Introduction
When controversies blow up, there are two things that must be done with them. One is to treat the controversy with the idea of stewardship in mind, seeking to be a faithful steward of whatever God has given you. Whenever God gives anything to His people, one of the things He wants to see happen is for them to turn a profit on it. This means that it is important to stay at your post and conduct yourself in the controversy with as much dignity as you have. Steward your controversies; invest the accusations against you. As John Piper might say, don’t waste your incoming slanders.
But the second thing you should do is step back in order to get oriented to the larger picture. Try to get a better grasp of what is happening and why. As King James himself might have asked, “What goeth on?” 
Sin
We are in desperate need of sin. We need sin — but by this I do not mean that we need to sin. I mean rather that we need the category of sin. This is because sin can be forgiven and all our substitutes for it cannot be forgiven.
In his essay on the humanitarian theory of punishment, C.S. Lewis points out that to treat a criminal as a wrongdoer, as a sinner, enables us to keep our response to him regulated and bounded by the rule of justice. But if he is “sick,” then how long he is in “treatment” is simply a function of whether he has gotten “better” yet. You keep a man in prison until his justly assigned sentence is up. You keep a man in the hospital until he is “better,” and no telling how long that might take. Let’s leave that to the experts.
The same principle applies to the population at large. One writer recently pointed out that if you don’t like someone, you call what they did “abuse,” but if you like him you call it “brokenness.” But what the two have in common is that neither one can be forgiven, neither one can have an assurance of pardon declared over them. But remember, Jesus died for our sins.
In controversies over abuse, victims, brokenness, and so on, this is why appeals to justice (i.e. let’s find out what actually happened) so often fall on deaf ears. They don’t care about executing the right prisoner. That is not what this is about. They don’t need to find out if you were the culprit. All they need to know is whether you are the patient.
And this is why we need to come back to a scriptural definition of sin, which is rebellion against the holy law of God. Sin is lawlessness (1 John 3:4). And this is what brings us to . . .
America
God has a controversy with America (Micah 6:1-2). We are a sinful nation, in high rebellion against Him. We have been dwelling in a generation of unrighteous savagery, and we have done so while pretending to ourselves that we have in the midst of it remained a kind and benevolent people. We have flattered ourselves in quite a grotesque way.
But the record speaks for itself. We have been slaughtering the unborn for a full generation now. We have done this instead of receiving each child with kindness and hospitality, and we have done this to over fifty million children. Our blood guilt is consequently staggering. On top of that, it has now been revealed to us that the merchandising of these baby parts has become big business for us, and it is a big business we refuse to repent of.
As I write this, a new video from CMP has just been released. I will of course be writing more on that, probably tomorrow morning, but in the meantime, just remember that all parts are guaranteed “fresh,” and also remember that the “headlines would be a disaster.” But because the American ruling class is profoundly hard-hearted, representing the people well, the headlines have not been nearly the disaster that they ought to have been.
In addition to our blood guilt, we have established the utter fruitlessness of same sex mirage as the law of the land, in defiance of all decent law and custom, and we have set ourselves to drop the hammer on any individuals who fail to join in on the new mandatory festivities. We said, celebrate.
We have done this with a peculiar sort of ferocity. It is the kind of ferocity shown when a wicked people are tring to convince you of their shining righteousness.
And so here we now are, in the presence of our three-headed Amer-idol — orgasm, blood, and mammon. We get off, we execute any inconvenient by-product from our good time in bed, and then we figured out how to make a buck off it. The hippies used to tell us to make love, not war. But their peculiar confusions have led us to the point where we can make all sorts of things at the same time. We now make love, make war, and make money. We make babies, we kill babies, we sell babies.
Oh, and we denounce those who resist us as sociopathic monsters.
As Christians, our task is not to find a place in the shadow of this ghoulish idol, some place where we can carve out a space where we can live peacefully. No, our assigned task is to topple the idol, and never to make our peace with it.
This great guilt that has settled in upon us is a guilt that can only be addressed by a proclamation of the gospel, the message of Jesus Christ, crucified and risen. But He did not just die and rise to show His power. This was not just a marvel, yet another wonder. He died for sin (Rom. 6:10), and He rose for justification (Rom. 4:25).
This is why proclamation of the gospel has two parts. The first concerns the objective content of the gospel — what God has done for us as sinners. The contents of the Apostles Creed would be a wonderful summary of the message of the objective gospel in this sense. Christ born, Christ crucified, Christ risen, Christ ascended, and Christ pouring out His Spirit of forgiveness on a lost and truculent world.
But the second aspect of this proclamation is a demand that is made of every listener, of anyone hearing the objective content of the gospel declared. That demand basically says that God now commands all men everywhere to repent and believe.
What is he to believe? We have already addressed that. He is to believe the message of Christ given for us men, and for our salvation. But what are we to repent of? The biblical answer is that we are to repent of our sins. But this needs to be made more specific.
The Long Coal Train
Now one of the missions of this forum, this blog, is to declare the need for a massive cultural repentance. Not only is secularism both dead and impotent, but it is a dead sin. In other words, while we are no longer getting the return on that sin like we used to, this is not the same thing as repenting of the sin. We are like a drunk who can no longer taste the wine, and has to drink a whole lot more of it than he used to. But nothing tastes anymore.
We cannot make our secularism work, and we cannot bring ourselves to repent of our refusal to name the name of Jesus Christ. That’s a bad place to be.
