On a related front, others have said that I advocated for leniency for Steven after his conviction and during the sentencing phase. In the course of the letter I wrote to the judge (in 2005), I simply reported on the nature of my counsel to Steven after he was caught. In the middle of that report, I said, “It is important to note that I have not offered him any spiritual panacea or ‘quick fix,’ and I believe Steven understands the importance of his need to resist these temptations over the long haul.” In addition, at the conclusion of my letter, with regard to the legal consequences of his behavior, I told the judge that I was “grateful that he [would] be sentenced for his behavior,” and was also grateful that there would be “hard consequences for him in real time.” At the same time, I urged that the civil penalties be “measured and limited.” By “measured and limited,” I meant principled, defined and deliberate. I did not mean trivial, light, or lenient. I was not requesting a slap on the wrist. If you put together what I actually said, you will see that what I expressed to the judge was my desire for hard consequences for Steven that were measured and limited. My hope is that the judge read the letter more carefully than others have since done. Douglas Wilson
Pastor Douglas Wilson of Christ Church, Moscow, claims that certain unnamed “others” have misread the letter he provided to Judge John Stegner on behalf of serial pedophile Steven Sitler. To remind you, Mr. Wilson wrote this letter to Judge Stegner on a Christ Church letterhead three months before he delivered limited notice about Sitler to some of the Kirk heads of households. Further, Mr. Wilson has informed us that the Kirk elders’ minutes do not document the existence of this letter, so we do not know when, if ever, he notified the Kirk elders that he wrote it.1
The Problem
In his letter to Judge Stegner, Mr. Wilson wrote:
I have been asked to provide a letter on behalf of Steven Sitler, which I am happy to do. . . . I am grateful that he will be sentenced for his behavior, and that there will be hard consequences for him in real time. At the same time, I would urge that the civil penalties applied would be measured and limited. I have a good hope that Steven has genuinely repented, and that he will continue to deal with this to become a productive and contributing member of society.
Mr. Wilson’s letter hangs on three points:
- Wilson’s happiness “to provide a letter on behalf of Steven Sitler.”
- Wilson’s “urge” for the judge to apply a “limited” sentence.
- Wilson’s “good hope” that Sitler could “become a productive and contributing member of society.”
Mr. Wilson happily wrote a letter “on behalf of Steven Sitler” to specifically “urge” the judge to give a “limited” sentence, with the “good hope” of reintroducing Sitler into society. These are the three primary points of Mr. Wilson’s 489-word correspondence. The remaining body text justifies these three points. And these three points now vex Mr. Wilson because they are prima facie evidence that he was happy to write a letter on behalf of a serial pedophile to urge the judge for a reduced sentence with the hope of restoring the child molester back into the community.
The Reinterpretation
Mr. Wilson tries to reinterpret these three points in the epigraph, which is 229 words, or slightly less than half the length of the original letter. But when you sift the water from the mud, Mr. Wilson says:
By “measured and limited,” I meant principled, defined and deliberate. I did not mean trivial, light, or lenient. I was not requesting a slap on the wrist.
Mr. Wilson’s reinterpretation completely misses the chief point that he made to Judge Stegner — namely, “LIMITED.” The phrase “measured and limited” is a restatement. The word “limited” restates the word “measured.” It nullifies it. And in this respect Mr. Wilson’s “measured and limited” echoes Ronald Reagan’s “Trust but verify.” Just as Reagan really meant “verify,” as in “Don’t trust the Russians with nukes,” so Mr. Wilson really meant “limit, or reduce, Sitler’s sentence from the number of years he actually deserves.”
Test the argument: If Mr. Wilson had stopped his urge at “measured,” without adding “limited” and without telling the judge he hoped for Sitler to “become a productive and contributing member of society,” few would take issue with him. The word “limited,” however, and the way he enlarges upon it, declares his true intent. Mr. Wilson specifically urged Judge Stegner to moderate Sitler’s sentence — he sought leniency.
And this means that, for those readers who are inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to Pastor Doug Wilson in his reinterpretation of the letter to Judge Stegner, perhaps you could take a tip from Ronaldus Magnus: Trust but verify.
1 In “A Reluctant Response” Mr. Wilson wrote, “Not mentioned in our minutes were the following facts, which can be corroborated by other means. . . I wrote a letter to the judge prior to Steven’s sentencing, wherein I told the judge . . .”
Doug Wilson has written dozens of books, including books on writing and rhetoric. So he knew what “limited” penalties meant. It meant limited. And a limited penalty is a lenient penalty for a serial pedophile.
For non-English majors: the word “penalties” is the noun in the sentence. The words “measured” and “limited” are adjectives modifying the noun “penalties.” Hence, Doug Wilson wanted the penalties to be limited. Now he wants us to believe he meant “principled,” “defined,” and “deliberate.” That is not what the word “limited” means.
Does Doug Wilson not understand this? Of course he does. He’s just hoping other people don’t. He thinks that by talking he can dig his way out of a ditch, but the more he talks, the more he digs, and the deeper the ditch gets.
This isn’t the only time Doug Wilson uses words to mean the opposite of what they actually mean:
— He called the Wartburg Watch writers “pedophile hustlers”. ‘Hustle’ as in ‘to sell or promote aggressively’ or perhaps ‘to pimp out’? If anything, the Wartburgers were disgusted and angry about Sitler being allowed to marry anyone — they didn’t hustle pedophiles at all.
— Floating around somewhere is a quote by Wilson about “a catamite who wants an ass that is bad.” Catamites are the receivers; a catamite doesn’t want an ass — a catamite IS the ass.
I don’t mean to be crass. I just find it odd how often Wilson uses words and terms for sensational or controversial effect, but then uses them incorrectly. If he is such a wordsmith, it shouldn’t matter how obscure or antiquated words are — he should know what they mean and use them accordingly.
And ‘limited’ is NOT an obscure or antiquated word.
He says it twice. Once for shock value and a second time to magnify the insult:
He is deliberately eroding the consciences of his readers, or as he wrote, “The whole point is to shock and insult those who don’t know that they are being played.”
Pay close attention to the headers on the site. We have over 400 of them in the rotation (though we’ve released less than 40), each one filled with Wilson filth and hypocrisy. Both of these quotes are in there now.
Not to belabor the point, but when you wade through the inflammatory rhetoric, Wilson’s logic here is beyond ridiculous. He uses Miley Cyrus and Lady Gaga to illustrate that people do things for shock value. Fine.
But the basis of the argument is that gangsta rappers say “n$&@?” And gays engage in gay sex for the purpose of offending white suburbanites. White suburbanites like him. I highly doubt this is the case.
Once again, Wilson manages to make it all about himself.
When do we get to see the letter that Pastor Wilson wrote to the judge in support of the victims, seeking justice for them and protection for the rest of his flock? I understand his statement that he is trying to support a member of his flock in supporting Sitler. But this is the reality. Letters to judges matter a lot. Judges typically receive very few and rarely from non-family members. A respected pastor not only supporting an offender but also claiming to be actively counseling him with positive results is about as good as an offender can hope for. It would very likely affect the final sentencing. Discretion and judgment is, therefore, vital in these cases. I also noticed that Wilson carefully used the term “civil penalties” not criminal penalties. Perhaps this was an oversight, or perhaps he was hoping that a large fine or civil settlement might help appease the victims in this case.
Wilson claims to have been counseling the victims at this same time. The reality is that when someone walks into a court room for a sentencing hearing, they have to make a decision. You either sit on the victims’ side, which is typically on the right, or you sit on the defendant’s side, on the left. In the end, every person entering that courtroom has to take a side. As a shepherd maybe he should have considered what Jesus said about which side is which with regard to sheep and goats.
The pain caused to all victims and survivors when pillars of the community consciously choose to sit and support that left/defendant side in felony sexual crime cases cannot be overstated. It would be different if Sitler were facing drug charges or had committed a property crime, but he didn’t. He violated the most tender, innocent and vulnerable of our society. I pray Wilson learns from this.
@Frank — Great point about the adjectives; I resisted the temptation to break out the dictionary and compare his definitions with the English definitions. Unfortunately, he puts you in that position, most likely because he’s a wordsmith.
@Jen — Excellent catch on the word “civil.” He would probably argue civil, as in civil magistrate. However, he used this term deliberately to soften the tone of the letter.
Also, regarding letters, Team Wullenwaber (aka Team Wilson) coordinated a letter-writing campaign on behalf of Sitler. They got 9 letters, including one from a victim family. Notice how Wilson framed his introduction: “I have been asked to provide a letter on behalf of Steven Sitler.” Passive voice. He doesn’t say who asked him to write the letter or why they asked.
Regarding the victims, he does not care and never will care about them. His affections lie with the predators, as demonstrated by his actions.