Mark, it is very interesting to me that the SJC brought up a point of negligence by the LA Presbytery for not having a face-to-face meeting. The hypocrisy is astounding. When I served in the LA Presbytery before becoming coming into the Church of England, I represented LAP in a complaint to the SJC concerning the assuming of original jurisdiction of a man who slandered Mr. Wilkins in the Southern Poverty Law Centre journal. The complaint was dealt with by the SJC, myself, and a representative from a church in the presbytery by way of telephone conference call. The SJC committee favourably sided with the presbytery which was then overturned by the SJC at their larger meeting. Why is there such a stink over a meeting over the phone when the SJC did the very same in that presbytery a few years ago? Mr. Sam Duncan moderated the phone meeting who was a member of the SJC. What a joke!
Mark, it is very interesting to me that the SJC brought up a point of negligence by the LA Presbytery for not having a face-to-face meeting. The hypocrisy is astounding. When I served in the LA Presbytery before becoming coming into the Church of England, I represented LAP in a complaint to the SJC concerning the assuming of original jurisdiction of a man who slandered Mr. Wilkins in the Southern Poverty Law Centre journal. The complaint was dealt with by the SJC, myself, and a representative from a church in the presbytery by way of telephone conference call. The SJC committee favourably sided with the presbytery which was then overturned by the SJC at their larger meeting. Why is there such a stink over a meeting over the phone when the SJC did the very same in that presbytery a few years ago? Mr. Sam Duncan moderated the phone meeting who was a member of the SJC. What a joke!