Was My Response to a Fellow Naznetter over the Top?

Well, possibly.  If so then I apologize. Tis not a left handed apology, I just really don't know if it was over the top.  It was intended to be sarcastic, sardonic and at points humors (I guess some well, placed emotocons would have been helpful).  The fellow Naznetter to whom I responded is often known for his sardonic approach and his own sarcasm, so I perceived that it would be received in the same vein.

If that failed to come across then I do apologize, and I am sincere.

Honestly, though I do not believe more than two or three people ever saw the post.

What I Should Have Said (And did say)

WHAT I SHOULD HAVE SAID:

Dr. Leth,
I’d like to point out that in your Open Letter I believe you unfairly disparaged Lighthouse Trails.  First, you called them your “accusers.” Sir, as far as I can see they have never mentioned you at all let alone accused you of anything.  I have word-searched both their Research site and their weblog, your name is not on their site.  You have not been accused of anything by these fellow believers.  I read the article linked to Lighthouse Trails by Mr. Silva’s site very, very closely, you are not mentioned, nor are you accused of anything.  How is it fair and gracious of you to label them as your accusers when they have not leveled any accusation against you? As far as I can tell you are not even on their “Radar,” I believe this characterization of the folks at Lighthouse Trails as your “accusers” to be entirely misrepresentative and hurtful to these folks who have not said anything against you.  Frankly, Sir I believe that this characterization is beneath the level of one so academically gifted and borders upon bearing a false witness, for to say they are your accusers I believe to be false.

Second, you asked several rhetorical questions, questioning their academic qualifications, their credentialing and their theological training ect.  Sir, I believe your type of questioning/tactic to be unwarranted and actually a sort of subterfuge..  You seem to be trying to hold Lighthouse Trails and specifically the “blog” of Lighthouse Trails to the same standard as that of a peer reviewed academic journal?  Are there any “blogs” that can or should be held to this standard?  I believe the simple answer is NO.  A blog is simply a web presence anyone can produce, for anything, thought, ruminations, contemplations, political theory, poetry, recipes, criticism,… ad infinitum.  No blog should be held to the standard which you imply by your questions.  I believe it to be pure subterfuge and disingenuous for you to imply that they should be held to such a standard. 

One may then ask about the Research site of Lighthouse Trails, what standard should a site purporting to do research be held to?  Well, their area of Research has a very limited focus, they believe many elements often contained in what has most often come to be labeled Spiritual Formation to be detrimental to the Christian faith, specifically, many things that can be tied to mysticism; lectio divina, contemplative and centering prayer, labyrinth walking, ect.  In one area they expose or list Christian Colleges that promote these practices or at least utilize authors that promote these practices, such as Nouwen, Foster, Willard, Manning, John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila to name a few.  The question to ask here is; does Lighthouse Trails purport to be an academic journal?  The answer is NO.  Then one must ask, does it require credentialing, or an academic qualification do perform research?  The answer is again, NO.  Anyone who has ever been a student has performed research, even if it is a sixth grade book report.  Trying to find the cheapest airline ticket or the cheapest gasoline in any local area is an act of research and requires no more qualification than literacy.  Since Lighthouse Trails does have a public presence, yet is has not claimed any academic standing, the only standard by which to fairly judge them would be the quality, that is the veracity and accuracy of that research and in particular there documentation of that research.  Again, questioning there credentialing, academic standing, or theological training I believe to be subterfuge and I believe that reflects poorly on you Sir. 

The standard to use is simply, to ask the questions; “Can I verify what they say?”  “Do they document where their information comes from?”  While I have not read the entirety of the Lighthouse blog, nor the entirety of their Research site, I can say that I have in the past read significant portions and I can say that they do research well.  I can independently find out the same information they use, because they most often document where and how they came upon the information.  A simple example might be that they say text XYZ is used in University course ZYX.  A simply perusal of the pertinent .edu site will show that yes in fact this text is used.  One can often (but not always) tell from the available course descriptions whether the text in question is used as a positive or negative light.  In such cases where this is ambiguous, I have seen that Lighthouse Trails use standard telephonic research much like any newspaper reporter, and then they document such conversations; “As per telephone conversation with Dr. So-and-so, Director of Such-and-such” I suppose if one were entering into this arena with a very high, and unwarranted state of skepticism and coming to it with a very negative presupposition, one could say ‘Well, how do I really know that Dr. So- and-so was really contacted…”  but that is to presuppose that they are lying.  I do not see that as warranted, do you?

All of this calling into question the folks at Lighthouse Trails reminds me of the many legal dramas I have watched.  Specifically the parts where an attorney, intentionally brings something forbidden out into the open, addressing the jury, that is not fair to the other side.  This is then followed by an objection by apposing counsel and the ever present admonishment from the Judge to the Jury to disregard what has been heard.  But to mix some metaphors, the cat is out of the bag, the seed is planted, the bell cannot be un-rung…  The attorney knows when and where to skirt the rules and plant in the minds of the Jury just what he wants.  I really don’t want to attribute this type of behavior to you Sir, but your tactics here do seem very, very similar.

Thirdly, you asked about there relationship to the Wesleyan –Holiness tradition, again I must say that I believe this to be misdirection and subterfuge.  They do not claim to be of that tradition, nor are they solely commenting upon the Wesleyan-Holiness tradition or it Universities.  The schools that they list run the gambit of denominations.  Bringing this up really has zero bearing upon the topic in question in my opinion, especially when they have a readily accessible doctrinal statement, why question this at all?  I especially, find this to be in poor form as, apparently this Open Letter was sparked by interaction between you and Mr. Silva over a visit to Olivet by Tony Campolo.  Is he of the Wesleyan-Holiness tradition?  He is American Baptist isn’t he?  How about the use of Richard Foster’s texts?  He is a Friend or Quaker isn’t he?  I am sure you have significant knowledge of Church History and are aware that historically the Quakers, due to their belief in extra-biblical revelation and “inner-Light” were often ostracized and considered outside orthodoxy.

