Doug Wilson and the Goring Ox
Trigger warning for descriptions of sexual molestation throughout the article.
Pastor Doug Wilson and Christ Church elders played a central role in overturning justice and placing a young child within reach of a serial pedophile. The sexual predator then, tragically, acted on his perverse desires. In doing so, the elders who placed this child in harm’s way, and then in their denial of any wrongdoing, are unfit for public ministry. They are the shepherds who let wolves into the flock. They are the keepers of a goring ox let loose upon the people of God. There is forgiveness in Jesus Christ for this sin, but our leaders are to be above reproach. Let us fear God rather than men in this ordeal.
Why write this at all? Am I just a “hater” with “Doug Wilson derangement syndrome?” Will this essay elicit mocking messages of “Moscow man bad?” Will I be called a slanderer? I’m sure all of this will happen, and most of it has already happened. Doug Wilson, himself, has passively aggressively and repeatedly named me a slanderer, and his supporters follow the example set. However, I have learned long ago not to focus on the diehard supporters of problematic men but instead offer a clear message for those who do not have strong allegiances. I wrote most of this almost two years ago. I did not want to publish anything in anger or spite. I wanted to be slow to write, and I wanted to seek counsel with my pastors and mentors. This is not the type of article I enjoy writing, and though I have written one other article such as this before, I would much rather spend my energy on different topics. As time went on, more and more people have asked me for my “take” on Doug Wilson and his scandals collection. When this scandal comes up on social media, it’s clear that many people still have no idea, or they’re directed to one article from Doug Wilson. There are some articles online about this scandal, but what I found lacking was the theological case regarding the ecclesiastical authority and fitness of Doug Wilson and the Christ Church session.
Though many resources have been invaluable in discerning the truth in these matters, some have unfortunately taken on the attitude of “discernment ministries” and not in the good sense. Though they make many strong cases and provide a service to the Church, a few of their weak points tarnish their persuasiveness and credibility. A far greater tragedy, though, is that other non-Christian resources have used Doug Wilson and Christ Church’s actions to tarnish the name of Christ. My goal is to provide a relatively concise, Christian, and compassionate assessment.
Though it is unnecessary to add this personal note, I want to add some of my context and history with Douglas Wilson. I desire to be as transparent as I can in this. I once had more Douglas Wilson books than any other author. At this point, I believe RJ Rushdoony and Gary North may outnumber Wilson books, but I’m not keeping count. I was a longtime fan and defender of Wilson. I first started reading him in high school, and I was an ardent defender of his till my mid-twenties. I am now in my mid-thirties. I read his blog almost daily, I shrugged off federal vision theology as if it were no big deal, I bought into the paleo-confederate myths, and I was a fan of the snark and harsh rhetoric.
I even recall getting blocked on Twitter by Anthony Bradley while tag-teaming with Wilson as we defended the idea that Southern slavery was a blessing. At one point in my life, I was seriously considering a move to Moscow. A former friend of mine once told me I could have “been someone” if I had made that move. Several years ago, mostly by reading primary source material on Southern slavery, I began to have concerns. Those concerns became more troubling as time went on and as I became aware of past Wilson controversies and as Wilson became embroiled in new controversies. Years ago, I began to see how truly wrong I was on most if not all of the “Wilson catalog of controversies.” I am not ignorant of his views, and I am not coming at this topic as a theological outsider. The articles I need to read to really “get” what he’s saying, I’ve read. His responses to various controversies, I’ve read. His books that I’ve been told I need to read to understand his context, I’ve read. I could write an essay on each of these topics, and I could probably defend Wilson better than most of his defenders. I do not hate Doug. Far from. I feel that we may have been good friends under different circumstances. He’s most likely the kind of guy I’d like to have a beer with. If he were not a public figure representing the name of Christ to the world, he might just be the affable but problematic older man in the church that we all love but don’t let near the pulpit. We all know the sort; the man who is friendly and likable but who is far from fit for leadership because he’s a ticking time bomb bound to cause unwanted and unneeded controversy in the Body. Doug Wilson was given that leadership, and that time bomb has gone off, and then gone off again, and again, and again. I’m sure he’s a nice guy to his friends, but that is not the standard. There is genuine mourning in the publishing of this article.
