“Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous. . .” 1 Timothy 3:3

Two weeks ago Pastor Doug Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, declared he would no longer identify with the heresy that he turned into a movement — namely, the Federal Vision. Mr. Wilson’s writ of divorce from the FV included these lines:

I am not trying to start a fight, but rather to own my portion of a fight that ought not to have gone on as it did. You could say (in my defense) that it is difficult, in the middle of a saloon brawl, to distinguish the motives of loyalty, manly principle, stubbornness, and cussedness. That it correct. It is difficult, but I still should have done a better job. I am responsible for not having done so, and thought I needed to say so publicly. (Federal Vision No Mas; incomplete sentence original)

Accordingly, Douglas Wilson asserts four propositions here:

1. He describes the Federal Vision controversy as “a fight” and “a saloon brawl”
2. He states that the “fight” “ought not to have gone on as it did”
3. He indicates responsibility (though no sorrow) for his “portion” in this “fight”
4. He predicates his “defense” for not having “done a better job” during this “fight” on difficulties that attend those “in the middle of a saloon brawl”: “it is difficult . . . It is difficult, but I still should have done a better job.” He does not state where the difficulty lied.

These four assertions, as well as the statement as a whole, ignore a key historical fact without which the Federal Vision controversy would not have existed: Namely, Douglas Wilson started this so-called “fight”; Mr. Wilson escalated it into the “saloon brawl”; and Mr. Wilson was the only participant in it (excepting his followers).

We considered Doug Wilson’s defamation of Dr. Joe Morecraft and the RPCUS, after the RPCUS declared his doctrine false. He published a full-page ad in Credenda/Agenda to mock Dr. Morecraft for conducting a heresy trial that never took place. This established the kind of response Mr. Wilson would apply whenever anyone criticized his doctrine of the Federal Vision — over-the-top abusive ad hominem arguments. We also furnished a list of Mr. Wilson’s “Yelling at My Windshield” blog posts, wherein he substituted the term “windshield” for the person he intended to yell at. This continued his pattern of abusive behavior toward opponents of the Federal Vision. Today let’s consider other examples of Doug Wilson’s conduct in this so-called “fight.”

In June 2006, the PCA general assembly appointed a committee to study the Federal Vision and determine if it conforms to the system of doctrine taught in the Westminster Standards. The PCA charged this study committee to write a report for the 2007 PCA general assembly. In other words, the PCA followed in the RPCUS’s footsteps. Study the doctrine; publish a finding.

Doug Wilson seethed. A panel of officers in a denomination beyond his control would examine his writings in light of Westminster. Six months later, on January 4, 2007, Mr. Wilson used his personal website to announce a Federal Vision Haiku Poetry Contest. He did not state the goal of the contest. Instead he furnished an example of what he expected:

Just teaching the word,
Surprise from the conference,
Whud I say this time?

Long months had gone by
Then internet turmoil from
Samurai Robbins.

Peach petals floating,
Now drift down on the water,
Ah, presbytery!

Words from the Bible,
And not in the Confession,
Caused a commotion.

Big books full of words,
Blogs earnestly publishing
Their crinkum crankum.

With seasons turning,
Presbyterian nobles
Lift their steel gaze to

The whole PCA
Standing Judicial
Commission Report.

Doug Wilson expected participants in his contest to belittle the PCA because they appointed a committee to write a report on the Federal Vision. Three months later he awarded three CREC acolytes for their poems:

Chris Witmer
You don’t resemble
My caricature of you
Because you’re lying.

SJC judgment
The sound of two hands clapping
Unanimously

Joost Nixon
RC is aging
who will assume his mantle?
Bombasticity

Nate Wilson
Cherry blossom spins
dropping charges, elusive,
brave debate partner (And the Winner Is . . .)

This strikes me as an exercise in bullying. Douglas Wilson taught his followers to disparage those whom he deemed worthy of contempt. And the PCA ignored him.

Two months later the PCA study committee released its report on the Federal Vision. They declared its chief doctrines “contrary to the Westminster Standards.”¹ Doug Wilson snapped. This time he launched an all-out ad hominem campaign against the PCA for failing to appoint a committee that met his standards of justice. Mr. Wilson believed the PCA should have chosen Federal Visionists to sit on the commission. And since they did not, he claimed that the PCA therefore “stacked” its committee against the Federal Vision. Mr. Wilson, who teaches logic and has written textbooks on the subject, apparently did not know that he framed an abusive ad hominem fallacy. He criticized the composition of the study committee (at man) instead of the content of the committee’s report:

“the committee was stacked with critics. . .” (Some Standard Misunderstandings)

“I continue to express concern about the stacked nature of the FV study committee. . . . (A Stacked Committee?)

“that committee was as stacked as a double order of golden brown buttermilks. . . .” (A Double Order of Golden Brown Buttermilks)

“A stacked committee. . .” (No Appeal to Scripture)

“So I am faulting those who stacked that committee like it some blonde in a tight dress. . . .” (Like Some Blonde in a Tight Dress)

“And this is why I intend to bring up the stacked nature of the PCA committee every chance I get, for as long as I can remember to do so. Not only will I do this, but I intend to memorialize it with as many metaphors as I can manage to come up with. That committee was as stacked as a double order of buttermilks, as stacked as some blonde in a tight dress, and as stacked as a brick house. The PCA, she’s mighty, mighty.” (The Rev. Rick James)

“the committee was as stacked as a Campbell soup display in the front aisle of Safeway. . . . the committee that was as stacked as all the Miles Davis LPs in an FM radio station basement.” (Greasing the Skids with an Holy Unction)

Douglas Wilson did not discourage his followers from emulating him. They piled on and he compiled their contributions into a blog post:

As Stacked As . . .
Topic: Auburn Avenue Stuff

Since a volunteer competition is breaking out already, let’s put them all in one place. I may have missed some in the gathering, and so if I did just add them again in the comments section. And if any new ones occur to you, please add them as well. I think we could have at least as much fun as the haiku contest.

As stacked as:

1. A double order of buttermilks;
2. Some blonde in a tight dress;
3. A brick house;
4. As Rick James on his way to detox;
5. As a deck of cards at a Magician’s Convention;
6. As the Library of Congress;
7. As a new-mown hayfield;
8. As a deck of cards at a casino;
9. As a lottery ticket;
10. As cordwood in November;
11. As a Harry Potter display, July 20, 11:59 p.m;
12. As Bay Bridge traffic on Memorial Day weekend;
13. As the odds against me winning the lottery;
14. As little brown pellets under a neglected rabbit cage;
15. As the assumptions required to support a claim for atheistic moral objectivity;
16. As a polygamist’s honey-do list;
17. As a dozen rocks in the middle of the Jordan;
18. As the odds against a productive study actually being accomplished by a stacked committee;
19. As the ballot box in a Mexican election (but I repeat myself);
20. As a double-decker bus with Japanese tourists;
21. As a Nigel Tufnel Marshall rig at the amusement park gig;
22. As the national debt;
23. As the strata in the Grand Canyon;
24. As plywood at Home Depot;
25. As a Campbell soup display in the front aisle of Safeway;
26. As all the Miles Davis LPs in an FM radio station basement;

A couple different verbs:

25. As stuffed as Derek Small’s spandex at the airport checkpoint;
26. As choreographed as a WWF match.

Posted by Douglas Wilson — 6/23/2007 7:47:45 AM

This resembles a mob dynamic. Doug Wilson incited his followers to join him in scoffing at the PCA. It’s unclear what he hoped his behavior would accomplish. Neither he nor the CREC followed any judicial process before he rendered his verdict that the PCA “stacked” its committee. Perhaps he thought he could intimidate & harass the PCA to cave to his demands, which he apparently thinks just. Though it’s more likely this was another temper tantrum — because this is part of a larger pattern.

Whenever Douglas Wilson cannot control the outcome of an event that cuts against him, he always ridicules those he deems responsible for it — and he encourages his devotees to follow suit. He did this with the RPCUS. He did this to the PCA. We saw him do this when WORLD Magazine reported his first dabble in plagiarism. And we shall see him behave exactly the same way when we document his slavery scandal. This is a pattern. It’s punishment. He exacts retribution against those who wound his narcissistic pride. He pitches a fit on the worldwide web.

The PCA ignored Douglas Wilson but he did not relent:

“so I advance the argument that the committee was as stacked as . . . as . . . as, I don’t know, stacked things.” (Far Worse Than a Stacked Study Committee)

“What I mock is stacked study committees. . .” (Reformed Catholicity)

“The problem with this second option is seen in the manifest injustice of how the national leaders of the PCA stacked the study committee — as stacked as Dolly Parton after her new implants.” (A Whole Lot Creepier Than I Remember It)

Douglas Wilson believes that Dr. Joe Morecraft conducted an illegitimate heresy trial against the Monroe Four and he believes that the PCA stacked its study committee against him. Further, he defends his behavior from that time by arguing he was in a “fight” — a “saloon brawl.” But Doug Wilson flatters himself. As demonstrated, Mr. Wilson sat behind a plastic keyboard instigating cyber-fights with anyone willing to trade insults. But he had no takers. It was all one sided. No one treated him as he treated others. And his revision of these events is false. There was no “saloon brawl.” Just one man acting like a two-year old who didn’t get his way.

¹ Report of the Ad Interim Study Committee on Federal Vision, New Perspective, and Auburn Avenue Theology, page 35.