[Vision2020] double oops Jones Letter & Metzler's Response

[Michael]

Oops. I offer my sincere apologies for cluttering up this list with the
ecclesiastical formalities between myself and my elders.  I'll offer a brief
self-justificatory, groveling explanation and then I'll go away and get off
the internet:  

 

A friend called, and he wanted to see Jones' letter to me while we were on
the phone; I pasted into the response I was writing up for Aaron-I think
anyway. "Hey, it is still not coming in," my friend explained.  "Really?
That's strange...Ah, I'm afraid you'll have to see it on Vision 2020!"
Sensory overload or something like that; time to go read a book..

 

At least note that I had permission to post this letter in anyway I saw fit
: -)

 

Last time this happened, Wilson said that it was not funny, not funny at
all.  For those of you interested in scanning this letter, please note the
good news: excommunication won't do me any good, so nobody is going to
bother.  Whew! 

 

Hey, and I think I'll just go ahead and copy my response below.  We're all
big one happy Moscow family by now after all.

 

Michael

 

 

May 4-th , 2006  

Dear Mr. Jones,

 

As I anticipated, my request for the elders to 'pace' themselves was not
headed.  Chris Schlect and Doug Wilson have both recently leveled numerous
and wildly false accusations against me.  I therefore need to offer a strong
defense.  Further accusations from you and your new ultimatums is further
exasperating my ability to offer my defense before the elders.  This is
actually not surprising, since this action of yours, seen properly within
the broader story line, is clearly an attempt to keep me away from
expressing my concerns to the elders. I have already pointed out beyond a
reasonable doubt the deceit in your claims about a full 'open door' for
me-whether formal or informal.  This letter from you is further proof of
just this.  I finally begin getting a hearing or interest from elders after
5 months, and your response is to immediately clamp down on my ability to
continue explaining my concerns and answering wildly false accusation
against me.  The session of Christ Church has been seeking to bring "some
level of closure" in their interaction with me for the last five months,
beginning with Wilson's refusal to speak with me normally many months ago,
following up with your disparagement of my desire to meet with the elders at
the time I started Pooh's Think.   I find it strange therefore that you
would say now that "The session of Christ Church is interested in bringing
some level of closure to our interaction with you. Humanly speaking, for a
long while now, we've obviously ceased to be any pastoral help to you."

 

In this letter to me, you make a series of claims that are not only false,
they are calling black white and white black.  Your claims about me, my
intentions, and what and how I have actually been addressing the elders and
posting on my web site are backwards.  The claims you make of me apply to
you, not me.  I will therefore, in a way that permits of robust
'falsification,' answer your fresh claims one by one:

 

 

DJ: We had hoped you would join us in trusting in the Spirit's work in the
Supper because any attempts at interaction with you only created more
tangled layers of misinterpretations.

 

MM: This is a wild revision of history, Mr. Jones. I have vigorously
interacted with all communication you have been willing to throw my way, and
yet each time you refuse to continue any sort of dialog.  You send me
authoritative utterances, I attempt to interact, agree, or challenge these
utterances, and then I either hear nothing in return, or else you just
glibly pronounce that I'm just "psychologizing."  For the last five months
you have refused any of what would be considered the most basic expression
of human communicative dialog.  You refuse to hear my replies; you refuse to
answer them; you refuse to so much as have a 'conversation' with me.  Not
once over the last three months have you attempted to demonstrate that you
have attempted to understand a concern of mine, and your refusal to answer
my arguments or criticism continues to this day.  Instead, I have been
belittled and disrespected to a severe degree:  I am losing it, I am
spiritually imploding, I don't know what I am talking about, I don't care
about the truth, I am confused, I know what I am saying is not true, I'm
losing my grip, I can't handle the truth, I am not qualified to make a
judgment about Wilson's false accusations against McLaren, etc. Mr. Jones,
this is classic, text-book, SPIRITUAL ABUSE, not pastoral 'interaction.' 

 

 

DJ: But now you've stopped communing with us. At the same time, you have
continued to make public accusations and have declined to submit any of
these accusations to us to evaluate in a biblical, accountable, orderly, and
responsible manner. 

