In light of the recent court proceedings involving Steven Sitler, and the resultant coverage of those proceedings in the media, we believe that it is necessary for the session of Christ Church to make a public statement of where we have stood in this matter, and where we stand now.
When Steven’s sins and crimes first came to light over a decade ago, as the pastor of Christ Church, I immediately encouraged the person who had discovered them to go to the authorities immediately, which was done right away. All the difficult circumstances that have followed since that time—for the victims, for Steven’s family, and for our church community—are entirely the cascading result of Steven’s initial sins. This entire avalanche is his responsibility. This includes the difficulties created for his own family by his current legal circumstances. In what follows, when we refer to Steven’s repentance, it is repentance for the whole situation that we are talking about.
Second, since Steven’s conviction and conditional release from prison and jail, Steven, as a penitent Christian, has been welcome at Christ Church, and has worshiped regularly with us since that time. On the basis of the death and resurrection of Jesus, he is as welcome as any other sinner is, which is to say, he is very welcome. At the same time, since his conviction, in accordance with the decision of the court and in accordance with an additional and separate determination by the session of Christ Church, Steven has never been to our worship service unaccompanied by a trained chaperone. He usually comes in shortly before the service, sits quietly, and leaves shortly after the service. Our ministry to Steven, in other words, has not been conducted at the expense of any children in our church community, or in a way that puts any of them at risk.
Third, in Moscow, Idaho there are 38 registered sex offenders. The chances are good that the only one you have heard about is Steven Sitler. This is because he provides an easy way for enemies of our ministry to attack us. If he abandoned the faith, or joined another church, or joined in on the attack on us, he would still certainly have the legal consequences of his crimes to deal with, but would probably be allowed to retreat into relative anonymity. As noted above, despite the greatness of his sin, we have not pulled away from him. But it should be noted that despite all the “extra treatment” he is getting, particularly on the Internet, it is to his credit that he has not pulled away from us either.
Fourth, the task of ministering to broken people is one of the central glories of the Christian church. For us, there are two causes of rejoicing in this. The first is that Christ came into the world for the sake of the screwed-up people. “And Jesus answered them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick” (Luke 5:31, ESV). We refuse to abandon that glory for the sake of our own reputation or convenience. This is the gospel—through Christ God saves sinners. Second, the church is a hospital for sinners, not a rest home for saints which brings us to the second glory. When we minister to people in this kind of desperate condition, there will be others in the grip of bile and bitterness who use the occasion to attack the hospital staff for “supporting and applauding” the diseases the hospital staff is actually laboring to eradicate. That is, the church’s detractors are people who allege that we, the church, are protecting, covering, or advocating molestation of children. These false allegations are simply slander. But even though such detractors speak their slander, Jesus said that when men despitefully use you, and say all manner of wicked things about you—e.g. that you protect and cover for child molestation—the church’s response is to “rejoice and be exceedingly glad” (Matt. 5:11-12). To be vilified for standing for grace is itself a grace. It is an honor to be so dishonored, a grace to be disgraced. But it is the grace the church glories in, never the sin that made the grace necessary.
Fifth, the fact that outsiders who vilify Steven believe him to be automatically guilty of anything that is alleged of him, as soon as it is alleged, creates a temptation for us to simply go in the opposite direction. We are aware of this temptation and are deliberately guarding against it. We do not believe that the temptations that earlier led Steven to molest children are out of his life, and we do believe that he, his wife, his chaperons, his ministers and elders, his fellow church members, his probation officers, and the state of Idaho, have reason and cause to be wary. Our fellowship with Steven does not mean that we think “he’s in, he’s good.” Those who slanderously diagnose our pastoral competence from afar (without bothering to check their facts) do not know anything about how we have taught him, prayed with him, admonished him, rebuked him, checked on his stories, and held him accountable. We do not believe that Steven has been magically “cured,” or that true repentance means anything other than an introduction to a lifetime of repentance.
Sixth, we need to speak with regard to the legal proceedings that are currently underway. Steven was sentenced about ten years ago; thus far he has successfully completed about 9 years of probation. As far as we know, there is no alleged probation violation filed against him. The court is now reviewing details regarding his interaction with his family and the protection of society. The court’s proceedings that were reported in late July and early September were status conferences. We do not complain that there is such a court-supervised process, and we do not object that the state of Idaho takes seriously the responsibility of protecting all children, including Steven’s young son. If some new, serious probation violations were alleged and filed against Steven, and if he were in fact found guilty of these things, and if the court deemed it necessary and just to revoke Steven’s probation and send him to prison, that would occur with the full approval of the session of Christ Church. Moreover, approval of such a sentence would prove no barrier to visiting him there, and seeking to minister to him.
Seventh, in the latest round of accusations, much has been made of the fact that Christ Church approved of Steven’s wedding to Katie through the fact that I officiated at the wedding. First, it should be noted that in our community, weddings are not arranged or determined by the church. Katie and her family had all the facts when she agreed to marry Steven, which was important, but the decision to marry was the couple’s decision, not ours. That said, I officiated at the wedding and was glad to do so. While we do not believe that marriage is an automatic “fix” for the temptations to molest children, we agree with Judge Stegner who approved the wedding and said that ‘an age-appropriate relationship with a member of the opposite sex from Mr. Sitler is one of the best things that can happen to him and to society” (emphasis added). Moreover, if everything is on the table, we do not believe the church has the authority to prohibit or “not allow” a lawful marriage.
On a related front, others have said that I advocated for leniency for Steven after his conviction and during the sentencing phase. In the course of the letter I wrote to the judge (in 2005), I simply reported on the nature of my counsel to Steven after he was caught. In the middle of that report, I said, “It is important to note that I have not offered him any spiritual panacea or ‘quick fix,’ and I believe Steven understands the importance of his need to resist these temptations over the long haul.” In addition, at the conclusion of my letter, with regard to the legal consequences of his behavior, I told the judge that I was “grateful that he [would] be sentenced for his behavior,” and was also grateful that there would be “hard consequences for him in real time.” At the same time, I urged that the civil penalties be “measured and limited.” By “measured and limited,” I meant principled, defined and deliberate. I did not mean trivial, light, or lenient. I was not requesting a slap on the wrist. If you put together what I actually said, you will see that what I expressed to the judge was my desire for hard consequences for Steven that were measured and limited. My hope is that the judge read the letter more carefully than others have since done.
And last, whenever the spirit of accusation takes center stage, preachers of the gospel need to be ready to respond with the only possible answer. Christ came into this world in order to save wretched sinners. Under the control of the accuser, the unbelieving world runs on condemnation, and loves trafficking in such accusations. Since this is the case, I want to finish with the only reply that can be made to such accusations. If God were to mark iniquities, no one could stand (Ps. 130:3). All of us would go down before the wrath of God, like grass before the scythe. No one is righteous, not even one (Rom. 3:10). This is the meaning of the Lord’s saying when dealing with the accusers who wanted to stone the woman caught in adultery (John 8:3). When Jesus said that the one without sin should cast the first stone, He did not mean that sin should not be dealt with. It must be dealt with because God dwells in unapproachable holiness (Is. 6:1-3). But it cannot be dealt with by Pharisees with rocks in their hands and anger on their faces. That is the so-called solution of religiosity, filled to the brim with its own moral impotence. In order to deal with our wickedness—and by wickedness, we mean child molestation, child murder, racial enmity, sodomy, slanderous accusation, fornication, adultery, theft, blasphemy, bitterness, disrespect of parents, pornography, hatred, malice, envy, drunkenness, drug abuse, and more—the Son of God had to die on a gibbet. He died there in order to secure the forgiveness of anyone who calls upon Him, and rose again for that same person’s justification, regardless of what that person has done. As the old hymn puts it, “Jesus, what a friend for sinners, Jesus, lover of my soul.” We are not ashamed of His blood; it is our only hope.
If you have occasion to visit our worship services, the chances are good that Steven Sitler will be there, listening to the proclamation of free grace. It is a proclamation that never gets old. He is welcome to be there with us, and you are most welcome also.
Cordially in Christ,
Douglas Wilson, on behalf of the elders of Christ Church
Thank you, Doug, and all the session members for your steadfast faithfulness to the gospel.
Seems to be more all about the gospel of Doug than the gospel of Jesus. Doug said, “All the difficult circumstances that have followed since that time—for the victims, for Steven’s family, and for our church community—are entirely the cascading result of Steven’s initial sins.” Take some personal responsibility here! if Doug hadn’t stuck his nose in it in the first place it never would have become such a scandal. https://rc-sproul-jr.blogspot.com/2020/02/rc-sproul-jr-steven-sitler-pedophile-coverup.html
How can I read this blog?
But why would anyone think it is a good idea for a pedophile to have children? What happens when this son experiences the “Father Hunger” you so like to talk about? That child cannot have anything resembling a normal relationship with his father when his father is “sexually stimulated” by contact with him.
Yes, the children of someone who struggles with perverted sexual impulses (key word: struggles with, not gives into) will have a difficult time in the world. But which of our earthly fathers is perfect? There are deep, catastrophic flaws in each and every human, meaning each and every father has the potential and likely does grieve his children at least once in his life. The difference is one of degree, not kind.
“But which of our earthly fathers is perfect?”
And yet they did not sexually molest us.
Comparing a father who ‘grieves his children at least once in his life’ with a child molester is ridiculous. The difference is indeed one of kind, not degree.
That is not at all what I said.
Then please do restate; I am happy to consider again.
Why should he re-state? What Ian said the first time was pretty clear to people who understand the ability to sin all of us have, and are you his teacher or judge that he needs your re-consideration? As long as you judge without any mercy at all, what’s the use of Ian wasting his breath? Read Ray D’s comment to Sarah Anne.