Someone must declare that this is a bad place to be, and someone must point the way out. The biblical vocabulary for this is repent and believe. This is a glorious mission, and I am not going to be deterred from it.
Think of this mission as a coal train, half a mile long, steadily approaching its destination. Think of the shrill opposition as someone organizing a coalition of about a hundred dogs to bark at the train. Or, rather, about ten of the dogs bark, and the rest of them give their barking quite a number of Facebook licks.
The great Puritan Thomas Brooks put it this way: “A gracious man should be made up all of fire, overcoming and consuming all opposition, as fire does the stubble. All difficulties should be but whetstones to his fortitude.”
The Glorious Pivot
So when confronted with the frenzied spirit of accusation, that central tactic and technique of the father of lies, the only appropriate response is to declare the gospel, and to take refuge in the gospel by declaring it. This is why — all through last week’s outcries — I turned again and again to the death of Jesus Christ for sinners. When I did this, I was not changing the subject. That is what all of this is about.
Jesus did not go to the cross as a well-respected rabbi. He died for us, that is true, but He was also cruci-defiled. He was cruci-defiled because God made Him who knew no sin to become sin on our behalf, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.
Someone might reply, sure, go ahead. Hide behind Jesus. Well, that is exactly what I intend to do. But when I hide behind Jesus, there are two senses in which I must do this. I am an awful sinner in my own right, and I know that if God were to mark iniquities, I could not stand for a moment. I know full well that the bit of filth named Douglas Wilson could have been justly consigned to eternal flames, and that I could have been consigned there for one of my better days. I know my sins right well. The only refuge for any sinner, including those who preach the gospel as I am bent on doing, is the Rock of Ages — “let me hide myself in Thee.”
I also know my own sins well enough to know when agitators start making stuff up. And when they start making lots of stuff up, this should tell you that you are in another place entirely. This is the case even when real failings are involved. David gave occasion for the enemies of God to blaspheme, but he also knew that the reason they wanted to blaspheme so much was because of his righteousness. David was attacked with his sins, but he was not attacked because of them.
This is why it is necessary to hide in God’s pavilion from the “strife of tongues.” This is the second way of taking refuge in the cross of Christ. Many well-meaning Christians do not understand the play that is being run on them.
They do not comprehend the tactics of the adversary. They think that when the air is full of dead cats and slander, we must do something to “fix it.” All who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. When they say every horrible thing that they can think of, rejoice and be glad. Jesus said to do that. When some of your friends are foolish enough to believe the flurry of lies, rejoice and be glad. He said to do that too. Beware when all men speak well of you. When you have a great testimony, Jesus says that you ought to be careful. You are probably doing something wrong. You should at least check.
So no, there is nothing to fix. No, not at all. This is what we are called to. Jesus died outside the camp, and He died in a contemptible place. We are not told to bring that cross of His inside the city limits, silverplate it, and start leaving baskets of fruit in front of it. We are not told to bring that gibbet in so that we might make it fully respectable. We are told, expressly told, to go outside the camp to join Him there. “Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach” (Heb. 13:13). Having to bear His reproach is not the sign of a broken play. This is God’s play.
But in the meantime, the world runs on accusation. The world loves pointing a finger, loves creating victims, loves picking at the brokenness, and loves shouting at all the despicable sociopaths. Far easier than what the cross invites them to.
Good words.
That was a whole bunch of words and zero confession. You’ve got one word right in all of that. Repent, Doug. You were wrong. The more you double down, the worse it gets. Don’t try to gospelize everything. These controversies are about you and your transgressions, which are rather clearly laid out there with publicly available information. Frenzied accusations? Pointing fingers? Turning the table to same sex marriage, abortion, and a host of other things is exactly that. If you are so aware of your own sin, how come you don’t become the pastoral example and confess it for crying… Read more »
Mark Lawerence, how did you like the cartoon?
So that’s a cartoon of Doug? I don’t see much resemblence.
There are two deeply flawed human beings pictured in the cartoon. The human tied to the stake understands this, the human with the torch does not.
If the human with the torch did understand his common state of flaw, he would not be threatening to burn the human who does understand their common state of flaw.
Except in the real world, nobody is threatening. They are just calling balderdash to the man who strapped himself to the stake.
Mark Lawerence, do you have any difficult counseling situations going on in your church or community, wherever that may be? There may be some people on the internet who want to critique your pastor’s or elders’ work.
Except my pastor doesn’t throw himself out there as an expert for the universal church. Can’t have your cake in the global evangelical realm, and then eat it as a local church matter, with outsiders unwelcome.
No time to reply, I have to go do some work in real life for some people I actually know.
So what theological / doctrinal disagreement does Mark have with Doug that fuels this particular contempt? You’re too easy to read.
If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.
Tim Paul: Theological/doctrinal disagreement? How about starting with pastoral disagreement?
Hey Nonni Nonna, (see a Shakespear commentary) nice to speak with you again. Hope we are both “thinking again” per our last exchange. You appear to be responding to my referrence to Matt. 12:7, though I am not sure how your comment relates to mine. Let me lay it out backwards: God does not like us condemning the innocent. (He was condemned and innocent) God wants us to be merciful as He is merciful. (He was merciful to us personally) God wants us to be merciful more than he wants us to be sacrificial. (He is our Sacrifice, our sacrifices,… Read more »
“Anyway, God says things so much better than I do….”
