I make the news

I have been mentioned in the trial of Peter Leithart by the owner of the GreenBaggins Blog, Lane Keistner.  He claimed that my letter to his Stated Clerk, accusing him of hypocrisy regarding the Federal Vision because he himself is out of accord with his church’s confession on the key issue  of sola fide, resulted in complete exoneration.

This all came as a surprise to me as you can imagine.  I had not expected to be mentioned in Peter’s trial.

Having thought about it, I have a few questions I would like Lane Keistner to answer.

Lane:

1. What did they study? No-one contacted me, and since I am the one making the charge, that strikes me as odd.

2. You must have brought the case against yourself. That is quite a precedent. How many accused wish they could do that? What does that tell us about the quality of the evidence you brought against yourself?

3. You claim that you were completely exonerated. Exonerated from arguments you yourself brought? Were arguments made, or did you just say you are orthodox, and you all went out for coffee?

4. How would you answer to the accusation that this looks and smells like a deal done in advance? What does that say about your claim of total exoneration?

5. On that subject, three Presbyteries have ruled against you, and your friends, on these central issues. The tide has turned against you. Does that not give you pause to think that perhaps you may be mistaken? That so many of your peers and superiors disagree with you is telling.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “I make the news

  1. Lane replied that the did not need to ask me anything because all they had to do was look at the places in his blog where I had corresponded on the issue, and make a decision. So then, Lane gets to interpret his answers, with no cross examination from his accuser! Lane, can you not see how bad this makes you look? At the very least, it betrays a lack of judgement.

    As for your claim that you totally exonerated, the actual verdict was that there was no strong presumption of guilt at this time. Not the same thing at all. I was struck by the conditional clause at the end, “at this time”. Hardly unequivocal.

  2. Hey Roger, This is not in response to the post above. Do you have another email address? I can’t get through on your talktalk one. Let me know. Thanks. Shaun.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s