The question is, can a “pedophile”, through a lifetime of repentance, become a “former pedophile”, who is able to live a pretty normal life. And will the “normal life” (in this case, marriage and children) be a help or a hindrance in fighting this sin? St. Paul says that we can repent of sin and put just about any category of sin in the past tense. “And such were some of you”, he says. Christ Church is betting that he is right, and the judge seems to concur, though a lifetime of probation means that there will be constant supervision.… Read more »
Or castration – if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off.
That is an option for the civil magistrate, although it would be regarded as “cruel and unusual punishment” in the USA and therefore not a live option.
So options a and b above are the basic choices for dealing with this sort of sinner if such a person professes Christianity.
Actually, if Steven Sitler wanted to pursue chemical castration, it could be a viable option. However, he would have to want it and it appears he is quite interested in sex.
Dee,
Yes, and for the men who choose it, the therapy often comes as a welcome relief.
How then are you typing?
I haven’t assaulted or molested anyone.
I vote for option (b). All research shows how unlikely child molesters are to change, and how skilled they are at faking repentance and acting like normal folk. Otherwise, they can’t get away with their crimes long enough to eventually be convicted of multiple offences, as Sitler was. In other words, he has forfeited any expectation of trust, or of a “normal life”, by his own actions. If he wanted normalcy that badly, he should have sought treatment, and not molested multiple kids. A truly repentant child molester shouldn’t mind remaining celibate for the rest of his life. He’s not… Read more »
I understand that you prefer option b. But Protestants are traditionally suspicious of “perpetual vow of celibacy,” because we have seen that they often don’t work out. And without a situation very much like a monastery, it is hard to avoid children all the time. People breed, after all. Note that when I said “normal life”, I meant that he could live successfully in an age appropriate heterosexual relationship. When you said “he has forfeited any expectation of trust, or of a “normal life”, by his own actions.” you are referring to him living without supervision. We are not contradicting… Read more »
There is such a thing as a vasectomy.
How would a vasectomy help?
I don’t think that prevents the sexual function, but it would keep him from fathering anymore children.
Paul does say ‘and such were some of you’, and he also says ‘flee from temptation.’
Sarah Anne, just one important point here. Read over again the section of the letter that deals with the current legal situation (the section that begins the sixth point). If what some allege is found to be the case, then Steven couldn’t and shouldn’t have a normal relationship with his son.
Well, perhaps. But if his own admission is found to be true, and it’s determined that he can’t have a normal relationship with this child, there’s no reason why he can’t start fresh with another baby a few years from now. Within the above ethical framework, his status would always be dozens, plus one, and innocent until proven guilty. “But if the ox has been accustomed to gore in the past, and its owner has been warned but has not kept it in”, that owner would be guilty for the damage done. Steven Sitler is not an ox, but, “Is… Read more »
“there’s no reason why he can’t start fresh with another baby a few years from now” Except the reason that he is sexually attracted to children.
I think you may be equating Dougs use of lawful with contemporary use of the word legal. I don’t think that is how he is using it.
It is Doug’s responsibility to define his terms. If he speaks without clarity on such an important issue, that in itself is suspect. Does lawful = legal? Did limited = lenient…at the time he was “happy to” write a letter in support of Sitler? How convenient for Doug that these things are not clear.
Doug has been. very clear in defining his terminology for a very long time in hundreds of venues and forums. That’s how I was able to make the comment with a high degree of certainty.
Then he should not hesitate to define his terms now.
What he wrote is pretty clear to me. This is bordering on concern trolling.
We think he has not hesitated at all.
Valerie, you said it so well. Thanks.
The accusation that he is stimulated by contact with his son is pretty serious and quite unfounded. Have you ever in your life sinfully lusted? Committed a physical sexual sin? Does that mean you are stimulated by every adult you come into contact with? Also, how exactly would you prohibit him from having children? Steralize him? That sounds like something leading to a sick dictatorship. Worse than our current government. There is no biblical warrant for prohibiting someone from having children. What is said is that fathers will be held responsible. That is something certainly preached regularly by Pastor Wilson.… Read more »
Matthew, your comments make it very clear that you have no idea of the recidivism of pedophiles. This wasn’t a “one-time fling,” or a “mistake” it’s a mental disorder that requires constant treatment and supervision.
Contrary to popular belief, recidivism rates are relatively very low for sex offenders. Not that extra precautions are not necessary, but using bad data to make decisions is a poor idea.
Sex offenders (which can be an 18 year old who took a whiz in public or had consensual sex with a 17 year old) or pedophiles? They are not one in the same.
Well, in this case, we already know Sitler committed multiple crimes and apparently admitted to “something” involving his infant son. Wouldn’t real care and concern say that perhaps this experiment has to end with Sitler staying out of the home of his wife and child?
We know the prosecutor characterized the results of a polygraph a certain way. At any rate, the recidivism thing is a myth for all classes of offender.
What about the recidivism of porn addicts, serial fornicators and homosexuals? We typically refer to people who have come out of those lifestyles as ex-whatever. But they are not ex anything, they are repentant. I understand that Steven is not an ex-pedophile since it is a mental diagnosis, but (if he has not broken his probation), he remains a repentant Christian. My point is, if he has sincerely repented who is anyone to say he cannot be a good father? This is not an experiment. If he has truly repented then his repentance isn’t a hypothesis, it is a fact… Read more »
“My point is, if he has sincerely repented who is anyone to say he cannot be a good father? ”
The point of many other concerned parties is “Who is anyone to say he has sincerely repented?”
Absolutely the Holy Spirit can keep him from falling BUT since we all know of cases where people fall, in this case aren’t the stakes of falling so high you simply cannot give benefit of doubt? Sin can be forgiven but many times consequenses of sin need to be accepted. Safety of children deserves no less.
I think we can push this end of the envelope too far. God is able to save us, but we don’t therefore throw ourselves from temple roofs. God is able to keep us from sexual failing, but we must FLEE FLEE FLEE all such temptation as the Apostle enjoins us.
I know this article and comment is from like 4 years ago, but I had to respond. It’s frightening how many people are defending a pedophile. Mathew you must be one yourserself. It’s scary you’re only concerned with what grown adults do and want to condemn gay people but find it no problem to forgive a pedophile. It’s scary you only concerned with grown adults who have sex, who like porn, and or gay people but have no problem with pedophiles. I bet if someone was gay you would be ripping them to shreds and asking that they have no… Read more »
This child will know that his father had a major problem and worked hard to get over it, involving multiple counselors to help. All children are raised by imperfect parents. I would rather have a repentant father who shows every sign of earnestly seeking help, than a proud parent who cares only about his reputation with men and puts so much pressure on his children to do things that will make him proud to boast about them that he loses his children’s affection. That father doesn’t love his children. Steven’s son will see his father slaying his own desires in… Read more »
“would rather have a repentant father…Steven’s son will see his father slaying his own desires.”
How are you able to judge that Steven is repentant?
How do you know he’s not, and why is it any of your business? I’d rather listen to Doug Wilson’s viewpoint because he knows what he’s talking about. He didn’t post this, by the way, to have a chance to slam somebody – he wrote it to inform those with a need to know the situation and instruct all in how one should go about dealing with a situation like Steven’s.
Wilson said he has been in continuous counseling with Steven. Why would Steven remain in this church for 10 years while on probation, under incredible restrictions in the church where he is chaparoned in and out of every service, continued counseling with Pastor Wilson, and in all of that time no one can be confident he is repentant? How can we be confident anyone is repentant of anything?
I have a solution for Steven. He should be in prison for the rest of his life or dead.. That’s where he belongs. Mathew and a lot of of you on here are disgusting for defending a pedophile. Even criminals in prison don’t like pedophiles. That’s where all people who commit crimes against children belong, in prison or dead. You’re disgusting trash Mathew for defending a pedophile. . You’re definitely a pedophile. Why are condemning gays and what happens between two grown grown consenting adults, but not those who commit crimes against children? What about the victims? Why do you… Read more »
I can’t imagine what it would be like to try to honor and love a father who finds me sexually attractive and who is considered so high risk that he may never legally be alone with me. All children are raised by imperfect parents as you note. Most children are not raised by men who have sexual impulses towards babies.
Let me get this straight. You think 1. men are the heads of household in all marriages, and should be obeyed 2. marriages should produce children and 3. pedophiles are no exception. Nice theology. Meanwhile, the wives are left to submit to the men who are “sexually stimulated” by their kids. Is it a sin to be sexually stimulated by your own son, pray tell? Is it a sin to encourage this situation to flourish by presiding over a marriage that necessarily produces easily-accessable offspring?
Your misrepresentation of what Doug Wilson believes says more about you than about him. If you disagree that pastors should officiate at the wedding of a convicted child molester, then make an argument for it. Make a case for what you believe; don’t libel him.
Doug’s been known to say churches should teach the wives of Nabals to behave along Abigailian lines.
Why does forgiveness entail encouraging marriage and children anyway? I mean, would you give a recovering alcoholic a job as a bartender? (and alcoholic beverages aren’t human beings with souls, so they don’t even really object to being victimized)
As a former drunk, your argument is ridiculous. No, I am not a tee-totaler as I have not quit alcohol, I just haven’t had any in about one year and now, as a born-again Christian, enjoy sobriety. God changes men from the inside out. Btw, I once witnessed to a man in a bar during happy hour. He died about one year late of cancer and accepted Christ on his deathbed. Your limits to what God can do, His complete victory over sin is a denial of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, specifically the part about the sanctification of men… Read more »
Okay, you’re right.
A better question would be, “Would you give a fox a job in a henhouse?”
Point being Sitler has a history of abusing minors, why give him his very own?
