For Shame

When Doug Wilson threatened to publish Natalie’s journal in a private email written September 28, he was doing something that he and many of his defenders have being doing for a decade and have since expanded on: attempted to shame her, attempted to vilify her, and attempted to insinuate that her current testimony is erroneous because she was, at one point, infatuated with the man who abused her. Or, alternately, because at one point, she believed the things Doug now believes about (many) abuse victims — namely, that they are to blame for their own abuse.

Shame is something church leaders have been using to invalidate the voices of those who criticize them since before Jesus called the Pharisees a den of vipers, whitewashed tombs, hypocrites, profiteers of religiosity, profaners of the temple who used God to make money from the pious.

ShameThe church leaders of the day knew well that “cursed is the man that hangs from the tree,” and they knew that the public nakedness and torture of the man who had opposed them would make him vulnerable, human, pitiful — nothing at all like a prophet or messiah was supposed to look. Nudity was particularly disgraceful in Jewish culture, and when he was hung up stripped for the world to see, the message was clear: here is your so-called holy man, humiliated. No holy man with the true words of God, with true power, would allow himself to be so ritualistically shamed. But, as it is written, he scorned this shame, because shame had no hold on him, no claim on him.

So remember, the attempt to publicly strip and humiliate says less about the testimony about the person being humiliated than it does about the person intent on this crucifixion.

And it is telling that Doug Wilson is attempting to crucify another in order to distance himself from questions about his own sins.

Doug has communicated in public, and also in private with Natalie, about things he has in his possession, specifically court records, claiming that she’s painting a one-sided picture that is “misleading and false.” Again, no specific mention of what is misleading and false; no attempt to detail what relevant legal material Natalie is leaving out of her public account. Even in private conversations to people he counseled and claims to be “protecting,” Doug can’t put his finger on what these legal details are.

And yet there are multiple people who say things like “I know things about this case that the general public doesn’t know,” insinuating that, in fact, Doug has told them things. Strange, given his inability to communicate these details to the actual relevant parties.

And I believe this is because Doug knows that, in actuality, there is no legally relevant material that Natalie is leaving out of her public account. Certainly there is none that he has shared with her.

The only legally relevant questions in reviewing the case is, 1. whether or not consent could be given by Natalie or her parents that would make what Jamin did not a crime (answer: no) and 2. whether Doug therefore had the authority to try to keep the case out of the courts and/or argue for leniency for Jamin (answer: no).

Doug’s repeated references to some top-secret thing that nobody knows that would change everyone’s minds is bizarre, to put it mildly. If Doug has information about the case that he kept from the courts, and, for example, Natalie’s parents are somehow legally to blame (he has said they are not, stating that what they did was not a crime) then he has a legal duty to tell the court. If, however, what he is talking about is not legally relevant, then why even mention it? Why insinuate that Natalie and her parents invited her rape, and pretend that this insinuation is all for the greater good, alluded to but not overtly said because Doug is such a great pastor and protector? In any case, the question Doug’s critics are asking isn’t “did everyone but Jamin do everything perfectly and would they do it just the same way given a second chance?” The question is “Did Doug Wilson overstep his pastoral authority by wrangling to keep this case from going to trial?” and “is he distracting us from this question by claiming or insinuating that the Greenfields created an environment where abuse could flourish?”

I agree, creating an environment where abuse can flourish is terrible. That’s why everyone is asking that Doug consider how his church handles abuse. That’s why there’s now a CREC inquiry into this very matter. That’s why other complementarians such as John Piper — or his lead pastor — have recently come out very strongly and very distinctly against abuse, stating clearly that putting the blame on the victim, or asking what sin they committed in the process, is the worst thing you can do in these situations.

So what did Doug detail in his September 28 letter to Natalie, if he couldn’t put his finger on anything she’d lied about? He wrote about embarrassing information that would humiliate her if it somehow leaked. Doug writes, “we have access to the love letters/journals that you wrote that the court reviewed and then sealed… it is not really possible to dig up just half the story. The rest of it is going to want to come up too. One of the official court documents says about some of the sealed evidence, that ‘those documents contain highly intimate and potentially embarrassing facts or statements, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to reasonable persons.’”

Those pesky stories with a mind of their own, banging against the outer walls of the manila folders Doug has kept for a decade.

Now, remember: Natalie is not Jamin’s only victim. A more recent victim made a public statement to the court during Jamin’s sentencing that you can listen to here regarding his felony strangulation of her. This most recent victim stated that she was not seeking vengeance for Jamin’s crimes, but wished that “the truth will be known about what he has done, that he will truly understand the damage he has caused, and that he will not be permitted to hurt anybody else.” She thanks friends for helping rescue her, the same families who left the church because of how her abuse case was handled. She speaks of emotional damage, the long-term psychological effects of her abuse and the help provided to her by those who told her that, contrary to what Jamin had told her, she was lovely, she was worth something, and the way he was treating her was not OK.

This is a full-grown woman. Her maturity did not prevent her from being a victim of Jamin’s abuse. Her maturity did not prevent her from believing the lies Jamin told her about herself. Her love for him did not prevent him from abusing her.

You would not — I pray you would not — look at this woman and say, “you are at least partially to blame for the fact that he strangled you, because you married him.” You would not say — I pray you would not — “you pushed his buttons, so you’re at least partially to blame here.” That would obviously be revolting.

This woman has suffered the effects of the choice in who she married and probably will on some level for the rest of her life — she doesn’t need to be dragged through the mud of public shame for speaking up and taking legal action against the man who abused her. We would never tap our chins and say, you know, we just don’t know the details of some letters she wrote to him once; we don’t have the elder minutes detailing detached men talking about her abuse. So we gotta hold off on passing judgment on this situation.

