasphemous, as referenced by Evan in the above quote. Perhaps he feels that his attempt to bring the death of Christ down to the level of a lewd trashy performer is SNL, and elevate the utter pap with some worth.

connie
Guest
connie

I wouldn’t go to your church if you paid me. I see how Doug treats rape victims. So glad my church is a safe haven, many are NOT.

Evan
Guest
Evan

Wow.

Rick Heidenger
Guest
Rick Heidenger

I really don’t see why these videos are, in their own context, remarkable at all. I am honestly very surprised that Doug Wilson does. All I can say is, he knows better. Performance art is a certain medium, one that uses the human body as its template. I suppose one can decide that the medium itself is reprobate–or that many of the uses to which it is put are–but that needs defending. Even if Natalie and her husband had become Wiccan and were posting videos of themselves eating human feces, it would not shed much light on the issues at… Read more »

Steve H
Guest
Steve H

Wow, I hope this will help calm the seething trolling and hatred, but I have a hunch that the only consistency the haters have is to be inconsistent. Rage and indignation to patriarchs in “power” regardless of the truth. This is just another story being used by the feminist wrecking ball. How many times can you answer according to this folly?

Susan Gail
Guest
Susan Gail

This isn’t retaliation, it’s telling the other side of the story after Natalie et al posted their side in great detail for a long time now. Things left hidden have been drug out into the street.

Natalie admits to marrying an unbeliever then moans about being excommunicated. Wow. Tragic case of self-inflicted wounds piling up for someone who was already seriously wounded by others.

MJ Diaz
Guest
MJ Diaz

She was excommunicated for marrying someone who holds different beliefs. Fine, churches get to make those kinds of rules. But guess what that tells everybody? It tells everybody that the church and Doug Wilson think her sin of marrying someone she loves is worse than the sin of the man who abused her. No matter what your beliefs, you ought to be able to see why that is wrong, and why she’d be upset about it.

duellsquimby
Member

Not quite, this isn’t a matter of opinion. You can find it plainly written by Paul in the New Testament that believers should not marry an unbeliever. 2 Cor 6:14. This wasn’t something they were ambushed by either. She would have known this would happen when she married him. He did have different belief’s but this isn’t something that was hidden in pages, or interpreted on the spot, and this wasn’t Doug Wilson’s personal opinion brought to bare either, this would have been the position of the Church, and CREC. Don’t make this out to be a personal vendetta.

eli
Guest
eli

Sin doesn’t cause excommunication. Unrepentant sin does.

Susan Gail
Guest
Susan Gail

Non sequitur. If the perp wasn’t excommunicated, it was because of repentance. That is the deciding factor, not the sin, which as you pointed out is clearly worse.

Natalie is/was unrepentant and that is why she was churched.

One can be put out of the fold for a less serious offense.

Gregory Hickman
Guest
Gregory Hickman

You must be from the South using ‘drug’ like that. ; )

timothy
Guest
timothy

Prayers for you Pastor.

Jane
Member

To the mind comes that image Doug used a few months ago of rain clearing the air — this is a very bitter, acid rain. But for those willing to listen, it does indeed clear the air, though blurring the vision a bit with tears in the meantime. How horribly sad for so many.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

It is sad, and I do see Natalie as utterly victimized–by people, by circumstances, by the aftermath of abuse and a failure to protect. She was prey as a child, and she is prey now to people who, whatever they may say, are using her as a heat-seeking missile. I don’t find it surprising that her story has changed. I wonder what will happen to her when everyone finds a new cause celebre and moves on.

timothy
Guest
timothy

On the lighter side, the spectacle of “respected theologians” defending Jezebel will have all gravitas of the guy on the airplane insisting he reads Playboy for the articles.

Ian Miller
Member

A very piercing image. Thank you.

duellsquimby
Member

Quite.

AMA
Guest
AMA

It’s worth noting that Laura Turner is a frequent writer for her.meneutics, the women’s division of Christianity Today. What in the ham sandwich is a Christian woman doing writing for Jezebel? Can two walk together unless they are agreed?

drewnchick
Member

Or…one might ask what in the Sam Hill is a “Jezebel” doing writing for a Christian magazine? Or, maybe, one might ask whether the two publications have that much distance between them…

AMA
Guest
AMA

Agreed. Turner has long been a vocal proponent of a liberal feminist version of Christianity. A few months ago, Christianity Today endorsed using pronouns of preference for “transgender” people. They’re going off the rails.

Cody
Guest
Cody

Using pronouns of preference for transgender people means they’re “going off the rails?” How is accommodating for a group of people bad? This comment baffles me.

drewnchick
Member

For a magazine with the word “Christianity” in the title, yes, it most definitely is going off the rails.

Cody
Guest
Cody

Christianity is all about caring for the marginalized, the minorities in our society. Transgender people are people too and should be respected.

Evan
Guest
Evan

“Christianity is all about caring for the marginalized, the minorities in our society. ”

Incorrect.

Cody
Guest
Cody

How in the world is this incorrect? Have you heard about Jesus? He did this, like, ALL THE TIME.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I think it is correct, but it isn’t enough. People can do the Lord’s work in caring for the marginalized without belief that Jesus came to save them. I think Christianity is “all about” receiving the gospel. The good works will flow from there.

Bonhoeffer1945
Guest
Bonhoeffer1945

Have you not read the Scriptures, Cody? Our Jesus is very concerned with the poor and marginalized… by feeding, clothing, restoring dignity and calling them to repent. I don’t read the Scriptures and see ‘victims’ I see ‘sinners’ and ‘sufferers’ both called to repent, believe, and live a life of imitation of God and mercy.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

But Matthew 25:44 makes it partly correct, I think. Our love for our Lord demands that we see and care for Him in the image of the weak and powerless.

Evan
Guest
Evan

@Cody, If Christianity is all about caring for the ‘marginalized, the minorities in our society’, then how is it any different than any other moralistic social program whether it is religious or not? “Now when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper,a 7a woman came up to him with an alabaster flask of very expensive ointment, and she poured it on his head as he reclined at table. 8And when the disciples saw it, they were indignant, saying, “Why this waste? 9For this could have been sold for a large sum and given to the poor.”… Read more »

Cody
Guest
Cody

I think you misunderstood my comment. I never said Christianity was “only” about caring for people. My opinion is that love and care, with a bias toward the downtrodden, is part of the heart of Christianity.

Also, you seem to be speaking of social programs in a negative way. I think Christianity can partner with these and bring more good to the world. And we can offer Jesus’ message of love, forgiveness and reconciliation in the process.

Evan
Guest
Evan

So when you said “christianity is all about…”, you didn’t mean “christianity is all about…”? Fair enough.

Cody
Guest
Cody

Just because I accidentally worded it wrong doesn’t give you a right to be a jerk. Very Christ-like of you.

Evan
Guest
Evan

” jerk”

Normally, I only let my wife call me that, but since you were so Christ-like when you said it, I’ll let it go.

Cody
Guest
Cody

You’re honestly saying that me calling you jerk, makes me a jerk? Wow.

Jesus called the Pharisees brood of vipers. I’m think it’s ok to point out jerk behavior.

“So when you said “christianity is all about…”, you didn’t mean “christianity is all about…”? Fair enough.”

How do you not see your statement as condescending?

Evan
Guest
Evan

I remember this one from when I was a kid:

“you’re a jerk!”
“no, you are”
“you’re the one that is”
“I know you are but what am I.”
“you’re a jerk!”

Seriously, don’t take yourself too seriously. This conversation is obviously over. The last word is yours. Cheers.

separateunion
Guest
separateunion

Don’t bother. These types constantly point the finger at everyone else while ignoring their own flaws and errors. It’s sick.

Evan
Guest
Evan

“Don’t bother. These types constantly point the finger at everyone else while ignoring their own flaws and errors. It’s sick.”

Can you tone down the condescension please? Thanks.

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

why?

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

cody this is what natalie would have been subjected to had she stayed in the kirk and the reason why her husband is the best man she’s ever known

Dave
Guest
Dave

Here, that is a false statement. Natalie was subjected to love not hate. She chose to turn her back on Christ. The Christ Church members did not turn their backs in her.

You are completely off base.

Bonhoeffer1945
Guest
Bonhoeffer1945

Let me get this right, Cody. You can condescend to someone (assuming Evan did) and that’s worthy of the tribunal, but you can call someone a “jerk” (as opposed to simply saying, “Evan, you’re mistaken…”) and that’s OK?

Bonhoeffer1945
Guest
Bonhoeffer1945

Cody – you spoke/wrote imprecisely. Take responsibility for it and move on. We’ve all done it. You may not have intended it, but you did.