Except… God is the one who gave Steven a wife and child in trust, not anybody else. It seems to me your argument is with him more than anyone else.
That seems to veer a bit too far into Hyper Calvanistic fatalism. If Wilson was against this marriage, I assume he could and would have exercised church discipline.
I think Wilson has made reasonable choices from what I understand of the situation, but he is in favor of the marriage, and that is something he is defending with heart and mind.
Ian, I believe that the issue of hyper-Calvinism deals more with whether God actively predestines people unto reprobation, or whether the reprobate He “simply passes by”. I think Eph. 1:11 might be applicable to Erin’s question. From our perspective, we have freedom to apply Biblical constraints (i.e. we are not permitted to marry an unbeliever) as well as good general wisdom (don’t marry people you are not physically attract to). From God’s point of view, He apparently has a plan, a particular one, one which takes into account the free choices of people, cause and effect relationships, and all the… Read more »
That is one type of Hyper Calvinism. The fatalism I am criticizing is another. I believe that simply saying “God willed it because it happened” doesn’t give believers or non-believers a sense of whether God approved or intended action s to happen to demonstrate hlHis judgment on a fallen race.
Well, I think it might after all despite the “how” being completely beyond my comprehension (Acts 2:23;4:27,28)
Do we say this same thing about every single thing that ever happens? That God did it?
Does this apply to every single marriage, in your mind – that God gives a particular woman to a particular man in trust(and the child(ren) also)?
Children are born out of wedlock all the time. Moral degenerates get married all time (Jerry Sandusky). Was that God’s will, too?
Perhaps a helpful distinction to make here is between God’s providential will (that which happens in history) and God’s revealed will (His commands for us to follow.) A marriage between two people may be in line with God’s revealed will, and is also obviously His providential will. Alternatively, a marriage could be against God’s commands, and yet still be according to His providential will, because it happened. He’s in control of all things. If He didn’t want it to happen for some reason, it wouldn’t. Does that clear things up?
“…the church is a hospital for sinners, not a rest home for saints which brings us to the second glory. ” and this is a great mercy, otherwise I’d have been chucked out years ago! Thank you for this clear statement and for the way you have continued to preach the Gospel. It brought hope to me over a decade ago and it continues to bless me every minute.
I know of Christians that God has saved from paedophilia, sodomy, adultery, and bestiality. The fact is God desires men to repent. It seems that Jesus is inviting the repentant riff-raff into the kingdom while the unrepentant accusers would rather sit outside and bask in the glory of their own self-righteousness. Given that Satan is the Great Accuser one would suspect people would be more cautious who they make their father.
“The fact is God desires men to repent.” Agreed. But not all men do repent. And whether Doug Wilson is capable of judging whether or not a convicted child molester has repented is an appropriate question to ask.
But perhaps the more appropriate question we should ask (though, this is the internet…) is why dozens or hundreds of people who don’t know Sitler nor have sat through hours of counseling with him believe that THEY are capable of judging and condemning him.
Sitler has previously been convicted of repeated child molestation. Local prosecuting attorneys have brought the latest scrutiny of his behavior, not people on the internet. You can read their views here: http://www.correctionsone.com/corrections/articles/9369232-Idaho-sex-offender-allowed-to-return-home-with-child
I am praying for the church family there in Moscow. I have missed your fellowship and encourage you to continue your faithful ministry to the broken and needy. Christ came to save sinners. Doug, when I was in Moscow, you and the elders were always faithful to minister with compassion and firmness. This taught me what being a man of faith was about. I will pray that the Lord brings the church through this trial. Keep fighting the good fight of bringing the gospel to those in need.
That brought tears to my eyes. God bless you.
Beautiful statement, sir.
It’s an understatement that I’m no fan of Doug’s theology, but I’m having a great deal of trouble understanding what Steven Sitler has to do with anything. I’m happy to assume that any mistakes that Doug may have made in the handling of it were honest mistakes based on a desire to give someone a second chance. Even if, in hindsight, some things should have been done differently, it’s not a character flaw to give someone a second chance. And even if it were a character flaw, it has nothing to do with the validity of Doug’s theological views. Those… Read more »
“Moreover, if everything is on the table, we do not believe the church has the authority to prohibit or ‘not allow’ a lawful marriage.” This statement will cause Pastor Doug problems. “the woman caught in adultery” One tradition holds that what Jesus was writing in the dust was a sin of each man in the crowd. Our Wesley said something like “Church is the place where one beggar tells another beggar where the bread is.” “At the same time, since his conviction, in accordance with the decision of the court and in accordance with an additional and separate determination by… Read more »
Kelly, thank you for praying for Steven.
You are the only one picking and choosing. Answer the questions that you refuse to answer.
I would be interested in reading a more complete assessment of what those problems look like.
If “the church [DOES NOT] has the authority to prohibit or ‘not allow’ a lawful marriage,” then what is the basis for a church to object to SSM? Once there are 5 votes holding that the 14th Ad requires a state to issue two men or two women a marriage license, the human/secular argument is over. Unless and until the Constitution is amended, or a personnel change results in a second 5-4 vote going the other way, that’s human law. Whereupon we all deepen the rut of Ps 2, SSM is not really law, the Supremes can’t make law, they’re… Read more »
Thanks Kelly.
I think you may be equating Doug’s use of the word lawful with the word legal in common American parlance. I don’t think he meant it that way.
You are most likely correct in any case, as I can see a whole herd of “A’HA’s coming behind that.
Watch me risk boasting, repetition, profound, refusal to communicate, etc, etc, but I believe you’ll find that’s the way virtually everyone uses those two words, and they are used interchangeably. Heck, statutes commonly say, “It shall be unlawful to ______ ” or “It shall not be lawful to _____ .” NOT trying to beg the question here, but if this was intentional, then a thundering, stampeding collection of herds of AHA’s are converging on Idaho . . . . EDIT: added “secular” to above post. Even Justice Kennedy “graciously” allowed us to complain about and preach against SSM. So Pastor… Read more »
I understood the “law” in Doug’s “lawful” to be the law of God.
I’m sure that’s what he had in mind, as on the pedophile question his church does not have a doctrinal problem with such afflicted people marrying, provided full disclosure and so on. Since he was dealing with a barrage from only one immediate front, he was focused on just responding to those charges. So, I’m sure he was NOT thinking of how some people could take his sentence and run with it. But, were I him, I’d go, “Yeah, my bad, that’s was an ‘oops’. But it was ONLY an ‘oops.’ Of course I meant only in the narrow case… Read more »
Kelly, it is good to see that you can pontificate on issues you didn’t even hear about until they broke and have little knowledge of the situation. How about answering the questions that you haven’t answered.
What law did the Supreme Court make with their decision?
What law did Davis break?
What law did Judge Bunning cite as reason for his contempt charge?
Why do you place man’s law above God’s law?
Understood. and I roger your points.
I will just throw this out. I have read quite a few of Doug’s books and sermon’s. I think he has been pretty clear that when he uses the word “lawful” he intends his audience to understand lawful in accordance the the Word of God.
If I am incorrect about that I suppose I shall either be corrected or we will hear nothing of it.
Except perhaps the cacophony you mentioned.
UPDATE/EDIT
Just looked at Dougs fb page where he responds to a lady on this very issue. qoute “I meant biblically lawful”
OK; he has already filled the square. If the horde of herds seizes that line as a club, he can refute them, However, since he’s on notice from the bloggers running accusations against him (the most obvious one being that he has coddled a child abuser), he should NOT presume secular readers will be aware of the difference. As a result, I think he ought to explicitly say “Bible law, not human law” in the future. Avoids/preempts such needless problems.
(Chuckles and nods sagely)
As prolific a writer and speaker as he is, and given the strident opposition he is accustomed to,.one would think that reflex would be as automatic as “check your safety”. However every runner will step on a pebble now and then.
Hope you don’t mind my changing metaphors it not quite the same as mixing.
It 5:43 and I must be off.
Nord, Please correct me if I’m wrong, but based on your response below, I gather you understand the rationale of these lines: START Once there are 5 votes holding that the 14th Ad requires a state to issue two men or two women a marriage license, the human/ secular argument is over. Unless and until the Constitution is amended, or a personnel change results in a second 5-4 vote going the other way, that’s human law. STOP NOT asking you to pick a side on the merits, just please confirm (or deny) that you followed my argument. I believe those… Read more »
I understand completely.
Thx; that was helpful.
Often prior to starting marriage (and regular healthy sexual activity) there are certain temptations, and afterwards there are different ones. This change can be a means of growth.
We’re talking about a convicted pedophile here, not about two kids who are fooling around in the back seat of a car. Get a grip.
–Deana M. Holmes
I made a general statement.
Funny how it’s all “Jesus ate with sinners”, until the church does likewise; then it’s “You gluttons! You adulterers!”
Thomas, I am only reading about this story from afar, and I do not know if Doug and the elders made errors in judgment, but I will say that when Jesus told his disciples to forgive people seventy times seven times, the reason they responded by asking Jesus to increase their faith is just because of the point you are touching upon. Life is very messy because of sin, and all of us can get burned when we make ourselves vulnerable to the pain caused by sin, and that is always a liability when we forgive. My statement should not… Read more »
I agree.
Mr. Wilson, I am calling BS on this. You had the responsibility, and every opportunity, to protect Katie and her future children from this pervert. You should have counselled her never to have children with Sitler, and that if she wanted kids, she should stay far, far away from him. If you didn’t advise her this way, then your counsel was hopelessly irresponsible.
