Some folks wonder why I would be averse to remaining in the blog culture, and what kind of comments I was referring to when I noted the Reformed are especially mean-spirited and ill-mannered. Here's a good example. The author of course doesn't use a name, identifying himself/herself only as 'Anonymous' in the comment thread at another site.
If this represents the Reformed world, can you blame anyone for fleeing in terror to join the Methodists, Baptists, or Catholics? Hey, most of those folks are fairly nice.
DP Cassidy:
I read your blog loud and clear, except for those archives that you nuked, which in all my years in the field I have never seen anyone do under any circumstances (I wonder what compelled you to do such a thing). I am concerned, however, for your reading and comprehension skills, because it appears that while you post data on the web, you don’t read what you write or, in the least, you don’t act in accordance with what you write.
You and I differ on the nature of toxicity, seeing your choice of friends and their rabid contribution to the blogosphere. Do you really need me to quote some of the despicable rants of Jeffery Meyers and James B Jordan, men whom you describe as a “blessing” to you? In fact, now that I think about it, can you please tell us if you are among the select few in the PCA who have not bowed the knee to Baal, and while you’re at it, can you please tell us if Pastor White is among the anti-Christs whom James B. Jordan anathematized a couple years ago. This would be helpful information to know.
And I don’t think you’re “ashamed of affirming the importance of the Westminster Confession and that people criticizing it should not expect a sympathetic hearing in Presbyterian circles.” I think you’re a dissembler, saying one thing confidentially, in private, among your BH buds, and another thing completely opposite in public. That’s just my opinion, and every smarmy syllable of yours in this thread confirms it.
Ecumenically yours,
TLOTB
A couple of things:
1. The author having read the blog post that I wasn't going to blog any further didn't read the follow up post that noted I would blog about Toni's health updates, publish sermon notes, and pass along news.
2. He doesn't like some of my friends. Gosh. Oh no. Start the heresy trial.
3. He's ticked off that I 'nuked' all my old blog posts. In his vast experience (?), he's never seen anyone do that. I love being a pioneer. I have all my sermon notes, which in my opinion was the only thing worth preserving. You really want me to archive my praise of the 08 Cubs?
4. I have no idea who "Pastor White" is, but obviously that's a big deal to him. Why it should be to me escapes me.
5. Despite the fact that I was examined in depth for ordination and transfer by two presbyteries and found blameless, not to mention being examined by Bob Phillips (!), and preaching for several years here without the slightest complaint about some funky doctrine I might be teaching, and teaching the confession to successive Officer Training classes, this dude/dudette sees that in fact I am a total hypocrite when it comes to the Reformed Faith. Wow - who knew? My guess is that my colleague on the SJC - who is also the chairman of the credentials committee for the South Texas Presbytery - would've picked up on my dissembling ways.
In short, it is exactly this kind of stuff that is no longer worth dealing with at any level. I offer it here for information purposes only, to assist readers in understanding the weirdness that is out there and why encouraging and enabling such behavior - and I could cite far worse - is neither profitable nor edifying.
10 comments:
I think some people wish we were back in the 17th century. I wish I could say I was surprised, but nothing really surprises me anymore, but you might be surprised at home many 16 year old kids are reading these blogs and looking to start trouble. I have some experience with kids that seem pretty knowledgeable throwing daggers such as you posted. I at least wouldn't totally discount the possibility.
Maybe he is talking about James White?
Sigh. That makes me really sad. People are cruel when they don't have to say things to your face, huh?
Well, your blogs have always been an encouragement and/or challenge to me, and I, for one, stand with you in forgetting whatever positive things we EVER said about the Cubs.
Blessings to you and Toni. We miss you and the church much, but have happily found another great Redeemer Presbyterian out here in sunny CA. So there's that. :)
David,
I don't disagree with you, the blogging world can get pretty vitriolic. However, the bigger culprit in all this "ill feeling" is the attempt to hold together a communion that is too broad in it's commitments. For example; I'm "Klinean" in my understanding of biblical covenants. I'm amillenial in my eschatology. I'm firmly committed to the L/G hermenuetic. I'm strongly 2k in my view of culture and engagement. I embrace the concept of strict justice in the edenic situation. I could go on and on.
My point being you shouldn't ask and it's unfair to ask me to live in ecclesiastical harmony with a monocovenantalist who is postmillenial, neo-calvinistic/theonomic/reconstructionist/, shepherdian in their understanding of justifying faith, and Barthian in their embracing of a creation-fall-redemption motif.(this isn't an implication that you are these things, I'm just trying to give a brief sketch of the two poles the PCA thinks it can/should hold together). We would all be better off in seperate communions on sunday and having lunch during the week.