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

all about in the vernacular doesnt mean only about

Ian Miller
Member

I agree they are people and should be respected. However, there is disagreement on whether transgenderism is a healthy mental self-image or a mental disorder. If someone believe someone else has a mental disorder, encouraging the disorder does not seem respectful.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Like giving Napoleon hats to the deluded who think they have been exiled to Elba. I see it as a mental disorder which calls out for our sympathy and intelligent support.

Ian Miller
Member

But does support mean agreement?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

No. Let’s take the Napoleon example. It seems easier in the moment to hand over the hat than to explain, lovingly and patiently and repeatedly, that the person is in the grips of a delusion. Before long, there is a cottage industry of Napoleon hat-making, with experts arguing on both sides of the tricorn approach. A while later you find people who disagree with handing out Napoleon hats being pilloried as unloving and hostile by people who do. Tempers flare, and the poor delusional patient finds himself in the center of a fight which has really nothing to do with… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

Totally agree. I don’t like the anger at transsexual people I hear from so many conservative voices (though I think some cases do seem to be someone attempting to cash in on a trend to indulge their perversions, which does deserve anger, but erring on the side of caution to minister to the truly broken is probably the better path). Your analysis seems quite sensible and sensitive, thank you!

Ian Miller
Member

I do agree that unnecessary antagonizment is inappropriate. But where does the line between truth and hostility get drawn?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Tell the truth in love. When I figure out how to do that consistently, I will get back to you.

Ian Miller
Member

Don’t we all wish for that? :)

drewnchick
Member

Um, not it’s not, and those who told you this–whether actual people or your own thoughts–were deceiving you. Christianity is all about God condescending to save His people, which include the “marginalized” as well as the “well-heeled.” Sexual deviants who mutilate their bodies because their brains are battered by lies from Hell are certainly people too, and God may condescend to save some of them, too. When He does, there will be much rejoicing in Heaven, and much contemplation of what to do now here on Earth since the body has already been mutilated. But until then, there’s little cause… Read more »

Cody
Guest
Cody

You honestly believe we’re not supposed to care for “the least of these?” You can have whatever beliefs you want, but please don’t use the name Christianity.

You’re treating these people like they’re monsters; we are all equal.

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

You think these people (your words) are the least of these? They are unfortunate, but that does not necessarily make them the people Jesus was talking about. Now how is grief, prayers, and Christian charity (Malachi’s words) treating them like they are monsters?

Vishwanath Haily Dalvi
Guest
Vishwanath Haily Dalvi

“But until then, there’s little cause for respect.”

Dear Mr. Malachi,
I can give you grounds for respect: That these people are made in the very image of God. That they are immortal beings. That Jesus died for them while they were still His enemies. The shed blood of our Lord demands that you give them respect.

Jane
Member

It is about those things, but it is also about speaking the truth, not complicity in lies.

Rick Davis
Guest
Rick Davis

I’ve always loved the quote by Dorothy Sayers, “It is fatal to let people
suppose that Christianity is only a mode of feeling; it is vitally necessary to insist that it is first and foremost a rational
explanation of the universe.”

Don Shellie Martin
Guest
Don Shellie Martin

Christianity is about the gospel of Jesus Christ. Making dead people alive .

Bike bubba
Guest

Yes, the “transgender” are created in His image, but Christianity is first about (per Westminster) glorifying God and enjoying Him forever, and the means by which we do this is to repent of our sins and come to Him.

Repent of all our sins, including transgenderism, by the way.

Carson Spratt
Member

Partially because the sin they’re currently involved in is what is informing their choice of vocabulary. The Bible tells us we don’t choose our gender. They reject that truth, and part of that rejection is the rejection of common pronouns. They seek to control the discussion by controlling what words are used. Try correcting someone without the words “sin,” “forgiveness,” and “Christ:” it’s hard. Equally hard is correcting and reproving a transgender person while tacitly admitting their point by using the pronouns they want to be addressed by.

Carson Spratt
Member

This also means that when a website declares that it is changing to a trans-gender friendly vocabulary, it means that tolerance of the sin itself is right behind. It’s the next boxcar on the train, so to speak. Hence the comment about “derailing.”

jesuguru
Guest
jesuguru

That’s really the issue here… while people should be treated as made in the image of God, and shown the light and mercy available through repentance and faith in Christ, it is not helping in any way to be complicit in the lie of “transgenderism”. No amount of surgical genital reconfiguration, hormonal rebalancing, or wardrobe overhauls can undo one’s God-given gender: xx chromosome for female, xy for male.

rungeeric
Member
rungeeric

Now you’re speaking some truth that, in our attempts to be gracious, we all have trouble seeing.

Jane
Member

Her.meneutics is pretty bad on the whole, though, so while it’s a shame it’s in a Christian magazine, the crossover doesn’t surprise me all that much.

adad0
Member

Really liked the “Women freed” link! Thanks Ladies!

Ladies 3, darkness 0!

Evan
Guest
Evan

That picture is my new desktop background. Thank you.

Random
Guest
Random

How Jesus like and pastoral of you. That’s exactly what Jesus would do in order to bring people closer to him! Bring their follies to light for all to see. Good job. You are certainly going to be able to reach those who need love this way. If you really believed Natalie and her husband are lost and need help, you wouldn’t have done this in an effort to make it clear to all how right you are and how wrong they are.

Mark Hanson
Guest
Mark Hanson

Ah, you mean like Jesus to the Samaritan woman: “…you have had five husbands, and the man you have now isn’t your husband.” Sounds exactly like what Jesus would do.

And that Samaritan woman ran away, started a blog, and wrote about how Jesus had abused her.

Oh, wait…

separateunion
Guest
separateunion

Wait, Doug is Jesus now? Wow…

Mark Hanson
Guest
Mark Hanson

I think you didn’t read Random’s post I responded to, which compared Doug to Jesus.

Random
Guest
Random

It seemed as though you were being harsh towards Doug but instead we now see you were defending him and disputing my comment. Are we not called to strive to be like Jesus? Is a pastor not held to a higher standard in this calling? I didn’t say Doug was Jesus. But shouldn’t he strive to be so?

separateunion
Guest
separateunion

Comparing Doug to Jesus is quite different than saying Doug IS Jesus.

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

where have you been?

Random
Guest
Random

When Jesus said this was he speaking to an audience in an attempt to prove how right he was and how wrong she was? Or did he say this directly to the woman in an effort to draw her to him?

Evan
Guest
Evan

“When Jesus said this was he speaking to an audience in an attempt to prove how right he was and how wrong she was?”

How else is someone going to come to Jesus unless they are made aware of how right He is and how wrong they are? Is there any other way to come to Jesus other than through repentance?

Random
Guest
Random

Motive is the point here. Doug’s motive in showing these videos doesn’t seem to be to loving show Natalie and Wes their faults in an effort to bring them to Jesus. If you think that is the point, please explain it to me so I can see it with you.

Evan
Guest
Evan

“Motive is the point here. Doug’s motive in showing these videos doesn’t seem to be to loving show Natalie and Wes their faults….”

If you already know Doug’s motives then you’re already well beyond me. I try to stay out of that game, not being omniscient and all. *wink*

Random
Guest
Random

I didn’t say it WAS his motive. I don’t know his motives. I said it SEEMS.

Evan
Guest
Evan

Either way my point still stands. No one comes to Jesus unless they know they are wrong and He is right. Unless I’m mistaken, that’s one of Doug’s jobs as a pastor; to help facilitate that.

Random
Guest
Random

And my question still stands…. If Doug was doing this in an effort to bring Natalie and Wes to Jesus, great. Do you think that was the point? Given the context of this blog? If so, please show me. Seriously. I want to see it too.

If it is not his point to bring them to Jesus through showing this, then are you ok with him posting this? If so, please explain.

Another question – is a public blog the place to try to get others to see the errors of their ways?

Evan
Guest
Evan

Instead of wondering what the point is, why don’t you read what Doug wrote instead of hypothesizing? Here you go: “Update: The first link above to their posting of “The Bridge” video has now been taken down by them. You can still see it here, but only if you need to. Caution still advised. The relevance and/or propriety of these links has been questioned in the comments below, but surely the relevance is obvious? This behavior is something that Natalie currently believes is normal. Notice that they took down the first video, but not the second. That one must be… Read more »

Random
Guest
Random

“This is the worldview perspective that is criticizing our handling of sexual abuse cases.”

Do we need to prove the devil evil to prove Jesus is right and good?

Evan
Guest
Evan

Do I need to eat biscuits to know that cake is good?

Random
Guest
Random

Exactly! Why bring biscuits into a discussion about cake? Why bring evil up to defend Jesus?

Evan
Guest
Evan

I don’t know, I forgot what we were talking about. Hungry for a cake all of a sudden…

jesuguru
Guest
jesuguru

Why can’t we have our cake and eat our biscuits too???