Scandal Portfolio
Although I do not want to lose focus, I want to provide a very brief (and incomplete) overview of other notable controversies at Christ Church. All communities will have their share of controversies; however, weighty introspection is due at some point.
There is a second case involving the sexual molestation of a child by a member of Trinity Reformed Church (a sister church of Christ Church). The perpetrator, Wight, was in the Greyfriars Hall, a pastoral ministry training program of Christ Church and led by Doug Wilson, and the victim was a member of Christ Church. Church officers, on many points, also severely mishandled this case. The former pastor of Trinity Reformed Church, Peter Leithart, has come forward admitting “major errors of judgment.” The Shubin Report details this mishandling in depth.
A more recent case has developed involving the reported sexual assault of a seventeen-year-old student by Jim Nance, a Christ Church elder and Logos School teacher (school associated with Christ Church). Here for the testimony of the victim, here for the official take from Doug Wilson. This story is still under development, and it’s likely we will hear more details in the future. Sadly, the victim no longer claims Christ.
Doug Wilson is an advocate for the Federal Vision teaching. The RPCUS has named Wilson and other Federal Vision leaders heretics, while the PCA, OPC, URNCA, and RCUS have condemned The Federal Vision teaching. Note that Wilson dissociated himself from the label in this article while also plainly stating that he still believes all of the same ideas. For a brief introduction to the concepts, see here. For the Joint Federal Vision Statement that Wilson signed and still affirms, see here.
Multiple plagiarism controversies, including widespread plagiarism in the Omnibus Curriculum textbooks co-edited by Douglas Wilson, A Justice Primer co-wrote by Wilson, and Southern Slavery: As It Was also co-written by Wilson.
Making various statements minimizing the reality of Southern Slavery and generally defending the institution. See here, here, and here. A notable quote from Southern Slavery: As It Was, co-written by Doug Wilson.
“Slavery as it existed in the South was not an adversarial relationship with pervasive racial animosity. Because of its dominantly patriarchal character, it was a relationship based upon mutual affection and confidence. There has never been a multi-racial society which has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world.”
There were ninety-four ecclesiastical charges filed against Doug Wilson that the CRE (later to become the CREC) dropped due to a technicality. Presbyterian and Reformed News reports [p 6].
“The charges can be broken down according to the various commandments which are allegedly violated. With regard to the third commandment, there are eight specifications (six charges of a breach of the third commandment, one of ignoring Scripture, one of covenantbreaking). There is one charge of violating the fourth commandment. There are thirty-nine charges of breaking the fifth commandment; these include four general charges of a breach of the commandment, fifteen charges related to malfeasance, eight with respect to obstruction of justice, two charges of conduct unbecoming a gospel minister, six related to pastoral tyranny, abuse, and/or manipulation, two regarding Sessional tyranny, one charge of dereliction of duty, and one charge of violating Scripture with regard to the civil magistrate. With regard to the sixth commandment, there are five charges of carnal threatening, four of sinful anger, and one of railing. With regard to the eighth commandment, there are three charges: one each of stealing, financial malfeasance, and violation of fiduciary trust. There are thirty-two charges of having violated the ninth commandment, including twenty-one general charges of a breach of the commandment, eight charges related to slander, and three charges related to effecting and instituting a breach of the commandment. There is also one stand-alone charge of hypocrisy, as well as several charges (embedded with those above) which speak of hypocrisy.”
The charges were made by someone outside of Christ Church, so the CRE dropped all charges [p 10]. There also appear to be some confusing shenanigans involving the documents. Christ Church answered at least a few of the allegations [p 9].
The Sitler Case: As It Was
As I stated above, many issues raised red flags for me concerning Doug Wilson and Christ Church. However, the case that “woke” me up to these controversies’ severity was the Steven Sitler case.
