Comments on: Bias? http://www.hornes.org/mark/2007/05/11/bias/ The cyberstalkable freelance writer making retractions on the web since 2000.... Oops, 1993? Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:20:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Mark Horne » The Silent Edit: Why it matters http://www.hornes.org/mark/2007/05/11/bias/comment-page-1/#comment-15059 Mark Horne » The Silent Edit: Why it matters Fri, 18 May 2007 16:56:31 +0000 http://www.hornes.org/mark/?p=1352#comment-15059 [...] OK, perhaps no more changes will be made. Perhaps this is it. But this was not a “slip” in the sense of purely accidental error. Every minister on that committee was picked because they had an axe to grind. Jon recently took down Sean’s material. I think this was a mistake. It isn’t about past sins it is about a current miscarriage of justice. Sean was picked for the committee because he passionately opposes Peter Leithart and all the rest–that passion is what cannot be adequately communicated by a summation of what he said; you have to see it to believe it. Lig Duncan was deemed fit for the committee because he has waged a war of propaganda against the “miscreants” in his beloved denomination who, he has said, don’t deserve a fair hearing. [...] [...] OK, perhaps no more changes will be made. Perhaps this is it. But this was not a “slip” in the sense of purely accidental error. Every minister on that committee was picked because they had an axe to grind. Jon recently took down Sean’s material. I think this was a mistake. It isn’t about past sins it is about a current miscarriage of justice. Sean was picked for the committee because he passionately opposes Peter Leithart and all the rest–that passion is what cannot be adequately communicated by a summation of what he said; you have to see it to believe it. Lig Duncan was deemed fit for the committee because he has waged a war of propaganda against the “miscreants” in his beloved denomination who, he has said, don’t deserve a fair hearing. [...]

]]> By: mark http://www.hornes.org/mark/2007/05/11/bias/comment-page-1/#comment-14812 mark Mon, 14 May 2007 16:12:18 +0000 http://www.hornes.org/mark/?p=1352#comment-14812 Sean Lucas responded <a href="http://seanmichaellucas.blogspot.com/2007/05/reprocessing-bad-process.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. My response: Sean, you have GOT to know that I would never claim any moral high ground against you for tone. Nor do I want to. But you have participated in something I can't even trust myself to describe off the cuff and issues of prejudged verdicts are one (not the only) major issue of concern. That is the only reason this is all relevant. Not past ethics, right or wrong, but passionate zeal. Why were you chosen and not Dr. Jack Collins, or Professor John Frame, etc? By what proper process was Dr. Peter Leithart treated like an outsider without a say in a forum that was obviously committed to condemning him? By what Presbyterian or Biblical standard does one treat ministers in good standing as pariahs? And how can we countenance a process that claims to find they are unorthodox when it was formed on the premise of their unorthodoxy? There is no getting away from this Sean. I am nothing but impressed by what you have done in the past. But what has resulted from your present actions is much more problematic and will be more damaging to men--not convicted errorists, but men simply decided to be such beforehand, with a nominal procedure invoked to wrap official appearances around a prejudice. Sean Lucas responded here.

My response:

Sean, you have GOT to know that I would never claim any moral high ground against you for tone. Nor do I want to.

But you have participated in something I can’t even trust myself to describe off the cuff and issues of prejudged verdicts are one (not the only) major issue of concern. That is the only reason this is all relevant. Not past ethics, right or wrong, but passionate zeal.

Why were you chosen and not Dr. Jack Collins, or Professor John Frame, etc? By what proper process was Dr. Peter Leithart treated like an outsider without a say in a forum that was obviously committed to condemning him? By what Presbyterian or Biblical standard does one treat ministers in good standing as pariahs? And how can we countenance a process that claims to find they are unorthodox when it was formed on the premise of their unorthodoxy?

There is no getting away from this Sean. I am nothing but impressed by what you have done in the past. But what has resulted from your present actions is much more problematic and will be more damaging to men–not convicted errorists, but men simply decided to be such beforehand, with a nominal procedure invoked to wrap official appearances around a prejudice.

]]> By: scott cunningham http://www.hornes.org/mark/2007/05/11/bias/comment-page-1/#comment-14655 scott cunningham Fri, 11 May 2007 16:19:52 +0000 http://www.hornes.org/mark/?p=1352#comment-14655 Mark, who wrote this? Ligon? Mark, who wrote this? Ligon?

]]>