 

MM: We leave town every other weekend.  I therefore believe it has been two
to three Sunday's in town since our last meeting with you at Christ Church.
We have communed at other Christian Churches during this time.  I have
submitted accusations continually in an accountable and orderly manner;
given your character assignation, unaccountable arrogance, and refusal to
respect my desire to express concern, my web site is fully 'biblical.'  And
I would think that my attempt to offer a judicious and rational (i.e.
evidential and argumentative) display of my concerns once you refused to
take them 'in house' has certainly been done in a responsible manner when
contrasted to your irrational, authoritative, belittling responses to me.
Mike Lawyer expressing his confidence that I don't have any more Christian
friends is an example of the level of contrast I see between the elders'
willingness to engage in rational conversation and my own.   
  
  
DJ: This option would include taking down your blog (for your sake), remove
yourself from all Christ Church disputes, seek forgiveness, and begin
attending Christ Church again regularly. Nothing we've seen in your
correspondence suggests that you are in any way inclined in this direction.

 

MM: Notice here that the path of 'repentance' is to basically 'shut up and
sit down.' I am to remove myself from all disputes.  This is an amazing
admission to what your attitude has been all along.  When we met privately
many months ago, I was to either forget everything, shut up, and go silently
on my way, or else there was going to be a nasty fight. Actually considering
my concerns or leaving the mere possibly open to the fact that I might
provide some kind of laymen spiritual gift for the edification of the body
was rejected a priori.  A Greyfriar student with gifts like I have is simply
not allowed to express criticism or concern?  This is outrageous, and one of
the very justifications I providentially received for continuing Pooh's
Think.  I'm sorry you have not been able to silence me as quickly as you did
other dissenting kirkers. 

 


DJ: Your blog should be much more of an embarrassment to you and your family
than to us. 

 

MM: The logical options here seem to be the following: you are either
self-deluded or else you are putting on a rhetorical magic show for the
other elders. There might be another psychological option, but I'm not sure
what that would be.  I would say that about 9 out of 10 of those people
without an identity attached to Doug Wilson in any way find my web site to
be largely sound and cogent.  And I would guess, from the vast
correspondence my web site has created, that about 7 out of 10 are glad I
have done what I have done.  Of those individuals who would like to see me
go in a more 'positive' direction or else just stop blogging, none of them
(but for one odd fellow I think) find my web site an "embarrassment." Even
Wilson-defending critics on the 'outside' of Christ Church usually do not
see my site as an "embarrassment."  No, only those 'inside' kirkers express
this sort of cognitive and emotional response. And there are even local
kirkers who are listening with agreement and mild approval.  If this is not
rhetorical deception, then you need to get out of your bubble Mr. Jones.
What you say here is clearly false by the only possible standard to which to
test it.  This further reveals that the people living in non-reality
currently are those loyal members of the Kirk. 

 

 

DJ: A faithful church is supposed to generate this sort of false accusation,
and when we compare its bizarre disconnect from reality, it only confirms
that we're doing something right. When we cease provoking sentimental men,
then we will have failed in our calling.

 

This "bastard apologetic" [penned by another local pastor] has been fully
illustrated and refuted in the Wood; you simply refuse to acknowledge it.
This is one of the ad hoc developments of the Kirk's unique imprecatory,
Enemy Theology.  To normal Christians who understand our current culture, it
is basic common sense why so many people have taken offense from our
behavior.  We have been non-missional, arrogant, insulting, and rude.  We
have not extended a culture of love and grace to outsiders but rather
journalistic satire.  We have even done many very silly and stupid things,
like writing positive remarks about the happiness of the 'interracial'
mixing of blacks and whites before the civil war, and throwing around a
static, ugly, theonomic position in the face of refined liberals with a good
taste for social justice. (The property ownership and voting thing is really
cute.  Ah, the founding father's agreed!  All legal regress here in America
the last 200 years.) The smugness and irrationality that many kirkers have
consistently expressed on Vision 2020 is simply an embarrassment.  In fact,
our behavior has been so unwise and arrogant that I have marveled at how
judicious many on the outside continue to be.  No sir, a faithful Christian
church in our society is NOT supposed "to generate this sort of false
accusation."  As you and others at the Kirk have revealed over and over
again, it is you and not people like me who have a 'bizarre disconnect from
reality.'  And you, Mr. Jones, will one day have to answer for your arrogant
dismissal of concerns expressed by numerous men with hearts and
personalities more in conformity to those of the characters we see in the
bible.  If Jesus, Paul, or David were at Christ Church today, you would have
certainly labeled them as "sentimentalists" and told them to take a hike.
I've seen you play this game with other godly men, such as Jon Amos.  That
was really your only way of defending the serrated edge: anyone who
disagrees is just a sentimentalist.  This is subterfuge, Mr. Jones.  

