We Apologize for Misquoting Jonathan Leeman

In the post Should Autonomous Churches Be Cooperating in Church Discipline?, we quoted Jonathan Leeman as follows:

Leeman goes on to explain:

"That means (i) another church’s decision in a matter of discipline and membership never formally binds your church, but (ii) you should give other churches the benefit of the doubt, assuming they have acted wisely until you have concrete reasons for thinking otherwise. Also, I hardly think churches should conduct manhunts for excommunicated members, following them everywhere they go and putting in phone calls to the pastors of any church building they walk into. But you should do what you can, with prudence, to aid other churches whenever they ask you about members who once belonged to you. 

Finally, there is no reason why Baptist, Presbyterian, Anglican and other churches might not informally cooperate in such matters. Every church has a gospel-interest in seeing the others succeed in gospel health and faithfulness."  Everyone sins and falls short of the glory of God.  Let's say that you have a heavy handed pastor and you confront him.  He puts you under church discipline for challenging him.  Call and report you are under church discipline.  Use church discipline to keep control of members."

However, the quote should have been:

Leeman goes on to explain:

"That means (i) another church’s decision in a matter of discipline and membership never formally binds your church, but (ii) you should give other churches the benefit of the doubt, assuming they have acted wisely until you have concrete reasons for thinking otherwise. Also, I hardly think churches should conduct manhunts for excommunicated members, following them everywhere they go and putting in phone calls to the pastors of any church building they walk into. But you should do what you can, with prudence, to aid other churches whenever they ask you about members who once belonged to you. 

Finally, there is no reason why Baptist, Presbyterian, Anglican and other churches might not informally cooperate in such matters. Every church has a gospel-interest in seeing the others succeed in gospel health and faithfulness."

We inadvertently included some editorial notes (the words in bold which we meant to delete) in the blockquote, and we extend to Jonathan Leeman our sincerest apology for our inadequate editing.

Comments

We Apologize for Misquoting Jonathan Leeman — 16 Comments

  1. It’s funny . . . I remember when I was a kid and learned the definition of the word “integrity.” For some reason, that word just resonated inside me – it wouldn’t leave me – integrity – wow — that’s what I wanted to have – to live a life of integrity. I sought out people with integrity and have continued to take note of it when I see it. That’s what I see going on here. This is good stuff, Maynard.

  2. Deb wrote:

    Kolya wrote:
    Well done guys for being honest enough to admit a mistake.

    We are definitely fallible creatures.

    Geez Deb. You two have it all over these guys. Not only do you correct when you get it mixed up but you published what they wrote in the first place.

  3. “Finally, there is no reason why Baptist, Presbyterian, Anglican and other churches might not informally cooperate in such matters. Every church has a gospel-interest in seeing the others succeed in gospel health and faithfulness.”

    I don’t know about the Baptists but the Presbyterian and Anglican/Episcopalian clergy I know probably aren’t on board with the Church discipline/cult-like harassment thing for the following two reasons: 1) They’re busy actually caring for their flocks and others in their communities instead of trying to figure out who’s leaving a Church because its Pastors are harassing them about things that are none of anyone else’s business; 2) They’re educated enough to know that disclosing confidential information about a Church member is against the law in most States.

    Plus, the Episcopalian/Presbyterian Rev. may be a woman who would love to hear about how she’s not qualified to be a Minister from a nutcase who probably hasn’t even been to Seminary.

  4. After the ‘loving’ correction to TWW, I’m blessed that they were able to ‘perceive’ their error. But wait, shouldn’t they now be asking Jonathon to perceive his contributing or reactionary errors? Sarcasm off.
    Please do not blame TWW for my sinful snark.

  5. Patti wrote:

    @ Julie Anne:
    Love that quote Julie Anne, I still say it too. Was that Malt O’Meal?

    I have no idea, Patti – it’s something from way back that just stuck with me. I’m a mixed bag of expressions from our former military days.