“That’s Doug”

A couple of months ago a friend called to observe that Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow, has successfully conditioned people across the country to create a special category, just for him, to accept his sin with a wink and nod, instead of delivering to him the appropriate biblical response. This is an excellent point that deserves everyone’s undivided attention, and I submit yesterday’s post to you as Exhibit A to help establish that this special category exists.

The Moscow–Pullman Daily News quoted Doug Wilson ascribing the word “nigger” to the Son of God because, according to Wilson, the Lord Jesus was using a racial insult to make a point or else He was simply using a racial insult.

If this front-page story had appeared with any other pastor’s name attached to it, the Christian church and the general population would have risen up with a unanimous voice to condemn the reprobate responsible for the blasphemy. And make no mistake: twisting Scripture to place a racial slur on the lips of the Savior of the world is blasphemy:

Question 113: What are the sins forbidden in the third commandment?
Answer: The sins forbidden in the third commandment are . . . misinterpreting, misapplying, or any way perverting the Word, or any part of it, to profane jests, curious or unprofitable questions, vain janglings, or the maintaining of false doctrines . . . the maligning, scorning, reviling, or anywise opposing of God’s truth, grace, and ways; making profession of religion in hypocrisy, or for sinister ends; being ashamed of it, or a shame to it, by unconformable, unwise, unfruitful, and offensive walking, or backsliding from it.

But when Wilson blasphemes, people shrug their shoulders and say, “That’s Doug,” as though those two words justify and account for what would be intolerably reprehensible behavior from anyone else.

I have more evidence to support this theory of the “special category,” which is part of a larger post. For now, however, I simply wanted to feed the hamster in your brains. And don’t get me wrong, as disgusted and appalled as he makes me, I take comfort knowing that “the Lord will not hold him guiltless that takes his name in vain . . . especially because he will be so far from acquitting and sparing the transgressors of this commandment, as that he will not suffer them to escape his righteous judgment, albeit many such escape the censures and punishments of men.”

Thank you.

The Sunday Funnies

As long as we’re on it, and we will be on it in our next TF post, here is what the Fearless Leader wrote vis-à-vis rape, disintegrating cultures, and the judgment of God:





Notice how he writes with such authority and unction, as though he really holds these convictions. Notice how he leaves the impression that he is committed to biblical standards and that he fears God.

Now notice this blog post that Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow, uploaded to Blog and Mablog exactly one week after Jamin Wight’s conviction. I republish it in entirety:

Yes, I Know There Are Many Godly Youth Ministers
Topic: Cartoon



Posted by Douglas Wilson - 5/19/2006 11:27:27 AM | Link to this post

Here’s the real punch line to the cartoon. Wilson concealed Jamin Wight’s crimes from the membership of Christ Church, Moscow, just as he hid Steven Sitler’s predations. Consequently, when he published this clever piece of art (which, by the way, he drew with his own hand; you can confirm this fact in the combox), all of his rabid disciples would have thought he was ridiculing the modern church, as usual, and implying that the Kult was immune from such carnal hustlers.

Again, notice how he leaves the false impression that his cult is above it all. Notice how he doesn’t acknowledge that his highly esteemed pupil who was studying for the ministry just dodged the mother of all bullets for rape, which was the major point of the plea bargain. (The other point was getting tagged as a “Sex Offender” in the State of Idaho; Wight had one of the best criminal attorneys in Moscow. In fact, I’m close with Moscow’s lone capital attorney who tells me that if he ever had to beat a rap, he would retain Wight’s attorney: “He’s a pit bull in court!”)

Back to point: Do you think that Wilson’s cartoon is funny? If the victim saw it, do you think she laughed? If the father whom Wilson threatened with discipline saw it, do you think he got a kick out of it? What kind of message do you think it sent to the victim family? What kind of message did it send to Wight, whom they never disciplined? What kind of message did it send to Wight’s classmates at Greyfriars Hall? Seriously, what happened to all that posturing about “God’s hand of judgment” being “heavy upon a people”? How does this tasteless image comport with Wilson’s written standards? Is there anything funny about “The Sunday Funnies”? You tell me.

Thank you.