It’s Christ Church and churches like that which want to have the parents and elders be involved in a prospective marriage. The usual idea is that a man asking his ladyfriend’s parents for her hand in marriage is a violation of her sovereignty and independence. Asking for permission supposedly shows that in his mind the woman is a piece of property being negotiated over. While I’m not a fan of the whole courting idea that Doug Wilson usually advocates, it’s got some good ideas, like ‘involve the parents and church in the whole thing, instead of treating them like enemies… Read more »
I see. And in the meantime, should I be vilified by people who don’t have any earthly idea what my counsel was?
Katie had a child with this creep. That means either you advised her that it would be OK, or she disobeyed you. And it’s very, very hard for me to see her disobeying a pastor in a patriarchal environment.
AICT, If every woman at Christ’s Church is incapable of making decisions because they are allegedly not allowed, or because they have allegedly been brainwashed to no longer have a voice or volition, do you see how circular this reasoning becomes? I remember reading that Katie chose to marry Steven – I have no idea why, but she did. To dismiss this out of hand by claiming that Doug somehow planted the idea in her head is really not fair, at least not without evidence. The concern I am expressing is that this view becomes the non-empirical, unassailable and thus… Read more »
I agree with you. It also reinforces the notion that women are morons.
I’m not sure I follow…
Katie was 23 or so at the time of her marriage. Yet the story is being spun to sound as if a clueless, unsuspecting bride was handed over to a predator. If we assume that a grown woman is powerless to resist the machinations of the patriarchy (if there is one), we are also conceding that she is too dumb to take care of herself. And, eventually, this attitude comes back to bite women.
I’d like to better understand Katie’s thought process, as well as that of her parents. It’s not my business, but this is a part of the story that is difficult for me to grasp…why marry him? Or, why did you marry him?
Trying to be as charitable as I can manage, I find that part of the story completely incomprehensible. She knew he was on lifetime probation, and that he would not be allowed unsupervised contact with any children of the marriage. She knew the probation department opposed the marriage and consider him at high risk to reoffend. She knew that his preferred victims are very young children. So I also wish I could understand what she and her parents were thinking.
Exactly!!
Not only that, but what kind of a provider is he going to be? I can’t imagine he has great job prospects.
I suspect at the end of the day, the answer is that she married him because she loved him. I certainly hope he has made it worth it to her.
I think they could not have thought through what this child’s life would be like even if the father never re-offended. He requires constant line-of-sight supervision. How would a growing child interpret this and be able to trust and respect his father? How quickly would he become aware that his mother’s primary and court-ordered role is to protect him from his father, and how could this fail to create a toxic environment for the child? Who would let their children have play dates at the Sitlers’ house? I find myself wondering if she simply did not believe it. Perhaps she… Read more »
I remember reading that Katie chose to marry Steven – I have no idea why, but she did. To dismiss this out of hand by claiming that Doug somehow planted the idea in her head is really not fair, at least not without evidence. And, pray tell, what evidence would you accept? I’ve read the stories of women (and men) who’ve escaped from patriarchy (or as I like to call it, patrio-centrism). I heard over and over what it’s like in such environments. To me, that’s evidence. I have no doubt that Wilson runs his “kirk” in much the same… Read more »
I would be willing to take seriously anything above the level of conjecture as well as the assertion from an anonymous commenter on another person’s blog about their personal experiences which are then made equivalent to a church that I’m not sure that anonymous blogger has ever visited. I think that’s part of the response that we’re seeing from Doug which is that people are quite sure what goes on at his church not on the basis of personal testimony but on the basis that people don’t like his theology, and then with a theological axe to grind people decide… Read more »
Cult Meter is pegged at 10.
It reminds me of the Children of God cult from the 1970s. Massive abuse of children, justified by the leadership.
Pastor Wilson, This is a timely post for the day I have at hand. My Dad sexually abused me when I was a teenager, and I confronted him about it a little over a year ago. His response to me was not repentant, rather full of swagger and justification, and we have been estranged from that day. One of the most disturbing behaviors that predicated my discussion with him was his actions towards my oldest daughter, who is now only five. He began hedging and favoring her and it became uncomfortably apparent. While none of my children were ever alone… Read more »
What drives me crazy is that you are the same crowd that supports war and capital punishment. But then again, that mostly kills black and brown people, so that’s acceptable.
Was there a sale on strawmen at Walmart?
Teresa, There is a Biblical theology that would support war in some circumstances, even if most of our most recent wars would not oblige those standards. There is a Biblical ground for capital punishment in some circumstances as well. As I see this (I do not live in Idaho and so I have no personal dog in the fight), a pedophile came to a Christian church and expressed a desire to be forgiven by God. At minimum, the church cannot turn him away, no matter how repugnant his sin. From what Doug’s writing indicates, the man comes to church with… Read more »
” while they would seem to indicate that Wilson should have sent a sinner in clear need of grace back out into the world when he came to the Church for help.”
It is Mr. Wilson’s *manner* of helping that is problematic here. There were many choices available for seeking to assist Mr. Sitler, but Doug Wilson chose to write an advocacy letter to the judge, officiate his wedding, and cast himself as qualified to evaluate the repentance of a child molester, without any training in the matter.
There’s no need for “Biblical precendent”. Wilson could have denied Sitler marriage on the grounds that it’s stupid and wrong for him to be married. Having children is too great a risk for him, and being married to him would offer no chance at a normal life for any woman. Denying marriage would be an act of mercy to the woman and to her future children.
I cannot fathom why Katie married Steven. However, ministers are supposed to have biblical grounds for marrying on refusing to marry two people. This situation is….bizarre to me, but my point was that you have a man who has confessed and reportedly submitted to the state and the church in terms of reform and safe guards (that doesn’t mean there couldn’t have been better demands and safe guards), and you have two adults who are both in the church who want to get married. Ministers can’t just say “No, your marriage is stupid”. That being said, I don’t understand quite… Read more »
You’re wrong. Ministers can just say, “It’s stupid and wrong for this man to marry.” It’s called common sense, and Jesus never commanded us to abandon it.
But what you’re referring to is not common sense necessarily. I’ve said before that I cannot fathom why Katie agreed to marry Stephen. Your assumption that the fact that she agreed to marry Stephen is somehow proof of patriarchalism is a completely unconvincing argument and is in no way a logically sound conclusion. She could have been coerced but for all you and I know she could have agreed to marry him without any coercion whatsoever. I can’t understand why she would do the latter but there are people who do things that boggle the mind. And in terms of… Read more »
I’m glad I’m not responsible for such momentous decisions and I’m glad I don’t have to carry out those responsibilities under a hostile microscope. This is a well stated defense but I’m still holding Doug Wilson personally responsible for the mishandling of issues at Ligonier Ministries.
Ligonier ministries? Whaaa?
Kind of an inside shot at someone on here few days ago demanding Wilson respond to the RC Sproul Jr scandal.
Gotcha, let’s throw the Iran deal on him as well.
Picket’s charge too.
And Hillary’s emails.
Really?
What do you mean “mishandling?” What did that have to do with him at all? Did he cover something up?
I switched gears from serious to sarcastic between the first and second sentences. See explanation below. Sometimes attempts at wit are just confusing.
What about Katie? What about the baby? What about the distress Katie must be feeling at this point in time? I certainly hope the church has Katie’s back as strongly as it has Steve’s. However, based on the fact that Katie is pretty much thrown under the bus of she knew who and what she was marrying, so she made her own bed, I would say that Katie is basically hung out to dry based on this letter. No mention is made about HOW she and Steve met. Their meeting was arranged by an elder at the church with the… Read more »
Oregon Girl, Doug can correct me if I am wrong, but at the time that Steven and Katie met, I do not believe he was an impenitent pedophile. Before you respond, I agree with you that there are some besetting sins which are so deep that honestly, even though on one level I believe God can do anything, I struggle to believe He can do THAT with such sins like pedophilia because I feel as if I have never observed it before. I know how that statement does not prove that God cannot help these people, and that we walk… Read more »
I think there is a lot at play in this situation. 1. it is my experience that when a young women is in a circle where there is a lot of pressure to marry young (whether internal or external pressure), she may become desperate enough to marry anyone that is deemed fit for her to marry. 2. I do believe that even pedophiles can be 100% repentant and be forgiven by society and by the Savior. However, there are certain actions that have severe earthly consequences. I believe that one such consequence should be that serial pedophiles not be allowed… Read more »
OG,
I agree with a lot of what you wrote. Would you say that a penitent pedophile should be barred by the church from marrying? Or, they can marry, but they are not permitted to have children?
David – I, personally, believe that a penitent pedophile should not marry. He should not expect a woman to choose a life without children, nor can a woman be expected to completely know the extent of what she is getting into to begin with in this situation (this is true to an extent with all marriages, but magnifold greatly in a situation such as this). There is forgiveness at the cross for EVERYTHING and EVERYONE who repents. After all, the man hanging on a cross next to Christ himself went to Paradise. This gives GREAT HOPE!!!! However, also note that… Read more »
I completely understand
Thank you
I hope he is honest with his PO. But the website I read reported that he failed a routine polygraph.
Thank you for mentioning the Jamin Wight case, Oregon Girl. It is an important part of the wider context of this discussion.
Yes, you are welcome. This topic is much broader than Steven Sitler, it seems to be a recurring theme.
Yes. Doug Wilson’s pastoral conduct in regard to Steven Sitler should be evaluated in context with his conduct in the Jamin Wight case as well.
As a person not in your community with no prior knowledge of any of this… “huh?”
I am really amazed at the lack of care and concern being expressed for Steven Sitler’s son, who, as it has been expressed has been the subject of “contact resulting in actual sexual stimulation” from his own father. What about “the least of these,” to quote the man you believe brought your salvation? People fail to understand why there are those of us who have heard the gospel and walk away. Well, here’s a great example. That’s because the “gospel” preached by Doug Wilson/Christ Church is no gospel, but the teachings of patriarchy and ownership masquerading as Christianity. If Doug… Read more »
Deana,
Are you arguing that Doug and Katie’s father coerced her to marry Steven?