David
Guest
David

A lot of good people at Christchurch including in my opinion Doug Wilson are being maligned because of this ongoing discussion and so I don’t think it’s unfair to bring facts out into the light since there’s so much misinformation getting a great deal more airtime on the Internet. The same nothing is to essentially appear as if the accusations are true. There are different ways to defend yourself and if your defense is true then by defending yourself you’re defending the truth. The fact that people can defend themselves out of selfish motives does not by way of a… Read more »

Random
Guest
Random

38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.

David
Guest
David

Matthew 23:33. And this is the same Jesus speaking as in the sermon on the mount.

There’s no contradiction between these passages, just a problem with your proof texting.

separateunion
Guest
separateunion

You can make someone aware of their sin without broadcasting their sin for all to see. For some reason, CREC pastors seem to think public shaming is the same as calling someone to repentance.

wackytobeme
Member

What sins did Pastor Wilson broadcast that weren’t already out there (of their own doing) for all to see?

soylentg
Member

Yeah, what was John thinking when he recorded that conversation. Not very Christian of him. And why in the world did Paul reveal all those sexual shenanigans in 1 Corinthians. He definitely should be called out for not being very “pastoral.”

random
Guest
random

Did Paul make these revelations in an effort to defend himself? Doug is using another’s sin to justify/defend his own actions. Why does he feel that necessary?

soylentg
Member

If you read the first 4 chapters of 1 Corinthians there are a number of places where one could read into the text that Paul was defending himself, but of course he is really defending biblical principles. But of course Pastor Wilson’s motive is to defend himself. It could not possibly be to defend the church he pastors, or to defend biblical principles. I guess I just missed that due to my lack of the spiritual gift of mind reading which you seem to have.

random
Guest
random

Why is it that the majority of responses I am getting from people defending Wilson come with a certainly rudeness? Have I been rude to you?

soylentg
Member

I would not have thought that proclaiming your spiritual gift was rude, but rather flattering. Or do you think it rude to use sarcasm? …you know, something like “How Jesus like and pastoral of you”

Evan
Guest
Evan

” Or do you think it rude to use sarcasm? …you know, something like “How Jesus like and pastoral of you”

Doh!

Random
Guest
Random

Touche! I was being snarky.

Reading through the comments especially those from Malachi leave a bad taste.

soylentg
Member

I thought at least some level of snarky-ness was a requirement for commenting here; and I say that with what I hope is the appropriate level. Personally speaking, without sarcasm I would be a pretty quiet guy.

David
Guest
David

Because there are people ready to proclaim everything that Doug Wilson touches and the people at his church as being nothing more than a patriarchal sex cult on the basis of the misinformation that’s been bandied about by this story. And that may not be important for the individual people per se but since this is a Christian Church and a Christian ministry there is nothing wrong with them defending themselves. Honestly, the hypocrisy in this question is breathtaking. Everybody wants to comment negatively about the man and the moment he tries to clarify even a factual issue he’s accused… Read more »

Matthew Schraud
Member

The Apostle Paul named certain persons to be avoided in letters that were publicly read. Jesus also handed out some “woes” to the lost pharisees in front of his disciples and a pretty general crowd. This had a dual purpose. It was to call the pharisees to repentance, and it was also to protect the sheep from the lies of the pharisees. This post by Pastor Wilson I think serves a similar purpose. He is both calling out those who are lost and are behaving hypocritically, but he is also guarding his own flock. If he took this situation quietly,… Read more »

Julie Anne
Guest

You mean he submitted himself to his friend. Wow.

Vishwanath Haily Dalvi
Guest
Vishwanath Haily Dalvi

Dear Mr (?) Random,
Could you suggest a manner by which Mr. Wilson could have presented his side of the story without doing the alleged harm to Ms. Natalie et al? Because, if you could, that would be edifying.

Random
Guest
Random

I think he can present his case by stating what he did in care for Natalie and say he stands by it. Why must he stoop to their level? Should he not be above reproach? And if he did everything correctly then why must he bring up a corpse? That’s retaliation. Not defense.

Steve H
Guest
Steve H

Sure it’s a defense, people do it all the time in courts of law. It’s called a ‘character witness’, in this case it happens to be the husband. Don’t you folks watch reruns of Law and Order?

Random
Guest
Random

Shouldn’t Wilson as a pastor be above the court of law in his actions? Is he not held to a higher standard?

Evan
Guest
Evan

“Shouldn’t Wilson as a pastor be above the court of law in his actions?”

Wait, like Steven Seagal?

Steve H
Guest
Steve H

What is higher than the law? Are you suggesting that Wilson can’t be lawful? Character Witness is one reason we believe in the resurrection. Me thinks you just don’t like Doug’s tone…

Steve H
Guest
Steve H

If God was not bound by His law, he would not have had to send His son to die. Why can’t Doug operate within the law?

Vishwanath Haily Dalvi
Guest
Vishwanath Haily Dalvi

“stoop to their level …”

Yes. This is a valid complaint about Mr. Wilson’s approach. I have often wished that he would practise what he preaches so well: especially about being suspicious of the tendency of the flesh to defend itself. It may well be the result of writing too much too fast (Proverbs 10:19).

Maybe the Holy Spirit will cure him of this soon. Perhaps the cure is already underway. Let’s see …

AM
Guest
AM

Did you really create a blog where women can anonymously share how you helped them with their sexual abuse? Wow.

Jane
Member

The answer is, no he didn’t. They did.

AM
Guest
AM

Yes, I see this now. After reading the blog I see it was created by women in his church. My bad.

wyclif
Guest
wyclif

Wait, DW created that blog?

Citation needed.

Pastor L
Guest
Pastor L

Doug,
I appreciated many of the things you said in this post, but posting a link to those videos was way over the line. I understand why you did it, but it makes you seem petty and crude. Just because something is public does not mean we should direct people’s gaze towards it (trigger warning or no). As a fellow pastor and Christian brother, I ask you to please remove those links.

Rob Steele
Guest
Rob Steele

I’m taking the warning seriously and not looking but I wonder whether it’s possible to describe them without being gross.

Jack Bradley
Guest
Jack Bradley

Ditto. We don’t need to see it, and you don’t need to show it.

Tyrone Taylor
Guest
Tyrone Taylor

I respectfully disagree on this point, and I do mean respectfully because I was of this same opinion at some points in my life. The reality is you could open another browser and google “naked man beats concrete with stick” and find something equally or more crude. Doug described precisely what was in the video so that it was the reader’s choice to click the link, just as it is our choice to google dirty things. I think the point was to show the depth of depravity of this couple and the choice that was made by the woman to… Read more »

AM
Guest
AM

Why does Doug need to show the depth of depravity of this couple to show he cared for her properly? Because something can be easily accessed doesn’t mean it is ok for a pastor to share it. Shouldn’t pastors be above reproach?

Does he need to prove the devil evil to show Jesus is good, just, and right?

Tyrone Taylor
Guest
Tyrone Taylor

I don’t have strong disagreement with what you said. I think the point here is you don’t just have the pagans lining up against Doug, you also have Christians condemning him. The point of posting the video is to show the average spectator in this whole thing that maybe the one side is not as pure as they are representing themselves. I think that is very important in a battle between Christians, because the fruit of the person is important when we are judging a Christian. And one side’s fruit is pretty rotten. Matthew 7:15-20.

Am
Guest
Am

We are all unpure. There. Done. Now back to not slinging unnecessary mud.

David
Guest
David

Because there are people on the internet who claim to want to defend the victims of sexual abuse but have a very funny and unbiblical way of going about that process. And they want to, unbiblically, without any oversight or first hand information themselves, accept any accusation without qualification against Doug, so that the only response left is for Doug to confess whatever words are put in his mouth by any of a number of accusers, or else he’s being self righteous. So posting links to videos like this might help wise up a lot of people who I think… Read more »

AM
Guest
AM

Being above reproach doesn’t have limits. There is not clause that says it’s ok to cross lines blur lines when there are people making accusations that you need to defend.

David
Guest
David

I don’t believe he crossed the line. He’s responsible for his actions and so when there are accusations made against him not only is it responsible for him to respond but he is required to buy the teaching of Scripture because the ministry that he has is not his own but is Christ’s ministry. For him to sit idly by and to be accused of being the purveyor of a safe haven for sexual predators denigrates not only the name of Christ but all that’s done in Christ’s name through that church. I think you’re confusing living above reproach with… Read more »

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

i dont think depravity means what you think it means.

Ilíon
Member

You’re wrong … and you will not listen to the why of it.

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

I’m actually glad he did. After viewing them I’m even more convinced of the truth of Natalies narrative. There is no there there…just a naked guy expressing….i don’t know but apparently frustration. Perhaps with the church that claims to represent God, which treated his wife in such a horrible way. It wasn’t a big deal in my opinion unless we’re now going to start deeming the renaissance painters as mentally unhinged bc they drew nudes?