 

 
DJ: You've created a web of unfalsifiable accusations and psychological
conspiracies in which you are always the victim. With God as our witness,
our consciences are clean in regard to your accusations, and we
unhesitatingly believe that you will be terribly surprised and ashamed of
your claims when we sit as brothers on Judgment Day. You clearly have no
idea how far from reality your vision is, and we clearly lack the means of
persuading you otherwise. 
  

MM: With God as my witness Mr. Jones, I want to charge you with lying here.
You know fully well that I have addressed you with arguments and evidence.
I have given you almost nothing but the ability to provide 'falsification.'
You consciences' are not clean, as your behavior towards me for the last 8
months has been screaming loud and clear.  But you are right that you
clearly lack the means of persuading me otherwise; you lack the means of
persuading any rational independent onlooker to this.  In fact, you simply
refuse to even attempt a falsification to my arguments and claims, arguments
and claims that would be easily falsified if they were entirely incorrect.
What seems very apparent to me and many others on-looking all this is that
you don't have any good reasons for thinking that my claims are not true.
What is easily falsifiable and yet also clearly demonstrated beyond a
reasonable doubt is the fact that Wilson misrepresented Brian McLaren's
book, to give just one example.  So did Wilson do this or not?  Most on the
outside think he did to some degree.  For anyone that rigorously compared
his 'review' with the actually book, I think the results would be
staggering; Wilson's actions against McLaren are atrocious, and I labored
with a dozen lengthy and scholarly posts demonstrating just this.  So just
how is it on this one particular claim of mine (for mere illustration) that
my vision is "so far reality"?  

 

Excuse me Mr. Jones, but you are simply revealing the fact that you are not
an honest man; you are not demonstrating a 'clean conscience' at all.  Just
look at your very claims here.  You call white black and black white.  Who's
claims are really unfalsifiable here.  Mine or yours.  You hide behind a
wall of ad hom remarks and subterfuge whereas I want to get right down to
business and lay the fact out on the table.  Can't you see how silly it
looks from the 'outside,' when after all this you cannot even provide and
argument, and explanation, or any evidence to your strong accusations
against me?  What about just one example Mr. Jones?  Just one.  Can you come
up with at least one illustration?    

 


DJ: The second option urges you to take responsibility for your accusations,
justify them coherently, and allow them to be evaluated and cross-examined
in an orderly manner before our session immediately. As always, we're far
from perfect and always open to correction. We now lack, however, the
confidence that you are any longer able to discuss these items with us
informally, and so this option asks you to justify your accusations
carefully and precisely. At the same time, this option includes taking down
your blog and removing yourself from other disputes as evidence that you are
willing to pursue these issues in an orderly manner. 

 

MM:  Mr. Jones, why the procrastination and all the time spent on this long
letter to me?  Let's get started right now.  Structure it any way you like.
Who goes first?  Let's dance man.  For heaven's sake, after five months,
will the elders finally start "evaluating and cross-examining" me?  Go for
it.  I'm tired of cross-examining Wilson, since he turns up more guilty than
I even imagined every time-and it has now been four times.  So now your
turn.  Please, present some kind of reasonable argument or counter claim.
Pick a topic; ask for clarification on something.  Why is it my
responsibility to figure out how to get my concerns voiced?  Of course I'm
able to discuss all this informally with the Session; I discuss difficult
and controversial subjects with all sorts of people on a weekly basis.  Why
do the elders get in the way of this by merely maligning my character and
declaring that I'm simply living in a fantasy world?  Who is it really
getting in the way of rational discussion here?  Of course I'm not going to
take down my Blog right now; I've got too many character attacks coming out
to defend myself about. 

