[Vision2020] Schwaller the Reductio

Wed May 16 06:49:46 PDT 2007

Schwaller whiffs again, this time minimizing the impact of Wilson's influence on his devotees when he wrote,

"For your example to hold up, Mr Sitler .  .  .  would need to have seen Doug Wilson .  .  .  in the act of molesting children, then justify his actions by saying "Well Doug did it, it must be OK for me to do it."  Since this was not the case, Doug Wilson cannot be held accountable for Mr Sitler's actions, in the sight of man, of law, or of God."

Of course, this is absurd because it ignores the overwhelming testimony of Scripture, which clearly holds teachers to a higher standard, "for in many things [they] offend all" (James 3:1, ff).  And the "many" includes the all the little things that encompass a man's doctrine and that illustrate his sermons on a daily basis.  Consider these examples of the influence of Wilson's doctrine on Steven Sitler:

Pedophiles rely on manipulative deceit to capture and silence their victims, and Steven Sitler sat under the master of manipulation — Douglas Wilson — when he preyed in Moscow.  Rest assured that by reading Wilson's blog and observing his interaction with the public, Sitler learned cunning beyond measure.  Yes, indeed, he watched his pastor twist other's words into meaning something that no one intended, in order to manipulate them into giving him what he wanted (do kirkers really believe the stories that Wilson peddles about Duck? He fabricated every one of them while he applied enormous economic and emotional pressure on the Schulers, hoping they'd cave).  Sitler learned from Wilson how to create opportunities by misrepresentation and then pounce on weakness the moment he saw it.  And not ironically, Sitler arrived in Moscow in fall 2003, just in time to witness Wilson and Jones deceitfully manipulate the thesis of "Southern Slavery As It Was" into a book about
 non-violent emancipation.  He saw Wilson dismiss the capital crime of manstealing and manipulate its proceeds — slavery — into a "life of plenty."  Wilson taught him how to manipulate words so that oppressive slaveholders became "noble Christians" and stolen labor became a lifestyle of "mutual affection."  Yes, know for sure that Wilson taught Sitler the deceitful art of manipulation.

Pedophiles are typically narcissists and Sitler sat under the poster child of narcissism — Douglas Wilson — during his stay in Moscow.  Indeed, his parents educated him on the Wilson classical model, praising all things Wilson, with the hope they could send him to New Saint Andrews College where he could fawn over every word that fell from the master's lips.  And as saw the master encourage the worshiping multitudes to adore him, know for sure that he learned self-love exceeds self-denial as the preeminent Christian virtue.  

Pedophiles act in contempt of all law — God's and man's — in order to obtain their desires, and Sitler's 18 months in Moscow forever embedded the principle in his mind that if the law stands in your way, break it.  Steven Sitler was an eyewitness to Douglas Wilson's public defiance of state property tax law as well as the City Zoning Code, and he learned firsthand that Christian dominion Wilson-style provides for self-willed antinomianism, if necessary.  Wilson taught Sitler that the law does not represent a gift from God, rather it is a tool of the godless intoleristas to persecute the godly kirkers whose reign shall be for ever and ever.  No doubt Wilson's wholesale contempt for authority encouraged Sitler to disdain any authority who would check his impulses.  (If you disagree with this assertion, please show me one example in the last five years where Wilson exemplified humble Christian submission to the civil magistrate pursuant to Romans 13.)

Finally, pedophiles see children not as humans but as objects, and the most important lesson that Steven Sitler learned in Moscow was in the field of anthropology.  Douglas Wilson taught Steven Sitler to take joy and satisfaction in dehumanizing and humiliating human beings made in the image of God.  And just as Wilson strips people of their dignity, taking sadistic pleasure in flaying them alive with his serrated edge, so Sitler stripped children of their dignity, scarring them for life with his naked flesh.  No surprise that victims of pedophiles usually suffer acute shame — inexplicable feelings of humiliation and embarrassment — as a result of their molestation.  And Sitler learned the chief article of his faith in Moscow, Idaho, where Douglas Wilson, pastor of Christ Church, taught him the ABCs of dehumanization.  (This is also perhaps the best explanation that accounts for kirkers' lack of horror at Sitler's crimes; Wilson has successfully desensitized them from
 feeling compassion for their fellowmen.  They are "without natural affection.")

No, Christian doctrine is not limited to a set of credos; rather, it is a system of beliefs lived out each day.  And while Douglas Wilson never approved of pedophilia or taught Steven Sitler how to rape a child, he certainly helped the serial pedophile hone the deviant personality traits necessary to commit the unspeakable, and Wilson did it in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.  Welcome to Christ Church, Moscow.

