Turnabout is Not Fair Play
Exposure for the sake of the “greater good” of the blogosphere or SI readers in particular is what has been appealed to in the rationale of why this revelation was appropriate to be made by the publisher of this site. In my understanding of what has been offered on this thread, the desire for information about Weiss from secondhand, thirdhand, or even more speculative sources is what is being invited. No attempted contact with Weiss has been referenced.
I can say from personal experience that personal contact and communication with Norm has always been cordial and more open and forthright than one might expect, given the often provocative content of Remonstrans. While I would not endorse all the content or tone he chooses to make public on his site, I don’t believe that the privilege of divulging hearsay (true or not) is a privilege that SI or its Site Publisher had the right to exercise under the circumstances.
As one heavily involved in this site through its history, I have been privy to information, some firsthand and some not, that could me much more explosive or of interest if revealed to the readers/blogosphere in general than this relatively small exposure. Should I now divulge this information for the “benefit” of all? After all, it might help better understand the source of information and perspective of the information offered here.
Of course not. That would be inconsiderate, arrogant, and dishonorable.
The last I looked, Jesus said,
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them… (Matthew 7:12)
There is no exception given by Christ for those who are caustic or harsh in their tone. The duties of humility and subservience are not lifted if not reciprocated.
I would like to go on record as being quite disappointed in these recent proceedings, and saddened by the apparent lack of judgment and integrity evidenced by this decision of my former colleague (whom I still consider a friend and brother).
(This is cross-posted at SI.)
I have to agree. Even if it were necessary to have more information about Dissidens, there were less invasive ways of gleaning it. Obviously, approaching Dissidens was one. Approaching Kevin Bauder was another. A mass appeal for hearsay was not.
Overall, SI is a good site, staffed by good, well-intentioned people but as you’ve said, this episode is a serious lapse of judgment
I learned more about Jason that I did about Dissidens.
Thank you, Pastor Linscott, for what you have said. We, too, are incredibly saddened–saddened by what has happened and more saddened still that such uncharitable and unethical actions continue being defended. It is particularly ironic to me that the statements made on SI by leadership fly in the face of the principles contained in their soon-to-be-released comment and moderator guidelines.
Since I have resigned both my (4) staff positions and my member account, I am unable to correct one gross inaccuracy in what the Site Publisher said last night. May I do so here? In his post 24 in the thread in which he outed Dissidens’ identity, Pastor Janz stated that, “All the staff of SI has known for months [in context, who Dissidens was].” That is simply not true. I had no fewer than four staff “hats,” and I never knew what Dissidens name was (nor did I care).
Pastor Linscott, like you, I have approached Dissidens privately, and like you, I was struck by the kind and cordial way in which he treated me–a total stranger to him.
You noted that “turnabout is not fair play.” (For pity’s sake, we teach that to our children!) Neither is it the way in which Christians are to conduct themselves. There really is no acceptable excuse for what has been done.
Greg,
Obviously I’m not at SI anymore, but I do follow some of what goes on. Thanks for standing up for the right on this. This is the type of stuff I’ve witnessed for quite some time on SI. More and more SI seems to be a place where those who disagree with the owner are under threat of being kicked out, “outed,” etc. As I look back at the conversations that resulted in Kent and me being booted I still can’t believe it. In both cases we were disagreeing with the owner, but we did not get anywhere near to crossing the line like so many others who are “protected” have. Of course, they weren’t disagreeing with Jason, but with those whom he disagrees with!
The whole attitude that Jason displayed in this SEEMED to be nothing more than a juvenile “na, na, na, na na–I’m telling who Dissidens is” gig. It really stinks.
Pastor Greg, I respect you greatly. I wonder how Jason took your comments. I remember when you said something to me about my tone, I really took it pretty hard (whether I let on or not!). Keep it up.
Posted by Jay at SI:
I applaud this post.
There is no doubt that I used harsh words in my description of Mr. Weiss. There was a better way to say what should have been said. I should have attempted to approach him privately, even if I was unsuccessful as I feared I would be. There is no point in stirring up strife, as adrenaline-rushing as it may be. From Jason’s comments, I was reminded of Proverbs 13:10 “Only by pride cometh contention” and 2 Timothy 2:24 “the servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle…” I failed in these regards. What I want to be most in my life, a gentle servant of God, is exactly the opposite of how I approached this situation.
I do believe there is a place for righteous anger. That anger, however, should be directed toward the false teacher or unrepentant brother directly, not blasted on a public forum for all to see, even if it is directed that way from him.
So I also ask for your forgiveness, Mr. Weiss, and from my brothers and sisters on this site who saw an ugly, sinful side of me. I am ashamed. Anger has a way of perpetrating such filth in my life.
The truth is the truth. I am a firm believe in transparency in Christian communication. I am opposed to elitism in regards to culture. But it was not said in love, as I would desire. The truth is: it is far easier to blast someone publicly than to confront privately. That’s the tough love.
Greg,
If I recall correctly, Janz said he felt it important his SI readers should know Dissidens was not a fundamentalist. Well, if that’s the case, he didn’t have to “out” him to do that. All he had to do was point to his faithful to any half dozen of Dissidens’ posts. His anti-fundamentalism was no secret.
In their mad dash to “out,” I believe Janz and Company violated Scripture and gave an occasion for offense. To me this whole SI debacle comes under the application–an application, mind you, Janz violated–of Prov. 25:9,10.
“Debate thy cause with thy neighbour himself; AND DISCOVER NOT A SECRET TO ANOTHER: Lest he that heareth it put thee to shame, and thine infamy turn not away.”
Plainly put, Dissidens’ anonymity was HIS SECRET. And Janz betrayed it.
Shame on him!!!
Greg,
would you send me an email at the address that accompanies this note and tell me how I can email you now…I’m guessing that the former way is defunct?