Now there’s a true statement. Hang in there, Daddy -O.
True indeed for all of us and a wise course for all.
Between the two of us, somehow there are a lot of extra vowels lying arround.
I suspect Vanna White! ; -)
2 Timothy 3:15-16
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Truly amazing. Speechless.
I think it’s the bomb. People who have no first-hand knowledge of complicated situations in towns they don’t live in and churches they don’t attend, feel free to demand people they don’t know admit wrongdoing per the demanders’ specifications. It’s madness.
Man wants to put himself up on a pedestal outside of the confines of the church into the realm of theologian, author, and blog fire starter. Then said man gets public criticism and his loyal disciples want to cry “Go away. This is a private church matter.” Sorry Charlie, can’t have it both ways.
Yes, because if you say anything publicly, everything else you do or say in any other realm also has to be public. And if private, it must all be private. Stands to reason.
And yet, the comments I made are in response to his public post. He opened that door.
“Man wants to put himself up on a pedestal outside of the confines of the
church into the realm of theologian, author, and blog fire starter.”
Oh sure–Doug Wilson put himself on a pedestal–riiiiiiight…
Doug is accountable to elders, Mark–this has all been adjudicated within the confines of a local Church.
Yep, there’s nothing to see here. Move along.
However, the people who do live in the town, attend the church or have done so, and still speak out with their first-hand knowledge, are being called bitter, castigated for opening Pandora’s box, or swept by waves and waves of bloviation. Doug’s exchange with Natalie Greenfield is just one example.
So who is it who may speak?
Mark: Repeatedly I have seen Christians implore Doug Wilson to own up to his faults in this matter. And these aren’t just Haters, but sensible Christians with wisdom. Sadly, it seems Doug Wilson is determined to turn any admonishment, any constructive criticism, any profitable correction as a means to prove he is being persecuted for Christ’s sake. He thinks himself to be the victim and won’t budge from that place. It is a sad thing to watch.
If people are wise, then probably NOBODY may speak!
I have not read any comments regarding the “insiders'”perceptions of, say, Natalie Rose or her father. So their words mean nothing, since we outside of Moscow have no first-hand knowledge. I would bet neither do most of the members of the CK enclave. What you do have are your pastor’s and elders’ reports to you. Those inside the body who have been relegated to shame, abuse, and isolation are MY brothers and sisters, regardless of geographic proximity. I’ll weep with them and insist on justice for them.
You sound way more high-minded and noble than me. I was just aiming for not gossiping, praying for the people involved in this, and being nice to people when I see them at the grocery store.
Thanks! Nevertheless, while not gossiping is good, sometimes our lot is to speak out in defense of others though it be uncomfortable. Praying is good, but you have to admit we may also be called upon to act. Being nice at the grocery store is always good. And here’s a voice from someone inside the Moscow camp: https://www.facebook.com/peter.roise/posts/10207677541674551
Janet, you missed the irony in my comment. I put it in there to bring out the contrast between saying lofty-sounding things on the internet and doing the things the Lord has called us to do in our communities that help suffering people and keep Christians in loving unity with one another.
No, I didn’t miss your irony (actually sarcasm). You mistake silence for unity. That’s a very dangerous place to be.
What is it you want him to confess, exactly?
What I want him to confess to the public at large? Patriarchy is false teaching as shown by the fruit of its loudest proponents (Phillips, Gothard, Duggar, now this), and he was wrong for advocating it for so many years. I would like him to acknowledge that his skewed view of Scripture and women at least in part influenced him to make such horrible errors as signing off on the marriage of a pedophile and shaming a 13 year old for her own manipulation and rape by a man 10 years her senior as well as laying accusations against her… Read more »
You should confess lying. I am no big fan of Wilson, but you can read his writing and see very plainly that he has said nothing of the type that you have said here. In fact, he has specifically refuted it using his own family as examples. As I suspected from your first comment, you are not an honest man. You want to harp on the sins of others while ignoring you own, and then you double down when you should have been wise enough to stop talking. If some man is living in my house molesting my daughter, it… Read more »
What lies? The heresy of modern Christian Patriarchy and the publicly available articles where he defends it? That he approved of and conducted a marriage that was a horrible idea? Or that he shifted the blame from the perp to the victim and her family. There are other claims out there not supported by the publicly available evidence. Please support your accusation towards me with facts please. Otherwise move along. And once again, when Wilson, in his letter, refers to protecting the man’s daughter, he is not talking about from what happened in the past, but from the “legal process.”… Read more »
Your lie that Wilson believes that women should be treated like servants who are to be traded by men like cattle. He has said nothing of the sort that I have seen, and my guess is that you can’t produce anything like that that he said.
“A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts” , combined with his publishing views of the father’s role in “biblical” courtship, reduces a woman to not much more than a servant who gets married off at her father’s will to another man who is immediately her authority. Now perhaps you have a wildly different definition of a servant who is being traded, but I can’t help your comprehension.
What you call heresy is entirely biblical. Were Christians living a heresy for hundreds of years? Were Jews living a heresy for thousands of years before that? Where do you get the authority to claim orthodoxy for a concept of gender and marital relations developed in American over the last hundred years or so?
You don’t actually believe that, Mark. I am quite sure of that. You know, as well as the rest of us, that you are simply being disingenuous. You are likely familiar with the sex act and understand exactly what he means by that. It was obvious from the very beginning to everyone, and all but the most obtuse got it immediately. You may not agree with Wilson on the role of women; I certainly don’t. But I do know enough to understand basic language and know what he says. You do as well.