Rachel Shubin has provided the most thorough documentation of this scandal. The Shubin Report, densely packed with citations and evidence, details both the Sitler scandal and the Wight scandal. I considered documenting all the various points in the controversy, but there’s not much use reinventing the wheel when the Shubin Report is on record. I will label Shubin Report citations as [SR].
Here are a few points that are relevant to my theological argument.
Steven Sitler is reported to have molested as many as 25 minors (or 15 or more, according to Wilson). [SR p 1]
According to multiple health professionals, Sitler is a “Fixated Pedophile,” which puts him at a high risk of repeat offending. [SR p 8]
Douglas Wilson and Christ Church elders did not inform the church of these molestations for almost eight months after the discovering of Sitler’s criminally predatory behavior. [SR pp 2-3]
Sitler, after being caught, repeatedly lies to both law enforcement, courts, counselors, and Wilson. Wilson believes him. [SR pp 12-15]
Wilson is on record for advocating the death penalty for child molesters.
While Sitler is incarcerated, Wilson writes a letter to Judge Stegner urging “limited and measured penalties.” [SR pp 283-284]
Sitler is released on probation. A Christ Church elder romantically sets Sitler up with a young woman in his church. Wilson approves of this marriage, calls it wise, and marries the couple. To this day, he maintains that marrying this couple was the wise and righteous thing to do. [SR pp 18-22]
Wilson marries the couple with the knowledge that they plan on having children. [SR p 29]
Wilson cites marriage as having a therapeutic effect that could assist Sitler. [SR pp 28-29]
After Sitler and his wife have a child together, civil and ecclesiastical officers allow him to cohabitate with his wife and child with the understanding that he can’t, effectively, function as a father or ever be left alone with the child. His wife, though entirely partial, is made an official chaperone of her husband. [SR pp 24-26]
Sitler fails multiple polygraph tests. It is discovered that he had been having sexual fantasies about his young child, becoming sexually stimulated due to these fantasies, and engaging in physical contact with the child resulting in his sexual stimulation. The Idaho Department of Corrections calls these parole violations of a “heinous nature.” [SR pp 26-27]
Doug Wilson tasks the presiding ministers of the CREC to evaluate the pastoral ministry of Christ Church regarding the Sitler and Wight case. The Presiding Ministers’ Report includes multiple corrections for Wilson, including, “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.”
Soon after Wilson receives the PMR correctives, he publishes an article in which he seemingly disregards his denomination’s ministers’ counsel and mocks his fellow ministers. “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?”
The Shubin Report is required reading for anyone interested in discerning the truth of these two scandals. Though it is an intimidating 499-page long document, much of its size is due to the republication of various supporting documents and articles, including articles from Doug Wilson giving his defense. Shubin does a remarkable job of providing evidence for her claims and concerns while also providing contrary arguments for review. Instead of repeating the Shubin Report’s work, I encourage all those who want to know more to dig into this document.
See Rod Dreher here, here, and here to read a more brief analysis of this case.
Goring Ox and Failed Shepherds
One of the most common justifications for mishandling abuse cases in the Church is an appeal to grace and Christ’s forgiveness of sins. Though these concepts are very real and very significant, we must realize that God’s grace, as well as the grace we are commanded to show to others, does not lessen the temporal standards of justice. Nor does an orthodox understanding of grace remove all earthly consequences of our sin. Though we may be uncomfortable with this standard, even a spiritually redeemed murderer should be punished as a murderer. The same standard should apply to rapists, child molesters, or any criminal who comes to Christ or repents while in prison. Our state of salvation does not change earthly justice. Though I rejoice that evil men come to the Lord, as I am also a sinful man, justice is not served if their punishment is negated due to a spiritual awakening. This dynamic is especially true with capital crimes such as murder, manstealing, or rape. Part of true repentance is the willingness, even the insistence, that justice is served.
