This is sad.
I get fed up with adversarial blogging and try to deal with public accusations of scandal through a private message. This is the result.
I’m not asking anyone to violate their consciences by allowing me to speak anywhere. I would not hesitate to encourage my session to stop John Gerstner from teaching my congregation that it is wrong to allow their young children to pray the Lord’s Prayer. What I’m asking is that we stop making false claims that certain people are “hiding,” engaged in “subterfuge” or “doublespeak.”
Kind of like accusing the OPC Stated Clerks office of consipracy, eh?
http://www.upsaid.com/scarecrow/index.php?action=viewcom&id=623
“You are really stretching my capacity for a “judgment of charity” to tell me that someone with power did not intend that document to go far and wide outside of the OPC.”
Then later:
“Pentamom, sorry. I agree with you about the clerk. I overreacted.”
The latter statement was because someone saw fit to interact with me about what I had said rather than use it in another way.
I stand by my second thought that my first response was lacking in charity and should not have been posted as a comment.
Readers can decide for themselves how much what I said is “like” the material on the Puritanboard or, for that matter, “like” the description offered above.
Oh dear puritanboard, what would we ever do without you?
I think everyone’s time would be better spent watching LOST and smiling just a little bit.
i thought our tribe had it bad …
Wow!! this is ugly. I thought the PG doc was good. How often do the disputing parties sit down and talk to each other( maybe talk on the phone?). Hang- in there Mark