If Natalie’s case hadn’t been mangled so badly by pastoral meddling, Jamin would have potentially have been in jail longer or would have been disciplined more harshly within his own community, which would have made it harder for him to hurt another woman. Remember that, the next time you see someone demurring about Jamin’s crimes and pretending that the church handled Jamin Fiasco 1.0 so well that they’re guiltless of the fact that he snookered them a second time in Jamin Fiasco 2.0.

New Deplorable 7 copy
Click on image for one sample of the comments made about Natalie by Doug Wilson’s supporters.

So why is Natalie being drug through the mud for this? Why — why the hell — are Doug’s supporters writing reams upon reams of comments on Doug’s blog speculating about Natalie seducing Jamin as a 14-year-old and bringing this and other kinds of abuse upon herself? Jamin has been a repeat offender and has been described by the court as having a “high risk to reoffend.” He’s committed perjury. So why disbelieve Natalie’s words about him, especially when she describes his behavior to her in much the same terms as his most recent victim did? Why all the emphasis on “well, we don’t know all the facts, so she was probably to blame as well”? This is, frankly, so disgusting I feel physically ill reading it, and should give anyone wanting to send his or her daughters into the halls of Doug’s churches or schools serious pause. If Doug’s supporters are saying this about such a clear-cut abuser, what do you think they’d say if it was your 14-year-old daughter being abused? Especially by a man who didn’t have a count of felony strangulation to his name? What do you imagine they would do? A crowd of men who describe a repeat abuser in this way is not safe.

And it does not matter how many people in Doug Wilson’s community are good, kind and compassionate if the people defining and setting the tone for the way abuse is handled in this community are saying these things — dwelling on details that have no legal relevance whatsoever, designed to shame Natalie and anyone else who speaks up about the mishandling of abuse in the church. Claiming that even saying abuse was mishandled is “slander.” Pretending that the people leaving the church over the way abuse is handled are malcontents or don’t even exist. Refusing to openly address how abuse is handled, and instead collapsing onto the virtual fainting couch of faux-persecution, gasping out “calumny!” and popping up again to crow “bring me my Laphroaig; someone disagrees with me!”

Chalk that up to one more thing Doug has ruined for me: my favorite Scotch. For shame, Doug. Is nothing sacred?

86 thoughts on “For Shame

  1. Doug Wilson isn’t a real man. REAL MEN protect women and children. Doug Wilson is A TOTAL FAILURE. Doug Wilson is a disgrace to REAL MEN every where. Doug Wilson should just ‘fess up: “I am not a Real Man. I will step out of the way, shut up, and let the Real Men handle ‘business.'”

  2. Doug Wilson is a piece of shit. I feel like I want to beat him into a coma for his behavior to Natalie Greenfield. I won’t.. but believe me I want to. The man should be publicly horsewhipped.

  3. Eloquent and pointed, as always. The things Natalie, you, and others are bringing to light are challenging my instincts of how to be engaged with parties I have deep disagreements with. I have rubbed elbows with the Christ Church community as a natural part of being in this community for years, and I have always fancied that I would be able to find some good in everyone by going in without prior bias, and simply assuming good intentions. But, sometimes “assume good intentions” is a foolish act. I can bring good intentions and strive for good action; I can hope for good intentions and good actions from others; but assume nothing, because assuming good intentions can make us blind to bad.

    Technical note: I’m afraid I’m experiencing a problem with the image you provided – the thumbnail doesn’t seem to actually have a link attached to it.

  4. What could a 14 year old do, Doug Wilson? Could she be tall and therefore responsible for your preacher-in-training sexually abusing her, emotionally threatening her? No, of course not! You condemned Jamin (but she WAS tall!) What could she do to be guilty, Doug Wilson, to be shamed and blamed and threatened by you, a man who was charged with ministering Christ’s love. Why did you ask her to detail just what sexual acts she was guilty of later when she agreed to talk with you? Was it oral sex? Does this knowledge help you decide what prayer to pray for her? Just how sick can all this matter get before the people of the church stand up and say enough…. I won’t hold my breath.
    Oh wait, Doug Wilson knows secrets…. shhhh, everybody…. shhhhh…. Let us ‘prey’.

    1. Apparently in Doug’s world, a 14-year-old girl can be such a vile heathen temptress that a PASTOR IN TRAINING CAN’T CONTROL HIS NORMAL MANLY URGE TO MOUTH-RAPE HER.

      Meanwhile, in the real world, it’s anybody’s guess why Jamin hasn’t been shot yet. And it’s also anybody’s guess why nobody has seen fit to shove Doug’s Laphroaig bottle right up his ass, or between his teeth.

  5. Katie, I’d like to take a breath and say that I think you are doing a stellar job of covering this story, and that I am sickened by the intensity of my own outrage. This entire story is so appalling that it drives me to the edge of reason.

    Please do not hesitate to let me know if you would like me to dial my language back a notch for the sake of decorum. Honestly though, I am so furious with that stupid goddamn church and that stupid fat drunken pathetic excuse for a pastor that I don’t know any other way to express my infuriation without smashing things. I’m so sorry that this situation is as bad as it is, for the sake of Wight and Sitler’s victims. It’s unconscionable and it’s disgusting and no real man would ever have any of it. Doug Wilson nauseates me.

    1. I can’t speak for Katie. But what is going on is rage worthy. It’s sickening. I’m glad it is being exposed and hope that the power this man once had melts into nothingness.

    2. I feel your outrage, Dash.

      Take a bike ride. Maybe 100 miles.
      Play some guitar.

      Me? I think I need to go swim a couple of miles in the lap pool at the gym.

  6. Back when I used to blog I would point out how men like John Piper simply didn’t get abuse. I would be angry and say angry things about him and what he said but would eventually concede that, deep down, Piper was a decent sort. He just didn’t get abuse.

    I’d hardly ever bring up Wilson because I knew he was so far gone over the cuckoo edge he wasn’t worth my trouble.

    Until I found out that the movers and the shakers, like Piper, thought Wilson was some sort of brilliant, albeit misunderstood, theologian. I found this arrangement revolting.

    Bottom line: Doug Wilson IS so far gone over the cuckoo edge he shouldn’t be worth anybody’s trouble. He should have never been as big as he has been for as long as he has.

    I’m hoping Piper and other ‘leaders’ have learned their lesson. Wilson was not worth the trouble. He should have never had their respect.

    And whatever trouble Wilson is trying to make for Natalie now, may it roll off of her like water off a duck’s back. Though he had been a towering figure in her life at one time, I hope that he is or soon will become insignificant to her. I hope that he barely registers on her ‘worth the trouble’ meter.

    As Doug continues to try to make himself large and Natalie small, he only accomplishes the opposite. He is decreasing himself despite all his attempts. Natalie is the one that is rising up as the stronger, better person.

      1. I meant his lesson about how crazy-off-the wall Wilson truly is. I’ve long given up on Piper ever ‘getting’ the damage his own teaching does to men, women, children, and marriage. Sorry I didn’t make that clear.

        And according to the comment below by Melody, Piper isn’t going to get it after all.

        But there are others who see through their blustering errors and verbose misinformation.

      2. Glanced over Piper’s pipings. It’s the same ol’ rigmarole. It looks upon respect as some sort of cure all. But as usual, it completely ignores the fact that personality disorders and brain disorders might be in the mix. No amount of unconditional respect (or love) in the world can cure some marriage problems. That is, respect and love as defined by Piper and Wilson.

        Here is a response to this sort of teaching I had written some time back.
        (Apologies, Katie, if this appears to be shameful self promotion. It’s really just me tired of writing the same things over when I can just link to it to save space here and time in my life.)

    1. I wish John Piper had more sense, but the Desiring God website has a typically clichéd post on marriage dated October 17th 2015 by a Mr. Douglas Wilson. There are no words beyond despicable.

  7. Katie, could Doug be spinning so hard to try to obscure the New Saint Andrews boarding house scheme that seems to be a major factor in this issue? Doesn’t that scheme put kirkers into a kind of economic bondage, indebting them to CC and NSA and fostering potential abuse of the kind Sitler and Wight have perpetrated? If so, that makes Wilson, who concocted and enables the scheme to this day, directly culpable for “plowing the ground” in which these bad seeds have sprung up like weeds to choke out innocence and virtue. But if we focus on the “evils” of a 14-year-old girl, well, who will notice the framework within which the “evils” were hung?

    1. I think that Doug Wilson’s New Saint Andrews and Christ Church can be sued for negligence and other torts for not properly vetting these sex offenders that they placed in peoples’ homes and then children got sexually abused.

      Since entities usually have to have insurance to rent buildings or own them, I wonder what Wilson’s insurance company is thinking. Many churches are getting their coverage cancelled because the insurance companies can’t face the liability/irresponsibility of churches. The sexual abuse of minors is the No. 1 reason that churches get sued every single year according to attorney Richard Hammer at Church Law & Tax.

      Adding to the exposure for sexual abuse that Doug Wilson’s enterprises face, the Idaho Supreme Court issued a ruling in August 2015 permitting their state’s sexual abuse victims to sue beyond the normal statute of limitations.


    That is how Satan works. And Nancy and Douglas Wilson:

    Nancy’s threatens in that passive aggressive way that patriarchal led women learn too well, she says (threatens) on her blog:

    “As someone who knows the whole story, I don’t want to let people who know half the story tell lies on my blog. Nor do I want to engage in fruitless discussion with them.”

    i.e. “Don’t push it, sister, or I will tell secrets that you don’t want out there.”

    When Gary Greenfield wrote his recollection on Douglas Wilson’s blog he was threatened with,

    “You may want to stop now, before I have to tell things that should not be made public, but I will if I have to.”

    (Douglas Wilson removed the comment because?)

    And like Satan, Nancy is really adept at using scripture to beat you over the head (in that passive/aggressive Patriarchal way that she knows so well):

    ““Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you” (Matthew 5:11).”

    (And then imagine here more self- serving, self-aggrandizing, passive/aggressive verses)

    Cry me a river.

    And then somewhere in the midst of her whiney post, Nancy writes:

    “Slander is a slippery business, and it is entirely out of our hands. It is an evil work and God will judge it. The Lord never blesses those who spread falsehood, slander, and lies. “Whoever spreads slander is a fool” (Prov. 10:18b). It is far better to be wronged than to do wrong.”

    So, two questions:

    Q: What does Natalie gain in telling about her abuse? A: Nothing
    Q: What do Douglas and Nancy Wilson get by slandering Natalie? A: Their kingdom

    Hmmmm. Indeed, Nancy, slander is a slippery business.

    Shame and intimidation are the tactics that Satan loves to useand loves to see used.

    1. So, back over at Femina Girls, Nancy declared that Natalie’s father had been denied the Lord’s Supper at CREC, not because he had converted to the Orthodox faith as a CREC elder had explained online, but because he was abusive to his family. She also said “we believe” Natalie was in better spiritual condition back in 2006 [when she was suicidal] than she is now. Shortly after that she closed comments.

      I’m not a Christian, so maybe I just don’t understand how Christian love and communication are supposed to work, but golly.

      1. I saw that. Nancy is not doing the situation any favors. Gary is not an abusive personality; he is known by his children and hid friends as a tenderhearted individual whose world collapsed when his daughter was treated the way she was. But even if Gary was abusive, how the heck would that make Jamin not abusive? It boggles the mind.

      2. I also question why, if Gary was so bad, the elders were not confronting him BEFORE the whole abuse issue with Jamin and Natalie became exposed. If he was abusive, why was he allowed to board Greyfriars/NSA students?

        Nancy’s answer came off as smug, offhand and accusatory.

        This is all so very heartbreaking…to attribute others’ pain and the tearing apart of said family a ‘Large Dose of Blessing’ for oneself! 😦

      3. I suspect that by “abuse”, Doug/Nancy mean that Gary didn’t protect Natalie because he “let” the perp live with them. They might also mean that he was very angry when he found out about it, and cussed at people and also Doug. Plus perhaps (oh noes!) he threw things across a room.

        I recognize Doug’s kind of word-stretching. It’s like what my abusive pastor-father did. Unflappably, whenever intractable critics appear, he lies by twisting/distorting. He flips/stretches words central to critics’ arguments in an attempt to keep them off-balance.

        This particular lie-set only works when accompanied by, “You don’t know what I know”. One can easily see it is a feint because he never does tell. His excuse, “I am protecting hurt people by not telling all” really means “I am protecting myself from having to face that I’m not as correct as God.”

        That he’s threatened to publish a teen’s diary shows both the lie and the extent of his desperation. He’ll likely squeeze out of it because he has a stalwart bunch of supporters. But still, everybody knows, even the sycophants:

        Everybody knows that the boat is leaking
        Everybody knows that the captain lied
        Everybody got this broken feeling
        Like their father or their dog just died
        Everybody talking to their pockets
        Everybody wants a box of chocolates
        And a long-stem rose
        Everybody knows. (Cohen)

    1. That exact point has crossed my mind. Were it a 14-year-old boy, the perp would be in prison now and for the foreseeable future. No nice letters of support would have come from DW, asking the court to be sure that punishment to be ever so reasonable and certainly not too punitive. Or that it should be resolved with a cozy plea bargain, that amounted to a slap on the wrist.

      Katie, I’ve come back to this post because it was relevant back in October and more relevant, even prescient, here at the end of November, as DW sinks to ever sleazier depths. If he publishes all or parts of Natalie’s adolescent journal (his nuclear option), in what he fantasizes as his coup de grâce, I’ll, I’ll — actually I don’t know what I’ll do. Maybe drive to Moscow to pour out a full bottle of Laphroaig in front of him, or something.

  9. I really liked this post, but there’s just one (very minor) part I had a visceral “hell no” reaction to:

    “That’s why other complementarians such as John Piper ”

    Please don’t venerate John Piper as someone who’s “doing it right” in terms of counteracting abuse. This is the man who very famously said that women were obligated to endure abuse for a season (as long as the abuse were simply about hurting her instead of actively requiring her to sin). He later backtracked on that after getting deserved flak, but only to say that it was okay for women to seek help, but only as long as they did so while under proper biblical submission. So it’s okay for a woman to go to the police, but only because she is then under the symbolic headship of the civil authorities. There is no allowance made for a woman who might have to run away in the dead of night to save her life; my guess is that that’s too independent for someone like Piper.

  10. I finally got a chance to listen to the testimony of Jamin’s most recent victim.
    Heart rending.

    Now I’m curious about how the church handled her abuse case. apparently not well because you said, Katie, “She thanks friends for helping rescue her, the same families who left the church because of how her abuse case was handled.”

    Do you have any links or insight on that?

    1. Well, I’m working on getting specific details, but the church said it did a pretty good job handling the abuse case. More on that in a future post (Lord willing and the creek don’t rise).

  11. Katie, I tried to click on that blog comment section from Wilson’s blog, but nothing happened. Not sure if you can fix that.

  12. You are on fire! Thank you for providing such insightful coverage of this story. When you brought up the aspect of intimidation that people such as Doug use, by having this “hidden information” about the victim’s story that if leaked would “change everything”…. it was like you were describing the exact tactics of another father I know (who strangely also lives in the same city as D.W.). It’s so enlightening and freeing when you realize they really *don’t* have a hold over you. They are just bluffing. They are just counting on their intimidation continuing to give them the upper hand.

  13. I think Doug would have done this to me if he could have. He printed out a comment I wrote where I refer to my ex-abusive husband as “my dear husband” and had it given to me. It was as though he was saying, “See? See how you said kind things about him years ago? See how you referred to him as ‘dear’? Nope! No abuse here!” It was so disgusting and I almost felt violated. I was always trying to be a good wife . . . that was why I scoured his blog. I thought there were answers there. Oh, it disgusts me to think about it now . . .

    1. Ugh. I’m sorry. That’s such an abusive tactic in its own right.

      Doug reserves the right to redefine his own language whenever he wants: “measured and limited” does not mean “measured and limited,” but with others, he uses their words to try to lock them in and control them. Very ugly.

  14. Katie,

    What a totally lovely article, about a totally horrid mess.

    Doug Wilson is showing a total lack of sense. Or intelligence. His writings about Jamin are so fifties and forties that you’d think the man has entered a time warp, and was stuck there.

    I pity anyone who is being abuse, and is a member of any organization/church that Doug Wilson has anything to do with.

    My condolences to Natlalie, and all the others that Doug Wilsom has hurt by his actions. You deserved far better than what you got from those who should have protected you.

  15. Mr. Wilson talks about being an honorable man. How can it possibly be honorable to hang onto a teenage girl’s diary and letters, let alone insinuate that he might make them public and if we read them we’d think differently about abuse?

    He needs to return the documents to Natalie immediately. They aren’t his moral property. Wilson loves to cite Tolkien, but when it comes to this he is behaving rather like Wormtongue, not any of his heroes. Pouring poison into people’s ears.

  16. Am I reading that comment excerpt correctly that Malachi is making up a statutory rape scenario completely in his head, and then berating someone for arguing that it was rape because IN HIS HEAD the 14-year-old victim was actually “adult” AND the aggressor? And that this MADE-UP scenario is “totally made up but altogether too common”?!?

    I keep opening up that image and trying to make sense of it, but my brain is rebelling.

    1. The point with all this is “we just don’t knooooowwww what happened, so it could have been anything.” Except that, no, it couldn’t have. Jamin is a serial abuser with multiple counts on his criminal record, and Natalie was a 14-year-old homeschooled girl. Any way you slice it, he’s a criminal, she’s the victim of many of his crimes. That’s it, no other discussion needed.

      1. That, and Doug is attacking Natalie by way of still trying to restore Jamin to the good graces of patriarchy because OF COURSE a patriarch-in-training is worth more than some throwaway Kleenex victim. OF COURSE. And that vile 14-year-old temptress completely derailed Jamin’s illustrious pastoral career. I don’t know why all you heathen LBGTQ anarchists can’t see the facts. Sheesh.

        Seriously, can I just go kick Doug’s ass yet, or what? The frustration is killing me.

      2. Dash, as I was thinking about this last night I remembered an acquaintance who was raped in college by a star athlete.
        It was the same thing for her. The college wanted to sweep it under the rug. They did not want this little incident to derail his illustrious career. She was throwaway material. He was the untouchable golden boy and cash cow. They did not care one bit that this incident derailed her whole life. They did not care about the therapy and tears and years it took to get her back on track.

        Yes, this is what patriarchy is all about.
        The leaders and rising stars are protected.
        Women and children (and beta males) are afterthought add-ons that can be thrown away when they get in the way of the lives or doctrines of the patriarch.

        i.e. patriarchy is diametrically opposed to the gospel.

        Matthew 18:6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

        (lookie, lookie, dougie supporters. i can quote scripture too. but i quote the parts you ignore so you can continue to throw children under your patriarchy bus. beware of milestone doctrine and behavior. it will come back around and bite you in the fanny. not even kidding. have a nice day.)

  17. When I was a young boy in the Christ Church community I was abused by an NSA grad for several years. This man was receiving counseling from Wilson, yet Wilson failed to alert my parents or protect me in any way.

    No one has heard my story.

    How many people have been abused at Christ Church that we don’t even know about?

    1. Anonymous, if you would like to tell your story, please contact me through the contact link. Wilson has a legal duty to do something when he is faced with abuse cases (the law is worded ambiguously when it comes to pastors as mandatory reporters, but I’ve been looking into it, and there is nothing in the church’s constitution outlining confidentiality, which would make a difference). If he didn’t in your case, he committed a crime. And, in case you are worried about speaking up in the public eye, journalists have a code of ethics when it comes to naming abuse victims, particularly if they were abused as minors.

    2. This makes me horribly sad! Yet another child who was not protected by the “pastor” of a church. I feel like Doug allows little lambs to be slaughtered by wolves and then defends the wolves. I am so sorry you were abused.

    3. Anonymous,
      I am so sorry to hear that you were abused by someone in the church when you were a child.
      I am glad that the Idaho Supreme Court recently (August 2015) permitted their state’s sexual abuse victims to sue beyond the statute of limitations. I am glad that resources are growing for victims of abuse, their families, and for the churches. There is an epidemic of child sexual abuse in the conservative evangelical church according to insurance companies (Church Mutual is the largest insurer of churches in the US) and attorneys like Richard Hammer at Church Law & Tax (he releases a yearly article and chart of the reasons that churches were sued the previous year after he studies 10,000+ lawsuits against churches; child sexual abuse is No. 1 every single year and has been for years).


      Anonymous, I am so sorry for what you have suffered in slience. Please, PLEASE come forward and tell your story. Please do not let that fat sack of shit win this battle with his poisoned barrage of rhetoric. Please contact Katie and tell her what happened to you. This is not right and should not be left as it is. I will pray mightily that you can find the strength to speak your piece.

      1. Anonymous,

        I second what Dash said. If you feel like it, please tell Katie your story. Also Julie Anne at Spiritual Sounding Board is really great and understanding. You have supporters here, the SSB, The Wartburg Watch (Dee and Deb) and elsewhere.

        Thanks for the brave step of telling us.

    5. Anonymous, Thank-you for saying it. You are very brave whether or not you feel able to carry on with it and allow it to be known further. I just want to tell you that you were not at fault and you did nothing to cause your abuse. It is very difficult to share how it feels to be harmed and especially hard when it involves the patriarchal judgements of men who are paid to hurt others while calling it love. I admire your bravery. I am sorry you were harmed and will do my best to support you, whatever decision you make regarding the abuse. That you state it here, to Katie, is a very strong sign that you have great character and resolve. You have been encouraged by her eloquence and simple telling of the true. Me too. Welcome… you will find good hearts here, people who know what you are talking about and care.

    6. Anon, you have a lot of friends you don’t even know yet. We all support you, and there are FAR more people who would take up your cause than those who support despicable enablers like Doug Wilson. My heart goes out to you, and just know you’re admirable for surviving and getting to where you are—you’re already a conqueror.

  18. Hey guys, where’s the real wisdom here? Remember that “The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him.” It’s in danger of becoming a pat proverb, but only because incontinent hissy fits like this keep needing the reminder!

    Solomon’s advice goes for everyone—Doug, Natalie, Jamin, me, you. None of you have all the facts. You should know this without Doug mentioning it. Are you God?

    Don’t be so quick to 100% pardon Natalie. Isn’t quick pardoning, after all, what you claim Doug Wilson gave to Jamin?

    1. This right here is the thinking that makes churches unsafe for victims of abuse. I’m sorry you don’t get it, Gwen. Jamin has committed multiple crimes; these things have already been entered into legal history. So your “we just don’t know” is about a decade too late.

    2. Natalie was 14. Jamin was 24. Even if Natalie was twitterpated by the guy, Jamin still had the responsibility TO KEEP HIS PENIS IN HIS PANTS and not put it in her mouth. Gwen, I would encourage you to take a class on sexual abuse and the psychological damage that grooming does to the victim. Maybe it would help you develop some compassion for victims instead of being so quick to back the rapist.

    3. Hi Gwen,

      OK, be quick to listen and slow to speak. There is value in that: You learn something.

      There is an epidemic of child sexual abuse in the conservative evangelical church that rivals of exceeds that of the Roman Catholic Church. Sources: Church Mutual, the largest insurer of churches in the U.S., and (Harvard-educated) attorney Richard Hammer at Church Law & Tax.

      The sexual abuse of children is the No. 1 reason that churches get sued every single year according to the report that Mr. Hammer releases each year, after studying more than 10,000 lawsuits against churches.

      These are felony crimes.

      The problem is SO SERIOUS for insurance companies, given how irresponsible churches have been to protect children, that insurance companies are getting out of the church insurance business altogether because the liability from these cases is too great.

      Sex offenders themselves, when interviewed, say that they love going to churches because it’s a great way to get new victims and that Christians are so gullible and trusting, and will believe anything (to the peril of children).

      1. “OK, be quick to listen and slow to speak. There is value in that: You learn something.”

        why do people “talk” to each other on blogs? Let’s just say it is for the exchange of ideas, with the hope of betterment with regard to the topic.

        No one really likes their own or others sins or crimes. People end up committing sins and crimes because they have done something the “wrong” way.
        Neither of us like any form of abuse or sexual abuse against anyone. Everyone is against it. Some people are abusive, in spite of their efforts not to be abusive.

        However, there are many directions to go wrong in dealing properly with any sort of abuse.

        I am speaking against going too far in the abuse “activist” and “expert” direction.
        The Fells Acres case, link below, was a case where an innocent family was wrongly prosecuted and wrongly jailed for alleged child sex abuse, by “activist” abuse and law enforcement “experts”.

        The reason the family was wrongly prosecuted was because of the false, coercive “expertise” of an “activist”, fake, child abuse “expert”, Susan J. Kelly, in combination with an “activist” District Attorney, who wanted abuse prosecutions at the expense of due process, Scott Harshbarger / Laurence Hardoon.
        A Darkness in Massachusetts

        It is good for people to blog and advocate against any form of abuse. However, do keep in mind that it is possible, as the Fells Acres Case demonstrates, that “advocates” themselves, can be abusive in their advocacy, when they over reach in the zeal of their efforts.

        My comments here and elsewhere are intended to help keep good efforts within good practice.

        The disputes on this topic appear to be about what constitutes “good efforts and good practice”. Everyone thinks good efforts and good practice are needed.

      2. JFS,
        Throwing this story at this conversation at this time, whatever your intention, comes across as minimizing and deflecting away from the seriousness of the issue.
        Just because someone has gone overboard somewhere else in a completely unrelated story doesn’t mean that is what is going on here.

        Much time has already passed. The evidence is front and center. Inaction has ruled in this situation for too many years There has been plenty of time to listen. Years and years of time to listen. Way more time for listening than was ever needed for the situation at hand.

        It is time for action. It is time for those who have perpetuation abusive systems to be called into account for what they have set up and vehemently defended as “God’s will.”

        How many children do you want to sacrifice on the altar of inaction?
        What’s going on needs to stop. Now. It does not need to be given more time so it can perpetuate more abuse on those who have no way of getting out without help.

    4. Gwen,

      Here is Pastor Jimmy Hinton’s excellent 2+ hour training video about pedophiles in the church and child sexual abuse prevention. Jimmy is the pastor of a church that has been around for about 100 years in PA. It is in the Church of Christ denomination (no affiliation to Doug Wilson’s church).

      Jimmy turned in his father, also a pastor at the same church, for sexually abusing children in their church. Jimmy’s father is now serving a life sentence in prison.
      Jimmy’s mother Clara Hinton has the excellent blog called Finding a Healing Place.
      Their family are tireless advocates now to protect children.

      They have taken a unique stand, and a brave one: To deal honestly and truthfully with a sex offender in their own family and in their church. They are a wonderful example for how we are to treat victims.

    5. Gwen,

      Here is an excellent interview with Dr. Anna Salter, a nationally known expert about sex offender and authors. She is being interviewed on Corrections One/Tier Talk,
      a professional organization for the corrections industry. The interview about sex offenders is broken in to five parts.

    6. For Gwen and other folks,

      Some other helpful resources dealing with child sexual abuse and prevention in the church:

      *Pastor Jimmy Hinton’s organization (the guy who did the video in the above post)

      *Pastor Les Ferguson’s blog about his painful journey of having his disabled son sexually abused by a church member and that church member murdering Les’ wife and disabled son. All of the things that Les has learned about abusers and his tough journey of healing (and struggles with faith).

      *Pastor Jimmy Hinton’s mom Clara Hinton’s blog called Finding a Healing Place.

      *Brenda’s blog, A Solitary Journey, about being married to a pedophile pastor and her life becoming undone when law enforcement came to their home.

    7. Gwen,

      A favorable ruling from the Idaho Supreme Court (August 2015) for their state’s child sexual abuse victims to sue responsible entities such as churches. There’s a good reason that churches should kick it in gear and protect children from sex offenders:
      It’s the right thing to do, the legal thing to do, the moral thing to do, and it saves money. Entire churches are being bankrupted by sexual abuse lawsuits and selling off assets. And honestly, it serves them right for turning a blind eye to sexual abuse.

      I have no sympathy for these churches. Jesus said it would better off that a person had a millstone tied around their neck and that they be drowned in the deepest sea than that they would harm a child.

      1. Don’t you love how DW supporters quote all kinds of scripture but somehow can’t seem to find that pesky one about that millstone in their Bibles?
        Do they have some sort of patriarchy standard version that doesn’t contain the millstone verse in Matthew, Mark, or Luke?
        Or perhaps they don’t really fear God as they say they do. Perhaps they don’t think God will follow through with that millstone bit of the Bible.

        I do have a bit of sympathy for these churches. Not as much as Betsie Ten Boom who prayed for the Nazi prison guard beating the concentration camp prisoner or anything. Betsie was on a different plane from most of us. She understood a few dynamics that escape most of us, like the judgement of God on the oppressor and the mercy of God toward the oppressed. But like her, I do feel bad for these blind guides leading the blind, rushing in like fools into places angels fear to tread. I feel bad for them for believing that they are soundly in the right when they are so ridiculously wrong. It is painful to watch. They make a mockery of themselves and the gospel. Then they think the backlash is some sort of persecution for being right and representing God. Their self-delusion is truly pitiful.

    8. Gwen, we are not talking about money owed or going to court over custody issues: where that verse makes sense. This is about a girl being used for sexual pleasure, groomed and used. The verse you quoted from the Bible cannot be applied here bc the accusations are true, JW was at fault. All the way. No question.

      You mention we don’t have all the facts…how can you even think to compare a 14 year girl to a man in Grey friars? So you think if if she battered her eyes at him that means its ok to do what he did for all those years? If she wore a short skirt or kissed back that would constitute what he did to her? Who should know better?

      Your statement just shows me you are ignorant when it comes to abuse and the psychology of abusers. Putting any blame on their victims, even 1% perpetuates the very thing being fought against.

    9. Gwen: “Don’t be so quick to 100% pardon Natalie.”

      Pardon Natalie for what? For being victimized by a serial abuser?
      Pardon Natalie for what? Being vulnerable to an experienced abuser who groomed her for his own selfish pleasure
      Pardon Natalie for what? Being used by Jamin in her own home, in the home of her parents, the ones generously providing him a place to stay for free?
      Pardon Natalie for what? Being tall, beautiful, and too immature to understand what he was doing to her?

      Natalie doesn’t need any pardoning.
      She didn’t commit any crime.
      She didn’t go into Jamin’s home, take advantage of his parents generosity and try to secretly seduce him under their noses while she was 24 and he was 14. She didn’t do any of that.
      That was Jamin’s game, not hers. It’s a game he played very well, showing great experience.
      She was too young, sheltered, and innocent to understand his game.

      The church did not prepare her or her parents to understand and deal with abusers like Jamin. They were a family of sheep. Their church sent a wolf in sheep’s clothing to live in their house, eat their food, and abuse their little lamb.

      You really don’t get what went on, Gwen. Not at all. Because if you actually did, you wouldn’t say something so asinine.

      1. The pretzel logic put forth by the Wilsonistas, who undoubtedly ridiculed Bill Clinton for his “depends of what your definition of “is” is”, sounds, in its own way, remarkably similar to that infamous quote.

    10. Oh my Gwen, that is one of the ugliest things I’ve ever read. The fact that you don’t even have a clue is truly frightening. Objecting to sexual abuse being blamed on the victim is a little hissy fit? Do the women in Wilson’s circle draw straws every day to try to come over spout what appear to be Christian platitudes and try to nick away at the victim’s self esteem? Does someone go to the Stiles house every day and tell his wife his urging are her fault? And your little ditty is pure nonsense along the lines of whoever smelt it dealt it and I know you are what am I.

      The fact that you both hold men as the head of your “house” and as an infant never seems to cross your mind. Grown men fully understand that it is illegal to have any type of sexual experience with an underage girl. High school boys understand this as does anyone with the slightest bit of ethics and morals. The fact that you are blaming a 14 year old says nothing good about the men you know. The fact that you hold Natalie responsible for any of this makes you as bad as him (and so is Wilson). Revictimizing her, making excuses for bad behavior, just horrible.

      She was not legally able to consent, and even if she was, the age difference and his position of power given by your church make what he did totally immoral- FULL STOP. I weep for the harshness in your heart and the ugliness in your soul. The other ladies here have been very nice to you. As a complete outsider, let me point out that what you are doing is completely horrible and you are truly a horrible person. As your church disintegrates and you have to go out into the real world, you will quickly see your reflection and it is ugly, inside and out.

      If anyone wants to sue Warren and his wife for slander or even abuse of authority, I will help set up a go fund me page.

    11. Matt Chandler accused Amy Smith and I of “not knowing the whole story.” Yet, we did and eventually Chandler had to apologize. This sort of tactic is used by many people who do not want to admit that a number of people, in this instance, know enough of the story to realize that what happened was just plain wrong.

    12. Gwen,

      Doug Wilson advocates slavery. Do you as well?

      Doug isn’t the “sharpest tool in the shed”.

      I dismiss anything that Mr. Slavery says.

  19. These men are immature boys, yet grab all the power because they think they are the manliest of men. They infantilize the women around them, yet also require them to be ultra-mature by catering to their every spoiled-brat desire. They solemnly declare that this is what God requires.

    It’s like a chapter in Gullivers Travels.

    When these man-boys are confronted, they go from “I’m being picked on just because I’m gooooooddd” to “I’m gonna let everyone read your diary if you don’t shuddup” to “Unless you’re God, you don’t know what happened” to “She was even wronger than me!” to “I know you are so what am I?”

  20. One of the most disgusting things (out of many disgusting things) about this, and I am certainly not the first to point it out, is the intimation that the victim is somehow culpable. That she used her 14 year old feminine wiles on an adult male, and he simply could not control himself. Yes, he could have. To claim that he was seduced is ludicrous. A responsible, adult male “seminary” student should have found it well within his moral, ethical and mental capabilities to have easily discouraged any alleged advances by the young girl. Rape is rape, and he well knew it. Yet he knowingly committed statutory rape. Repeatedly. And that is the only fact that is necessary. To try to shift blame, even partly, to her for being a “Lolita” is absurd. But of course, not to those who have swallowed the toxic Kool-Aid.

    1. Here’s hoping that other victims of sexual abuse in Idaho’s Christ Church will come forward, even together, and sue Doug Wilson’s church and schools. The Idaho Supreme Court gave an August 2015 permitting their state’s sexual abuse victims to sue beyond the statute of limitations. Hurrah! (The case was a group of men, former Boy Scouts, who had been sexually abused in Idaho churches’ Boy Scouts groups.)

    2. My husband taught highschool math at a Christian school for a while. A young girl who had been abused and whose grandparents were raising her developed a crush on Mr. Hunky. She started coming into his office and acting slinky. He shut that down b4 it could go any further. He was kind but blunt and just let her know that under no circumstances was she to enter his office when he was alone. Because rules. She was a bit embarrassed but definitely respected him after that in a different, more childlike way. This is how real men behave.

  21. I won’t repeat the excellent commentary on this article (which is good.)

    I’ll just add a few things to the list of stuff that Doug W. has done his best to ruin for the rest of us.

    You mention Scotch. Amen, sister!

    Also, G. K. Chesterton, who was pretty much the anti-Doug, despite DW’s attempts to appropriate him.

    And P. G. Wodehouse, who would never have put such a cruel edge to his humor as Doug puts to his.

    As you said, “Is nothing sacred?!”

  22. Just listened to the entirety of the sentencing hearing. At the 22min mark the prosecutor reads from Jamin’s domestic violence assessment where he states he doesn’t remember why he was arrested in 2006, only what he was convicted of. WTF?!?!?!?! (Which is basically the reaction the prosecutor has has well) yeah, jamin is a changed and repentant man. Right. Another wtf moment from the recording, if you listen all the way to the end, the last thing the judge says after they dismiss Jamin is “ok, last case today is Stiller, go ahead and bring him up from the cell”. I didn’t know whether to laugh or throw up at the irony.

  23. Question: why aren’t we considered adults at the onset of puberty??? After all, our bodies are beginning to show maturity, right? We are now able to to start reproducing at the onset of puberty… So why don’t we start getting married and forming romantic relationships at 12 or 13??? The reason, obviously, is that our minds and hearts need to FULLY mature, just like our bodies need to FULLY mature before we jump into the massive task of managing adult relationships, emotionally, mentally, spiritually, physically and sexually. The fact that a girl starts developing breasts at 12 or 13 doesn’t mean she is ready to use them. And in the same way, just because a young girl starts to have junior-high crushes and begins to develop budding romantic feelings for others (and may even feel inclined to act on them), it doesn’t mean she is ready to fully employ those feelings. Just because a pubescent teen is beginning to have a budding body and developing feelings certainly does not mean that she is capable of giving consent during her stage of transitioning development. Transitioning doesn’t equate maturity or the ability to make the judgement call of consent. A caterpillar in chrysalis is not the same as a butterfly. And forcing a caterpillar out of its chrysalis before its time does not make a butterfly. It makes a dead caterpillar in a broken chrysalis. As a people we have categorically determined adolescents of this age are incapable of consent- they still don’t fully know who they are and are not mature enough to call the shots on issues of this magnitude. This is why it is illegal for them to marry so young. We have no problem establishing that 13 year old children are not capable of consent to marry at this age… so why are so many eagerly pushing that Greenfield was attracted to him and had a junior-high crush, and thus she should be treated like a consenting adult??? If a big crush and a rush of developing hormones establishes ability to consent, the age of consent should be reduced to 12, and maybe even less.. 11? 10? Puberty is hitting earlier and earlier these days… How about 9? Since when have feelings of attraction equated full-grown maturity and the capacity to make a good call on very adult issues?!?

    1. Just try to imagine the nastiness, cruelty, and vindictiveness of those who are trying very determinedly to argue that Natalie invited and was complicit in her own abuse.

      Really. Just try to actually imagine that. I can’t even start to distort my own thinking that far without experiencing violent waves of revulsion and nausea. It literally makes me sick to my stomach to read the utterly psychotic shit that Doug is allowing on his blog by way of comments defending his stance towards Natalie Greenfield. What kind of sick psychopaths are capable of distorting the message of Christ like that? It’s fucked beyond all description.

      1. They are making a great big deal over a perceived splinter* in Natalie’s eye, all the while they are completely blinded to and by the logs, beams, and tree stumps stuck in their own eyes. It is no wonder that they could never help her. It appears they will never deal with their own blindness. And yes, it distorts Christ, is screwed up, and in more extreme cases, like dougie doug, it’s psychotic.

        *note, when I speak of a ‘splinter’ in Natalie’s eye, I’m referring to her being young, vulnerable, and dealing with raging hormones. It’s not sin. It’s normal stuff that young ladies have to deal with, mature beyond, and learn to control. They do that with the help of the adults around them. But the dougie doug crowd were/are not capable of being reasonable adults able to disciple. They failed her on so many levels. Then instead of owning it, dealing with their logs and beams, they want to throw her under the bus. “No logs or beams in our eyes, no sirree. Move along, nothing to see here.”

        The more they rage against her and her supporters, the more they condemn themselves, exposing the darkness of their hearts for all the world to see.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: