CREC Presiding Ministers’ Report 2017

Puppets on strings who tell lies

UPDATE:
You can read an HTML version of the report here. We’re still formatting and updating it with hyperlinks, but it’s much easier to navigate as well as cut & paste.

Safe link:

CREC Presiding Ministers’ Report 2017

Source file here.

16 Comments

  2. CREC Presiding Ministers’ Report 2017:

    “Under the circumstances, we strongly question the wisdom of Christ Church leadership in supporting and solemnizing the Sitler/Travis marriage”

    Doug Wilson:

    “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.” (An Open Letter from Christ Church on Steven Sitler)

  3. CREC Presiding Ministers’ Report 2017:

    “Christ Church elder Ed Iverson, who helped bring Katie Travis together with Sitler, was unaware of the full extent of Sitler’s sexual crimes (specifically, he was unaware that Sitler had molested multiple children).”

    “While Katie Travis (now Katie Sitler) assert she was fully informed about Sitler’s past crimes, it is not clear her family or home church elders were (the committee’s interviews with the concerned parties did not yield a clear answer to this question).”

  4. Also, could they not have chosen a more obscure, hard to read, impossible to copy and paste, format for this report? (said with sarcasm)

  5. Doug Wilson:

    “We live in a generation that wants to establish, as a matter of public dogma, among many other related things, that we live in a rape culture, that women don’t ever lie about such things, that the patriarchal masculinity of our age is suffocating, and that is the duty of all right-thinking individuals to simply turn over the handling of complicated sexual abuse cases to the trained professionals. But trained by whom? By what standard?” (How Flocks Are Protected)

    CREC Presiding Ministers’ Report 2017:

    “We also believe the church could have provided better counseling services for Natalie (preferably a female counselor specifically trained to deal with sex abuse victims), as well as providing a wider and more sympathetic network to help her deal with the shame, isolation, and trauma that follows such abuse. It would have been good for someone other than Pastor Wilson to be her primary counselor; she needed to be ministered to by someone with expertise in sexual trauma.”

  6. Doug Wilson:

    “…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.” (An Open Letter from Christ Church on Steven Sitler)

    CREC Presiding Ministers’ Report 2017:

    “Under the circumstances, we strongly question the wisdom of Christ Church leadership in supporting and solemnizing the Sitler/Travis marriage”

    “Christ Church elder Ed Iverson, who helped bring Katie Travis together with Sitler, was unaware of the full extent of Sitler’s sexual crimes (specifically, he was unaware that Sitler had molested multiple children).”

    “While Katie Travis (now Katie Sitler) assert she was fully informed about Sitler’s past crimes, it is not clear her family or home church elders were (the committee’s interviews with the concerned parties did not yield a clear answer to this question).”

  7. Doug Wilson:

    “Joan says, “Doug Wilson . . . claims on his blog that he notified a meeting of the Christ Church Heads of Households in November or December of 2005.” What I actually did was notify them in writing at the parish level Heads of Households meeting in November, and then again at the church-wide Heads of Households meeting in December. This second verbal report is noted in the official minutes of that meeting. So I don’t claim I did this “in November or December, gosh, I don’t remember exactly.” Rather, there is written documentation and proof that I reported on the situation in detail in both November and December.” (Joan Opyr, Cub Reporter)

    CREC Presiding Ministers’ Report 2017:

    “In the Sitler case, it was a serious mistake for Christ Church leadership not to formally inform the congregation (or, more specifically, all parents of young children in the congregation) of his pattern of serial molestations immediately after it came to light…

    The session first officially notified the congregation of Sitler’s molestation at the Head of Household meeting of November 2005, while Sitler was confined at Cottonwood, which was almost eight months after church leadership became aware of the abuse…[C]hurch leadership should have officially informed the congregation immediately, for there are more important concerns in play besides just removing the immediate threat…

    Christ Church elder Ed Iverson, who helped bring Katie Travis together with Sitler, was unaware of the full extent of Sitler’s sexual crimes (specifically, he was unaware that Sitler had molested multiple children). This raises questions about who else in the Christ Church community might not have known that a serial child molester had been indwelling the community for an extended period of time”

  8. I think the committee was overly cautious about saying anything negative about the awful ways the abuses were handled. I think they realize anyone of them could have done/said foolish things in their ministry and would want “kid glove” treatment. And that’s what they gave him. To a fault. The committee overly understood the “minefield” a pastor walks and under-emphasized victims’ treatment. And just to cement that reminder for loyalty, I think it is no coincidence that Douglas Wilson posted on August 14 (the day before the report went public) his piece on Church Membership and Disloyalty, his way of reminding all those CREC pastor’s where their butter came from for their bread. Hey, I raised 7 kids; I know that false shocked, “Whaaaat?? That was just a coincidence! I didn’t do that on purpose!”
    (Child now feigns a shocked hurt sad between the shoulders stance.)