Doug’s statement suggests she chose to marry him, although I do not know why.
I am saying that Katie Travers was in a position where she had no choice. She asked an elder in the church to find her a husband. He found her a convicted pedophile on lifetime probation named Steven Sitler. Douglas Wilson married them. Given the status of single women (adults, but under the control of an “elder”) within Douglas’ “kirk,” I don’t think she had much of a choice. And just so you know where I am coming from: I am a 55 year old, single, never married, childless woman with two university degrees, employed by a structurally important financial… Read more »
At least you’re not a gossipy spinster.
Ah, but I am a real-life spinster!
–Deana M. Holmes
Katie may not have had your choices or mine, but she had some choices. I think too highly of women in general to believe that most of us would have said to the elder, “Hey, great choice!” She had to get the permission of the court for the marriage to proceed. It is unbelievable to me that part of that process would not have involved being counseled about the risks. I think we do her and all women a disservice if we decide she was a poor helpless little girl who had no choice.
Yes, but in her world, men are the decisionmakers and she must be counseled by them, due to their belief in Eve’s sin of disobedience* being visited upon all women. Church people who preach that women are tainted by Eve’s sin and must always be under the headship of a man cannot get out of that by saying “oh we do women a disservice if we decide she was a poor helpless little girl who had no choice,” because those are the teachings Katie Travers was raised under. *That’d be the one sin Jesus didn’t die for. Women are still… Read more »
What is the source for the information that Katie Travers asked an elder to find her a husband?
Yes, I know the type. If Doug had refused to marry them, you’d be screaming sexism because he was making Katie’s marriage decisions for her.
God bless you, EtR. The “Christian” vultures have come seeking carrion from which to pick flesh and sate their appetite, but, it’s because “they care,” so they never touch this community until this post then they start slinging bricks in defense of victims they weren’t of until they did a 15 google search 16 minutes ago and read some blog of some person who’s “deeply concerned about” or enraged or offended or slightly off put by Doug and/or anything he’s ever said (or didn’t say) and who smelled blood in the water. I know you differ with Doug, and A… Read more »
Rev. Denison (Dallas; Denison Forum) sent out an e-blast about the 400 pastors around the country who were outed in the Ashley Madison leak.
That hardly invalidates either marriage or Christianity. It only shows “all have fallen short.” Ministers are human. We make mistakes; so do they. Our mutual task is to help each other find and follow the Way.
At this point, I have no clue if these latest charges are true or false – – and neither do you. But no one has 20-20 hindsight.
I believe I’m going by an account in a newspaper quoting a prosecutor. I think that’s more than what you have, right?
As far as the sin-leveling, you can keep it.
–Deana M. Holmes
Does the newspaper account have anything from the defense? I wouldn’t expect so, but then I’m sure you still recall the verse in Proverbs about “seems air tight . . . until the other side speaks?”
Since I’ve haven’t heard the term “sin-leveling” before now, I’m kinda doubtful it belongs to me. Nothing I can recall from sermons, SS class, or Disciplines. However, if it becomes important, someone whose denomination does have that doctrine will show up about it.
Kelly, it is good to see that you can pontificate on issues you
didn’t even hear about until they broke and have little knowledge of the
situation. How about answering the questions that you haven’t
answered.
What law did the Supreme Court make with their decision?
What law did Davis break?
What law did Judge Bunning cite as reason for his contempt charge?
Why do you place man’s law above God’s law?
Dave, Got a response from my little press-to-test. The other person had no problem following the logic trail of the 14th Ad/Art Supremacy clause argument as to why Judge Bunning thought he had the authority to order Kim Davis to jail. Not surprised; I fully expected to receive such an answer. (Did NOT ask if he/she agreed; just asked if he/she could see the judge’s logic.) Between your hassle with Clay Crouch over those same issues and the very short 14th Ad snapshot I posted in the child abuse thread (Pastor Doug’s problematic line about lacking the authority to stop… Read more »
Kelly, you still didn’t answer the questions. You can type paragraphs but you can’t answer four simple questions. No I am not concerned about how things worked out while working for Uncle Sam. By the time I retired the generals knew that I knew they were lying to me. It was interesting to listen to colonels and generals talking to junior and field grade officers and then listen to the discussions between the generals about what they were really doing. Straight lies to the men they just spoke to and no ethical concerns. Just like you are doing in your… Read more »
What I find both sad and humorous is that many churches won’t let innocent men work very closely with little kids in nurseries, Sunday School classes and such for this exact reason – a male poses a higher statistical risk than a female. What is the point of such safeguards if everything is forgivable with the waive of a hand?
I went from such a church to a church where men and women are asked to work in nursery equally and I kind of resent it.
There is no way in the world I would have handed my baby or toddler over to a male worker in a church nursery. I don’t assume that every man is a pedophile. I do tend to assume that many men will not be as gentle and watchful with young children as many women are. My husband’s idea of soothing a crying baby was turning up the TV to drown the noise!
Respectfully, I think that’s a false line to draw. There are plenty of women who are uncaring and neglectful with children. If you don’t trust the church to watch over what sort of people are allowed to watch children, you shouldn’t leave them with anybody. If you can trust the church to be responsible in this matter, then the simple fact of male or female should not be an issue.
Rationally, I think you are right. And, when I think back on it, I didn’t trust my church to be responsible. In general, I suppose it was a prejudice rather than a principle!
I think the threat can easily be overstated but I can understand churches being cautious. I am more than happy not to be forced to interact with other people’s children. If a church had women working in the nursery and men loading and unloading equipment I would take it as a good sign that they didn’t hold progressive ideas about working against human nature.
Of course, if there’s no equipment to load or unload on any regular basis, then it might be nice if the women didn’t have to miss worship quite as often because the men took their turn at doing something that needed to be done.
Men caring for small children for brief periods of time is not working against human nature. I mean, God did give children fathers and everything; I expect He intended for them to have SOME contact with them.
Jane, I have thought this over for a little while. Of course, I agree with you. But think about our darling Mr. Knightley and Mr. Darcy and Captain Wentworth. Can you imagine any circumstances under which they would be useful tending infants in the church nursery? Whereas most of the heroines are good with children. Do you remember in Persuasion when Anne tells her sister Mary that a father’s place is not naturally with a sick child? Could this intuition have been flat out wrong for millennia?
Nobody, including Doug Wilson, is suggesting that Sitler should work with little kids in nurseries and Sunday school classes.
It would seem to me that someone who is untrustworthy with other people’s children is not ideal father material.
Well you’re correct about one thing. The enemies of your Church will most certainly use Sitler’s crimes and your facilitation of them under the guise of ‘grace’ against you. And thank the gods I don’t believe in that we do. Christianity has an abuse epidemic, a child rape epidemic, and someone needs to point out that the comfort of a child rapist is apparently more important than the vulnerable children in your care. You call yourself Christ Church, but perhaps you should have named yourself after Molech, considering how casually you sacrifice children’s safety so that your congregants can have… Read more »
Can you provide one iota of evidence that the “child rape epidemic” is greater (or even as great) in the church as outside of it? And are you choosing to conflate the Catholic Church abuse crisis with this incident in a non-Catholic church?
If people really want a better idea of what is going on with Steven James Sitler, I’d suggest you go to the Idaho Supreme Court’s state public repository. It can be found here: https://www.idcourts.us/repository/mainpublic_id.do?forward=mainpublic_id Click on the top link at the left (Name Search), fill in Sitler’s name, click on Search, fill out the Captcha, and then select Case History with ROAs. (I can’t give you a direct link because it will time out.) You will note there are quite a few entries. The first ones are from 2005-2007, and there are 191 of them. Then there are a total… Read more »
Mirele, what do you mean, or to what are you referring to when you say, “This is not “just a mistake.” There is something very wrong here.”?
I’m pointing out that Doug Wilson is being disingenuous here. You don’t rack up 69 docket entries, including a bench warrant (later dismissed) and a bunch of hearings without there being some sort of problem.
I have never known Doug to be disingenuous.
Most of us don’t know that someone is disingenuous until we are informed otherwise. Did you check out the links?
Yes. But most of it was slander.
You’ve obviously never practiced criminal law. Docket entries in the three and four digits are not uncommon, especially for someone on lifetime probation.
Yes, but in such a short time? Seriously, don’t teach me what I know. I know how quickly an active docket can get stuffed with filings.
If you know how quickly an active docket can get stuffed with things, then why the surprise that this docket has 69 entries?
Oh, don’t be obtuse. I noted that there hadn’t been but eight items from 2008 to December 22, 2014. That is a period of nearly seven years. Then there are 69 items in nine months by comparison? Of course something is up.
The guy is on lifetime probation. That means that periodically the file comes up for review. When it does, they get reports and hold hearings to make sure that he’s in full compliance. So yes, 69 items could mean “something” is up; though that something could be just about anything. On the other hand, it could mean nothing more than that after seven years it was time to do a complete review of the case.
Did you actually review the 69 items, or you’re just confidant that it must be “something”? Like Gilda Radner used to say, it’s always something.
If any of these guys had any evidence they would have posted it by now. The purpose is just to throw around a lot of “if there’s smoke there’s fire” and build a word association between Doug Wilson and pedophile. Its a bad situation. The law and a host of church elders are on top of it. I don’t see any reason to believe that a mob of concern trolling atheists and chronic church malcontents could have handled it any better.