Herodotus

----- Original Message ----
From: Glenn Schwaller <vpschwaller at gmail.com>
To: J Ford <privatejf32 at hotmail.com>; vision2020 at moscow.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 1:46:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Question for Mr. Schwaller

Ms Ford

I think what Paul meant by these verses is that if "someone with a
weak conscience" commits a sin because he has seen you (with a strong
conscience) commit that sin, then you will be held accountable for his
sin.  For your example to hold up, Mr Sitler (weak conscience) would
need to have seen Doug Wilson (strong conscience) in the act of
molesting children, then justify his actions by saying "Well Doug did
it, it must be OK for me to do it."  Since this was not the case, Doug
Wilson cannot be held accountable for Mr Sitler's actions, in the
sight of man, of law, or of God.  Could Doug Wilson have handled
things in a better way?  I think so.  Could law enforcement have
handled things in a better way? I think so.  Could everyone involved
in this have handled it in a better way?  I think so.  But were any of
these individuals or groups responsible for Mr Sitler's actions?  I
think not.

As far as "proof" of Doug Wilson pronouncing Mr Sitler as "cured", I
have not seen the document to which you refer, but I will look for it.
I suspect, as in Paul's letter to the Corinthians which you cite,
there is some fairly important "stuff" before and after the parts you
selected which may put things in a different context.

Schwaller

"Once upon a time there were cannibals; there are no cannibals any more"
     Mark Knopfler (and maybe Jonathan Swift as well . . .)