Was she 13, or was she a legal adult? This makes no sense. If she was 13 during any part of the situation, then she was obliged to be protected. If she was not underage during any part of the situation, then she wasn’t 13.
Protecting those who are under your protection is not treating them like servants or cattle. What an odd idea.
Charitably, I think it’s possible he was bouncing back and forth between the two examples on hand (Sitler marriage and boarded student), though either way it is helpful to have clarity on the reason for his rancor. It is now abundantly clear that his real issue is with Doug’s theology rather than the specific facts of either case.
I’m not sure how it could be read that way even with a truckload of benefit of the doubt — if there was blame dished out for Mrs. Sitler’s father, it wasn’t by Doug and friends, it was by the “mob” so to speak. So I can’t figure out where there’s both a 13 year old AND an 18+ year old whose father was accused by Doug of not protecting her, regardless of whether that’s one girl or two. But you’re right, the bigger issue that he hates the biblical theology of sexuality and wishes to attack Doug for it,… Read more »
Let’s clarify a timeline for you. She (Natalie) was 13-16 when the abuse occurred. Reported it at 17. When all of the admonition for protecting his child was going on, she was an adult, not under his protection, except in the crazy theology called patriarchy. What was done was done. There was no protecting, in that sense, that her father could do going forward, other than loving and supporting her. Blame him if you want for what had happened in that past, but he is about as responsible for it as the Lord is. Could the Lord have intervened? Yes.… Read more »
I read the letter. There’s nothing in there about making it go away with the least amount of stink possible. I have no idea where y’all are getting this line, except by reading through an extremely prejudicial filter.
Well by all means, how does one neglect duties through a legal process that is not in his hands then, except by not talking about the case and asking for the mercy that DW suggested? Remove your head from the sand.
So did Tullian Tchividjian also prove that “nothing but grace”/Sonship-type doctrines are false teachings? I was never a big fan of Gothard/Phillips/Duggar stuff, but “patriarchy” has been the dominant view of the church and better-functioning societies since Creation. It’s only been really challenged in the last 40 or so years. We’ve seen the disastrous results–much more than a few fallen leaders.
You better believe after what happened to Tullian that people ought to take a hard look at how he emphasized grace over repentance. Simply asked, when the Bible speaks of “knowing them by their fruit,” is it speaking about judging the common man’s salvation as many people use that passage? No. It is speaking specifically about false teachings. People should take a long hard look at him and an equally hard look at all things patriarchy, since it has been an especially rough couple of years morally for the big name proponents. Both teachings, hypergrace and patriarchy, are inherently flawed.
Mark Lawrence, SJW advocate and a champion for all things matriarchical. Bet Mark’s actual name is Betty.
This is to all who have commented here to Mark. First, I don’t subscribe to the Patriarchy put forth as Doug Wilson, Bill Gothard, Doug Phillips, John Piper, Debi Pearl, and the Duggars teach it. With that said, a question was asked. “What is it you want him to confess, exactly?” I don’t expect DW to confess that Patriarchy as he teaches it is wrong. Christians have disagreements about all sorts of things in the theological/Scriptural realm. It very well may be that Mr. Wilson’s views stemming from Patriarchy influenced the way he handled the Sitler and Wight cases. I’m… Read more »
“First, I don’t subscribe to the Patriarchy put forth as Doug Wilson,
Bill Gothard, Doug Phillips, John Piper, Debi Pearl, and the Duggars
teach it.”
Of course you don’t, because that’s not even a thing. The various people you describe have wildly varying views.
Wildly varying views? I’d say they converge on a myriad of points. Whatever disagreements they may hold, they’re minimal.
I suppose it’s all a matter of perspective. Debi Pearl says things that Doug Wilson would find repugnant, and vice versa. John Piper and Doug Phillips’ views are similar only in that they both believe in a fixed biblical difference between men and women — the outworking of that is substantially different between the two of them. I imagine Doug P. in his salad days would have considered Piper’s views part of the problem, not similar to his own. Yes, there are commonalities. If there weren’t, they wouldn’t even all be identifiably Christian. But the differences go right to the… Read more »
Thank you. Now we know what you believe, that you don’t understand what Wilson believes, and that you don’t understand what the Bible teaches.
It’s good to know where you are actually coming from.
When you can’t actually make a point, attack the messenger.
Pastor Wilson:
I am a fan of yours, but do you really think any of the discussion on your blogs, and others like it, actually amount to much in terms of affecting the real world? Maybe we overestimate the importance of the digital realm. Yes people spend (and waste) a lot of time charging into battle on web forums, but in the end what do they conquer? It seems to me a rip-roaring fire contained in a wastebasket.
So don’t say anything? None of us know the end results of whatever we do in the scope of our abilities. A spark wafted from that red-hot wastebasket can catch the curtains.
Even fools are thought wise if they keep silent, and discerning if they hold their tongues. Proverbs 17:28.
It just seems to me that if you look over the past week or two of posts on Doug’s site, you will see thousands of comments and millions of words, 99% of which are already forgotten. All that time invested on comment forums, facebook etc, could be invested on lasting things like building your local church community, talking face to face with your neighbor. You know, all those things we did before the internet.
I’m assuming you see the irony in posting this here.
John, I disagree with you, strongly. I’ve had my share of (I hope friendly and cordial) disagreement on matters of Calvinism with Doug Wilson as I have had with RD Sproul Jr and George Grant, yet I conside them all dear brothers in the faith. I have received more good, solid meat from Doug Wilson over 25 years than from any other of the 100+ authors and teachers whose work I have studied over my 42 year stumble with Christ. A few times, his satire has bitten too hard for my tastes; for every one of those ‘offenses’, I’ve had… Read more »
I’ve changed.
This blog and the discussions contained within the comments have been of inestimable value in my real world. My $.02
Jerrod is a newbie here. Go fly away and find whatever you think edifies you. By all means keep it real safe. Lots of blogs will tickle you. What I think repels you is this cancerous, wicked, backbiting, judgmental comments filled with rancor that stinks like rank Limberger from that SJW platform.
The same ilk profile.
And yes, that kind “always lie.”
What makes you think I’m a newbie? Are you dating me according to my disqus account? That would be an incorrect method to utilize…sort of like trying to carbon date inorganic matter. :-)
God has used him to teach me via this medium. Granted its not much, but God does use little things in marvelous ways.
“Here is a boy with five loaves and two small fish, but how can they serve so many?”
Many years ago, I endured a horrifying public trial after witnessing a crime that did great harm to my family. I testified in court and saw the criminal convicted. In the aftermath, in spite of having done nothing wrong, I was maligned, called a liar, and watched as this criminal received abundant support. I desperately wanted to vindicate myself, but decided that almighty God would vindicate me. I believed scripture. I remained silent. It was one of the best decisions I have ever made. God was infinitely faithful to me, and I learned to direct my own hurt toward advocacy… Read more »
To clarify, I am not saying that victims should remain silent. My hope is that all who have been harmed would have a voice and would receive justice. But contrast the quiet, humble voices of Natalie and her father with that of Doug Wilson, and tell me who you are more inclined to listen to.
Jael, the problem with using that illustration is that they are the ones talking about the situation, and I am the one refusing to talk about it. I am the one being silent. I am refusing to talk about it for the sake of protecting other silent individual/s who are not currently involved in your melee, and I am thereby avoiding the creation of additional hurt. People like you are demanding that I talk about it also, and in such a way as to make certain individuals, who did not volunteer for it, walk through all the hurt again —… Read more »
Then by all means, if you are being silent for the sake of protecting others, continue to act righteously. Silence, however, is not what comes to mind when I consider your responses this past week.
And I am not “betting with someone else’s pain” nor is this “my melee.” Do not attribute to me things I did not say or intend.
Every time you say anything you look more foolish than before. Not a good trajectory. Take 10 years off to get some wisdom and then come back.
As a total outsider, I can attribute to you things that you actually wrote, and that is enough.
At NSA and all the other work to which he has given life, the buck stops with Douglas J. Wilson and there is a point at which silence implies consent.
Beyond that, all of us in public ministry have the responsibility to kick off the occasional yapping puppy at our ankles, if only to get work done.
Suppose he did not blog on this? Then the charge would be his silence incriminates him because he obviously has something to hide.
But you are. You keep posting here, this way, and then saying you didn’t when called on it.
Put a tent peg in it Jael.
Douglas, again with reframing the narrative. Let’s grab the conversation clumsiley knocked of track and try again. Jael wisely suggested contrasting the voices of those involved in this mess. It’s very simple. Natalie and her father: Quiet. Humble. A spirit of forgiveness hovering around her and the grace that comes from surviving, what was quite literally a great trial. You: Loud. Disseminative. Unrepentant. Occasionally glib. Playing the victim. Clearly unnerved that you cannot use your force of will to redirect this narrative . I would like to remind you that this is your casino, it’s your game that’s running. I… Read more »
Here comes Randman, kinda late night, probably fueled on some liquid courage and folly. The heart of men grow cold and angry.
Or maybe fueled by a desire to weigh in on a particularly horrifying injustice to these children instead of a unrepentant and disseminative pastor.
If all of the “concern” posturing were really about injustice done to children, why does Randman keep making it about Doug? It’s as if Randman thinks Doug was the perpetrator. Why does Doug’s name keep coming up more than the actual offenders in each case? It seems to be driven by a need for an additional scapegoat. It’s as if everyone involved in every direction around a victim must be guilty of something, and if they don’t assume the posture, then they are even more guilty. It’s manipulative. I get that there’s a really powerful cultural narrative of betrayal from… Read more »
FWIW, your framing of the contrast sounds purposefully diametric, and while God alone knows the truth of your statements, I will state the obvious that perceptions of Doug vary widely and that just because you say it, doesn’t make it true.
Why yes, it is purposefully diametric. That is to remake Jael’s excellent point. The one that Douglas so obvious sought to move away from. BTW once you recognize this technique of his, it appears on every page. And with respect, saying God alone knows the truth of my statements is a bit of a cop out. Perhaps. But consider that God is also watching us manifest our ability to evaluate evidence before us- a gift that he gave us. To evaluate the truth of my statements you only need contrast the obvious and convincing nature of the experience of the… Read more »
The experience of the victims does not equate to truth, regardless of how “obvious” and “convincing” they are. Furthermore, these experiences are not adequate contrasts to whatever Wilson has done, which you have framed (without evidence) as mistakes. Finally, the “size and volume” of protestations against Wilson are in every conceivable way irrelevant to any intelligent evaluation of truth.