I get the creepy feeling that the Kirk thinks Sitlers marriage is more advisable than Natalies.

Rick Davis
Guest
Rick Davis

No Christian should ever marry a non Christian. For any reason. Ever. Period. 2 Cor. 6:14.

However, there is nothing unscriptural about one Christian marrying another Christian who has committed terrible sins in his past and has since repented.

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

oh wow. the denial is strong.

Sara F.
Guest

THIS is the reason Pastor Wilson had to post the videos. This. Right here. I didn’t watch them, but the description is enough to make me question the character of this couple. These weren’t leaked. THEY posted them. This shows how they view sex and sexuality, which is incredibly relevant to this discussion. THIS guy comparing a naked guy on the floor to renaissance painters. Wow.

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

the videos aren’t about sex. obvious to the most casual observer.

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

btw..i did watch them.

wackytobeme
Member

So you would be okay with showing the videos to children?

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

Doug will do anything to avoid apologizing apparently.

wackytobeme
Member

Huh? How is that an answer to my question?

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

are you planning to?

Vishwanath Haily Dalvi
Guest
Vishwanath Haily Dalvi

Dear Pastor L,

Why has it crossed any line? He merely posted a link to the videos: he did not embed them in his blog. The mere fact of pointing to a liquor bar does not make someone an alcoholic. And the “liquor bar” in this case was very much relevant to the point Mr. Wilson was making.

From where I sit, I don’t see how it brings dishonour to the name of our Lord in any way. Posting the links was a quite neutral action in that regard.

Dave
Guest
Dave

Pastor L, I understand your request for the links to be removed and I disagree; however crude, they are necessary to show the mud that an unbeliever sinks into and how the whole family is pulled in. Natalie blames Wilson but refuses to see her Dad’s part in her abuse. Why didn’t Natalie blog about her journal? Is she ashamed of it? Those who champion her cause based on current blogging need to see her husband in such a disgraceful manner and to see that he is the type of man Natalie looks up to.They need to see what her… Read more »

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

predictable…more stirred up over nudity than all the mess perpetrated by sitler and wight

Rob Steele
Guest
Rob Steele

Urbane-adjacent! I think that’s a promotion, right? Go for sub-urbane.

Am
Guest
Am

Anyone else think it odd that Natalie thought it necessary and had the presence of mind to write in her letter: “I have written this on my own accord using my own, adult, thinking mind. I have not been persuaded, manipulated or coerced into anything. I stand on my own two feet and my feet are planted on my rock, Christ the Lord.” doesn’t that sound just like something a cult member would be forced to write?

That Doug keeps going back to things she wrote during the abuse shows he knows nothing of sexual abuse.

adad0
Member

Hmmmmm. Your comment sounds forced. Please signal if you need help!

Jane
Member

What exactly would someone say if they wanted to communicate that they wrote of their own free will and that was actually true?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I, Jillybean, with a Saturday Night Special held to my head, hereby assert…..

Ian Miller
Member

Ummm. I like this comment, but am unsure whether or not the “like” button is appropriate…

drewnchick
Member

Was the Apostle Paul involved in a cult from which he could not escape when he wrote his letter to the Galatians? (Gal 6:11)
AM, you really need to stop and think before you speak. And then probably not speak anyway.

AM
Guest
AM

It’s interesting you can’t reply to anyone disagreeing with you without being ugly.

herewegokids
Guest
herewegokids

no its totally representative of cult speak. i wish i didn’t know why.

David
Guest
David

Am,

If the situation were reversed, and Natalie had initially accused Doug of having a hand in her abuse, but then later recanted that statement, would you say the same thing?

drewnchick
Member

Wow…when the light shines, the cockroaches scatter and the vrocks go to screeching.

insanitybytes22
Member

What a mess of a situation. I’m sorry for all those who have suffered, including the church. All in good humor here, but from the article, “Why are people attracted to Doug Wilson? “He has a very take-charge presence,” Natalie said. “He is charismatic, very assertive. He talks a fancy game, and he’s a master of rhetoric—and that’s enticing to a lot of people, especially Christian intellectuals.” Actually it’s his commitment to scripture and the love behind it that I find appealing. Some people have a strong understanding of theology, but they are nothing more than clanging gongs because there… Read more »

drewnchick
Member

That Natalie would, in the midst of her agony say “[Doug] is my pastor and I will seek counsel from him when I feel it necessary. God put him over me as my shepherd and he has been a great encouragement and help to me . . . I love my church and my community” … and now say pretty much the opposite is troubling. Saddens the heart, actually…

insanitybytes22
Member

Something I pray she comes to understand, much of what she writes and does she says is “for the others,” to be a voice for them. The thing is, our own healing must come first, to focus on our own selves, to receive an abundance of grace and mercy and to let the others find their own way. That is one problem with the social justice bandwagon, the personal becomes political, and we are encouraged to take up the cause for the good of the world, “for the others.” Somebody smart said, “everybody wants to change the world but nobody… Read more »

Evan
Guest
Evan

Wow, very well said. I’m surprised your comment hasn’t been disparaged yet. There’s still time I guess.

adad0
Member

Ah…. Performance “art”.

Ain’t exactly “The David” is it?
(Junk not withstanding .)

Perhaps it was an “homage’ ” to those periodic, difficult diaper changes?

ashv
Guest
ashv

Reminder that Jezebel is part of the Gawker conglomerate, a group of journalists who (among other things) advocate full communism: https://nithgrim.wordpress.com/2014/06/13/gawker-is-communist/

Better to not link to anything they put out, they measure success by number of clicks, not positive or negative reactions to it.

Ian Miller
Member

Agreed. I’m hoping to read the article in a cache (I don’t know for sure that avoids contributing to their cesspool, but…)

ashv
Guest
ashv

Sure, sites like donotlink.com assist with that.

Ian Miller
Member

Thank you! Hopefully that worked for me.

Ian Miller
Member

I wish I could find a way to read the Jezebel article in a cache, because even though Doug linked it, I really don’t want to encourage them by giving direct clicks on their links.

PerfectHold
Guest
PerfectHold

Doug — seems like you’re making the sausage correctly.

Do you reserve this kind of thorough, intimate attention to “members” only — or to all you invite to the Table?

Steve
Guest
Steve

If JP is so against this blog, why does he spend so much time here? I don’t get trolls. Isn’t your time more precious?

BP
Guest
BP

Some people want to know the name of the “freed women” blogging. But if the names come out, the insatiable hunger of the haters will not be satisfied. They will then ask for their husbands’ names, their children’s names, their former churches’ names; they will never be satisfied, not even if more hurt, more details, more pain are caused. They remind me not of the mad people watching the Roman circus, but of the lions who devoured Christians. To the Freed Women, stand firm in the freedom God has given you. Go to him in prayer and go to the… Read more »

Ian Miller
Member

Amen. Thank you for speaking out, and I am so grateful to God for your lives and testimony – not just here, but in day by day trusting God. I’m sad that it’s come to where you felt it necessary to post, but very thankful that you have the courage to do so.

Rob Steele
Guest
Rob Steele

They would out the women in the name of helping women. How, what would you call it? Quaint? “Hypocritical” doesn’t do it justice so that some kind of ridiculous understatement seems called for.

Rebecca
Guest
Rebecca

I’ve been around the internet since “gopher” and “newsgroups”, and — having been both anonymous and not, depending on circumstances, I am very much in favor women maintaining anonymity for the sake of safety. As an advocate for sexual trauma survivors, I am firmly opposed to any attempts to call for their public outing or shame any of them for not providing more information than they choose to provide.

This is the Internet, not a court of law. Survivors need not attempt prove their stories just to satisfy strangers.

Bike bubba
Guest

From the notes our gracious host makes, it sounds to me like he’s got something of a dossier of records relating to these cases, all of which have probably been submitted to a court of law, and hence all of them would likely be accessible to the detractors of our gracious host. In which case it is doubly damning that they persist in their stories. Moreover, I would infer that given this trail of evidence, our gracious host probably also has a trail of documentation related to the cases discussed on “womenfreed.com” that these ladies might agree to make public… Read more »

ABC
Guest
ABC

1 Timothy 3
Qualifications for Overseers and Deacons
3 Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife,temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.

Can this post be defended as not quarrelsome and above reproach?

bethyada
Member

What is not above reproach here?

And where is Doug being quarrelsome?

ABC
Guest
ABC

Is it not quarrelsome to go tit for tat? I told her not to push me to this point…..Jezebel posted so Doug posts.

bethyada
Member

I mean specifics. Doug has been restrained for reasons he has documented before. But even Paul defended himself against the superapostles.

So you disagree that Doug should have responded? Fair enough, I have warned him likewise (but note all his enemies demanding he respond). But your disagreement about that does not make him quarrelsome.

