So suppose Rod were simply to say that he continues to differ strongly with what I did in marrying Sitler, and he would never do that kind of thing himself, but that he judged too hastily in saying that this was scandalous and “insane.” I would be happy with that level of disagreement, would shake hands with Rod, and would do my best to buy the beer. Douglas Wilson

In a post entitled An Olive Branch for Rod Dreher, Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow, misrepresents Rod Dreher and at the same time establishes the terms under which he will have fellowship with him.

Misrepresentation
First the misrepresentation. In the post Scandal in Moscow, Rod Dreher wrote:

“The state is investigating whether or not the baby boy born to the pedophile and the woman that Wilson married has been molested by his father . . . and Doug Wilson thinks this is a matter to be laughed at, while raising a glass of Scotch to spite the critics? That is insane.”

Note carefully what Rod calls “insane.” Contra Wilson, it’s not the marriage, though Rod likely believes that marrying a 23-year-old graduate of New Saint Andrews College to a serial pedophile falls into the category of “insane.” Rather, Rod calls Mr. Wilson’s response to his critics as well as his response to the crisis created by the marriage “insane.” This raises the obvious question: Is Mr. Wilson’s response insane?

Wiki¹ defines insane:

“Insanity, craziness or madness is a spectrum of behaviors characterized by certain abnormal mental or behavioral patterns. Insanity may manifest as violations of societal norms, including a person becoming a danger to themselves or others, though not all such acts are considered insanity; likewise, not all acts showing indifference toward societal norms are acts of insanity. In modern usage, insanity is most commonly encountered as an informal unscientific term denoting mental instability, or in the narrow legal context of the insanity defense. . . .” (emphasis added)

This definition fits. Mr. Wilson’s response to the catastrophic circumstances surrounding serial pedophile Steven Sitler’s home violate societal norms. Laughing at critics, dancing a jig and drinking Scotch in response to news that the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare Child Protection Services has opened an investigation into an abusive home environment that you specifically cultivated breaks the rules of behavior considered acceptable in society. In fact, most people would probably agree that the words “violate societal norms” are an understatement.

Further, Mr. Wilson’s actions have become a danger to others. He became a danger to Katie Travis when he encouraged and presided over her marriage to Steven Sitler. Likewise, he became a danger to their future children, because he did know Sitler planned to have children.² Therefore, Rod Dreher accurately used the word “insane.” It is not hyperbole or exaggeration to describe Mr. Wilson’s behavior as insane.

Terms of Fellowship
But Mr. Wilson wants something more from Rod Dreher. He has very specific terms of agreement under which he would be willing to extend the right hand of fellowship to Rod:

So suppose Rod were simply to say that he continues to differ strongly with what I did in marrying Sitler, and he would never do that kind of thing himself, but that he judged too hastily in saying that this was scandalous and “insane.” I would be happy with that level of disagreement, would shake hands with Rod, and would do my best to buy the beer.

Rod must retract something that he did not say and he must declare that Mr. Wilson’s behavior did not rise to the level of scandal or insanity when he presided over the marriage of a serial pedophile to a graduate of New St. Andrews College. In other words, Rod must deaden his conscience to become like a glassy-eyed kirker whom Mr. Wilson has conditioned to accept this heinous union. According to Mr. Wilson’s terms of fellowship, Rod Dreher must agree to the normalization of pedophilia.

And that, dear reader, is an olive branch of death.

¹ Wikipedia as opposed to a medical dictionary, because Rod described Mr. Wilson’s behavior; he did not offer a formal medical diagnosis. However, neither a medical dictionary nor a legal dictionary improve Mr. Wilson’s standing on this point.
² We know this because Mr. Wilson cites Judge Stegner from the audio tape of the June 2011 status conference to discuss Sitler’s upcoming marriage. Mr. Wilson quotes Judge Stegner favorably. And if he heard Judge Stegner, then he heard the Department of Correction, Probation & Parole, and the Latah County Prosecutor inform the court that Sitler had declared his intention to sire children. Mr. Wilson understood this fact as well as anyone, yet he still encouraged the couple to marry.