    I think they took cold hard facts and simply dismissed them or considered them superfluous when they should not have. Wilson’s attempt to shame Wesley Peterson by ferreting out his university performance piece comes to mind. Wilson’s veiled/blatant threat to expose Natalie by revealing the contents of her journal also come quickly to mind. These are obvious ways that Wilson made it clear to any woman who has been abused to be afraid, be very afraid of bringing abuse to light in the church but especially in the CREC. The report cautions, “If we present evidence via social media suggesting that someone should be condemned or censured in the eyes of the public, we have functionally put ourselves in the position of a prosecutor.” But Douglas Wilson got a pass from the committee on his absolute lack of moral, Christian, and plain old common sense.

    Wilson’s roostering about patriarchy certainly does not calm an abused woman. Rose Huskey is quoted in the report, “Complaints about Douglas and Nancy Wilson’s “celebration of patriarchy, and the notion of covenantal and gender entitlement,” which she contends are “powerful, and arguably key elements, in the creation of Steven Sitler’s psyche.” Blaine Holman’s correspondence with Rose Huskey is very relevant to all things screwed up about patriarchy.

    When the committee writes, “Churches that (rightly) teach and practice masculine headship, as set forth in the Scriptures” and then has to clarify, couch, and preface for the next long paragraph, maybe it’s time to realize something’s wrong with your paradigm. Maybe it’s time to realize patriarchy invites abuse towards women and children. This is more of why I will continue to say, Smash. The. Patriarchy.

    My advice to anyone reading the report:
    Do not neglect to read all the appendices

    1. They went out of their way to misrepresent Rosemary Huskey for a reason that only about 8 people (including Wilson) on the planet know. Rose Huskey has done more for that little Sitler child than everyone in the CREC combined — starting with the Sitler family. The CREC commissioners (Wilson butt boys) purposely misconstrued Rose to mislead their readers. They do not want anyone to know that if Rose had not notified Bill Thompson and Judge Stegner, then they would not have known about 2011 wedding in advance. Rose threw a fly in that ointment. P&P knew but didn’t bother to inform Stegner. Ditto for the baby. P&P knew but didn’t bother to inform Stegner. Rose sent an email to P&P to ask why they had not informed Stegner and she ccd both Stegner and Bill Thompson. Boom. The Review Committee didn’t want anyone to know this, most likely because it makes Wilson look worse than he already does, so they put her email through the blender to make her look unhinged. Rose Huskey is the hero in this story and I plan to document this for the CREC, so they can see what an injustice these men did to the truth and to the victims. Wilson certainly never bothered to inform the authorities that his pet child molester was living with a baby. All that blather about caring for the victims in the report, but they sure didn’t note this fact.

      And think about this: No one from the CREC contacted Rose to ask what her interest was. They wanted to ad hom her. No one contacted MoscowID.net either. Wilson appointed the Review Committee in response to the site, the Review Committee relied on documents and arguments from the site — but no one bothered to contact us to ask our interest in the matter. This wasn’t a review. It was another attempt to sanitize their dirty filthy dear leader.

      One other thing, since I’m venting. I read my wife this line this morning: “What is done is now done.” Her response — especially coming from her — says it all: “Those men are gonna burn.”

      Yes they will. And may their smoke rise forever.

  9. As with any report like this, they could have gone further — and done more.

    However, let’s just assume that all you had was this report — and considered it authoritative. First of all, Doug Wilson should thank these men, and humble himself in such a way that he agrees to follow the solemn advice given in the report.

    And we should magnify any future transgressions — to the advice given in this report — he makes.

    If history is any indicator, we will have ample opportunity to remind him that his unilateral thoughts/actions do not comport with the sound advice given in the report — however lacking.

    1. ‘As with any report, like this, they could have gone further – and done more.
      However, let’s just assume that all you had was this report – and considered it authoritative. First of all, Doug Wilson should thank these men, and humble himself in such a way that he agrees to follow the solemn advice given in the report.’
      Agreed. No matter how they walked on eggshells, there’s still enough rebuke in the report to make Wilson angry. Will he follow your advice and humble himself? Or will he follow his backbiting theology and punch back twice as hard? We shall see.

  10. I’d be interested to know how you learned of the report’s being posted. Did the kirk make an announcement?

    1. Hi W: A friend sent an email very early Friday morning. To my knowledge the Kirk has not made a public announcement, Wilson has not announced it, and I see no link to it on his website. The CREC linked it on their website under the “News” category but not under the “Reports” category. All indications suggest that Wilson does not want to call attention to the report — probably because the commissioners did not grovel enough to his satisfaction.

  11. “As our review progressed and interviews were completed, it became apparent to the committee that the Greyfriars program needs a significant overhaul (more than it has received). For example, it was revealed that a large percentage (perhaps the majority) of ministerial candidates never complete their required studies while in Moscow but are expected to complete them at their next location. Also, records kept on students were often incomplete and there was a lack of communication between various entities involved in a student’s training (churches, Greyfriars, internship locations).”

    This paragraph could use some more consideration. How many Grayfriars wash out? How many blow up churches? How many don’t finish their studies? And if they don’t, does Grayfriars still certify them to pastor a church?

    This question should drive many more questions as Grayfriars is the primary pastor creating institution. That being the case, do we have a bunch of men who haven’t finished the non-accredited Seminary program pastoring churches?

Comments are closed.