ABC
Guest
ABC

What is your definition of quarrelsome? It would be possible to defend oneself without responding to the demand of enemies. Example:

Doug might say: My pastoral care for Natalie was xyz. I stand by it.

Enemy might say: Oh but you suck! Im going to write about you and be crazy about it.

Doug might say: My pastoral care for Natalie was xyz. I stand by it.

bethyada
Member

Doug’s opponents have made accusations and demands. When he declines to answer them they claim he his hiding stuff (or has nothing to say). When he does answer them they say he shouldn’t have shared specific information, or they say that his tone is unacceptable, or that he insults.

I think that all accusations need to be specific. False accusations are easier to make if they are broad or non-specific. So it is important to specify what exactly people say that is wrong. It is nigh impossible to defend against vagueness.

ABC
Guest
ABC

Why does he need to give anyone anything? Is it not the definition of quarrelsome to go back and forth with someone responding to their side with your side?

Would you tell children to they need to justify their actions to a bully? They need to engage the bully?

Again, can he not simply reply I did xyz. I stand by my actions. He doesn’t need to say See how wrong and bad Natalie is now!?

Evan
Guest
Evan

You’re being awfully quarrelsome about this.

ABC
Guest
ABC

I know! Good thing I’m not a pastor and held to a higher standard.

Evan
Guest
Evan

Thank goodness!

ABC
Guest
ABC

What can be the cause of your job in my not being a pastor? I mean, I am happy I am not either, but all you know of me is that I object to something Doug Wilson has done. Does that make me unworthy of being a pastor?

ABC
Guest
ABC

*joy

Evan
Guest
Evan

Sorry, you’ve reached your question quota for the day. On a side note, do you know that the average 6 year old asks 437 questions a day?! Mind blowing.

separateunion
Guest
separateunion

ABC also doesn’t claim to be an elder.

Evan
Guest
Evan

I for one, am thankful for that.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I just wish this whole issue, in its specifics, would stop being a public discussion. One of the most damaging side-effects is that we are all encouraged to think we somehow play a role in this drama, whether as prosecutors or defenders, and we all tend to think we know facts that we can’t possibly know. The lack of charity among some of the participants here is appalling and should be a warning to us to back off. When I come home and want to check my laptop right away to see if I have missed anything, I am treating… Read more »

Evan
Guest
Evan

“When I come home and want to check my laptop right away to see if I have missed anything, I am treating this family’s tragedy as my personal entertainment. This is not a pretty thought.”

I resemble this. Thanks for the reminder. Time for less comments and more prayer.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I wouldn’t say quarrelsome, but I think Doug’s fondness for a sharp retort sometimes distorts his overall tone. I think the “feminists can’t take a joke, and your feminism is one” (I think that is more or less correct but I didn’t look it up again) is unnecessary and it hands a weapon to those who think that all this misery is the result of patriarchal abuse with its concomitant disrespect for women. I think he would have done better with something more like, “You say you represent feminism, yet you don’t seem to care about the welfare of individual… Read more »

adad0
Member

C’, it’s OK to expose fruitless deeds of darkness. Getting “stoned” for it, as Stephen did literally, and other have, figuratively, does not make the truth speaker “quarrelsome”.
As G.K. Said, ” people quarrel because they cannot argue.”
Wilson is known for having a more than cogent argument.
Do you?

ABC
Guest
ABC

Looking through your comments here it seems all you have is rudeness and a sharp tongue.

adad0
Member

Is that an argument or a quarrel?

David
Guest
David

ABC,

Okay, fair question. However, you need to define quarrelsome, so that it does not become a double-edged sword. You are disagreeing with people on this thread, right? Does that make you quarrelsome?

When Jesus called Herod a vixen, was He being quarrelsome in the manner that Paul is referring to in the verse above?

Evan
Guest
Evan

Yeah, but alphabet soup’s not a pastor apparently, so he/she can do what he/she wants. Right?

ABC
Guest
ABC

“The relevance and/or propriety of these links has been questioned in the comments below, but surely the relevance is obvious? This behavior is something that Natalie currently believes is normal.”

What does it matter what Natalie believes to be normal? Can you not defend your actions in caring for her without trying to point out her flaws? If you believe her actions today to be a result of her difficult painful past, are you not exploiting that for your benefit?

Aaron
Guest
Aaron

#forthewin

Evan
Guest
Evan

“I’m not always quarrelsome, but when I am, I make sure I blame it on someone else.”

-Anonymous internet meme

ABC
Guest
ABC

This would be funny if it made any sense at all. What am I blaming on someone else? I am not blaming MY actions on anyone. And, yes, I prefer to be anonymous.

Evan
Guest
Evan

Hey, don’t look at me; I was just throwing rocks at that pack of dogs….

adad0
Member

I think you just blamed me for being “rude and sharp tonged”. Even Socrates was made to drink hemlock for his questions! ; -)
Correct?

ABC
Guest
ABC

Like good little soldiers- keep nodding and March right off of that cliff without asking questions. I for one like questions and if a pastor and his people can’t handle questions or have an issue with them perhaps there is a bigger deeper issue?

adad0
Member

Again, is that a quarrel or an argument?
I can Handel questions C’, I also go the next step and offer or take on answers.
Not everyone finds this process “rude”. ????

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

You can Handel questions? Are the answers written on the Bach of your hand?

ABC
Guest
ABC

LOL. Clever. Love a good musical pun.

adad0
Member

C’, in case you were not aware, that jilly brings her heart and mind with her, everywhere she goes! Somehow she even likes me! You might take that under advisement.????

ABC
Guest
ABC

What makes you think I don’t like you? A difference of opinions? You seem to have a sense of humor and can laugh at yourself. I appreciate that.

adad0
Member

It’s that I don’t know that I am “rude and sharp tonged”. This blog, like this world, can be a rough neighborhood at times. Some times truth is hard and should not be softened.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I would look pretty weird without them.

adad0
Member

Well, it is getting near Christmas, when we show our joy that The Messiah showed up! Even though Handel seems to have written it for Easter!
Jilly, thanks for your sense of humor, even here, where faith does in fact get worked out, warts and all!????

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I need my sense of humor this afternoon. My own special little snowflake, who tends to regard me as cerebrally challenged, decided to speed dry her towel by draping it over some plastic lamp shades. Which were covering burning bulbs. This led to a lovely fire and the destruction of aforementioned towel and lamp shades. Our guardian angels were on overtime this afternoon.

adad0
Member

Sounds like they were Jilly! Don’t go anywhere without them either! ; – )

Ian Miller
Member

Too bad that, as Andrew Klavan says, children never seem to have that moment where they realize you were right. They go straight from “leave me alone” to “why don’t you fix it now?” :)

timothy
Guest
timothy

Jilly, what is in them beans you’re eating? That’s hilarious!

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

They’re full of jilly, of course.

jesuguru
Guest
jesuguru

You should be building others up, instead of Chopin them down.
Will you now respond openly, or go into Haydn?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Very clever indeed! But I have a little Liszt of punsters like you.

jesuguru
Guest
jesuguru

What will you do with your Liszt – are you threatening me with violins?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

You are too good.

Jane
Member

I feel like Haydn from all of this.

Edit: darn, too late again!

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

If I were, would you be shaking like a bowl of cello?

jesuguru
Guest
jesuguru

I’d wait for you to regain your composure, before reminding you to conduct yourself better!
Are you going to bow out now, or shall we string this along further? ;)

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I can’t continue to dally with someone who marches to a different drummer yet who clearly knows the score. No matter how wide I castanet, I cornet find your equal in sheer virtuosity.

Evan
Guest
Evan

Oh my word, is this still going on?!

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

We need someone to put an end to this.

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

Let’s you and him fight.

Evan
Guest
Evan

Ha! “I’m a lover not a fighter.”

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

I run for cover at the first sound of raised voices. And if I can’t get away, I hover on the sidelines saying, Please! Just be nice!

insanitybytes22
Member

Amen!! No wait…that’s not quite right…

Christopher
Member

From my armchair quarterback position: I do not think that Doug needed to respond to the jezebel artical and this post is a tactical error.

Christopher
Member

JP upvoted this, I don’t think he comprehends my position.

DEF
Guest
DEF

What ABC said: “The relevance and/or propriety of these links has been questioned in the comments below, but surely the relevance is obvious? This behavior is something that Natalie currently believes is normal.” What does it matter what Natalie believes to be normal? Can you not defend your actions in caring for her without trying to point out her flaws? If you believe her actions today to be a result of her difficult painful past, are you not exploiting that for your benefit? There was no response to this from any of the kirk. I’m curious to know what the… Read more »

David
Guest
David

What Doug’s accusers think is normal is important, as it speaks to the character of the parties in this mess, and their reliability, especially when there is now a significant difference in what Natalie is saying about Doug and her father, and what she said/wrote about these two men years ago. This is fairly standard. For example, a criminal on death row convicted of beating his children to death would not be a reliable arbiter of what constitutes excessive corporal punishment. If he testifies in exchange for a reduced sentence, this may discount his credibility as a witness. It’d be… Read more »

ABC
Guest
ABC

Let’s use your court analogy-
Defendant: I’m a good person your honor. Look how bad the prosecutors husband has been!