According to God’s Law, what is the point of civil punishments such as financial restitution or the death penalty? The secular and modernist justice system is entirely geared towards rehabilitation. It is criminal-focused. A genuinely repentant murderer, then, could be seen as someone due temporal mercy. Since he is allegedly rehabilitated, he can be released. However, God’s justice is fundamentally penal. It is about paying back and making right what was wronged. Theonomic justice is victim-centered. From this perspective, a criminal that professes Christ and says that they are very sorry must still pay back the just restitution for their crimes; it is not primarily about the criminal and his/her heart. It is about the victim. Rehabilitation and the restoration of criminals is certainly one facet of God’s prescribed penology, but it is secondary and never comes at the expense of neglecting justice. While we can be and should be genuinely joyful about the spiritual redemption of a sexual predator of little children, justice has not been paid till he has been put to death. Though pastor Wilson urged the judge in the Sitler case to be lenient, I agree with Wilson’s other [public statements] that justice would have been death. I cannot reconcile this discrepancy. Though Wilson has argued that “limited and measured” does not mean lenient [p 202], surely we can discern that Wilson did not have the very much justified death penalty in mind when he typed “limited and measured.” Civil magistrates determine civil punishment; however, it is the sacred right and duty for ministers of God’s Word to prophetically call on the magistrate to establish justice. Wilson called on the magistrate to neglect justice.
In a society that does not recognize God’s standards of civil justice, the Church will inevitably be forced to deal with the possibility of repentant men and women guilty of capital crimes seeking fellowship. When men like Steven Sitler are brought back into Christian fellowship because of their alleged repentance, the question now is, how does the Church deal with such a person? This question is not directly answered in scripture, but Biblical principles could and should apply.
In the book of Exodus, there is case law regarding a violent animal. This text, of course, does not apply perfectly, but it does shed light on the severity of bloodshed.
“When an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the ox shall not be liable. But if the ox has been accustomed to gore in the past, and its owner has been warned but has not kept it in, and it kills a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death.” - Exodus 21:28-29
In this case law, the violent animal is promptly put to death. The bloodshed of Image Bearers clearly outweighs the animal’s life and the property of the animal’s owners. In the first case, the violent animal does not have a past reputation for violence. Because of this, the owners are not liable. However, if the animal has a violent reputation (perhaps just hurting a person or being noticeably overly-aggressive towards other animals), the owners are responsible. They are liable to a degree as if they did the killing themselves. This principle points to the weight of responsibility and stewardship placed upon those who have jurisdiction over animals proven to be violent.
How can this principle be applied to a child molester who escaped justice? There are obvious points of disconnect:
The molester is not an animal.
The molester has, according to his confession of faith at least, been made new by regeneration, which is something not available to an ox.
The molester does not have owners.
However, even given these essential distinctions, there is much to be learned from the Goring Ox Principle.
First, reputation matters. The past matters. Yes, for the believer, our sins are as far away as the east is from the west (Psalm 103:12). But we must keep our categories straight if we are to speak intelligently and Scripturally about this issue. Soteriologically, our sins are paid for. The debt is paid. There is no longer any condemnation for those who are in Christ (Romans 8:1). But these texts are talking about soteriology; they are not speaking civilly or temporally. Think about it this way. If an unregenerate man steals your car and then wrecks it, after being apprehended he confesses Christ as Lord, it is justice to let him go free without paying restitution? Again, according to the Law/Word of God, justice is not primarily focused on the criminal’s rehabilitation, but rather it is focused on the victim’s rights. According to these principles, although the sins of the child predator may be forgiven by Christ, the consequences of that sin in the here-and-now remain. Reputation, especially a violent and predatory reputation, matters according to the Law of God. The consequences of that reputation will change according to the crime and the social situation. In the case of a fixated child molester, constant supervision, impartial chaperones, and not cohabitating with a child are bare minimum and common-sense requirements.
Second, those who have advocated for and who are jurisdictionally over the child predator have a great deal of responsibility and possibly even liability. This is not the same degree of liability because the relationship is not property to the owner; instead, the relationship is congregant to elder. This is a substantial difference in authority. Property holders exercise dominion over their land and property, while elders and church leaders do not exercise sovereignty over their congregants. What can and should be applied, however, is a strict call for greater care and diligence in the discipleship of the child molester, but more important, care for those who could be adversely affected by the molester; whether that effect is physical harm or whether that effect is social or legal.