Whatevers, guy. The reality is that from the very beginning, Doug Wilson has given quite a bit of deference to a man who sexually assaulted multiple children. So much for caring for the “least of these.”
–Deana Holmes
I see DISQUALIFY .
Thanks Barnabas. I had to laugh at someone commenting on a post written by someone actually deeply involved in the events, that if people want to really know what’s happening they should go elsewhere.
Sure, I could ask Armstrong about the surface of the moon. But if I really want to get the low down I should go and speak to the postman.
Such is the nature of unbelief. Never risk believing or even consulting the source.
Wow … looking at many of these comments from Christians, one might surmise that God’s grace isn’t sufficient after all. Who knew?
Wow, looking at these comments, you would think that there might be some adults in the Doug Wilson/Christ Church orbit who could have spoken up and told him that blessing Steven Sitler’s marriage might not be such a good thing and could come back to bite him on the butt. However, the orbit around Wilson must be filled with sycophants and yes men (and the women, all of them, are silent, because that’s their place), because it happened and now Wilson is being righteously chewed out for his actions. And he deserves to be. Even this letter from Wilson/Christ Church… Read more »
(Reads comments section. Sighs) So, let’s begin by stating the obvious–pedophiles are still human beings. Also, pedophilia is wrong. First, the atheist trolls: Y’know, there’s such a thing as making a mistake–and I do not refer to Sitler in this, I refer to Wilson. The blathering about Wilson “enabling pedophilia” and whatnot is spleen-venting, no more. Second, Douglas Wilson: The path you and yours are taking here in dealing with the situation as it stands is as prudential as it can possibly be. My one question is why anyone thought it would be beneficial for this guy to get hitched… Read more »
I think Doug is showing a great depth of confidence in the Gospel and I am praying that he is rewarded, God glorified and Steven continually delivered. I understand that those who believe in evolution have a hard time accepting the possibility of radical transformation, and even many bible believing Christians may buy into the idea that people don’t change. I believe God is more than capable of transformation. People change all the time. Whatever the outcome, I am thanking God for the commitment to the Gospel being shown by those actually involved. The complexity and the demands, not to… Read more »
“Whatever the outcome…”? Does that “whatever” include the possibility of Sitler molesting or raping his own son? Will you be thanking God if that happens? I know I won’t be.
Yuk. No. What an odd remark.
Well, that’s a relief. There are some “christian” wingnuts who would rejoice and thank God at someone being abused. Paige Patterson comes to mind, but he’s a different kettle of fish.
Jesus: “But whoever shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Doug Wilson: “I would urge that the civil penalties applied would be measured and limited. I have a good hope that Steven has genuinely repented, and that he will continue to deal with this to become a productive and contributing member of society.” Jesus: “Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you? Every one who comes… Read more »
Guester, one can only hope that you are actively supporting Defund Planned Parenthood in addition to your posts here.
Planned Parenthood is clearly off-topic for this post and comment thread. Why are you trying to change the subject, Dave?
“But whoever shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” No guester, it is one of the many ways in which little ones are offended. They are murdered and thrown into the fire. My point is that if you and the others who know only a little of this situation are so against harming children, that you must also cry clearly for Planned Parenthood to be disbanded and you must cry clearly against… Read more »
Again, not the topic of this post, Dave.
I appreciate the transparency involved in a letter like this Mr. Wilson. It shows integrity and a willingness to be examined. That being said, I don’t think it’s any of my business and probably not the business of most people here in the comments. Yet how can they resist the opportunity to stand on their electronic soap box? As sparks fly upward…
That letter gave short shrift to the infant victim and didn’t mention Sitler’s wife except as one of Sitler’s chaperones. (Think about this for a moment–Steven Sitler is such a vile pedophile he has to have a line of site chaperone when he is with his son or any other child under the age of 18.) It’s all about the butt-covering for Douglas Wilson.
Infant victim of what, exactly?
Of being born into the same household as child predator. With the apparent approval of an entire church no less.
Amen, Amen again.
I am deeply concerned with the way Christ Church and other CREC communities address sexual abuses of many varieties. Other Christian leaders approach the issue of pedophiles in communities very differently. Jimmy Hinton writes about protecting our communities while extending divine love and abundant grace. I have grave concerns over the treatment of Steven Sitler. Proverbs 27:6 teaches us that the wounds of a friend are faithful while the kisses of an enemy are deceitful. I AM NOT THE ENEMY.
Hi Osanna, I checked out Hinton’s web site, and it looks like he has a lot of helpful information to help churches be aware of how molesters take advantage of parents’ trust of people within their church community to gain access to children. Doug urging the discoverer of the molestation to report it to police seems very much what Hinton would urge, so are you concerned instead with the church allowing him to worship with the congregation, even if he stays with a court-approved chaperone? That part seems me to be the right way to extend grace to someone who… Read more »
The least of these are his victims. Were they consulted and ready to have him reintegrated into the church? Or had they already gone elsewhere?
If a person is an alcoholic or has been one in the past, it is wise for them to stay out of bars and it is wise for them not to get a job as a bartender. If a person is a pedophile, yes, Jesus can forgive that sin, but wisdom dictates that that person not expose himself to temptation. That is simply common sense. And considering the seriousness of that kind of sin and bent, it is also wisdom to accept the consequenses of past behavior and not be around ANY children. The stakes are too high to do… Read more »
By the way, for those of you who are so convinced his repentance makes him okay to be a father-would you allow him to babysit your children or grandchildren? If not, why not? It makes no difference how sincere his repentance is-I make no judgement on that. But this is more than a weakness, this is an orientation, and you cannot gamble with a child’s safety. A repentant man will understand that this would be part of the consequences of his sin and would be in total agreement with staying away from all children. That is not too much to… Read more »
Connie, No, I personally wouldn’t. I am not an elder, but if a pedophile (which honestly, to me is like the lowest of the low of the low) came to my church and I were an elder, and that man communicated to the session that he knew he was a horrible sinner, and he wanted help, I would advocate that he be allowed to have fellowship in our church, but not be around the children unattended. I am not sure what I would do if that same person came to me and said “David, I want to marry so and… Read more »
I hope those reading and commenting here will have the respect for the least of these to read the *other* letter sent to Judge Stegner–not by Doug Wilson, who was “happy to” write “on behalf of” Steven Sitler–but the one from the parents of the boy who Steven forced to engage in a sexual act when the child was just. two. years. old. Their letter, while evidencing far more mercy for Sitler than I think I could have mustered in their situation, nonetheless pleads for justice on behalf of the VICTIM. It is a cry for justice on behalf of… Read more »
Something to point out: Your most vicious critics are a particularly hypocritical bunch; something that is characteristics of the social justice types which I constantly see toss every “ist” and “ism” at Doug Wilson and Christ Church. Seriously, “F*ck them.” These people don’t care about children being molested. They care about demonizing their opponents in every way, shape, and form. Ignore them, laugh in their faces, and document every example of their hypocrisy. This may sound harsh, but there is no point to a moral highground with people who have no interest in morals, nor apologies. They are disingenuous and… Read more »
I’m sorry, I didn’t realize it was such a terrible, terrible crime to want to defend an infant from the adults in his life who can’t seem to bring themselves to put him first. His mother is unable to be a line of sight observer for his pedophile father, who admitted to sexual stimulation from his infant son. And the pastor of Christ Church, the guy who testified on the father’s behalf to the court and who presided over their marriage, his words have been to protect himself and Christ Church and Sitler, with little to no concern for the… Read more »
Social Justice Warriors like you and Beelzedub on this thread don’t care about pedophiles. You don’t care about defending children. You don’t care about anything other than victimhood and who can be the most “oppressed” and how to use them as token minorities as your own personal shields to deflect criticism. You only care about “winning” and using any ends to justify the means. I’d advise Doug to ignore your ilk. Don’t worry though, I strongly support your right to abortion and urge all of you to always abort. It will make it that much easier to outbreed you and… Read more »
Have I said anything about myself in any of this? No. I have focused on the child and his mother. I have focused on the pedophile father. Have you mentioned them at all? Nope. Instead you’ve gone after me. I think it’s clear who cares about whom.