  
DJ: Given that you have declined to follow your membership vows to submit to
our government and discipline while pursuing purity and peace, as evidenced
by your refusal to worship with us or heed our counsel, this option has us
confirming your actions by immediately releasing you from your membership
vows and our obligations to you.

 

MM: I do not have a clue to what you are talking about.  I have headed every
exhortation that the session has given me.  Have I not?  When have I not?  I
even asked further many times if there was anything additional and
particular that the elders would require of me.  Unfortunately, I have to
once again follow up and accuse you of lying here Mr. Jones. You have no
authority or right to declare that I have refused to head the Session's
demands after I have just headed every one of the Session's demands.  That
might look like psychologizing to you, but most human beings call it
straight forward logic.  

 

I "refuse" to worship with you?  Two or three in-town Sundays is a
"refusal"?  The elders are on record encouraging and then refusing to
discourage another 'kirker' brother who was hatefully and irrationally
threatening me with litigation.  Doug Wilson called this despicable and
violent "argument" "unassailable."  I'm sorry, but that kind of wierded me
out a little bit.   It was hard enough to continue worshiping with you as it
was, but until you repent of this kind of injustice and mishandling of me,
and your wild failure to protect me and my family through basic pastoral
care, then I really am going to have a hard time coming back and worshiping
with you now.  Let me know when you are willing to discharge your basic
duties on that one event and I will consider coming back.

 

 

DJ: This is not excommunication or suspension; we believe those would be of
no spiritual benefit to you. 

 

MM: Really?  Then why is it beneficial for ____________?  He thinks the same
things I do are true about you and Wilson.  He has the identical missional
heart and the same fear of Wilson.  So why is it helpful to him, even though
he has even already joined himself to another church for accountability and
nourishment?  This is truly perplexing to me.  If you have any helpful
thoughts on this matter I would greatly appreciate it.  Further, Wilson has
already stated in writing that part of his strategy with me is to not do
anything that could show up negatively on Vision 2020.  Your game here is
clear.  If I didn't start my blog at all, I would not have been suspended
for like-behavior?  This makes no sense to me; so again, if you have any
helpful comments that could help clarify this for me I would greatly
appreciate it.  

 

 

DJ:  We count you a brother in need of great help we can't provide. 

 

MM:  But Christ Church is one of the best pastoral/educational churches in
the USA [not really].  Why would you not be in a position to help me?
Again, this makes no sense to me.  What sin am I in that would preclude you
helping me?  I'm a conservative, committed, missional Christian faithfully
married to another Christian woman and raising four children in a 'biblical'
manner.  I have a high sense of duty to pursue truth and what it is that God
has set forward in his scripture.  I'm even somewhat educated, and broadly
so; this would give you plenty of material to work with.  I'm sensitive and
have an imaginative mental life; it seems this is something you could used
powerfully in your desire to relieve my fears, answer my concerns, and guide
me to safer shores.  Have you really even tried to do this?  Outside of just
trying to get me to shut up that is.  You guys write books on discipline and
counseling.  What is the unique problem with me?  You can't provide me with
any help at all?   

 

DJ: Please feel free to circulate or post this correspondence as you see fit
before God. 
  

MM:  This is one of the first honest statements I've heard from you in a
long time.  Thank you, I appreciate that.

 

As for the various options:  please send me an official letter from the
Session of Christ Church that it is their desire for me to remove my
membership if I am not willing to comply with the other two options.  As for
filing formal charges, everyone on the 'outside' is strongly discouraging me
from doing this.  Most folks appear to think that I would be lynched in a
dark basement if I threw myself at the feet of your beautiful sense of
justice. But I'll have to talk to my wife further about it. 

 

The much needed defense against Chris Schlect's and Doug Wilson's slander
will be forthcoming. 

 

Thank You

 

Michael Metzler
  

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060504/4468e0e2/attachment-0001.htm