The Truth About Moscow http://www.moscowid.net Tue, 17 Oct 2017 03:18:18 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8.2 http://www.moscowid.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/cropped-favicon-32x32.png The Truth About Moscow http://www.moscowid.net 32 32 99973832 Flashback 2005: “Arrogance Out of Moscow” Part 2 http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/16/flashback-2005-arrogance-out-of-moscow-part-2/ http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/16/flashback-2005-arrogance-out-of-moscow-part-2/#respond Tue, 17 Oct 2017 03:17:22 +0000 http://www.moscowid.net/?p=32978 Definition of Arrogance

“When he speaketh fair, believe him not: for there are seven abominations in his heart, whose hatred is covered by deceit, his wickedness shall be shewed before the whole congregation.” Proverbs 26:25–26
The Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches used to hold an annual meeting of bigwigs, much like a Baptist convention.1 (The CREC decentralized about 10 years ago and began meeting every three years.) This sets the context for Douglas Wilson’s Arrogance Out of Moscow blog post. Twelve years ago during the CREC’s annual meeting, a fellow CREC pastor informed Mr. Wilson that over the years a few of Mr. Wilson’s followers had told this man the way he should be doing things. Mr. Wilson posted Arrogance Out of Moscow to his personal website in response to this pastor’s feedback.

Doug Wilson’s Alternate Reality

Douglas Wilson believes that Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, is ground zero for a “new reforming movement,” or a second Reformation, in the Christian church. We documented the doctrinal side of this belief here, in relation to the Federal Vision (please note the grandiose rhetoric). And as recently as last month Doug Wilson likened himself to the prophet Elijah while simultaneously comparing the Presiding Ministers of the CREC to King Ahab:
And don’t bother trying to tell me that I am being a troubler of Israel. That is what Ahab said to Elijah. Right. The guy who imported all the idols and brought the wrath of Heaven down on his nation, he is the one who wanted to pretend that the man who opposed it all from the beginning should take responsibility. (Blog & Mablog, A Tether Ball in a Tornado, September 18, 2017)2
So Douglas Wilson believes he is a prophet of biblical proportions, and as noted above he has thought of himself this way for over a decade. Similarly, he uses inflated rhetoric in Arrogance Out of Moscow:
I just said that God has blessed us greatly in the CREC, and we have certainly experienced the same thing in Moscow. But with this kind of blessing comes a peculiar kind of testing. . . . The problem is one of arrogance, and it is arrogance out of Moscow. We . . . have done what we could to prevent it. . . . But we are not willing to deal with this problem by refusing or denying the blessing that some are foolish enough to be proud about. . . . Remarkable things are happening in Moscow, and we have been greatly blessed. . . . (Arrogance Out of Moscow, emphasis original)
Doug Wilson uses “Moscow” as a metonymy for “Christ Church.” Note the catalyst for the arrogance:
  1. “we have certainly experienced the same thing” (“blessed us greatly”)
  2. “this kind of blessing”
  3. “the blessing that some are foolish enough to be proud about”
  4. “Remarkable things are happening”
  5. “have been greatly blessed”
In October 2005 Doug Wilson really wanted people to believe that, despite the arrogance, something great and remarkable was happening in the Kirk.

“Remarkable Things”

August 2005Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, told the truth when he wrote, “Remarkable things are happening in Moscow.” Just six months before making this statement he discovered that a serial pedophile had been raping Kirk children for the past 18 months. This child molester — Steven Sitler — had committed abominations against 25+ children in at least 3 different states for the previous 7 years. This qualifies as “remarkable.” Additionally, one month before making this “remarkable things” statement Mr. Wilson discovered that one of his ministerial students — Jamin Wight — had sexually molested another child of the Kirk. This too qualifies as “remarkable.” September 2005But Mr. Wilson neglected to state these facts when he wrote Arrogance Out of Moscow. Instead, he created a false impression3 by sketching a “remarkable” picture that ignored the horrors visited upon Christ Church in 2001–2005. These horrors still haunt a now-grown-up victim of sexual abuse; and they will haunt a 2½-year-old boy for the rest of his life. (Try to imagine growing up in a home where your father fantasizes about molesting you and your mother and grandparents want to protect him from the legal authorities at your expense.) October 2005Douglas Wilson was neck deep covering up the sexual molestations of Kirk children when he wrote Arrogance Out of Moscow. At that time he still had not informed the Kirk membership of predation, and according to the Presiding Ministers of the CREC we have no idea what he told the Kirk elders.4 Click the images on the right to see the flurry of “remarkable things” that Mr. Wilson concealed from the Kirk, the CREC, and the community to mislead his readers about the true state of Christ Church. Doug Wilson would have been much more honest if he had posted his letter to Judge Stegner alongside this crushing letter, which was written by two heartbroken parents. These two documents say everything everyone needs to know about the Kirk. The problem is not arrogance out of Moscow. The problem is the beast who dissembles when he laments arrogance out of Moscow.