How would that work out for the defendant?

Jane
Member

The proper analogy is the witness’s husband. And if the defense attorney pointed out that the prosecution was trying to portray the witness as an expert on what it’s like to be mistreated by men sexually, then the defense pointing out that the witness married a man who has no concept of the difference between appropriate and inappropriate sexuality, would certainly be pertinent to the case.

Joseph
Guest
Joseph

How are you judging a man’s concept of sexuality by a piece of ‘performance art’ that is nonsexual?

Jane
Member

I think I just judged your concept of sexuality since you’re capable of thinking of that as non-sexual.

Joseph
Guest
Joseph

What can I say, you did give me a chuckle this afternoon. Art is subjective and therefore your opinion of it is valid, but that you believe this to be inherently sexual says more about you than about anyone else. There’s no eroticism in this, save that which you infused through your own perspective. Hate to break it to you, but you’re the one making it sexual.

Rebecca
Guest
Rebecca

Are you saying the purpose in posting the link to the videos was to point out that Natalie’s claims of being mistreated by a man sexually should not be believed because of actions of her husband years later? Did Douglas Wilson tell you directly that this was his motive or are you merely speculating?

David
Guest
David

ABC,

What you listed does not really use my analogy.

I want to know whether Doug, or Natalie, or whomever can be trusted, if I am going to listen to one party accuse another.

If Doug had made those videos, you darn well would find that relevant, would you not?

Evan
Guest
Evan

The rest of the alphabet is making JP look pretty tame in comparison.

ABC
Guest
ABC

I will gladly be wild and crazy for truth and justice. If you and your pastor are right then being challenged and questioned about your stance shouldn’t be a problem.

Evan
Guest
Evan

Cool, what is the truth exactly?

ABC
Guest
ABC

That’s what all the questions are for!

Evan
Guest
Evan

So you don’t know what the truth is. Thank you for admitting that. How are you going to be “wild and crazy” for the truth when you don’t know what the truth is?

Christopher
Member

Presumably people who know the truth will honestly answer the questions….

adad0
Member

C’, the Jezebel article did have a few questions, but it had more statements:

“What would you tell Doug Wilson, I ask her, if you could make him understand anything? She thought for a moment. “It’s never been about taking down a church or making this man go away,” she said. “It’s always been about healing and hopefully connecting with other victims who are in similar situations. It’s important to be loud.”

Can you understand that others may have a “stance” issue, besides Wilson?
Some Wilson critics think “it’s important to be loud”.

ABC
Guest
ABC

Let them be loud. If Natalie is lost as is being said then one would expect an unbiblical response from her. Wilson is a pastor. Much more is expected from him.

adad0
Member

Wisdom has been known to cry out in the street,
Has it not?
(Quiet question here. : -)

Also, ms. Turner is an alleged Christian author. Any expectations of her?

Tim Mullet
Guest
Tim Mullet

Why do the nations rage and the people plot a vain thing? The kings of the earth have set themselves against the Lord and His anointed… There are more people to consider in situations like this than the hurting nonbeliever lashing out (raging) against the tough pastor who can take it. If this were only about the personal indignation which results from knowing you were being misrepresented by someone in their pain, then swallow your pride. Sure. However, Satan is very clever. He knows that we live in a society which demands that all members of approved victim classes must… Read more »

Bro. Steve
Guest
Bro. Steve

The videos are sick. Not that they aren’t evil. They are. But they are also sick, sick, sick.

Reb T.
Guest
Reb T.

Doug, if all of this is true and you were perfectly correct in your handling of the situation, what was Peter Leithart apologizing for in this statement? https://www.facebook.com/Leithart/posts/10152973045111467?hc_location=ufi “A number of the things I said about Jamin to the congregation and court at the time his abuse was uncovered were spun in Jamin’s favor; I am ashamed to realize that I used Jamin’s talking points. Though I never doubted that Jamin was guilty, I trusted his account of the circumstances more readily and longer than I should have, and conversely I disbelieved the victim’s parents (to the best of my… Read more »

adad0
Member

Reb T.

Peter has a facebook page, why wouldn’t you ask him yourself?
Not only that, per the quote you attach, Mr. Leithhart appears to be apologizing for:

“I used Jamin’s talking points. Though I neverdoubted that Jamin was guilty,”

“I trusted his account of the circumstances more readily and longer than I should have,”

“I disbelieved the victim’s parents.”

“I should have seen through Jamin, and didn’t.”

“I didn’t appreciate how much damage Jamin did and I was naive
about the effect that the abuse had on the victim’s family.”

Any more questions about Mr. Leithart’s apology Reb?

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

I think Reb’s question is referring to the same question I have. And that is that Doug appears to be saying the parents were in on this. And Peter appears to be saying he didn’t believe Natalie’s parents. It is a fair questions and this response does not help those of us who really do want to continue supporting the work and ministry of Doug Wilson.

adad0
Member

Well, Reb appears to be capable of asking his own question, which was: “what was Peter Leithart apologizing for in this statement?” Yourjustasking question apears to be: “Doug appears to be saying the parents were in on this.”? Wilson’s clear response is: “Was she trying to insinuate that I was trying to foist Jamin off on the Greenfields? Or was I saying that it was totally crazy? Hint: my views are that a secret relationship between a 23-year-old and a 14-year-old is beyond irresponsible. In real life, I found out what had transpired in the secretly-arranged courtship years after the… Read more »

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

I think your response goes a long way towards furthering the ministry of Christ Church. Congratulations.

adad0
Member

While I may seem bruske to some at first, you will notice that I offer a response to the questions of some folks, but I don’t ask many or any of Wilson himself. The thing that is not innocent about many of these questions is that they don’t appear to consider some of the involved family, who never comment on this situation. How heart broken are they? What if this or something like it happend to our own personal family? Things similar to this happen to many families in a fallen world. These families, and others involved don’t actually owe… Read more »

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

I have lived through this. Very publicly. In the paper. I get how this works. Please see my other comments if you want how I feel about this. But my concern is not about “this” situation. It is about integrity. Doug, very clearly (as you aptly noted), stated Jamin had permission to court Natalie and they, Natalie’s parents, hid it from the church. I believe elsewhere Doug claims this is what Jamin said. While Peter says he believed Jamin over Natalie’s parents and apologized. Her father denies he gave Jamin permission to court Natalie as well. Doug is accusing Natalie’s… Read more »

adad0
Member

I doubt Wilson would have written anything about this on his own. This post and previous posts were always in response to irresponsible “reporting” by other venues / blogs. Wilson has responded with integrity. 1 Peter 3:14-16 14 But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” 15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,16 keeping a… Read more »

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

Your rebuke in this case is taken. And you are correct. And I should pay attention to my words and consider them much more carefully.

adad0
Member

‘Asking,

Funny you should mention rebuke. It’s a word nobody likes. We often don’t know how to take it, we often don’t know how to give it and we often don’t understand that godly rebuke is an act of love.

Anyway, let’s call our conversation a mutual admonision,
God and His Word are correct, me / us, not so much. ; – )
Thank you, on Thanksgiving week!

Colossians 3:16

Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly

as you teach and admonish one another

with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts.

Dave
Guest
Dave

Wilson doesn’t accuse Gary Greenfield of lying, he pointed out the fact that Gary was lying. This round was started last spring by a busy body who lives outside of Moscow and has spent a good portion of her life hating God, Wilson and anything associated with Wilson. It was out of public view until the busy body forced trouble on the Sitler’s to get at Wilson. Natalie is seeing a secular counselor who does not consider posting incorrect and false thoughts to be a problem. Just like when the lions were sent in to the arena, those who wanted… Read more »

Reb T.
Guest
Reb T.

“A” dad, my question is for Doug, not Peter Leithart, whose position is indeed clear from his statement. There would seem to be a discrepancy between these two closely-associated pastors, who worked together on this, in their views of how they handled the situation and of the need to apologize for disbelieving Natalie’s family regarding her abuse by Jamin.

adad0
Member

Looks to me from the writen record, that Wilson came down apropriately hard on Wight, in writing, at the time.
If there is s similar writen record by Leithart, I am not aware of it.
What was “disbelieved” by Liethart in the above, is not well defined.
Anyway, there are more direct forums to ask Wilson such questions, although a blog that takes it’s name from the most sketchy woman in the OT, is not one of them.

