Sam Weddington Speaks Out

Last Thursday I posted my theological refections on a discussion I had in Charlotte Courthouse with a man I called “The Rev”. He and I had talked about Jamaat ul-Fuqra and the compound at Red House, as well the road bearing an official county name that honors the Pakistani terrorist Sheikh Gilani.

After I saw the videotapes of the news programs, I learned that “The Rev” was in fact Sam Weddington. Yesterday he came over to Gates of Vienna and left the following comment on my post:

Hello. This is the “Rev”, or Sam Weddington whom you seek to discredit in this blog. Just wanted to let you know that I was referencing Psalm 137:9. I could go on with the list, but I won’t waste your time. Also, by the way, I am well read on Martin Luther. I would simply point out that Luther was also an Anti-Semite, and as such, he had little to say that was positive about other faiths (thus, we are “Reformed, yet still reforming” Ecclesia Reformata, Semper Reformanda; Luther wrote the pamphlet “On the Jews and their lies” in 1543, an almost proto-nazi handbook). In the end, we will all choose to believe what lies in our heart of hearts. I stand with Christ’s teachings to love one another, and to pray even for my enemies. I wish you all a good day, and I pray without ceasing for you.

— The “Rev”, Sam Weddington

The Martin Luther reference was to my Friday post. I declined to point out that his argument is one that I call “discrediting the source” — that is, rather than address the substance of what Luther said, it impugns his character. If Martin Luther’s character is suspect, does that make his writings on Islam prima facie incorrect?

Anyway, here’s what I said to Sam in response:

Sam,

Glad to have you here.

In what way did I seek to “discredit” you? Have I misquoted you, or misrepresented your views, or changed the meaning in any significant way of what you said that night?

If so, please give me the details, and I will update my account.

If not, then I think you are in conversation with people who simply disagree with you.

Sam came back the next day to leave a second comment:
- - - - - - - - - -

When I refer to “discredit”, what I meant was that, judging from the article and the response to it, me and my theological position is being dismissed and discredited and nothing more than an extension of liberal Protestant theology and Christian pacifism. I will commend you for quoting our conversation correctly. However, what I really took issue with was your assertion: “…with room for peaceful Muslims here and terrorists there….” You know, as well as I do, that in our discussion I maintained that I do not believe that the people who live in Red House have any connection with terrorism. You may think that I am picking at words, but it is in the detail of words that meaning and resolution can be found. I have done research on this community and others. I realize that there was a couple arrested at this community a few years ago on gun charges. However, it takes more than a handgun charge to make one a terrorist. I would just point out that I have had people under my pastoral care that have run afoul of the law as well. In the end, what I believe is that the people of this community genuinely seek to live their lives peacefully. While some may seek shelter there under false pretenses, this does not adequately represent the truth of the community’s religious commitment. I would also point out to those who would respond to those who would charge me with “pie in the sky” liberalism and pacifism that I am not a pacifist. In fact, I count myself one who very much believes that the secular, civil order is needed to maintain control over the evil tendency towards disorder and destruction that lies in the hearts of people living in human society (i.e. to give short leash to the “sinfulness” of human beings in the city of man, to borrow from St. Augustine from whom Luther borrowed his two cities metaphor). However, it is my belief that the secular order’s power to maintain order and establish laws is predicated upon God’s law of justice and compassion, and as such, all such use of force must be exercised with an eye towards equity, fairness, and the establishment of truth. It is to this end that I support the members of this community to whom I credit the attempt to live their lives in accord with their own religious conscience and under the rule of law of the “city” in which they find themselves. Thank you and I will still be praying for you.

I felt that his second comment deserved a longer and more detailed reply. Below you will find his words in regular font, with my responses in italics.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
When I refer to “discredit”, what I meant was that, judging from the article and the response to it, me [sic] and my theological position is being dismissed and discredited and nothing more than an extension of liberal Protestant theology and Christian pacifism.

A logical extension of your position would be pacifism, since a refusal to look at overwhelming evidence of a violent ideology and its violent history would indicate a predisposition towards pacifism.

But I’ll concede the possibility that you do not intend pacifism in what you have been saying, despite the lack of evidence to back up your assertion.

I will commend you for quoting our conversation correctly. However, what I really took issue with was your assertion: “…with room for peaceful Muslims here and terrorists there….” You know, as well as I do, that in our discussion I maintained that I do not believe that the people who live in Red House have any connection with terrorism.

You did indeed maintain that position. You also refused even to hear any of the evidence indicating that other people — people whom you have not met, people who are committed members of the Muslims of America and Jamaat ul-Fuqra — have conspired to commit violent acts, have committed murder, and continue to engage in other violent unlawful activities to this day.

There is copious evidence to support these facts, much of it found in official government reports. I can make these data available to you, if you so desire, either as URLs, in digital documents, or as printed material, with sources cited.

Your contention is that I had no right to make judgements about the Muslims of America without having met any of your friends from Red House.

I have also judged the Third Reich without ever having met a single Nazi. The same thing is true of the Killing Fields of Cambodia, or the Rwandan Genocide. For each of these subjects there is ample and reliable documentation.

I accept that some people at the Red House compound are simply sincere practitioners of Islam, and know nothing of terrorist activities. That much is clear from various sources on the topic.

However, I will repeat my contention: people you have never met, including Sheikh Syed Mubarik Ali Gilani, are using the Red House compound as a front for a violent terrorist organization, and the people that you have met are either innocent and sincere dupes, or skilled and cynical manipulators.

The evidence is overwhelming and incontrovertible. “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

You may think that I am picking at words, but it is in the detail of words that meaning and resolution can be found. I have done research on this community and others. I realize that there was a couple arrested at this community a few years ago on gun charges. However, it takes more than a handgun charge to make one a terrorist.

This is a disingenuous argument. You are “picking at words”. These were no mere “handgun” charges; the case was about stockpiling automatic weapons.

From Defense Watch:

“The Red House, Va., compound was under surveillance by law enforcement prior to the 9/11 attacks for stockpiling weapons. Three members of the compound, including leader Vincente Pierre and his wife Tracy Upshur, were later arrested for illegal arms purchases.”

Those “illegal arms” were not Saturday night specials.

I would just point out that I have had people under my pastoral care that have run afoul of the law as well. In the end, what I believe is that the people of this community genuinely seek to live their lives peacefully. While some may seek shelter there under false pretenses, this does not adequately represent the truth of the community’s religious commitment.

Nobody “sought shelter there under false pretenses”. Fugitive felons escaping the crackdown in Colorado fled to Red House as a safe house, with the full knowledge and approval of the group’s leadership. Leaders from Pakistan make regular visits to Red House; they are well aware of what goes on there.

The FBI considers it likely that John Allen Muhammad, the Beltway Sniper, holed up in Red House for a brief period, although I think it is more probable that he went to the Meherrin compound.

I would also point out to those who would respond to those who would charge me with “pie in the sky” liberalism and pacifism that I am not a pacifist. In fact, I count myself one who very much believes that the secular, civil order is needed to maintain control over the evil tendency towards disorder and destruction that lies in the hearts of people living in human society (i.e. to give short leash to the “sinfulness” of human beings in the city of man, to borrow from St. Augustine from whom Luther borrowed his two cities metaphor).

If you are sincere in this wish, then it is incumbent upon you to consider evidence in addition to that which you learn first-hand from your acquaintances in Red House. Jamaat ul-Fuqra has been engaging in violence and criminality in this country for nearly three decades.

Simply to ignore and wave away the mountains of testimony about what has been done by Jamaat ul-Fuqra, including at the Red House compound, is to be derelict in any obligation to defend yourself, your country, and the Christian faith.

However, it is my belief that the secular order’s power to maintain order and establish laws is predicated upon God’s law of justice and compassion, and as such, all such use of force must be exercised with an eye towards equity, fairness, and the establishment of truth.

As I said above, if you rely solely upon the testimony of the people at Red House, you may discern a fragment of the truth, but the truth in its entirety will elude you.

It is to this end that I support the members of this community to whom I credit the attempt to live their lives in accord with their own religious conscience and under the rule of law of the “city” in which they find themselves. Thank you and I will still be praying for you.

As a wise theologian once said, “Prayer is what we do while we are waiting for something to happen.”