A pastor in my denomination and presbytery was vindicated against suspicions expressed in a letter that claimed he needed to be investigated for his doctrinal orthodoxy on a number of matters. While I had several objections to the letter that I won’t bore you with here, I was also outraged that it was done in public. A commenter on another blog mentioned something I want to quote in full:

I found the part of the report where seven signatories commented on the release of the letter to a news agency to be interesting:

“Sadly, it has come to our attention that the [Letter Of Concern] was distributed publicly. It was never our intention for this to be a public letter, but rather a letter to Missouri Presbytery and Mr. Meyers. We simply wanted to lay this nformation before our brothers in Missouri Presbytery for their attention. The letter was not one of charges or accusations, but concern for clarity and doctrinal understanding. Such matters are for the courts of our church, not for the Internet. We are sincerely sorry for the public development of this situation, of which we had no part, and want to express our apology to the Missouri Presbytery and Mr. Meyers.”
****
“I thought I was signing a private letter from the group of signatories to Missouri Presbytery. I was never consulted about publishing the letter and never gave permission to go public with the letter. I was as surprised as anyone that it was made public and had no idea that my name would be splashed across the Internet. I was saddened that this took place. . . . It was too late to do anything about [the LOC going public.]”
****
“Moreover, I never consented to make the letter public. I do not know who is responsible for posting the letter, and I regret that this has occurred…”
****
“I certainly did not advocate for or agree to the contents of the request for an investigation of TE Meyers to be made public over the Internet, and I am very sorry that it happened. I deeply regret that the contents of the letter were made public…

“I do not know how or why the letter was published on the Internet, nor did I have knowledge that the letter would be made public. If I had, I would have objected. I think that its publication was an exceedingly unwise, if not sinful, thing to do…”
****
“I do wish to assure you, I had absolutely nothing to do with the posting of the Letter of Concern Re: TE Jeff Meyers on the Internet. I was absolutely appalled that occurred and I do appreciate the way in which MO Presbytery has handled the entire situation going forward.”
****
“…I do know how the LOC came to be published on the Internet after the act. No, I was not aware that the LOC was going to be made public. Yes, I did inquire about it, but in my position I allowed older and wiser men to communicate to each of the signers of the letter about the LOC being made public.”
****
“Moreover, I and the other signatories of the original letter never consented to make the letter public. I do not know who is responsible for making the letter public, and I deeply regret that this has occurred…”

These comments are to the credit of the signatories and show that a sense of honor is not dead in the PCA. Well done men.

I wish I could feel better about why these men thought such a letter should be sent in the first place, but I fully agree with the writer that the comments are to the credit of these men. In fact, I am smitten with guilt about the way I felt about the signatories. I assumed without investigation that they all had planned to make this document public.  I totally misjudged them and am sorry I did so.