The elder who vouches for and is pastorally over the sexual predator has a goring ox in his care. Yes, pastorally care for and minister to that “ox,” but be diligent in watching out for others’ good concerning the child molester. The Christ Church elder session should have done everything within their ecclesiastical jurisdiction to ensure the innocent’s safety. The session failed in this task. They did not ensure that Sitler did not cohabitate with a potential victim. They did not ensure that Sitler’s chaperone was impartial and able to do her job (his chaperone being his wife, who had every reason not to report facts faithfully). The Church does not have the jurisdiction to make these legal decisions, but the Church does have the authority to discipline those who refuse common-sense regulations for the sake of innocent children. Though Christ Church chaperones Sitler while attending services, it is unclear if they ever recommended any further restrictions. They certainly did not do so formally, and it never became a matter of church discipline. An appeal to liberty, in this case, is vain and unwarranted. When justice has been neglected to this degree, limitations on freedom are not extreme and should be joyfully accepted by a repentant man.
So, in the case of a pastor advocating for leniency of a seemingly repentant pedophile and molester, we should be mindful of these categories and principles. Pastor Doug Wilson advocated against the Theonomic standards and helped secure the release of this pedophile. Wilson and the Christ Church session then helped set up a marriage for this man and personally wed a sexual predator to a woman in the church. The sad conclusion to this story is that this seemingly repentant pedophile sexually molested the child he had with the woman Wilson married him to. Wilson consistently defended the criminal and minimized the possible victims and actual victims. He had a goring ox in his care, and he supported and actively participated in putting innocents in the path of this violent and perverse man. The result was the sexual molestation of a child. Though I commend the attempt to care for a man such as Sitler pastorally, we must not put the pastoral needs of Sitler above the safety of children. The ministerial grace and blessings the church gives the greatest of sinners must not result in the devouring of the flock.
Even recently, Doug Wilson is engaging in minimization with his often-repeated Motte and Bailey fallacy tactics. He minimized the Sitler scandal into merely marrying a sinner. It grieves me that so many are convinced by this sort of bait n’ switch, but it grieves me even further that pastor Wilson has yet to acknowledge the consequences of his and Christ Church’s actions.
The goring ox was allowed access to the flock, and an innocent lamb was harmed. The shepherd must take responsibility. Doug Wilson must take responsibility. Christ Church elders must take responsibility. They have not done so.
The Oath of God
In Martin Selbrede’s excellent essay, Liberty from Abuse, he makes the case that pastors who fail to protect their flocks are unfit to remain shepherds. This position seems like an obvious conclusion, but it should not be taken for granted. Far too often, celebrity pastors are held to a far lower standard than “normal” pastors and an even lower standard than secular leaders. While any business executive would have been forced to resign after similar scandals that happened under his watch, celebrity pastors’ common appeal to a false grace is used as their scapegoat away from responsibility. Since there’s “grace” for predators, shepherds are freed from their burden to protect the flock. These church leaders, so they say, have no other choice but to allow predators freedom and liberty. But God is not to be mocked.
“Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: As I live, declares the Lord God, surely because my sheep have become a prey, and my sheep have become food for all the wild beasts, since there was no shepherd, and because my shepherds have not searched for my sheep, but the shepherds have fed themselves, and have not fed my sheep, therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: Thus says the Lord God, Behold, I am against the shepherds, and I will require my sheep at their hand and put a stop to their feeding the sheep. No longer shall the shepherds feed themselves. I will rescue my sheep from their mouths, that they may not be food for them.” - Ezekiel 34:7-10
While Wilson and Christ Church loudly set up a plethora of media organizations and continue to gain influence, money, and esteem, wolves have preyed upon the flock under their care. Selbrede notes that this text answers the question of what to do with a shepherd who lets a predator devour his flock.
“How, precisely, does God save His flock so that they should no more be subject to the shepherds who have inflicted harm on the sheep? The answer once again is found in verse 10: God calls for the permanent removal of such shepherds from their office. Then the sheep can never again fall prey to the men who have violated the trust that God has reposed in them as leaders of His people.”
Are we going to take the oath of God in Ezekiel seriously? Selbrede makes a strong case from 2 Kings, Isaiah, and Hebrews that God’s oath in Ezekiel is eternal and abiding. Selbrede also makes the case that this oath from God is essentially staking the existence of himself, God Almighty, on this matter of justice.
“It naturally follows that God’s policy respecting shepherds who harm the flock is immutable. God has staked His Own existence on the eternality of His counsel as set forth in such passages.
If we decide that what God has laid down as an eternal rule in Ezekiel 34 no longer applies, having been somehow superseded by something else, God’s oaths mean nothing: He simply doesn’t mean what He says. The Lord’s words of confirmation are no better than the popular self-maledictory oath uttered by children: “Cross my heart and hope to die, stick a needle in my eye.”
For Christians who accept the word of God as The Word of God, His oaths should be to them “an end of all strife,” putting the matter being confirmed beyond any debate or dispute. We would then treat the confirmed matter with as much solemnity as God showed in putting His Own existence on the block to verify that His pronouncements have permanent validity.”
Do we fear God, Christian? Do we take God’s oath seriously? Do we take God’s Law seriously? Do we shrug at the command that elders should be above reproach (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6–7)?
Conclusion
In the aftermath of the Ravi Zacharias scandal, many in the Church were left wondering how his longtime predatory behavior was allowed to continue. Though some of us raised the alarm over three years ago, the vast majority of Christendom ignored those warnings and even scorned those warnings. It was common, immediately after the Ravi scandal had solidified, for Christian thinkers to warn against enabling good ol’ boy networks and Christian celebrity culture. Many warned about a lack of financial transparency, questionable integrity, yes men, sycophants, a lack of real ecclesiastical accountability, the failure to take responsibility, and many more relevant indicators of something rotten. Brothers and sisters, it is easy to write about such red flags after the dust has settled and there’s dozens and dozens of victims. Though the sins may differ and the circumstances may differ, the same loyalist good ol’ boy network and celebrity culture that protected Ravi is thick in Moscow, Idaho. I have lost count of how many times I have been named a slanderer for stating provable facts about the Sitler case. Any criticism is immediately taken as slander, and further ridicule is always right behind that accusation. How I am “slanderous” is never addressed, but, indeed, my criticism (and the criticism of many others) is automatically slander to a great many of the devoted loyalists. This is the behavior of those taken in by a cult of personality. This is textbook celebrity culture. But I get it. I was once there, myself, and it took some time to break loose.
Friends, pay attention to the culture surrounding Moscow. Are they correctable? Are they teachable? Are they above reproach? As I said before, it took me a very long time to finish and then publish this essay. I did not want to write it, but I fear God, and I fear that the name of Christ is being tarnished again and again because we refuse to clean our own house. Not only has Doug Wilson and Christ Church besmirched the reputation of Christ and his Church, but they are also setting an example for hundreds of other ministers and churches. Most of us have no formal jurisdiction regarding these matters, but we do have the right and duty to speak plainly and truthfully. We have our voice, and we should use it. Enough is enough.
Doug Wilson and Christ Church elders, you are unfit. For the name of Christ, the unity of the Body, and the Glory of God, step down and submit yourselves to elders that can minister to you faithfully. Elders who are not connected to Christ Church ecclesiastically or through its various business endeavors. We do not need your leadership, books, podcasts, blogs, schools, or ministries. Get jobs. Quietly and faithfully serve others. Do not seek to build your brands. And for all other elders and pastors who are likewise unqualified, do the same. For the sake of your souls and the crown rights of King Jesus, step down and humble yourselves. There has been enough reproach brought upon the Bride of Christ.
If you are in an emotionally, spiritually, physically, or sexually abusive church or home, you are not alone. Know that the abuse you are under is not okay, and you are not called to submit under the tyranny of narcissistic and manipulative men or women. I may not always be able to assist you directly, but I do know people and churches who can. There are Christian churches that offer grace and safety to victims as opposed to their predators. There is hope, safety, and healing in Christ. Please reach out.