I have nothing more to say to you. *plonk*
You defined yourself as a social justice warrior. Realize what that entails. SJWs dont care about anything but rising to the top of their pack by seeing who can be the most fervent in denouncing dissenters. You haven’t focused on the child, the mother, or the pedophile father because you don’t know them and you don’t care to. SJWs are to be ignored and treated with the same scorched earth tactics they’ve been utilizing for the last several years. Since I’m a minority, I can only conclude your disagreement must mean that you are a racist, misandrist, and considering I… Read more »
What are you now claiming is the source that says an admission about sexual stimulation from the offender was made? You already know from yesterday the alledged admission was prosecutor’s claim: { During Tuesday’s review hearing, Latah County Prosecuting Attorney Bill Thompson said the state originally requested a review of Sitler’s conditions of probation to provide guidance on how to move forward given the fact Sitler had fathered a child and the results of a polygraph test had disclosed concerning actions. Thompson said information the court now has “shows (Sitler) has had contact with his child that resulted in actual… Read more »
*shrug* I’ve heard worse dead-agenting from the Scientologists. Seriously, it’s not about me. It’s about an infant child who is surrounded by adults who are determined to protect a worldview that puts his pedophile father on a pedestal and does not care for the safety and well-being of the child. I don’t see you addressing the well-being of Steven Sitler’s infant son in any way. Instead you whine and moan about the prosecutor and strongly insinuate that he, and by definition, other JDs lie without any proof. My only purpose in being here is to confront Douglas Wilson with the… Read more »
Mirele, I do not know you, but the concern I have is that you are making hasty generalizations. Since Scientology does have a pretty strict, top-down authority structure, therefore anything which you perceive to have the same key features is now evaluated as being of the same species as Scientology. When others attempt to point out that you are confusing categories, then we are perceived as being just as blinded as those waiting for Xenon to return (or whatever the arch enemy in Scientology is called). Doug did not molest anyone, and Doug does not support adult-child sex, nor does… Read more »
Again, it’s not about me. It’s about a man, Douglas Wilson, who has aided another man, convicted dangerous pedophile Steven Sitler, in insinuating himself into the Christ Church community, which is by its own description patriarchal. It’s about showing how Douglas Wilson has over and over and over again protected Steven Sitler, up to and including this open letter. It’s is about the fact that Douglas Wilson has expressed little to no concern for the safety and well-being of Steven Sitler’s infant child. Instead, Wilson’s reaction has been to engage in butt-covering for Christ Church. Douglas Wilson could put the… Read more »
So without any comments sarcastic or otherwise regarding gender, let’s pretend that you were the pastor of the church where Stephen attended. Would you allow him to attend church if he was penitent and if he was chaperoned? Beyond that what if Stephen came to you and told you of his intention to marry a woman in your church and it turns out that the woman and her family were in support of this marriage? What would you do? I think just as importantly since we’re talking about a Christian Church and not some other religious group I’d like to… Read more »
I am not a pastor so I’m not going to answer your question from that viewpoint. I am going to answer the question from the viewpoint of a former child, which I was, and as a former child who was molested by a teenage neighbor (which I was back in the late 1960s), I’m going to tell you that if it were up to me, convicted pedophiles would attend church remotely. I’m not willing to take the chance that a repeat pedophile like Steven Sitler has even the tiniest chance in a church to get access to a child. I’ve… Read more »
I am not a pastor either and I cannot understand how Katie’s parents agreed to this marriage. However, for people who would criticize Doug for officiating the wedding, it’s very easy for people like you and me who are not pastors and who are not faced with this situation to simply kind of cop out and say well I’m not a pastor so I don’t have to give an answer as to what I would do. But if people want to take that easy out, that I don’t think it’s fair to criticize Doug for officiating at a wedding when… Read more »
So it’s okay that you make assertions that exceed the propositional truth content of your sources, and then when called on your unsubstantiated lie/claim that you introduced you hypocritically say, “Seriously, it’s not about me.” ? Indeed this article is not about you, other than the auxillary notion that you in response to this article have now wickedly fabricated information and born false witness to condemn Doug for faithfully teaching the husband’s lordship/headship over his wife per 1 Pe 3:5-6 and Eph 5:22-24 (and not with “the status of gods” as you just strawmanned in your continued Beezledubish false witness/accusation).… Read more »
Thanks for the letter, and thank you for your faithful ministry, Pastor Wilson.
This is the irony of “liberal/tolerant” critique of conservative/traditional/reformed Evangelicals. We’re told that we’re judgemental for labelling certain things as sins, which they think is OK. They’ll be quick to point out that Jesus even hung out with Prostitutes, which we don’t have in our churches (they assume). But then get all touchy when we reach out to the pimps and abusers. The problem with liberalism (of any stripe or degree) isn’t that it is touchy over judgement and holiness (although it is). But that it’s touchy over grace and transformation. I.e. it is self salvation (if they think salvation… Read more »
“They make their tongue sharp as a serpent’s,
and under their lips is the venom of asps.”
If you hate someone so much you actively hope a child has been or will be sexually abused, you need to re-evaluate your life and be introduced to Jesus. A. Isker One of my friends posted his thoughts concerning this situation and various commenters here elsewhere on the web. Despite all the hand wringing for a child that the posters here don’t know, there is an obvious lack of concern or Christian charity toward the child or the other family members. Cooling the keyboard jets would be appropriate for those who are just jumping on the bandwagon, those who hate… Read more »
I’m a Christian, Dave. I don’t hate God, and I don’t need to personally know a child to be concerned for his welfare. And I most certainly do not want him to be sexually abused. That’s why I want Sitler out of that house (so that his son is safe), and divorced from Katie (so that she has some chance at a normal life).
I’ve read enough of Wilson’s works before now to know that he’s ignorant, arrogant, and backwards. His decision to marry the creep Sitler to anyone cements him in my mind as a fool.
And if Doug has refused to marry them, how many feminists would then be screaming about the sexism of him not allowing her to decide for herself who to marry?
Who knows? I just know I wouldn’t be one of them.
AICT, your concern appears to be directed more toward Wilson and not toward the families involved here. In this case, you really do need to know the situation extremely well. If you haven’t noticed there is a sharp divide between those posting, like yourself, who hate Wilson and those who are saying think about the family and let’s wait for the facts. You posted about your abused childhood and I understand that. You push immediately for divorce. You assume God did not give this woman the ability to live in this situation and to flourish. Those who marry convicts have… Read more »
You posted about your abused childhood and I understand that. What are you talking about here? I wasn’t abused in my childhood, sexually or otherwise. The nearest thing to abuse I ever faced was some bullying at school. So I couldn’t possibly have “posted about my abused childhood”. (My commenting history is public, so you can check for yourself.) You must have me confused with someone else. You push immediately for divorce. You assume God did not give this woman the ability to live in this situation and to flourish. Forget what you think I assume. I push for divorce… Read more »
I think the main takeaway I’ve gotten from the comments section is that Beezledub hates child rape way more than all of you do. He has never even associated with a person who has molested of raped a child, not even unknowingly. He hates all degenerates who rape. You can’t even try and say that he’s OK with it cause he definitely isn’t. And he absolutely hasn’t raped any children so stop thinking it. He’ll know if you’re even thinking it.
You are correct. He is a courageous moral hero
One issue hovering over all of this is that Sitler’s marriage is only an issue because the criminal justice system failed to do its job; the few weeks he spent in custody are not nearly enough for molesting a child. Unless there’s some major exculpatory fact of which I’m unaware, had I been the judge I would have been inclined to give him a minimum of 20 years, in which case the question of his getting married and having a child would never have come up. But he was not sent to prison, so now the question is what to… Read more »
I feel sorry for churches who have to make decisions the state should have addressed. There used to be something called an “execution sermon.” Christ didn’t loosen the ropes on the good thief. When a church has to effectively monitor security solutions, it’s a sign that the magistrate, and the legislature, has failed.
That’s not exactly the situation here, James. Doug Wilson wrote an advocacy letter to the judge on behalf of Stephen Sitler. He involved himself prior to sentencing.
Guester,
The judge is a “big boy”. I have been involved as an expert witness in medical malpractice cases (I know there are important differences between those and this situation) and judges feel little pressure to listen to things that do not strike them as having the ring of plausibility.
Then why did Doug Wilson write an advocacy letter?
Well…..to advocate for a punishment that did not, in his estimation, was too harsh, I suppose. My point was that the judge is not under Doug’s spell. Doug can make a plea, one which could have been worded more clearly given his post above further explaining his intent, without being the person who, per his accusers, orchestrated molestation.
It wasn’t an advocacy letter; it called for punishment to be “measured and limited”.
Doug Wilson’s letter to the court begins “I have been asked to provide a letter on behalf of Steven Sitler, which I am happy to do”.
You can see the entire letter at this site:http://www.tomandrodna.com/CR_…
Definition of “on behalf of”:
1. in /on behalf of, as a representative of or a proxy for:
On behalf of my colleagues, I address you tonight.
2. in /on someone’s behalf, in the interest or aid of (someone): He interceded in my behalf.
Upon reflection, I think a penitent child molester would voluntarily sacrifice fellowship, just as the “good thief” didn’t demand release from criminal punishment. If I read the case correctly, Steven was sentenced to life in prison. Why was he ever allowed out on probation? When we allow violent predators to escape execution or jail for life, we put churches and other institutions in a position they shouldn’t have to face — turning all social gatherings into potential lock downs.
This is an interesting point, James. What would repentance look like here? Simply going to all the meetings (including pastoral counseling) required? That, for me, falls short because it could simply be an attempt to evade further punishment. I agree with you that true repentance would be shown by the limitations the offender places ON HIMSELF, not merely complying with the limitations that other people place upon him.
When the magistrate and the legislature don’t do their jobs, pastors, teachers, parents, and local police have to spend time monitoring the motions of a man who — if there were any justice — would be in jail for life or executed. It would be nice if a penitent molester, released from prison inappropriately, placed limitations on himself, but counting on that is dangerous. I think Doug is a brilliant, witty, polymath, but try as I may, I can’t see the wisdom of allowing this guy fellowship.
I think the best thing to happen for all concerned would be for Steven Sitler to be returned to prison. In my opinion.
“…true repentance would be shown by the limitations the offender places ON
HIMSELF, not merely complying with the limitations that other people
place upon him.”
-This.
And I should point out, because it seems it may be relevant to all of this, I am a Christian (those lines are getting blurry here), and I am thankful for almost all of D.W.’s work.
Even IF the judge supported the marriage, Idaho Department of Corrections did not. Wilson is choosing to cherry pick by saying that the judge was in support, however, I would love to see written documentation supporting that. http://sitler.moscowid.net/2011/05/27/idaho-department-of-correction-re-steven-sitler-2/
Idaho Department of Corrections is NOT Latah County Prosecutor’s office. It is clearly not simply Bill Thompson’s faulty or biased interpretation of the polygraph that got Sitler in trouble here. http://sitler.moscowid.net/2015/08/24/department-of-correction-special-progress-report/
Judge Stegner at 52:09 – “I think it’s a reasonable restriction that he not reside with his wife and child in the future if in fact they have children.” – Judge Stegner http://sitler.moscowid.net/2011/06/01/steven-sitler-hearing-to-approve-marriage/
OG, who owns the web site you ask everyone to look at?
Proverbs warns us that choice morsels go down to the inmost parts. Why are you so interested in attempting to fuel the fire rather than waiting for the proper authorities to act? Why are you and others so excited about this sad situation?
What you said unpleasantly affected my conscience! I don’t think I am excited but I am way too interested. What duties am I neglecting in order to be spending this much time wondering and speculating? Thank you.
Whoever owns this website you linked to should be ashamed of themselves. They are no more concerned about Katie or the child than bunko. To take their wedding video and make it a part of a site to attack Steven and Doug just uses Katie like a human shield. Not as disgusting as pedophilia, but still disgusting.
I disagree. What Doug Wilson said as he performed the wedding of a convicted pedophile to a member of his congregation is very relevant.
You are right. Do you know all of the counseling that was performed beforehand by state officials, church elders, parents and friends. No! Choice morsels taken out of context are very pleasing to the belly.
Here’s one of those documents you don’t like so much, Dave. http://sitler.moscowid.net/2011/05/27/idaho-department-of-correction-re-steven-sitler-2/ And I quote from the document, which is from the Idaho Department of Correction and is in regards to the Sitler marriage: “May 27, 2011 “William Thompson “Latah County Prosecuting Attorney “522 S. Adams St. “Moscow, ID 83843 “Dear Bill: “After careful review of Mr. Sitler’s history; the recent Abel Assessment; the opinions of Steve Lindsley and Dr. Richard Craig; it has been decided that the Idaho Department of Correction, does not support Mr. Sitler’s upcoming marriage. “In coming to a decision in this situation, Mr. Sitler’s original… Read more »
Read what I posted on your previous post concerning truth. Apparently you are not concerned with truth, protecting the family or the child.
There are six things which the Lord hates,
Yes, seven which are an abomination [a]to Him:
17 Haughty eyes, a lying tongue,
And hands that shed innocent blood,
18 A heart that devises wicked plans,
Feet that run rapidly to evil,
19 A false witness who utters lies,
And one who [b]spreads strife among brothers
You only show one small portion of the situation and that is the problem. You should stop gossiping until the whole truth is shown.
My conscience is absolutely clear. I know that protecting the least of these is the right thing to do. Go quote the Scripture again, and this time, look in the mirror when you do it.
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” signed, Jesus
Thanks to this website, I know that the Idaho Department of Correction “does not support Mr. Sitler’s upcoming wedding”. That is a documented fact that Douglas Wilson did not include in his justification of his and Christ Church’s conduct in this case. See http://sitler.moscowid.net/2011/05/27/idaho-department-of-correction-re-steven-sitler-2/ The same document records that Stephen Sitler stated his intention to have children to the Department of Correction. Since Doug Wilson stated in his own letter to the court that “Stephen…has been completely honest with me”, it seems reasonable that Doug also knew of this intention, and yet officiated at the convicted pedophile’s wedding anyway. This… Read more »
guester, you do not know even a small portion of what occurred. That is where you make your mistake. You point to only a small portion of what has happened and not to any of that which you know nothing about. How about waiting a bit.
In case you didn’t realize it from visiting Tom’s website, Tom hates Wilson and has supported numerous false accusations in the past that after investigation by federal and state authorities were found to have no merit.
I am only quoting primary source documents. If you have other primary source documents to add to the discussion, please do so.
Why are you upset about the truth coming out?
I was upset by the wedding video. I was not upset about the court documents. The wedding video made a mockery of Katy just as much as it did Stephen and Doug.
David, Yes, the wedding video is VERY upsetting to me as well. It should not be posted there for all to see. I do not post links in order to “fuel the fire”, as you claim. Nor am I linking directly to the video. Please don’t watch the video of the wedding! I, personally have not watched it nor have any desire to. I have simply used the site for the court documents to provide further clarity.
I just felt bad about the video for Katie. I also felt bad for Stevens parents. The owner of the site took personal photographs and applied them out of context.
The court documents were fair game. I hate to say this, but the mug shots of Steven, he just looks off. The hand written note was almost juvenile. There’s something not right there, just in those things.
The web site hosts a multitude of falsehoods and gossip also. It is not just court documents and facts. That is why there is a problem with it. There is a difference between telling the truth and spreading dissension by including gossip, innuendo and falsehoods. This site spreads the latter under the guise of the former.
Then you’ll be happy to show us where it’s wrong and to provide the correct evidence, right? Waiting…
Go ask the feds. They already looked and didn’t find anything except people mad at Wilson. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or brain surgeon to look at those web sites and immediately recognize the bias. For those familiar with the Moscow and those who hate Wilson, it is easy to see the problems right off — after all, the same people have been spewing hate at Wilson for over a decade without finding any federal, state or local agency to back their false claims. For the peanut gallery, individuals such as yourself, who are jumping on this situation right… Read more »
The feds have already investigated based on court documents dated August 24 and September 1, 2015? Wow, they’re fast, those feds. I assume you’re in touch with the feds then, Dave?
As I’ve said before, if you have primary source documents to add to this discussion, please do so.
Thanks to this website, I also know that Steven Sitler’s approved chaperones are his parents and his wife. This puts Douglas Wilson’s justification that “Steven has never been to our worship service unaccompanied by a trained chaperone” in a somewhat different light; he could merely have said “Steven has never been to our worship service unaccompanied by his wife or his parents.”
See http://sitler.moscowid.net/2012/03/07/stevens-county-washington-public-notice-sex-offender-notification-level-iii/
They are some of his approved Chaperones. There are others, as well.
It was enlightening to see that an older gentleman gave a prayer asking for God’s blessing of children in this marriage. How openminded…
I’d like to thank Douglas Wilson for allowing a free-flowing discussion regarding these issues in his comments.
–Deana M. Holmes
I agree with you, Deana.
Considering the Calvinist attitude towards children, this should not be surprising. Calvin said “there are babies a span long in hell.”
Doug Wilson: ” Steven has never been to our worship service unaccompanied by a trained chaperone…our ministry to Steven, in other words, has not been conducted at the expense of any children in our church community, or in a way that puts any of them at risk.” Steven’s chaperone was his wife, who has now been removed as a qualified chaperone because she did not properly inform Steven’s probation officer of “instances” (note the plural) which the court refers to as of “heinous nature”, and which caused the corrections officer to order Mr Sitler out of his own residence. This… Read more »
Give it up guester. You keep shedding false accusations — casting doubt — without any proof. Were you in worship services with Steve when he wasn’t properly chaperoned? No. I didn’t think so. So put up proof, not more internet nonsense, or stop spreading lies. There are six things which the Lord hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination [a]to Him: 17 Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, And hands that shed innocent blood, 18 A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that run rapidly to evil, 19 A false witness who utters lies, And one who [b]spreads strife among brothers… Read more »
Most of what I am doing here is quoting primary source documents related to the case, and comparing them to Doug’s own documented statements. You seem to have a problem with that, Dave.
I have not seen this particular point fleshed out. Could this be a case highlighting the hatred that the civil magistrate (CM) has for citizens in it’s sphere? I’ve been reading, listening and contemplating recently the theonomic arguments set forth by Greg Bahnsen. In a nut shell, Bahsen argues, and at many points convincingly, that the CM is under obligation to adhere to the penal sanctions of the Old Testament in the NT age. I would simply point you to his lectures found at Covenant Media Foundation and his books on the subject. Clearly, OT law would have had Mr.… Read more »
I’ll point out again that Doug Wilson intervened with the civil authorities on behalf of Mr. Sitler *prior* to sentencing. That is a hand Mr. Wilson chose, not one he was dealt. Likewise, elder Iverson chose to intervene by introducing Katie and Steven, even calling Steven a “godly young man”.
You may read Doug’s letter on behalf of Steven here: http://www.tomandrodna.com/CR_2005_02027/
And Katie’s account of elder Iverson’s involvement in her courtship here: http://sitler.moscowid.net/2010/08/15/the-meeting-katies-rendition/
So is that the extent of your interaction with my comments? Putting the phrase “hand dealt” under an electron microscope? To borrow a line from Monty Python…”is there someone else up there we can talk to?”
What else would you like to talk about, David? At least I interacted with your comment; noone else did.
Yea…any thoughts on the civil magistrate’s responsibility for this mess, which was the substance of my comment? Thoughts on Bahnsen’s call to the CM to execute the penal sanctions of the OT in ‘Theonomy and Christian Ethics’ and other articles, publications and lectures? Why or why would this not be proper? Thoughts on the radical 2K position that relieves the church from saying anything at all to the CM regarding the punishment of evildoers and it’s argument that the CM has only to look to “conscience” and “common grace” for the rules of engagement? Let’s start with that.
I don’t think Bahnsen’s interpretation of the Scripture is correct as rape so generally deserving the death penalty, unfortunately. And that’s nothing against theonomy, but against the interpretation of these verses of Scripture discussing this particular crime. Contrary to Bahnsen’s interpretation of the text, the death penalty for the (non-kidnapping, non-murdering, etc.) rapist is required only in two cases of “engaged virgins” or for “married women” (both being within the category of wife per Dt 22:24). [Hence, such sex isn’t adulterous on the audibly crying-out woman’s part — which if it was, then would deserve her death also — since… Read more »
Organized Christianity is a toxic joke, and this article proves it. Don’t let biology get in the way, whatever you do. Just chant “God can change you” and ruin a young woman’s life by giving her to a pedo, and let the pedo molest their child. What could be simpler? The recidivism of child rapists is widely known to result in their re-integration into normal society to be a hopeless cause. Not that this will stop you. Douglas Wilson you should step down from any position of authority you have over any human being and re-evaluate your life, I pity… Read more »