On 5/15/07, J Ford <privatejf32 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Wilson is accountable to God for what he teaches and who he harms, and
> certainly for any deficit in how he handled, and continues to handle,
> Sitler's situation.  But he is not accountable for Sitler's actions."
>
> Then how do you account for:
>
> 1 Corinthians 8:9-12 (New International Version)
> New International Version (NIV)
>
> 9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a
> stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if anyone with a weak conscience sees
> you who have this knowledge eating in an idol's temple, won't he be
> emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? 11 So this weak
> brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. 12 When you
> sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you
> sin against Christ.
>
> Just saying.............
>
>
>
> J  :]
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: keely emerinemix <kjajmix1 at msn.com>
> >To: Bob Herodotus <bherodotus at yahoo.com>, <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Question for Mr. Schwaller
> >Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 08:46:23 -0700
> >
> >
> >
> >Mr. Herodotus raises some interesting points in framing the debate about
> >the release of Steven Sitler and the community's response to it, including
> >Tom Hansen's and Wayne Fox's use of hyperbole to express their horror at
> >the idea that an untrained pastor can confidently conclude that Sitler is
> >"repentant," much less "cured."I caught some flack offlist  for writing a
> >few days ago that I was not qualified  to judge the sincerity of Sitler's
> >remorse and repentance.  I believe that still, just as I believe that no
> >one else but Steven Sitler is qualified to or capable of judging his
> >conscience -- not Doug Wilson, not Sitler's parents, not the judge, the
> >attorney, his best friend, or anyone other than the God he is accountable
> >to.  And while this is of interest to those of us who think in terms of
> >spirituality and theology, it likely isn't of interest to anyone else,
> >because repentance and remorse (and regeneration and redemption), while
> >eternal in nature and scope, are entirely different from law.  It is the
> >law and the circumstances surrounding Sitler's crimes, incarceration, and
> >release that ought rightly to concern every one of us.Just as I'm not able
> >to say whether or not Sitler is genuinely remorseful for his unspeakable
> >crimes against children -- not against "heads of households," but against
> >children -- I am also unable to judge if he is a psychopath or a sociopath
> >or if he's sick in ways that perhaps defy definition.  I'd rather not
> >speculate about the link to Wilson's teachings and the Kirk culture Sitler
> >was surrounded by and, in doing so, conclude that actual guilt for his
> >crimes is anyone's other than Sitler's.  That's wrong; besides, it misses
> >the point by focusing on Doug Wilson and not on the error and ugliness of
> >the theology itself.  This is what I was responding to in J Ford's post --
> >that there was a link, and thus a defined moral culpability, on the part of
> >Wilson and those from Christ Church who counseled Sitler.  I felt the post
> >was near-slanderous and otherwise unhelpful to the larger debate, and I
> >preferred then, as I do now, to focus on the legal aspects of Sitler's
> >culpability and correction while leaving the spiritual and moral aspect of
> >his professed remorse in front of an entirely different judge.  The parlor
> >game of "is he more sick than evil, or more evil than sick?", has not even
> >the value of a spirited game of gin rummy with the added toxin of gossip
> >and rumormongering.  I won't play it.I would rather focus on the truly
> >awful handling of Scripture and the bullying behavior toward his community
> >demonstrated by Doug Wilson.  I believe I've made it pretty clear that I
> >find most of Wilson's peculiar teachings and most of his public comportment
> >highly objectionable.  I also believe that bad theology -- and that by the
> >standard of Scripture, not my own sensibilities -- inevitably leads to bad
> >practice, and a continued emphasis on patriarchy, male hierarchical
> >headship, unbalanced submission and a church culture that appears to value
> >covenant over character may have made it easier for Sitler to do what he
> >would have eventually done anyway.  Still, if Wilson's teachings removed
> >some moral barricade that might have slowed him down, the nature of
> >pedophilia requires us to acknowledge that Sitler would have finished the
> >race regardless.  Wilson is responsible for a lot of harm because of his
> >teachings; they've taken root in people who bear accountability for any
> >tangible harm they've done to others because of their application.  Wilson
> >is accountable to God for what he teaches and who he harms, and certainly
> >for any deficit in how he handled, and continues to handle, Sitler's
> >situation.  But he is not accountable for Sitler's actions.  I wish Steven
> >Sitler weren't released, no matter how sincere he is.  I remain unalterably
> >opposed to the death penalty, I do pray for Sitler and for his victims, and
> >I continue in my skepticism that this was handled as well as it should have
> >been while steadfastly believing Doug Wilson to be naive at best in gauging
> >the depth of Sitler's remorse.   Why this hasn't caused people to bolt from
> >the Kirk is beyond me.  If I were considered, as a married woman, not
> >worthy by my elders of receiving direct and timely information regarding
> >any possible threat to my children, both Jeff and I would raise the roof
> >and level the foundation.  I believe acquiescence to error leads to
> >acquiescence to evil, and those who think they're being persecuted because
> >of their allegiance to Jesus might reexamine their loyalties and find that
> >blind acceptance of error and arrogance stems not from following Christ,
> >but from following those who amass titles and accolades in His name.keely>
> >Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 07:39:20 -0700> From: bherodotus at yahoo.com> To:
> >vision2020 at moscow.com> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Question for Mr.
> >Schwaller> > Dear Mr. Schwaller,> > You would have "staved off some
> >ignorance" and "offered up . . . factual information" if you had simply
> >replied, "We may never know," and even then you should not have qualified
> >your answer with the word "may" because we WILL NEVER KNOW what drives
> >Steven Sitler.  This is because the man is a psychopath, i.e. he has no
> >conscience and no compunction.  He lacks the moral capacity to feel right
> >and wrong — and he is aggressive.  One public record (which the court has
> >sealed) documented in explicit detail his rape of a two-year-old girl, in a
> >room immediately adjacent to a group of adults.  "Perhaps perhaps perhaps,"
> >you find this flip.  I do not; hence my inquiry about the website in
> >relation to the so-called apology.> > At best, Steven Sitler did not
> >comprehend that the photographs of victims on his website horrified normal,
> >decent human beings, which is another way of noting that he is twisted at
> >levels no one understands.  Consequently, "'cured' is not an option."  And
> >as "cured" is not an option, then it follows that no one can ever trust him
> >under any circumstance, which probably accounts for his constant need to
> >have a chaperon, i.e. a court-appointed guardian who will insure that he
> >does not wander near children.  And if the man is so untrustworthy that
> >even "a distressed result from a polygraph is going to bring P&P and the
> >court down on him like a ton of Logos Bricks," then it follows that no one
> >should believe a word he says, which includes his apologies.  Besides,
> >somehow the words, "I'm sorry I molested your baby," just don't cut it.> >
> >So it is laughable that you attribute remorse, "even if it was not 100%
> >heartfelt," to a psychopath, and if this was not so serious it would be
> >downright hilarious that you manipulated this seeming remorse into cause
> >for demanding an apology from community members who expressed shock at the
> >probation of a serial pedophile.> > Since you represent yourself as new to
> >the listserv, let me tell you a story. Years ago, Pastor Douglas Wilson
> >used to berate this list with the question, "By what standard?"  I say
> >"used to" because after hectoring and haranguing the community with his
> >fixed biblical standard, he proved himself a textbook hypocrite when he
> >applied a relative standard to justify the unbiblical thesis of his book
> >"Southern Slavery As It Was."  It was really quite amusing, though the
> >amusement didn't last long.  The poor fool ran from here faster than you
> >can say "Edna."> > I call these historical facts to your attention, Mr.
> >Schwaller, to ask you two questions:  First, by what standard do you
> >attribute "some modicum of sincerity" to an apology delivered by the
> >psychopath Sitler?  and by what standard do you ask Messieurs Fox and
> >Hansen to apologize?> > Bob Herodotus> > > > >        >

____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't get soaked.  Take a quick peak at the forecast
with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather