Blame-shifting on his part would be utterly inappropriate, and we had Jamin acknowledge that he was in no position to absolve himself by pointing fingers at others. Having said this, I can observe what Jamin should not. Douglas Wilson

Earlier this week we saw that Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow, asserted his right to blame-shift. He did not explain why he believes he possesses this right and why he believes others do not, nor did he explain who conferred this right upon him. He simply asserted it, like a medieval lord claiming jus primae noctis.

To remind you, Mr. Wilson asserted his right to blame-shift in the matter of public testimony on behalf of his personal disciple Jamin Wight, who had serially raped a member of Mr. Wilson’s congregation. At the time Jamin Wight attended Greyfriars’ Hall ministerial program and he lived in a home that was part of the Christ Church network of illegal boarding houses. He was 23-years old when he began his sexual predations; his victim was the 13-year-old daughter of his hosts. She describes some of his violations on her blog, which paints a much different picture than Mr. Wilson’s rosy impression.

Fisting, blowjobs, forced oral penetration — Jamin Wight exposed his 13-year-old victim to the full implications of Mr. Wilson’s robust theology. He asserted his right to her body in the same way Mr. Wilson asserted his right to blame-shift. He just took it. And just as Jamin Wight stole his victim’s innocence, so Mr. Wilson stole her parent’s innocence. He blamed them:

One other thing regrettably needs to be noted. In the meeting, we took care to have Jamin acknowledge that no matter what circumstances actually set up the temptation, the crime, the sin, and the deception were his responsibility alone. Blame-shifting on his part would be utterly inappropriate, and we had Jamin acknowledge that he was in no position to absolve himself by pointing fingers at others. Having said this, I can observe what Jamin should not. In our meeting the Greenfields (who had no idea of the sexual behavior occurring between Jamin and Natalie) acknowledged their sin and folly in helping to set the situation up. They did this by inviting Jamin to move in with them, encouraging and permitting a relationship between Jamin and Natalie, while keeping that relationship secret from the broader community. They thought (and were led to believe by Jamin) that the relationship was sexually pure, but they did know it was a relationship between a man in his mid-twenties and their fourteen-year-old daughter, and they helped to create the climate of secrecy. At the same time, their folly (as Pat Greenfield has aptly pointed out) was not a felony. It is not a crime to be foolish, while it is a crime to do what Jamin did. I agree with this completely, and in describing this aspect of the situation I do not believe it absolves Jamin of any responsibility for his behavior. But it does explain what kind of criminal behavior it was. For example, I do not believe that this situation in any way paints Jamin as a sexual predator. In all my years as a pastor, I don’t believe that I have ever seen such a level of parental foolishness as what the Greenfields did in this.

A seventh-grade Logos School student can read between these lines: “I do not believe it absolves Jamin of any responsibility for his behavior.” Wink. Of course he believed it absolved the predator or he would not have written it. In fact, if Mr. Wilson’s statement was the only testimony on the record, a jury would have convicted the parents and not the perp, which was his stated intent — “I can observe what Jamin should not.”

For whatever reason, Mr. Wilson did not want the full weight of the law to fall on Jamin Wight for his sins. He wanted a mitigating circumstance, so he fabricated it. By his own admission he blame-shifted. That is, he falsely accused the victim’s parents. And in doing this, Pastor Doug Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow, showed the world exactly how much he loves justice. He corrupted it.