Calendar Legend


1 The CREC calls itself presbyterian but its top-down denominational polity is independent — or Baptist. The CREC Constitution shields so-called “presbyters” from denominational accountability. “Presbyteries” in the CREC have no authority to discipline their members. This power resides in the local church only. For example, the CREC has no constitutional mechanism to excommunicate Douglas Wilson or remove him from the ministry. This explains why he could preside over the marriage of serial pedophile, pray for him to father children, and approve of the pedophile living in the same home as his child (children?). CREC ministers pretend to be presbyterians as they watch him commit evil. 2 He wrote this paragraph to defend his habit of objectifying women. The Presiding Minister of the CREC believes that his history of opposing idolatry confers privilege on him to ridicule ladies with impunity. 3 He did the same thing when Christianity Today interviewed him. He also worked in another reference to Elijah:
“I decided that if fire fell on Moscow, as upon Elijah’s altar, I wanted it to fall on an altar doused with water. I made a point of adopting certain unmarketable positions. I’m a televangelist with a blacked-out tooth — so if something happens, it’s God’s work.” (Christianity Today, The Controversialist, April 17, 2009)
If he truly wanted to douse the altar with water, then he should have told them about Steven Sitler. Few things are more “unmarketable” than serial child molesters. 4 “There were other communication breakdowns regarding the Sitler case. For example, 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).” (PMR 11, emphasis original)
]]>
Definition of Arrogance

“When he speaketh fair, believe him not: for there are seven abominations in his heart, whose hatred is covered by deceit, his wickedness shall be shewed before the whole congregation.” Proverbs 26:25–26
The Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches used to hold an annual meeting of bigwigs, much like a Baptist convention.1 (The CREC decentralized about 10 years ago and began meeting every three years.) This sets the context for Douglas Wilson’s Arrogance Out of Moscow blog post. Twelve years ago during the CREC’s annual meeting, a fellow CREC pastor informed Mr. Wilson that over the years a few of Mr. Wilson’s followers had told this man the way he should be doing things. Mr. Wilson posted Arrogance Out of Moscow to his personal website in response to this pastor’s feedback.

Doug Wilson’s Alternate Reality

Douglas Wilson believes that Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, is ground zero for a “new reforming movement,” or a second Reformation, in the Christian church. We documented the doctrinal side of this belief here, in relation to the Federal Vision (please note the grandiose rhetoric). And as recently as last month Doug Wilson likened himself to the prophet Elijah while simultaneously comparing the Presiding Ministers of the CREC to King Ahab:
And don’t bother trying to tell me that I am being a troubler of Israel. That is what Ahab said to Elijah. Right. The guy who imported all the idols and brought the wrath of Heaven down on his nation, he is the one who wanted to pretend that the man who opposed it all from the beginning should take responsibility. (Blog & Mablog, A Tether Ball in a Tornado, September 18, 2017)2
So Douglas Wilson believes he is a prophet of biblical proportions, and as noted above he has thought of himself this way for over a decade. Similarly, he uses inflated rhetoric in Arrogance Out of Moscow:
I just said that God has blessed us greatly in the CREC, and we have certainly experienced the same thing in Moscow. But with this kind of blessing comes a peculiar kind of testing. . . . The problem is one of arrogance, and it is arrogance out of Moscow. We . . . have done what we could to prevent it. . . . But we are not willing to deal with this problem by refusing or denying the blessing that some are foolish enough to be proud about. . . . Remarkable things are happening in Moscow, and we have been greatly blessed. . . . (Arrogance Out of Moscow, emphasis original)
Doug Wilson uses “Moscow” as a metonymy for “Christ Church.” Note the catalyst for the arrogance:
  1. “we have certainly experienced the same thing” (“blessed us greatly”)
  2. “this kind of blessing”
  3. “the blessing that some are foolish enough to be proud about”
  4. “Remarkable things are happening”
  5. “have been greatly blessed”
In October 2005 Doug Wilson really wanted people to believe that, despite the arrogance, something great and remarkable was happening in the Kirk.

“Remarkable Things”

August 2005Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, told the truth when he wrote, “Remarkable things are happening in Moscow.” Just six months before making this statement he discovered that a serial pedophile had been raping Kirk children for the past 18 months. This child molester — Steven Sitler — had committed abominations against 25+ children in at least 3 different states for the previous 7 years. This qualifies as “remarkable.” Additionally, one month before making this “remarkable things” statement Mr. Wilson discovered that one of his ministerial students — Jamin Wight — had sexually molested another child of the Kirk. This too qualifies as “remarkable.” September 2005But Mr. Wilson neglected to state these facts when he wrote Arrogance Out of Moscow. Instead, he created a false impression3 by sketching a “remarkable” picture that ignored the horrors visited upon Christ Church in 2001–2005. These horrors still haunt a now-grown-up victim of sexual abuse; and they will haunt a 2½-year-old boy for the rest of his life. (Try to imagine growing up in a home where your father fantasizes about molesting you and your mother and grandparents want to protect him from the legal authorities at your expense.) October 2005Douglas Wilson was neck deep covering up the sexual molestations of Kirk children when he wrote Arrogance Out of Moscow. At that time he still had not informed the Kirk membership of predation, and according to the Presiding Ministers of the CREC we have no idea what he told the Kirk elders.4 Click the images on the right to see the flurry of “remarkable things” that Mr. Wilson concealed from the Kirk, the CREC, and the community to mislead his readers about the true state of Christ Church. Doug Wilson would have been much more honest if he had posted his letter to Judge Stegner alongside this crushing letter, which was written by two heartbroken parents. These two documents say everything everyone needs to know about the Kirk. The problem is not arrogance out of Moscow. The problem is the beast who dissembles when he laments arrogance out of Moscow.

Calendar Legend


1 The CREC calls itself presbyterian but its top-down denominational polity is independent — or Baptist. The CREC Constitution shields so-called “presbyters” from denominational accountability. “Presbyteries” in the CREC have no authority to discipline their members. This power resides in the local church only. For example, the CREC has no constitutional mechanism to excommunicate Douglas Wilson or remove him from the ministry. This explains why he could preside over the marriage of serial pedophile, pray for him to father children, and approve of the pedophile living in the same home as his child (children?). CREC ministers pretend to be presbyterians as they watch him commit evil. 2 He wrote this paragraph to defend his habit of objectifying women. The Presiding Minister of the CREC believes that his history of opposing idolatry confers privilege on him to ridicule ladies with impunity. 3 He did the same thing when Christianity Today interviewed him. He also worked in another reference to Elijah:
“I decided that if fire fell on Moscow, as upon Elijah’s altar, I wanted it to fall on an altar doused with water. I made a point of adopting certain unmarketable positions. I’m a televangelist with a blacked-out tooth — so if something happens, it’s God’s work.” (Christianity Today, The Controversialist, April 17, 2009)
If he truly wanted to douse the altar with water, then he should have told them about Steven Sitler. Few things are more “unmarketable” than serial child molesters. 4 “There were other communication breakdowns regarding the Sitler case. For example, 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).” (PMR 11, emphasis original)
]]>
http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/16/flashback-2005-arrogance-out-of-moscow-part-2/feed/ 0 32978
Flashback 2005: “Arrogance Out of Moscow” Part 1 http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/15/flashback-2005-arrogance-out-of-moscow-part-1/ http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/15/flashback-2005-arrogance-out-of-moscow-part-1/#comments Sun, 15 Oct 2017 17:30:43 +0000 http://www.moscowid.net/?p=31212 Arrogance out of Moscow

Twelve years ago today Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, uploaded the following blog entry — Arrogance Out of Moscow — to his personal website, Blog & Mablog. The post is remarkable for too many reasons to note here (thus part 2), but suffice to say that Mr. Wilson had good reason to feign humility in October 2005: He confessed someone else’s sin; he did not own responsibility for it; and he never explained why Moscow breeds arrogance.

*   *   *

Arrogance out of MoscowArrogance Out of Moscow

Topic: General Ruminations As I mentioned in a previous post, we are currently in Portland for the ninth meeting of presbytery of the CREC. God has blessed us greatly, and one of the items of business was the division of our presbytery into two, Anselm Presbytery in the west and Augustine Presbytery in the east. We also had the first meeting of the CREC Council, which consisted of nine delegates from each presbytery. Our host church, Reformation Covenant Church, has been marvelous, and we had a wonderful time of fellowship together. One of the highlights was the worship service on Tuesday night. I just said that God has blessed us greatly in the CREC, and we have certainly experienced the same thing in Moscow. But with this kind of blessing comes a peculiar kind of testing, and I think the whole thing has gotten to a level where I can address it publicly without those public comments becoming part of the problem. Over the years in Moscow, I have frequently said to various folks (NSA students, congregants, etc.) that I am sure there are a number of godly pastors around the country who hate the sound of my name. They hate the sound of my name with reason; I am not addressing in this post those convoluted souls who don’t need a reason. The reasons would include the facts that after a sermon they have preached, they have heard, one too many times, that “that is not what Doug Wilson says,” or they have had a book of mine waved under somebody’s nose in the foyer in a manner not calculated to endear the recipient of the treatment to the one who waves. The thing that brought this subject to mind was a conversation I had last night with a friend, a fellow CREC minister, one of the finest men I know. Turns out over the last several years, he has had various visitors from Moscow — young bucks, let us call them. After the service, he went to greet the visitor, found out who the visitor was, and then heard something like, “Let me tell you what is wrong with your liturgy . . .” This has happened to my friend three times. James was a godly minister of the gospel, and he gave to Paul the right hand of fellowship. But there were certain “men from James” who were stinkers, and a cause of real dissension in the church. Now my friend is an experienced minister, and very shrewd, and knew enough to attribute this behavior to the stupidity of young bucks who assiduously learn one thing we teach in Moscow, and ignore other important aspects of what we teach — lessons like “don’t ever do that!” And regular warnings against this kind of arrogance is a central part of what we teach. I can assure you that if we found somebody representing us in this way we would (metaphorically speaking) tear his head off and scoop out his insides with a spoon. In a pastoral way, of course. The problem is one of arrogance, and it is arrogance out of Moscow. We know and acknowledge that this happens, and we have done what we could to prevent it. We don’t approve of it. We are also willing to do more — if anyone out there knows of a situation like this that we should address, please let us know and we will. But we are not willing to deal with this problem by refusing or denying the blessing that some are foolish enough to be proud about. There are two kinds of arrogance. There is the arrogance of the brain surgeon guy, who is also a fighter pilot on weekends with the reserves. He is the kind of man who can strut sitting down. On a certain level, a human level, he has something to be arrogant over — he has been blessed in multiple ways, and has forgotten what the apostle Paul said — what do we have that we did not receive as a gift? And if as a gift, then why do we boast? So someone with many years of medical training has been grealy [sic] blessed, and can be tempted to boast, or be rude, or obnoxious, or all three. But the other kind of arrogance is more low key. This is where someone has not had years of medical training at all, but undertakes to treat a friend’s advanced cancer with orange juice concentrate because of some article she read on the internet. This is arrogance that functions without the raw material of blessings. Remarkable things are happening in Moscow, and we have been greatly blessed. We bow before God in gratitude. We have warned and cajoled those who represent us to others to be careful, to please be careful. But some are not careful, regardless. And I also know the picture is complicated by other scenarios — a deacon at the church back home sees that a young NSA student home on Thanksgiving break has a copy of her Greek New Testament in her book bag. “Who do you think you are?” he snarls. “My wife used to change your diapers. Do you think you are better than everybody else?” “Me genoito,” she replies — no, just kidding. “No, not at all,” she stammers in reply. People are sinners, and they sin against one another. But our responsibility is to deal with our sins against others, and not to worry about their sins against us. We know that some of our people are sinning against some of your people. “Better to suffer wrong than to do wrong,” Thomas Watson said. But in Moscow, we are still at the point where some from our number are out there doing the wrong. And we acknowledge that some of the treatment we have gotten over the last several years is blowback from this kind of sin. So, for anyone who reads this, who has been the recipient of this particular kind of rudeness, on behalf of the elders of our churches in Moscow, I humbly apologize, and seek your forgiveness. If there is anything else we need to do to make something right on a personal level, please let us know. Posted by Douglas Wilson — 10/15/2005 10:30:42 AM

*   *   *

]]>
Arrogance out of Moscow

Twelve years ago today Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, uploaded the following blog entry — Arrogance Out of Moscow — to his personal website, Blog & Mablog. The post is remarkable for too many reasons to note here (thus part 2), but suffice to say that Mr. Wilson had good reason to feign humility in October 2005: He confessed someone else’s sin; he did not own responsibility for it; and he never explained why Moscow breeds arrogance.

*   *   *

Arrogance out of MoscowArrogance Out of Moscow

Topic: General Ruminations As I mentioned in a previous post, we are currently in Portland for the ninth meeting of presbytery of the CREC. God has blessed us greatly, and one of the items of business was the division of our presbytery into two, Anselm Presbytery in the west and Augustine Presbytery in the east. We also had the first meeting of the CREC Council, which consisted of nine delegates from each presbytery. Our host church, Reformation Covenant Church, has been marvelous, and we had a wonderful time of fellowship together. One of the highlights was the worship service on Tuesday night. I just said that God has blessed us greatly in the CREC, and we have certainly experienced the same thing in Moscow. But with this kind of blessing comes a peculiar kind of testing, and I think the whole thing has gotten to a level where I can address it publicly without those public comments becoming part of the problem. Over the years in Moscow, I have frequently said to various folks (NSA students, congregants, etc.) that I am sure there are a number of godly pastors around the country who hate the sound of my name. They hate the sound of my name with reason; I am not addressing in this post those convoluted souls who don’t need a reason. The reasons would include the facts that after a sermon they have preached, they have heard, one too many times, that “that is not what Doug Wilson says,” or they have had a book of mine waved under somebody’s nose in the foyer in a manner not calculated to endear the recipient of the treatment to the one who waves. The thing that brought this subject to mind was a conversation I had last night with a friend, a fellow CREC minister, one of the finest men I know. Turns out over the last several years, he has had various visitors from Moscow — young bucks, let us call them. After the service, he went to greet the visitor, found out who the visitor was, and then heard something like, “Let me tell you what is wrong with your liturgy . . .” This has happened to my friend three times. James was a godly minister of the gospel, and he gave to Paul the right hand of fellowship. But there were certain “men from James” who were stinkers, and a cause of real dissension in the church. Now my friend is an experienced minister, and very shrewd, and knew enough to attribute this behavior to the stupidity of young bucks who assiduously learn one thing we teach in Moscow, and ignore other important aspects of what we teach — lessons like “don’t ever do that!” And regular warnings against this kind of arrogance is a central part of what we teach. I can assure you that if we found somebody representing us in this way we would (metaphorically speaking) tear his head off and scoop out his insides with a spoon. In a pastoral way, of course. The problem is one of arrogance, and it is arrogance out of Moscow. We know and acknowledge that this happens, and we have done what we could to prevent it. We don’t approve of it. We are also willing to do more — if anyone out there knows of a situation like this that we should address, please let us know and we will. But we are not willing to deal with this problem by refusing or denying the blessing that some are foolish enough to be proud about. There are two kinds of arrogance. There is the arrogance of the brain surgeon guy, who is also a fighter pilot on weekends with the reserves. He is the kind of man who can strut sitting down. On a certain level, a human level, he has something to be arrogant over — he has been blessed in multiple ways, and has forgotten what the apostle Paul said — what do we have that we did not receive as a gift? And if as a gift, then why do we boast? So someone with many years of medical training has been grealy [sic] blessed, and can be tempted to boast, or be rude, or obnoxious, or all three. But the other kind of arrogance is more low key. This is where someone has not had years of medical training at all, but undertakes to treat a friend’s advanced cancer with orange juice concentrate because of some article she read on the internet. This is arrogance that functions without the raw material of blessings. Remarkable things are happening in Moscow, and we have been greatly blessed. We bow before God in gratitude. We have warned and cajoled those who represent us to others to be careful, to please be careful. But some are not careful, regardless. And I also know the picture is complicated by other scenarios — a deacon at the church back home sees that a young NSA student home on Thanksgiving break has a copy of her Greek New Testament in her book bag. “Who do you think you are?” he snarls. “My wife used to change your diapers. Do you think you are better than everybody else?” “Me genoito,” she replies — no, just kidding. “No, not at all,” she stammers in reply. People are sinners, and they sin against one another. But our responsibility is to deal with our sins against others, and not to worry about their sins against us. We know that some of our people are sinning against some of your people. “Better to suffer wrong than to do wrong,” Thomas Watson said. But in Moscow, we are still at the point where some from our number are out there doing the wrong. And we acknowledge that some of the treatment we have gotten over the last several years is blowback from this kind of sin. So, for anyone who reads this, who has been the recipient of this particular kind of rudeness, on behalf of the elders of our churches in Moscow, I humbly apologize, and seek your forgiveness. If there is anything else we need to do to make something right on a personal level, please let us know. Posted by Douglas Wilson — 10/15/2005 10:30:42 AM

*   *   *

]]>
http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/15/flashback-2005-arrogance-out-of-moscow-part-1/feed/ 4 31212
The CREC Presiding Ministers & the Pastor Who Does “Not Care” http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/13/the-crec-presiding-ministers-the-pastor-who-does-not-care/ http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/13/the-crec-presiding-ministers-the-pastor-who-does-not-care/#comments Fri, 13 Oct 2017 16:26:12 +0000 http://www.moscowid.net/?p=32723 Shock

  In September 2015 Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, charged the Presiding Ministers of the CREC to issue a written report regarding his handling of two child molestation cases visited upon the Kirk. He specifically asked them for their counsel:
Moreover, they [Kirk elders] have requested that the presiding ministers satisfy themselves as to the health and soundness of their pastoral care in such circumstances, and to provide them with their counsel and advice where they see any deficiencies. (Inquiry into the Pastoral Ministry of Christ Church (Moscow, Idaho), October 3, 2015)
In August 2017 the CREC Review Committee delivered the Presiding Ministers’ Report on the Sitler and Wight Sex Abuse Cases, or PMR. Page 18 states:
But when it comes to matters such as the Sitler and Wight cases, especially when victims are involved, an entirely different voice needs to be heard — one clad not in battle regalia, but in a humble linen tunic. Not only is this glorifying to God and the right thing to do, it is a kindness to victims, as well as to internet onlookers, who may already be confused by the allegations, and who will likely become even more confused by pastoral responses made with sword and mace. Had biblical humility and prudence been placed more to the fore — and that is what our suggestions are trying to express — we believe it would have placed Pastor Wilson and the entire controversy on a higher road. In that regard, let us point out a few specifics we believe are inconsistent with the high road. . . .
  • Using unnecessarily provocative language, including derogatory or calloused language about women. Referring to certain women as “small breasted biddies” or “lumberjack dykes” is not likely to serve an edifying purpose in this context. We note that this language has caused a good deal of anguish among pastors and elders of CREC churches who would otherwise be supportive of Pastor Wilson’s ministry. Pastors should be careful not to give women reasons to avoid seeking help from the church. Instead, we should make it clear that the church is a place where all people are treated with honor and respect, and where victims can find grace.
In this particular case, Pastor Wilson’s rhetoric has, unfortunately, been found offensive and inappropriate even by many in his own denomination (including other pastors and elders). Pastor Wilson’s blog posts regarding these cases have proved to be quite divisive even amongst those who consider him a friend and ally. A more prudent and temperate use of language would be helpful. . . . (PMR page 18, emphasis original)
The Presiding Ministers of the CREC flagged two phrases coined by Douglas Wilson as offensive — “small-breasted biddies” & “lumberjack dykes.” And they advised him to be considerate of others when he writes. Last month the Presiding Minister of the CREC replied to the Presiding Ministers, whom he appointed to give him counsel:
So if someone with a long enough face to be a dowager from Human Resources tells me that I am no longer permitted, as a cis-white-male, to make any observations or comparisons, metaphorical or otherwise, about any aspect of the female anatomy, guess what I am going to do? Guess what my next blog post is going to be about? Go on, guess. (Blog & Mablog, A Tether Ball in a Tornado, September 18, 2017)

Pig Mouth Is The Brand

Previously we considered one reason why Doug Wilson refused to submit to the Presiding Ministers’ suggestions in the PMR: He needs to “shock and insult” to keep his audience. If he surrenders the vulgarity, then “the whole game collapses.” Therefore, “small-breasted biddies,” “lumberjack dykes,” and all the other insults stay in his repertoire. In this respect, the pig mouth is the brand. The Presiding Minister of the CREC created a market to openly abuse others and the Presiding Ministers of the CREC gave him no reason to leave it. He diligently cultivated his brand under the dutiful eyes of the CREC — why should he change now?

Every Word Calculated

Douglas Wilson calculates the cost-benefit factor of his insults before he hits “publish”:
“Do I draw any distinction — have I noticed any difference between me in person and me on the blog?” [Laughter] I don’t know, have you? [Laughter] The answer is very much, “Yes.”. . . Um, when I’m writing, um, if I’m writing a blog post, I’m writing for thousands of people in all different walks of life, all different situations. Some of them are going to love me; some of them are going to hate me; some of them are going to be indifferent. Now some of them know me in person and some of them are not so hot about that either. . . So some people say, “Well, if you — if you could be more like you are in person on your blog, I think people would like you more.” Yeah, I think about ten times less people would like me. . . . the percentage of people liking me would be more, but the people reading me would be less, so it’s a basic tradeoff. . . How can we communicate the gospel as winsomely as possible to the largest number of people. And, um, I get a lot of feedback from people who are encouraged by the blog, a lot of feedback. I get people who are ticked off by the blog. So you have to say, “Okay, I’m speaking to a thousand people and 58 of them are upset and 600 of them are greatly encouraged.” That’s the thing I am thinking about how to calibrate all the time. . . . (Shubin Report, Christ Church HOH Meeting, October 27, 2015, page 218)
Please note how Doug Wilson uses “winsomely” as a euphemism for giving offense, or abuse. It’s a generic reference to “small-breasted biddies,” “lumberjack dykes,” etc. He “calibrates” this winsomeness (abuse).

Law of Diminishing Returns

The economic law of diminishing returns applies to this particular con game. Douglas Wilson needs to “shock and insult” readers, to keep the con going. He produces shock with each vulgar term. However, regular use of specific boorish words decreases their shock value. For example, the more he says “boobs,” the less it shocks his readers. His return diminishes because they’re used to it. So he has to add new terms to his portfolio. You can chart the pattern: Every two years or so he escalates — or “calibrates.” Here is a brief timeline that documents his first use of various terms on Blog & Mablog:
2008: “boobs”1
“. . . the Tomb Raider series wants us to see the incredible buns and boobs, connected by a fragile Barbie waist, in motion. . .” (Blog & Mablog, Gritty Realism, February 22, 2008)
2008: “dyke”
“It is behaving like an ecclesiastical dyke.” (Blog & Mablog, Pikestaff Texts, July 8, 2008)
2010: “getting laid”
“following her will greatly increase their chances of getting laid” (Blog & Mablog, How Bad Theology is Incentivized, July 28, 2010)
2010: “you could nickname these breasts”2
“Or, if you like, in another strategy of seeing things rightly, you could nickname these breasts of other woman as the ‘principalities and powers.’” (Blog & Mablog, Dealing with Nuisance Lust, September 5, 2010)
2012: “vibrators”
“Nobody should want the kind of Talmudic process that could conceivably result in banning pink vibrators but okaying all the others.” (Blog & Mablog, Dinner for Two at Angelo’s, January 13, 2012)
2012: “bitch”
“way to miss the redemptive moment, bitch” (Blog & Mablog, The Politics of Outrage, July 21, 2012)
2014: “tits”3
“make her tits bigger” (Blog & Mablog, Put an Egg in Their Shoe, February 24, 2014)
2014: “fudgepacker”4
“I thought the eff-word law was referring to fudgepacker.” (Blog & Mablog, Circumlocutions and Faggotré, February 27, 2014, emphasis original)
Every two years Doug Wilson spikes his lexicon with new vulgarities, in order to maintain the requisite shock value for the con. (2015 to the present have been off years, presumably because of the CREC Review Committee; to be sure, he has written a few blog posts to defend his vocabulary during this time.) You can see how he systematically “calibrates” the introduction of each term into his style guide for further use. Each new word is always more explicit than its predecessors. And note the common denominator: Sex and degradation of women. Remember, he stated the rule that controls his behavior:
“The whole point is to shock and insult those who don’t know that they are being played. Take that away and the whole game collapses.” (Blog & Mablog, On Learning to Hate Their Dog, September 2, 2013)
Raunchy rules.

He Does Not Care

We’ve already noted that he does not care whom he offends, including fellow pastors & elders in the CREC, women, and victims. In this quote, he tells us why he does not care:
Yes, someone might say. But still. Why you have to use phrases like “lumberjack dykes”? It is provocative. Yes, it most certainly is. But the people pretending to be outraged are liars. I put certain things out there as bait, because I know they will take it, and when they take it I have yet another glorious opportunity to not care about their faux-outrage. (Blog & Mablog, Win or Winnow or Both? March 21, 2017, emphasis original)
He does not care because, according to him, the people whom he offends are “liars.” And note how he relishes giving offense — he describes it as a “glorious opportunity.” This is more of that defiance for defiance’ sake. He has no emotional capacity to empathize with those he insults or those who take offense at his insults.

Conclusion

Nothing Doug Wilson says offends me and I could care less how deep he swims in the sewer to augment his vocabulary. The point isn’t Mr. Wilson’s pig mouth. The point is that Mr. Wilson must wax worse and worse to maintain his brand — and of course he wields tremendous influence. Just imagine what the church would be like if all Christians emulated Doug Wilson’s example. Imagine that all believers did “not care” about each other as much as much as he doesn’t care. One thing, however, we don’t have to imagine: The Presiding Ministers of the CREC sure don’t care.
1 Doug Wilson regularly features women’s breasts in his written corpus. However, he doesn’t use the word “boobs” until 2008, at least on Mablog. 2 This is a radical escalation because he instructs men to name the breasts of women. He is overtly corrupting his readers. 3 Use of the street term “tits” marks an escalation from his regular use of “boobs.” 4 Douglas Wilson has always used vicious insults to describe homosexuals, most likely due to self-loathing of his closeted orientation. However, this particular insult was a first.]]>
Shock

  In September 2015 Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, charged the Presiding Ministers of the CREC to issue a written report regarding his handling of two child molestation cases visited upon the Kirk. He specifically asked them for their counsel:
Moreover, they [Kirk elders] have requested that the presiding ministers satisfy themselves as to the health and soundness of their pastoral care in such circumstances, and to provide them with their counsel and advice where they see any deficiencies. (Inquiry into the Pastoral Ministry of Christ Church (Moscow, Idaho), October 3, 2015)
In August 2017 the CREC Review Committee delivered the Presiding Ministers’ Report on the Sitler and Wight Sex Abuse Cases, or PMR. Page 18 states:
But when it comes to matters such as the Sitler and Wight cases, especially when victims are involved, an entirely different voice needs to be heard — one clad not in battle regalia, but in a humble linen tunic. Not only is this glorifying to God and the right thing to do, it is a kindness to victims, as well as to internet onlookers, who may already be confused by the allegations, and who will likely become even more confused by pastoral responses made with sword and mace. Had biblical humility and prudence been placed more to the fore — and that is what our suggestions are trying to express — we believe it would have placed Pastor Wilson and the entire controversy on a higher road. In that regard, let us point out a few specifics we believe are inconsistent with the high road. . . .
  • Using unnecessarily provocative language, including derogatory or calloused language about women. Referring to certain women as “small breasted biddies” or “lumberjack dykes” is not likely to serve an edifying purpose in this context. We note that this language has caused a good deal of anguish among pastors and elders of CREC churches who would otherwise be supportive of Pastor Wilson’s ministry. Pastors should be careful not to give women reasons to avoid seeking help from the church. Instead, we should make it clear that the church is a place where all people are treated with honor and respect, and where victims can find grace.
In this particular case, Pastor Wilson’s rhetoric has, unfortunately, been found offensive and inappropriate even by many in his own denomination (including other pastors and elders). Pastor Wilson’s blog posts regarding these cases have proved to be quite divisive even amongst those who consider him a friend and ally. A more prudent and temperate use of language would be helpful. . . . (PMR page 18, emphasis original)
The Presiding Ministers of the CREC flagged two phrases coined by Douglas Wilson as offensive — “small-breasted biddies” & “lumberjack dykes.” And they advised him to be considerate of others when he writes. Last month the Presiding Minister of the CREC replied to the Presiding Ministers, whom he appointed to give him counsel:
So if someone with a long enough face to be a dowager from Human Resources tells me that I am no longer permitted, as a cis-white-male, to make any observations or comparisons, metaphorical or otherwise, about any aspect of the female anatomy, guess what I am going to do? Guess what my next blog post is going to be about? Go on, guess. (Blog & Mablog, A Tether Ball in a Tornado, September 18, 2017)

Pig Mouth Is The Brand

Previously we considered one reason why Doug Wilson refused to submit to the Presiding Ministers’ suggestions in the PMR: He needs to “shock and insult” to keep his audience. If he surrenders the vulgarity, then “the whole game collapses.” Therefore, “small-breasted biddies,” “lumberjack dykes,” and all the other insults stay in his repertoire. In this respect, the pig mouth is the brand. The Presiding Minister of the CREC created a market to openly abuse others and the Presiding Ministers of the CREC gave him no reason to leave it. He diligently cultivated his brand under the dutiful eyes of the CREC — why should he change now?

Every Word Calculated

Douglas Wilson calculates the cost-benefit factor of his insults before he hits “publish”:
“Do I draw any distinction — have I noticed any difference between me in person and me on the blog?” [Laughter] I don’t know, have you? [Laughter] The answer is very much, “Yes.”. . . Um, when I’m writing, um, if I’m writing a blog post, I’m writing for thousands of people in all different walks of life, all different situations. Some of them are going to love me; some of them are going to hate me; some of them are going to be indifferent. Now some of them know me in person and some of them are not so hot about that either. . . So some people say, “Well, if you — if you could be more like you are in person on your blog, I think people would like you more.” Yeah, I think about ten times less people would like me. . . . the percentage of people liking me would be more, but the people reading me would be less, so it’s a basic tradeoff. . . How can we communicate the gospel as winsomely as possible to the largest number of people. And, um, I get a lot of feedback from people who are encouraged by the blog, a lot of feedback. I get people who are ticked off by the blog. So you have to say, “Okay, I’m speaking to a thousand people and 58 of them are upset and 600 of them are greatly encouraged.” That’s the thing I am thinking about how to calibrate all the time. . . . (Shubin Report, Christ Church HOH Meeting, October 27, 2015, page 218)
Please note how Doug Wilson uses “winsomely” as a euphemism for giving offense, or abuse. It’s a generic reference to “small-breasted biddies,” “lumberjack dykes,” etc. He “calibrates” this winsomeness (abuse).

Law of Diminishing Returns

The economic law of diminishing returns applies to this particular con game. Douglas Wilson needs to “shock and insult” readers, to keep the con going. He produces shock with each vulgar term. However, regular use of specific boorish words decreases their shock value. For example, the more he says “boobs,” the less it shocks his readers. His return diminishes because they’re used to it. So he has to add new terms to his portfolio. You can chart the pattern: Every two years or so he escalates — or “calibrates.” Here is a brief timeline that documents his first use of various terms on Blog & Mablog:
2008: “boobs”1
“. . . the Tomb Raider series wants us to see the incredible buns and boobs, connected by a fragile Barbie waist, in motion. . .” (Blog & Mablog, Gritty Realism, February 22, 2008)
2008: “dyke”
“It is behaving like an ecclesiastical dyke.” (Blog & Mablog, Pikestaff Texts, July 8, 2008)
2010: “getting laid”
“following her will greatly increase their chances of getting laid” (Blog & Mablog, How Bad Theology is Incentivized, July 28, 2010)
2010: “you could nickname these breasts”2
“Or, if you like, in another strategy of seeing things rightly, you could nickname these breasts of other woman as the ‘principalities and powers.’” (Blog & Mablog, Dealing with Nuisance Lust, September 5, 2010)
2012: “vibrators”
“Nobody should want the kind of Talmudic process that could conceivably result in banning pink vibrators but okaying all the others.” (Blog & Mablog, Dinner for Two at Angelo’s, January 13, 2012)
2012: “bitch”
“way to miss the redemptive moment, bitch” (Blog & Mablog, The Politics of Outrage, July 21, 2012)
2014: “tits”3
“make her tits bigger” (Blog & Mablog, Put an Egg in Their Shoe, February 24, 2014)
2014: “fudgepacker”4
“I thought the eff-word law was referring to fudgepacker.” (Blog & Mablog, Circumlocutions and Faggotré, February 27, 2014, emphasis original)
Every two years Doug Wilson spikes his lexicon with new vulgarities, in order to maintain the requisite shock value for the con. (2015 to the present have been off years, presumably because of the CREC Review Committee; to be sure, he has written a few blog posts to defend his vocabulary during this time.) You can see how he systematically “calibrates” the introduction of each term into his style guide for further use. Each new word is always more explicit than its predecessors. And note the common denominator: Sex and degradation of women. Remember, he stated the rule that controls his behavior:
“The whole point is to shock and insult those who don’t know that they are being played. Take that away and the whole game collapses.” (Blog & Mablog, On Learning to Hate Their Dog, September 2, 2013)
Raunchy rules.

He Does Not Care

We’ve already noted that he does not care whom he offends, including fellow pastors & elders in the CREC, women, and victims. In this quote, he tells us why he does not care:
Yes, someone might say. But still. Why you have to use phrases like “lumberjack dykes”? It is provocative. Yes, it most certainly is. But the people pretending to be outraged are liars. I put certain things out there as bait, because I know they will take it, and when they take it I have yet another glorious opportunity to not care about their faux-outrage. (Blog & Mablog, Win or Winnow or Both? March 21, 2017, emphasis original)
He does not care because, according to him, the people whom he offends are “liars.” And note how he relishes giving offense — he describes it as a “glorious opportunity.” This is more of that defiance for defiance’ sake. He has no emotional capacity to empathize with those he insults or those who take offense at his insults.

Conclusion

Nothing Doug Wilson says offends me and I could care less how deep he swims in the sewer to augment his vocabulary. The point isn’t Mr. Wilson’s pig mouth. The point is that Mr. Wilson must wax worse and worse to maintain his brand — and of course he wields tremendous influence. Just imagine what the church would be like if all Christians emulated Doug Wilson’s example. Imagine that all believers did “not care” about each other as much as much as he doesn’t care. One thing, however, we don’t have to imagine: The Presiding Ministers of the CREC sure don’t care.
1 Doug Wilson regularly features women’s breasts in his written corpus. However, he doesn’t use the word “boobs” until 2008, at least on Mablog. 2 This is a radical escalation because he instructs men to name the breasts of women. He is overtly corrupting his readers. 3 Use of the street term “tits” marks an escalation from his regular use of “boobs.” 4 Douglas Wilson has always used vicious insults to describe homosexuals, most likely due to self-loathing of his closeted orientation. However, this particular insult was a first.]]>
http://www.moscowid.net/2017/10/13/the-crec-presiding-ministers-the-pastor-who-does-not-care/feed/ 2 32723