Sorry for all the theological shorthand but it is a combox after all, we shouldn't ask too much of the medium either.
Oh by the way, no, I'm not "anonymous".
Sean, Never thought so - So far as I've seen in my very brief experience, you have always owned your thoughts with equal measures of clarity and kindness.
The PCA is indeed very diverse, and of course this does create some unpleasant tensions at times. Lig Duncan and Tim Keller are seeking to highlight ways we might all dwell together in a greater authentic unity, though how successful that may be remains to be seen.
Just as an observation, when I am at GA it feels to me that I am in a conference of three or four different denominations, each with a certain emphasis, each at times each holding the others in low regard and viewing the others with deep suspicion. This, and the PCA is not very big at all really. Discerning a unifying principle can be a challenge.
If that unifying dynamic/dogma is clearly seen and embraced then the other doctrinal disputes and emphases can co-exist.
In Rome, the unifying, non-negotiable factors of Magesterium and Mass establish the boundaries within which extensive diversity occurs, with various parishes having different flavors and various orders a variety of ministries. Those differences are not as peaceful as is sometimes portrayed. On the contrary! Things get just as political and personal there too.
Yet the size and scope of the Roman communion means that the impact of such conflicts is mitigated. The PCA, like a small town, hears all gossip and feels all conflicts. Can it stay together? I hope so, despite the undercurrents pushing things the other direction.
David,
It's gonna be tough. For example, I'm always gonna be suspicious of a pastor who claims sola fide, but is monocovenantal and resultingly can't reconcile to strict justice/merit in the edenic situation. I'm always gonna be on my toes with him looking for works "creep" in his expounding on justification. This isn't because I'm mean or uncharitable, but instead is a sincere matter of conscience on my part.
From the other side, a pastor who is pushing a kellerite(maybe better a neo-calvinist) idea of kingdom expansion and cultural engagement is gonna dislike that I won't get onboard(this has actually happened), he'll wanna call into question my commitment for the unchurched, my eschatology may drive him nuts, though I'll try to explain to him that it's my eschatological commitments that allows me embrace my unbelieving neighbor and the local arts fair(without trying to "redeem" it).
It just seems like an unhappy marriage. I know Keller thinks we need each other in the same communion but man it's asking a lot of otherwise "good" people. I'm beginning to think it's asking too much. We want people of strong conviction, balanced commitments and sincere faith and it seems to me we may be causing people to sin against their own conscience by trying to hold these tensions together.
David,
I'm sorry for allowing the posting of that comment on my blog. Once I realized what it was saying, I deleted it. I did not mean to offend you. I thought most of the other comments were simply discussing why connections with Federal Visionists could be offensive.
I do have a question, though. How is that after posting on my blog and emailing me privately and posting on my blog that you did not know who I was?
Pastor Wes White
David,
How is it that you don't know who "Pastor White" is? You comment on his blog all the time?
www.johannesweslianus.blogspot.com
Kindest Regards,
TE Brian Carpenter
Brian and Wes,
Welcome.
Well that clears up that mystery! I had no idea who he was talking about. I have no idea about some incident between Wes and Jim Jordan either. I don't have any idea what this guy is going on about when he starts in on baal worship. Its just incoherent babbling to me.
Look, I know there are important disagreements on a legion of crucial matters among ministers in the PCA. These can be discussed without malice and bitterness. Ferocity in thought need not be accompanied by hatred and actions/attitudes that can only grieve the Holy Spirit.
I appreciate the insight.
Wes I commend you for removing the post. Thanks! I think the absence of such comments makes the blogging world safer for all.
IX,
DC
Sean,
Sorry to call you by your first name, but that is all I see here. Consider what you typed here:
My point being you shouldn't ask and it's unfair to ask me to live in ecclesiastical harmony with a monocovenantalist who is postmillenial, neo-calvinistic/theonomic/reconstructionist/, shepherdian in their understanding of justifying faith, and Barthian in their embracing of a creation-fall -redemption motif.
Consider that 99.9% of Christians have no idea what you are saying, consider that this is a public blog, and consider that yes we are called to love Christian's from different "motifs". And this is coming from someone hardly sympathetic to FV. The battle over justification is important, but your characterization if it does more to hurt the cause than help. You have created a wonderful straw man for the rest of the world to see.
Post a Comment