Think Al Capone Part 3

I want to revisit Douglas Wilson’s ex parte meeting with two Latah County commissioners in April 2005, when he served notice that revoking any more tax exemptions from his empire would be “a very expensive mistake.” As a reminder, here are excerpts from his statement:

If that is the case and if there are people in town who have had a very public vendetta against us for personal or ideological reasons of their own, my concern, which I wanted to express to you all, face to face, is that the mechanism of the law should not be used, or should not be allowed to be used, as a cat’s paw for fulfilling personal, settling personal scores. That sort of thing, it appears to me, would be a flagrant example of applying the law selectively. So in other words the “exclusive use,” the particular interpretation of “exclusive use” that you all decided on in the last go round, is now in appeal. That understanding of “exclusive use” must apply to all tax-exempt entities in Moscow or Latah County and not just to those entities that have me sitting on the board. . . . But I think we should all agree that the law should not just be applied to those who are the brunt of the animosity of a handful of people in town who want to run ’em out of town and who want to use the zoning requirements, the Latah County commissioners, or the Board of Adjustors, the Idaho State Attorney General, there was a complaint filed against me there on another thing. I don’t think that that should be — I think that should be recognized and I wanted to appear before you face to face and tell you face to face that that is my fundamental concern. I think it opens Latah County up to a great deal of exposure if the law is applied selectively in that way and I simply wanted to tell you that. . . . I guess the thing I wanted to say is that monsters don’t shrink when you feed them. And I believe it is your responsibility to not just look at the letter of the law, what’s going on in the law but also to look at the town and see what’s happening in town. The animosity, the ideological agenda that’s directed against us, is open, public; the archives of Vision 20/20 are there for anybody to read and in the last two years our adversaries have been overt about what they want to do; they want to run us out of town and they are using every device that they can get their hands on to do that. . . . But the fact remains that there is a de facto situation on the ground where a year later the tax exemptions that have been removed have been from our two entities; the next two that are threatened are two entities that I sit on the board of and I just wouldn’t want Latah County to make a very expensive mistake. And that’s why I wanted to appear.

First, notice how Wilson set the stage for his monologue by fabricating the existence of enemies in town who had a “vendetta” not against him but against “us,” i.e. the Christ Church Cult, and notice the language he used to describe this so-called vendetta:

. . . there are people in town who have had a very public vendetta against us for personal or ideological reasons . . . settling personal scores . . . . monsters don’t shrink when you feed them . . . . The animosity, the ideological agenda that’s directed against us, is open, public; the archives of Vision 20/20 are there for anybody to read and in the last two years our adversaries have been overt about what they want to do; they want to run us out of town and they are using every device that they can get their hands on to do that.

While this “enemies are out to get me” scenario is a complete fabrication of the Fearless Leader’s imagination, it nevertheless constitutes the warp and woof his worldview. The man cannot exist without enemies, real or imagined, and these enemies — these “monsters” — fuel his constantly growing paranoia. Of course, the truth is that no one ever wanted to run the Kult out of town; two citizens challenged the property-tax exemption of two entities in the kingdom of Doug. But the Great Protector had to fabricate this state of affairs to successfully hornswoggle the commissioners, which leads to the next point.

Second, notice that Wilson’s discourse assumes and concedes that his two entities are violating the tax code, which is why he warned them about “applying the law selectively” and that it “must apply to all tax-exempt entities in Moscow or Latah County and not just to those entities that have me sitting on the board.” In other words he said this: “Sure I’m breaking the law, but so is everyone else!” Unfortunately, he didn’t cite any examples of other churches in violation of the tax code, most likely because they don’t exist apart from his imagination. (BTW: the “you’re singling me out” argument is just more paranoia; try using it the next time a cop pulls you over for speeding.) But the point is that Wilson understood that his entities were violating the law and instead of bringing them into conformity, he saw fit to threaten the Latah County commissioners — “Don’t you dare revoke my exemption!”

On a secondary level it’s clear that he was warning the commissioners that if they held him accountable to obey the law, then in his mind they would be joining hands with the unnamed persons who wanted to run his cult out of town. This is really quite amazing when you think about it. He framed a bizarre circumstance for the commissioners where if Latah County compelled his entities to obey the law, then in his mind they were guilty of participating in the vendetta against him to run him out of town. Talk about paranoid. And remember that this is about property tax — the same tax that his entities would not have to pay if they simply obeyed the law. Nevertheless, this is one example in a long list of examples of the Fearless Leader’s contempt for authority, which he couches as personal animosity against him if he must submit to it. Consequently, he would rather threaten the Latah County commissioners with legal action than obey the law and “lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty” (1 Tim. 2:2).

Third, notice how Wilson twists the purpose of the law from an instrument appointed by God to protect society from evildoers into an instrument used by Wilson’s enemies to harass him, when he said, “the mechanism of the law should not be used, or should not be allowed to be used, as a cat’s paw for fulfilling personal, settling personal scores.” This is so perverted. If Wilson simply obeyed the law then there is no “cat’s paw” to “settle personal scores,” as he put it. But don’t miss this: in Wilson’s scenario he — the lawbreaker — is the righteous man and his enemies — the law keepers — are the evildoers. Now consider St. Paul’s instruction:

Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor. (Rom. 13:2–7)

In his perversion Wilson turned every single principle in this entire directive on its head when he threatened the Latah County commissioners against upholding the law during his ex parte meeting with them. How true are the Apostle’s words: “sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4).

Finally, please notice that according to the CRE minutes, the Fearless Leader did not take exception to chapter XXIII section IV of the Westminster Confession of Faith, which states:

It is the duty of people to pray for magistrates, to honor their persons, to pay them tribute or other dues, to obey their lawful commands, and to be subject to their authority, for conscience’ sake. Infidelity, or difference in religion, does not make void the magistrates’ just and legal authority, nor free the people from their due obedience to them. (“Of the Civil Magistrate”)

Now, it’s no surprise that Wilson didn’t note his exception during his so-called examination, because in the end he recognizes no authority save his own, and since he threatened the civil magistrate with retribution if they opposed his will, what do you think he would do to the monkey boys who examined him if they found him anything other than “robustly orthodox”? The Great Protector had no authority over the Latah County commissioners when he threatened them, which doesn’t remove his intent to intimidate; however, he had absolute authority over the monkey boys who examined him and he could ruin any one of them without notice if they made the mistake of dissenting from the groupthink — or to use his words, “It opens them up to a great deal of exposure.” And if you think about it, someone in Al Capone’s position wouldn’t have it any other way.

Thank you.