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

“A” dad, correct. You get it. Congratulations. What Peter disbelieved is not well defined. So he is asking a question. Not on a blog with a sketchy name, but on Wilson’s blog. And on the same blog that Wilson has written an abundance of words on this very subject. I am uncertain why you think it is out of line to ask about this. Peter has chosen wisely not to comment more about it in public. Doug has chosen something else, which is why the question is directed at him.

adad0
Member

1 Corinthians 6 7 The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8 Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters. 9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11… Read more »

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

This whole thing is very grievous. Having been here and done this in my own life and helping other women find healing in Christ, I know one of the besetting sins of abuse victims is lying. Now it is hard to know if Natalie is lying now, or when she swore of her own accord that she was of sound mind in her above statements. I can see where she would be angry with her father for letting the abuse happen and was manipulated by Doug to say what he wanted and hoping against hope that the church would come… Read more »

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

Pastor? I think not. He has claimed the title, but obviously does not have the calling.

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

I don’t think that is fair. These things are very difficult to deal with even when the victims and perps aren’t in your congregation. And just because I may have some concerns about this particular situation and how it has worked out, does not mean I am ready to throw the CREC under the bus or even Mr. Wilson for that matter. Calling names and being snarky are much easier to do than to actually have rational conversations about this kind of stuff. I wasn’t there. I don’t know what happened. But I have been a victim of abuse and… Read more »

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

I am not calling names or being snarky. Mr. Wilson went beyond the boundaries of good taste on his blog,. As far as a so called pastor calling out a member of his congregation in this manner just defies all biblical interpretation.

adad0
Member

LL’,
I know for a fact that you call some people “minions”. Me for instance! ; – )

Isn’t “name calling” a sign of abuse?
Isn’t abuse outside the boundaries of good taste?

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

Can you think outside the Doug Wikson box ? are you willing to test what you believe against Scripture? I think all this blathering back and forth is obscuring what Scripture says. I again challenge you to read The Bible for yourself.

adad0
Member

James 4
11 Brothers and sisters, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?

LL’can you even respond to James 4:11-12?
I don’t think you can.

duellsquimby
Member

, …

adad0
Member

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

Keep LL’ in your prayers. She might be learning!

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

This is a very thoughtful post. My only point is that I would not describe what many abuse victims do as lying. I think that in order to survive, they sometimes shape an alternative reality that is more tolerable. Predators are known for messing with their victims’ heads, distorting their sense of reality, and making them doubt themselves. All of this can add up to someone who has trouble discerning and telling the truth, but who is not in the usual sense a liar.

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

Jillybean, I will give this to you with hesitation. Because I know what you are talking about. But it doesn’t do victims any good to not call a spade a spade. Just because you were legitimately a victim doesn’t mean your sin nature magically disappears. And victims lie. They lie when it is just as easy to tell the truth. In my more screwed up days, I lied because I had a hard time discerning the truth and I lied with the intent to deceive. Both are true. But, given that this is a public forum and families are possibly… Read more »

Katecho
Member

We also live in a culture that celebrates victims for the purpose of advancing a particular political cause. Weaponizing the victims is another form of being re-victimized and being used by someone else, but the celebrity can be very tempting. Natalie is called brave and strong for changing her story and assassinating Wilson’s character. She is doing the blog circuit, delivering a popular narrative against an unpopular Christian faith.

mejustasking
Guest
mejustasking

katecho, I have many reservations about this whole scandal. It has been your posts that have put the brakes on my general distrust. I agree with your post above. I wish this were not the forum in which this conversation was taking place. Those in Moscow are reeling with the sting of this whole thing and those who have any concern are immediately labeled as part of the internet assassination mob. It would be nice to have a real conversation about all of this. Right now, there isn’t one.

Katecho
Member

I completely agree that arm chair internet warriors have dragged this horse into the living room with only limited facts. I wish it wasn’t so. They have demanded apologies without first establishing guilt. They have ignored the most basic principle of innocent until proven guilty. This has given Wilson an opportunity to speak to us about principles of justice, and to give limited information that hints at just how much of the story the internet posse was not privy to before they jumped to their conclusion. The truth is important, but I do wish it didn’t have to be tried… Read more »

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

I am appalled by the tactics you have taken. I have taken 9 hours to think and
pray about my response to you. You in no way resemble a Christian, a good person or heaven forbid, a pastor. I have been a Christian for 43 years, have attended Bible College and have been very involved in the local church. There are many verses in the Bible about protecting the sheep and false prophets . I am sure you know them. Who are you accountable to and who holds you accountable? You should be ashamed .

adad0
Member

James 4 11 Brothers and sisters, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister or judges them speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor? What has Wilson said that is untrue or slander? Ephesians 5:11-12 11 Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 It is shameful… Read more »

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

Matthew 23 for starters

adad0
Member

Matt: 23: from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I tell you, all this will come on this generation.

Wow, Wilson must be older than I thought! ; – )

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

Keep reading. . dUH!!

adad0
Member

37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you,?

Who has Wilson killed or stoned? When did Wilson become Jerusalem? (He’s actually not that heavy.)

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

I think you looked up the wrong verse. Read Matthew 23

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

Start with Matthew 23. Can Doug not speak for himself? He needs his minions to TRY to defend him. Again who holds Doug accountable? And who is he accountable to?

adad0
Member

“Can Doug not speak for himself?”

Yes, see every post on this blog, and all the youtube videos!
Especially the ones about raising kids. ; – )

Doug, like you and I, are accountable to God. Is that good enough for you?

If you are calling me a minion, can you at least explain why? And why that is not a judgement?

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

In the healthy churches I have been in the teaching pastor is accountable to the elder board, and the elder board is accountable to the congregation.it is fine to say we are all accountable to God, but therein lies letting the wolves into the hen house, .if we are not accountable to someone we fooling ourselves that we are accountable to God.

Anyone who blindly follows a leader without asking questions and using discernment is a minion.

adad0
Member

Christ Church has elders per 1 Timothy 5. I don’t know that the Word says elders are accountable to the congregation, but elders are often elected after a fashion, although I expect everyone a Christ Church is accountable to one another. Also, CC is having an independant denomoinational body investigate the handling of these abuse cases. Since God is real, and His Word is living and active, I am much more worried about being accoutable to God then men, although I am accountable to the Christians I fellowship with. As for questions, there are plenty around here for Wilson, and… Read more »

Dave
Guest
Dave

Leslie, there is Biblical accountability at Christ Church as you mentioned. No one is blindly following as is espoused on the web. It is obvious you do not have first hand information of what happened with Natalie and are making an incorrect decision. This post is about protecting the sheep and it is a call for Natalie and her husband to turn to Christ. You may think it rude, but it is necessary to point out the incorrect behaviour that is posted as truth. The keyboard crowd is happy to type away at Wilson but very little is posted about… Read more »

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

I would challenge you to study the Bible for yourself. Or with a Bible study group not affiliated with Doug, You may be surprised at what you learn

adad0
Member

I live 3000 miles away from Christ Chuch.

I ask you to take James 4: 11-12 to heart, you might be surprized at how freeing it is.

Also, these CC Ladies sound pretty noble don’t they?

http://www.womenfreed.com/

Christopher
Member

“Who are you accountable to and who holds you accountable?”

I assume Doug is accountable to the CREC. He is not accountable to you me or any other random commenter on this blog.

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

Mr. Wilson (and others of his ilk) are accountable to the same people to whom the Islamic extremists are accountable. It is an account they’ll never be able to balance once it comes due, I’m afraid.

adad0
Member

Jason Pearson, thanks for this explaination as well! ; – )

Ok, I think I’ll stop now. Any possibility that you will get your own point?

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

I’m afraid you’ll be getting a point of your own soon enough, dad. Hollow point, that is. Courtesy of the U.S. Government. Sure, keep laughing…

adad0
Member

; -) !!

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

Sigh, at least you can’t say you weren’t warned. Good luck, buddy. You’re going to need it :-(

adad0
Member

Hmmm.
A. “hollow pointed” by the govt.?
B. Abducted by aliens?

B. is the most likely. ; – ) Any more explainations? ; – )

duellsquimby
Member

And to think we were wondering where the Permanently Outraged were. (some of the usual suspects are currently missing) Thanks for coming in on cue.

Leslie Lea
Guest
Leslie Lea

I don’t think you, Doug or the other minions who support him have much to say, CertInly not Biblical truths. And not much common sense either. It seems to me you all need a whole lot of attention and to he** with truth, Biblical principals and downright human decency,. This blog is a lot like the Jerry Springer show which I watched once. I am out of here on this blog also. So glad not to be enskVed in this cult.

Evan
Guest
Evan

” I am out of here on this blog also. So glad not to be enskVed in this cult.”

*tears*
You will be sorely missed. We’ll keep the light on for you. And that goes for any other of the Ever Enraged who wish to leave. Happy trails.
*crying*

duellsquimby
Member

Again, then why are you here? Shouldn’t you just snicker and walk off into the sunset? Why are you letting us waste your precious time on this earth?

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

If you’re explaining, you’re losing. Cut the crap, Doug. Start a soup kitchen or something useful. Less sexy, I know. Probably more pleasing to Christ, though.

adad0
Member

JP, thanks for explaining this. ; – )

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

Not “JP”, Jason Pearson. One of the few people on here with the guts to use their real name. Sue me. Please sue me. Let’s really air some laundry.

adad0
Member

Jason Pearson, thanks for this explaination as well! ; – )

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

Yuck it up while you can, dad

Gabriel Rench
Guest
Gabriel Rench

I find this whole thread a little comical. First Doug doesn’t says very little therefore he is not fit for pastoral care, and then Doug puts a drop of context in the mix and therefore he is not acting pastoral. I choose to stand by the “edgy” artistic naked guy.

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

Even though my wife was horribly abused by certain villians within the CRE, I can’t in good conscience let this pass without a warning. Think about it: A fundamentalist religious sect based out of northern Idaho that is wallowing in lurid sexual scandals where women and children have been the victims of patterns of abuse. The headline writes itself. This is easy-picking, low-hanging fruit. I implore judicious readers of this warning to think about where all of this must inevitability end. Is it really worth it? There are alot of skeletons in this closet. And they’re not happy skeletons, either.

Christopher
Member

What is the inevitable end?

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

Waco, TX ring a bell?

Christopher
Member

I fail to see how that is inevitable.

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

God help you

Christopher
Member

with what exactly?

Jill Smith
Member
Jill Smith

With not feeling bad on the day that the heavily guarded compound–in which Doug keeps his entire congregation locked up and away from all contact with the outside world–is attacked by minions of the NWO. With not feeling guilty when the truth is revealed and you learn that all the men have been kept in cowering submission and all the women are sex slaves. And that the male children’s only schooling was in shooting AK-47s at images of infidels while their sisters scrubbed floors. I think that this is what he is trying to say.

Evan
Guest
Evan

That gave me a good laugh. I wonder if the Permanently Outraged ever laugh, or even crack a smile for that matter? I mean some of them are named after alphabet soup for goodness sake!

Christopher
Member

I thought he was hinting that the NWO was going to come after me for not thinking that they were coming after Doug.

Dave
Guest
Dave

Jason, you paint a beautiful picture with no facts just like the other trolls and those in Moscow who hate God with a passion.

Judicious Christian readers know that trolls don’t have scriptural foundations for their comments but rather choice false statements and innuendo which like choice morsels go the inmost parts.

Tell us why you hate Wilson so much. I hate Wilson because ______________.

Jason Pearson
Guest
Jason Pearson

I don’t hate Wilson. He can deal with hate in the hereafter. What I hate is injustice and incompetence. And I know of many (including my wife) who have been irreparably harmed by those who follow blindly his very twisted, self-aggrandizing interpretation of Scripture. Much like the insanity in Islam today, if Christians do not course-correct now, there will be a very ugly price to pay.

Dave
Guest
Dave

Jason: . . . Villians; Many irreparably harmed; Blindly following; Like Islam. No, you again falsely foist rhetoric as fact. This post is about course corrections and calling those who are off course to correct their ways to Christ and that includes you. Your posts show a generous disregard for scripture and fact. In the same manner, I am concerned with truth and for years have stood against those who paint false pictures of the CREC, Wilson and Christ Church. I was at a county commissioners meeting when two local women read a prepared statement that started out with we… Read more »

Jane
Member

Seriously? Over a period of a decade, there are two notorious incidents of sexual crime committed by people moving in from outside the community, both of which were immediately reported to the legal authorities, and that constitutes “wallowing in lurid sexual scandals where women and children have been the victims of patterns of abuse”? A “fundamentalist religious sect” whose theology resembles Presbyterianism?

You wouldn’t have some kind of interest in painting the situation in the most negative possible terms, would you?

Sarah M
Guest
Sarah M

For example, during the relationship Natalie had kept a journal of love letters to Jamin which are currently sealed by court order. If the case had gone to a full trial, then those letters would quite possibly have been used in the defense.”

I am a therapist who has seen many sexual abuse survivors. Doug’s insistence on bringing up things Natalie wrote to and about Jamin during the abuse shows he has no understanding of how to help sexual abuse survivors.

insanitybytes22
Member

These women’s stories seem to indicate that he does:

http://www.womenfreed.com/

ABC
Guest
ABC

Successes do not negate ignorance. You can successfully help someone and not understand sexual abuse. What does his insistence of bringing up a 14 year olds writings to her abuser say about his knowledge?

adad0
Member

Same for you, C’,I would be more concerned if you think this guy, Lundy Bancroft, is an abuse “expert”.

http://transitiontoanewworld.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-spiritual-community.html

Lots of secular and “Christian” advocates love him, but he is a charlatan,
and a cult founder.
He spreads lots of false “knowledge” about abuse.

ABC
Guest
ABC

That’s as relevant as bringing up Scientology when talking about Wilson and Christianity. Are you trying to make it look like Sarah agrees with this person you are posting about?

adad0
Member

It is relevant when abuse “experts” turn out not to be “experts”, as is the case with Bancroft.
It is relevant when folks who love Bancroft accuse Wilson of being cult like, when Bancroft, their “abuse expert” is a real cult founder.

ABC
Guest
ABC

Did I miss where Sarah mentioned Bancroft?

adad0
Member

Don’t know that she did. The question is still out there.
Many Wilson critics do mention and refer to “a cry for justice”, which is a “ministry” that is completely taken in by Bancroft.

ABC
Guest
ABC

It seems you are trying to take the subject and change it off of Wilson and trying to make Sarah look bad by having it seem she has something to do with this Bancroft.

Sarah made a professional observation given her background. She does not mention Bancroft.

Just like there are many different religions and different beliefs among religions there are different therapy beliefs and different therapist.

Shall I go find someone very controversial and start connecting that person with Wilson?

Scientology is a religion. Surely there is some slight similarity between Scientology and Christ Church and Wilson.

adad0
Member

The subject is abuse “expertise”, and there are many who say that they have it, when they do not.
Are you a Bancroft fan?

ABC
Guest
ABC

The subject is also on a pastors response to an issue. There are many who say they are the only true religion. Are you a Hubbard fan?

adad0
Member

No, I am a Jesus salvage job. Considering what He had to work with, I think I came out better than expected.
Where you aware that Jesus said that He is the only way to The Father? However it is that we find Him?

Evan
Guest
Evan

@herewegokids, Scientology got brought up. You might want to get in on this.

insanitybytes22
Member

“Successes do not negate ignorance.”

Success does a far better job of negating ignorance than failure does.

Dave
Guest
Dave

Sarah, what is your scriptural basis for saying there is no understanding here in how to help sexualy abused individuals?

Sarah M
Guest
Sarah M

Do I need scripture to back up my masters degree and experience?

adad0
Member

I would be more concerned if you think this guy, Lundy Bancroft, is an abuse “expert”.

http://transitiontoanewworld.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-spiritual-community.html

Lots of social workers love him, but he is a charlatan.

Dave
Guest
Dave

Sarah, this blog concerns scriptural application to real world problems so, yes a scriptural basis is of importance.

If you want to do whatever you want to do and there is no right or wrong then this whole situation is just typed words. If you believe that the Bible is God’s holy word and that it is to be applied properly, as salt to cleanse a wound or as a kiss to the mouth, then the situation is one to uplift and call those reading to Christ.

ABC
Guest
ABC

Can you not use education outside of the Bible to think through a situation? If not, that seems a bit cultish and like you should be on a commune not using the Internet to post your arguments.

And do you believe that what Doug has done here is uplifting and a call to Christ?

Dave
Guest
Dave

Alphabet, of course education outside of scripture is of use. Do you use that education in a Godly manner or in a satanic manner? That is the crux of this situation. Who is blogging about how bad a man Wight is? Who is blogging that Gary Greenfield set up a bad situation that caused this trauma to his daughter? Hardly anyone. However, the internet is ablaze with what a bad preacher Wilson is and how scripture was incorrectly applied. It is flaming with opinions and false information being posted by those who don’t have first hand information or are posting… Read more »

wyclif
Guest
wyclif

This post isn’t directly about helping sexual abuse survivors, it’s a response to an attack by a blog owned by Gawker Media.

ABC
Guest
ABC

So therefore Sarah’s observation is not relevant?

Tim Mullet
Guest
Tim Mullet

By way of analogy, if a wild eyed man who had an abusiv