In short, your last paragraph, sir, is meaningless.
Maybe to you. Your spirit of christian love is rather lacking towards the real victims here. Doug is not among them, tough he clearly considers himself to be. I will pray for you there.
This is false. Wilson observed that people want their pound of his flesh, but he just refuses the guilt manipulation and the sensitivity sham. In other words, he actually refuses to be victimized or play the assigned role. Instead of taking any “woe is me” attitude (as Randman wrongly implies of him), Wilson takes a “blessed are you when you are falsely accused” attitude. Of course God knows all the details, and even if Randman and others are not satisfied, God will be Wilson’s judge. From all that I can see, Wilson seems to be quite confident in God knowing… Read more »
Perhaps I did not make my point clear enough, and I certainly did not intend to invoke God’s clarity on the truth as a cop out. We have been given the capacity to weigh and judge, and depending on any number of factors, some use this capacity better than others, but we are all responsible to God for how we do it. In that we are agreed. Where we differ is in this: what you see as “obvious and convincing”, “Wilson’s mistakes”, and “the size and volume of his protestations”, I see differently, and where you see clear and diametric… Read more »
I would argue that five blog posts on the subject with his lengthy digressions and attempts to change the subject, qualify as a large volume by any reasonable standard. Natalie’s blog speaks for itself in the obvious and compelling department, if one takes the time to read it. One of Sitler’s many victims was at the time a two year old that he forced into an oral sex act, so I find her story pretty obvious and convincing. So there is that. You should revisit the manner in which Natalie recounts her experience. Then read Douglas’ consistent attempts at distance,… Read more »
“I am the one being silent.” Really? Five (six, sevenish? given how you blend topics it’s not quite clear) blog posts defending your actions and views are hardly silence. And Jael’s reference is clearly to the voices–the tone–of Natalie and her father compared to you. I agree with her that their tones, though grieved, are gentle and peacable while your tone is obstreperous.
You know Mr. Wilson I have come to understand one thing after reading through much of your blog, there is one unpardonable sin, it is the sin of actually truly needing Jesus, that is the one sin Jesus cannot forgive. I cant put my finger on it, cant even seem to line up why it comes out that way but it is so clear. I want to thank you so much for that, I can now just move on.
Proverbs 27:6 reminds us that wounds from a friend, or somebody who loves, are faithful and trustworthy. Doug, as a public pastor and blogger, you should be quick to apologize when you hurt the body of Christ. I have watched over the last week as you have side stepped this issue. Your actions and words caused people pain. I agree that Christ died for our sins, I think very few of my friends disagree. But, I don’t understand why you seem to feel yourself above offering an apology when you seem to understand you are a sinner. It seems to… Read more »
Healing and peace begins by not accusing someone of having a “prideful spirit.” Healing and peace begins with forgiveness whether an apology was issued or not. The world demands “apologies” as a way of demonstrating guilt, and especially in public forums. Scripture declares that “if your brother has wronged you, go to him.” YOU make peace with him who has offended you, not the other way around. Call Doug; write to him; offer your forgiveness for offenses both real and imagined…but do so for YOU, not as a representative in a class-action grievance. And may the peace of God wash… Read more »
It is okay to reprimand……. Reprimanding leads to righteousness often times.
Malachi says “Healing and peace begins with forgiveness whether an apology was issued or not.”
You might want to check out I John 1:9, Malachi. “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”. Confession precedes forgiveness.
Ivanna,
For the sake of clarity, can you please articulate what you think Doug is supposed to apologize for? As best I can tell, you seem to believe that he should apologize for doing and saying things that have caused people pain, and for having a prideful spirit, is that an apt summary?
thanks.
“Why don’t you make us all feel better and simply apologize?” One more fellow Christian joins in the chorus of guilt manipulation. This is not justice, it is herd mentality and partiality. It is the chorus of those who are themselves being played by sentimentalism and plausible narration.
Thank you for your stalwart witness to the Gospel in all things. You are greatly appreciated by many.
Pastor Wilson, thanks for your words. I find them encouraging. They’ve helped me understand the times a little better, and the importance of our responses. As a fellow blood-bought sinner, I can say you’ve helped me along. Hope to meet you someday.
Change tring to trying. Spelling error.
To those advocating silence instead of writing about it on the internet. You first.
Doug – someday the Judge of All the earth will execute His perfect justice and it will lay to waste all of the urgency for your humiliation. That said, I guess the mob feels they are better equipped to deal with you and really can’t wait around for all that. You keep preaching the Lord Jesus and Him crucified, bro. It’s glorious. When I read this, “We cannot make our secularism work, and we cannot bring ourselves to repent of our refusal to name the name of Jesus Christ. That’s a bad place to be.” it made me think of… Read more »
Max: Mob = anyone who would dare disagree with Doug Wilson in this matter. Anyone who would dare suggest that he made some serious mistakes.
Doug’s interaction with the Bayly brothers (and others) demonstrates that, at least for Doug, that’s not the definition of the mob.
Jane, I’m specifically responding to Max’s mention of the “mob.” As to the Bayly brothers and what has transpired between them and Doug Wilson, I have my thoughts on that, but the jury isn’t out just yet.
Why impute that definition to Max? He doesn’t specify that nor does he say anything in his comment that would favor that definition, over one that might be narrower. Nor vice versa, for that matter.
Why impute that definition to Max? Because he’s in agreement with Doug Wilson. You know, the man who has written all the recent blog posts where he must defend himself against those mobs. But I can see where this conversation is going. Me thinks we part ways on how DW handled sex abuse in his church.
If he’s in agreement with Doug Wilson, then he acknowledges that there is a mob, and there are also brothers and sisters disagreeing without being the mob. So by your own words, you accuse unfairly based on the false premise that believing that there is an accusatory mob, means you believe Wilson can’t be criticized. But the falsehood of that premise has been demonstrated repeatedly.
“If he’s in agreement with Doug Wilson, then he acknowledges that there is a mob…” Stop there…you are right. The rest of your first sentence, however, are YOUR words. “So by your own words, you accuse unfairly based on the false premise that believing that there is an accusatory mob, means you believe Wilson can’t be criticized.” I have no idea how you came to this conclusion. There can be accusatory mobs that are wrong in their assessments. There can be accusatory mobs, that in spite of their rancor, are right about the facts which implicate DW in wrongdoing. There… Read more »
Doug acknowledges that there is both an accusatory mob, and people appropriately disagreeing with/criticizing his past actions. Making this distinction is why I pointed out his interaction with the three Baylys and others, publicly via their blog and apparently some private conversations as well.
Therefore, one who “agrees with Doug” also potentially, if not probably, makes this distinction.
Yes, the jury.
I genuinely believe that Nonna has made a serious mistake by publicly impugning Wilson’s character without knowing all of the facts. Will Nonna now publicly apologize for her mistake? Can she be coerced to offer such an empty apology if she does not actually believe she is guilty in her agenda? If not, why not?
Katecho, read my reasons stated for why I think Doug Wilson was wrong in the Sitler case and why he should admit his wrongdoing. One doesn’t have to know ALL the facts. From the facts that can be known, one can come to a conclusion about DW’s pastoral care in this situation and his irresponsibility with regard to the safety of children.
It’s been six days now. It seems that Nonna doesn’t publicly apologize just because others think she ought to. It seems she doesn’t publicly apologize just to make everyone feel better. Perhaps she should extend this same courtesy to Wilson.
As has been said before, there is a place for silence and there is a place for speaking, as was mentioned before, deep in a thread. “The folks ought to allow for the possibility that a pastor may be of such high integrity, that he would protect the confidence of some, who even became his detractors, at great cost to himself and his church, because such a pastor was a man of his word and a man of The Word. Such a pastor would understand that when Christ took on the sins of said pastor, Christ could only defend himself… Read more »
I am humbled and encouraged by your words, Doug. And I anticipated that such loveliness will again be trodden as so many pearls cast before the 400+ posts of porcine feet.
And so I begin anew my habit of picking the little gems out of the muck and, after polishing them on my shirtsleeve, admiring their pearlescent beauty once more.
It’s none of my business what happened at your church, so I won’t comment. But I would like to thank you for your writing and wisdom. And I share you dismay at people’s basic unbelief of the gospel of free grace and impudent nosiness. You have my respect and prayers.
This is the way to respond
http://moscowid.net/2015/09/15/a-message-from-peter-j-leithart/
indeed, let’s look at the last paragraph. Douglas take note. It is clear now that I made major errors of judgment. Fundamentally, I misjudged Jamin, badly. I thought he was a godly young man who had fallen into sin. That was wrong. In the course of trying to pastor Jamin through other crises in his life, I came to realize that he is deceptive and highly manipulative, and that I allowed him to manipulate me. A number of the things I said about Jamin to the congregation and court at the time his abuse was uncovered were spun in Jamin’s… Read more »
Changing the subject no matter how sanctified the object of change… is still changing the subject. For you to move on from the real issue at hand to emotionally charged issues sure to get people worked up such as abortion and same sex marriage is a clunky move. Don’t run from your responsibilities. And if the cross is being defiled here, it is because you are looking past redemption to a mirror in which you are mesmerized with your arguement’s own reflection, the triumph of your will in this matter. Not our lord and savior. Rock of ages is merely… Read more »
Thanks for your post, largely agree and approve. But a couple nitpicks, arguably nits worth picking: 1) You seem to downplay the use of the terms “sickness” (or “brokenness”) as softening and diverting from the real issue of sin – instead, calling a sin spade a sin spade. Of course we’re [culpable] sinners and Jesus really died for real sin. But didn’t Jesus also describe sinners using the metaphor, “It isn’t the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick?” That hits home for me, because it’s the very verse that when I read it for the first time (in… Read more »
jesuguru wrote: Jesus didn’t die for cultures, rather people in them. As someone with a heart for evangelism, I don’t know how to evangelize cultures, but rather individuals, or small-medium groups. We need to let the language of Scripture become our language on these subjects. It uses individual examples, and collective language, so we can’t pit one form of expression against another and remain Scriptural. For example, Jesus died for the salvation of the whole world. Jesus sent His people to disciple the nations and to baptize the nations. Scripture uses the language of tribes, peoples, families, households, tongues, nations,… Read more »
Thanks for your reply. As I’m guessing you have, I have indeed devoted my life to letting the language of Scripture be my guide on all matters of life and faith, and try to understand how seemingly contradictory Scriptures can and must be reconciled. Still working on it, but slowly getting better day by day. “Jesus died for the salvation of the whole world” – well, no, at least not to this pre-mil. Calvinist. Jesus in a sense “died for the sins of the whole world” (1John 2:2), but He in fact came to the world so that “whosoever [individually]… Read more »
Honesty and repentance strengthens, not weakens. There is no shame in it. Another excellent thoughtful post: https://thenewblogproject.wordpress.com/2015/09/16/338/ ‘It is considered unChristian and bitter to try to speak to others about abuses, and when we speak to elders and church leadership about them, we either go around in circles or get shut down entirely. The problem is, trying to handle things behind closed doors is part of what has brought us here. The issue is not just that Doug threatened to bar Gary from the table. It’s that Doug wrote a letter insinuating that if Gary didn’t follow his advice, Gary… Read more »
Once again Randman simply assumes that he has all the facts when he doesn’t. This is why Randman is just not in a position to offer Wilson good council on how to be humble. Randman has prejudiced himself against Wilson from a distance and is disqualified. Fortunately, Wilson is not without council on such matters, and I trust them far far more than I trust Randman. I trust that they won’t simply be played by the internet guilt manipulators just to appease them. If they know of something that requires a private or a public apology from Wilson, I trust… Read more »
I am assuming that you did not read the link? You would know it was a quote from the blog I linked to. Also the quotation mark at the beginning and end is a give away. Best RM
“Fortunately, Wilson is not without council on such matters, and I trust them…” Since you appear to have the inside track, katecho, perhaps you can answer a question for me; I’ve asked it before on this blog and always get silence. The session of Emmanuel Orthodox Presbyterian denied Steven Sitler the privileges of membership because his grievous and persistent sexual immorality caused them to question his salvation. But Christ Church granted Steven Sitler the privileges of membership. So why did the elders of Christ Church not respect the decision of the elders at Emmanuel, Sitler’s home church? Why should we… Read more »
I find it astonishing how many folks have such qualified opinions.
Particularly those, arguably, knowing less about this situation , or the people involved than Adams house cat.
I have read some Warren Buffet on the internet. Y’all send me your money and I’ll invest it.
I wish I could say Australia is not like USA but I cannot. The implications of a generation of freely available porn, 3rd trimester murder and homosexual & atheist evangelism in numbers that dwarf history itself will be horrifying. I wonder, is the following line the reason so many readers here are red in the face?
“[America has] been dwelling in a generation of unrighteous savagery, and we have done so while pretending to ourselves that we have in the midst of it remained a kind and benevolent people. We have flattered ourselves in quite a grotesque way.”
“Now one of the missions of this forum, this blog, is to declare the need for a massive cultural repentance”,
And yet I Peter 4:17 states clearly that “For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begins with us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?” Wilson wishes for a cultural repentance that he is uninterested in displaying in his own house.
Except, of course, for claiming that a serial pedophile is repentant, and that we should take that on his say so.
http://moscowid.net/2015/09/16/the-open-letter-part-3-this-is-because/
“Probation & Parole opposed the marriage. The Department of Correction disapproved of it. And the prosecutor objected to it.”
And the judge supported it. Shouldn’t you mention that, if only for the sake of completeness?
The discussion amongst Latah County Prosecutor , Bill Thompson; Judge Stegner; and Mr. Wallenwaber, focused, in part, on the legal consequence if/when Steven Sitler and Katie Travis have children.
Judge Stegner ruled that the wedding could go forward and issues regarding the protection of children will be addressed if and children are a factor in the marriage.
I would not exactly call that ‘support’ of Sitler’s marriage as much as evaluation of the law and is execution. Certainly an unfortunate conclusion. Hardly ‘support’.
Perhaps you didn’t hear the part where he thought that marriage would be good for Steven, good for Katie, and good for society. I call that support, and in addition, it seems to have legal standing. That should count for something, right?
Please link me to where the judge said: “good for Steven, good for Katie, and good for society.”
Support the powerless. Support the true victims here of real abuse and neglect. Not those who would posture to be a victim of a ‘mob’ to draw specious parallels. “Dear church, you have the weak and hurting and abused, bruised reeds and smoldering wicks, in your midst. They need your support. They need your voices. When someone who has been grievously abused speaks up, she deserves your attention. When someone else tells you how their church leadership silenced and hurt them, they need your support.” “It may seem unfair to be judged for what you’re not doing, but I remember… Read more »
“Support the powerless” is a classic way increase your own power.
That a is both hilarious and tragic response, mostly because I know that you believe what you wrote.
Here are some other good words. Straight from the mouth of Douglas Wilson.
https://adaughterofthereformation.wordpress.com/2015/09/18/doug-wilson-in-his-own-words/
Rand, just in case “a daughter of the reformation” does not post all comments: “Rachel, Two points. 1.There was an execution for Sitler’s crime’s. Sitler’s Judge pronunced a sentance of death for Sitler’s sins and crimes. Then The Judge offered to step down from the bench, and if Sitler repented, The Judge would take Siltler’s due execution upon Himself. I don’t know if Sitler has repented, though The Judge does. I do know that I have repented from my sins and That Same Judge took my due execution upon Himself. I know He would do the same for anyone who… Read more »
Rachel, Thanks so much for allowing my comment. That was an answer to prayer! I do think my second point requires further emphasis. We all have our own definitions of issues and even legitimate, dissimilar understandings of The Word of The Judge. At the risk of “prooftexting”, a word I learned from your firend Sarah: Luke 11: 9 “So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one… Read more »