Fourthly, you characterize Lighthouse Trails as “shadowy” it appears to me that this is a deliberate attempt to malign these fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.  I hope I am wrong, but your phrase seems to lead one to the conclusion that they are involved in some deliberate attempt to mask their identity and operate in a covert manner.  Sir, I find this to the most egregious and maligning of your statements. It really appears to me that you are very specifically calling their integrity into question. It matters not on which of the three main Lighthouse Trails websites one goes to, as I previously stated it takes only two mouse clicks to find, email, address, and telephone number for David and Deb Dombrowski.  If you have found David and Deb Dombrowski then you have found Lighthouse Trails in its entirety.  There is absolutely no reason to attribute to them “shadowiness” or attack their integrity, they are completely aboveboard about who, what, and where they are. They are completely aboveboard about what they believe.  Sir, here I truly believe you have crossed a line.  By saying they are shadowy you no longer are bordering upon false witness, but have indeed witnessed falsely against a fellow brother and sister in Christ, and I respectfully call upon you to repent.

Finally, your entire reference to Lighthouse Trails, could have been ever so much simpler and effective; reflecting upon you a much better light, if you had simply said that you notice that they find some forms Spiritual Formation which they often refer to as Completive Spirituality to be detrimental to the Christian faith, further stating that you are not of the same opinion  and that you are therefore unlikely to find much common ground with, or share the same conclusions as the folks at Lighthouse Trails. Period –end of story.  That would have been sufficient, direct, on-point and admirable.  In my opinion there was no need to bring these folks any further into the disagreement between you Mr. Silva.  They have not accused you of anything, they are not shadowy and they are not to be held to the standard you implied nor is their statement of faith relevant to the argument or discussion at hand.

As I have reflected upon my previous, poor behavior and lack of graciousness and repented, I call upon you to do the same concerning your statements about Lighthouse Trails.

In Christ

George Wallace


Also posted here: http://www.epworthpulpit.com/pressing-matters/open-letter-manny-silva#comment-2247  

To Repent Or Not To Repent: That Is The Question

Upon, reflection, some Private Message admonishment from a fellow Naznetter and Pastor, prayer and a convicting sermon this past Lord’s Day I must conclude that the answer is yes, I need to repent.  My comments to Dr. Leth were not at all gracious, lacking seriously in proper form and etiquette.  My phrasing was incendiary and designed more to wound than to disagree--agreeably- . I posted in anger and out of a sense of pride, my entire tone was in bad form.  My message was lost due to the type of rhetoric I engaged in.  I was rude and unkind.  For that I do sincerely apologize, repent and ask his and the other Epsworth Pulpit readers for forgiveness.  I truly believe in the substance of my post and still whole heartily disagree with Dr. Leth’s characterization of Lighthouse Trails, yet my vitriolic phrasing obscured anything that might have remotely been viewed as positive.  Again, I sincerely apologize and repent of my un-Christlike behavior.
Also posted here: http://www.epworthpulpit.com/pressing-matters/open-letter-manny-silva#comment-2247 

Post That Put Me In Time Out

Fellow NazNetter

His [Dr. Leth’s] article linked to Manny's. Manny's article linked to a Lighthouse site.

George
Well let us see, if I indeed need to repent I will.  First, I just switched from Firefox to Google Chrome, maybe that's why I see no links whatsoever in Dr. Leth article on Epsworth Pulpit?  Hold on lemme check...  No, no links in Firefox either.  Let me try IE.... No links there either.  Well, I find zero hyperlinks in Dr. Leth's posting whatsoever. 

Where did you find them? 

You do mean link in the sense of Hyperlink right?  That's what people usually mean when you say a posting "links" to another.

I see no links to Manny Siliva's website. (I word searched the text to be sure).  I don't read Manny's bog/site but I know the name.  So after your post I went there to see what’s what, as my only concern dealt with the falsehoods spewed forth by Dr. Leth against Lighthouse Trails; I have no real interest in what has transpired between the Professor and Manny.

But, if a person did not know the name of Manny's website how would one go about finding out this particular back-story?  (and gain access to these links you are talking about?)  I don't see how, because I don't see any links.

Again, please show me where I am missing them.

Fellow NazNetter

Manny's article linked to a Lighthouse site. The Lighthouse page has the article labelling ONU as the 105th to be added to the comtemplatives list... The menu bar at the top of that page has a tab for, "About US." Clicking on the "About US" tab tells a story using the first person plural pronoun "we" explaining a bit of their anti-contemplative history. This "About Us" page does not give any names or affiliations or credentials, etc. 

George
Right and Wrong; You are correct, there are no credentials listed.  First, the site clearly says “from the lighthouse…the blog of lighthouse trails research.”  So, there are probably a few, but how many “blogs” are there that list credentialing?  Also, where does one seek to find “blogging” credentials?   Since when are “blogs” held to the same standard as professional, research, university, or business sites?

Second you are incorrect; the “About Us” page does much more than use “the first person plural pronoun "we" explaining a bit of their anti-contemplative history.”  It tells ABOUT THEM and actually hyperlinks the text in the extremely brief story about them, to their two other sites which has all the “shadowy” information available in the ever so difficult single mouse click. (Did you read it? Did Dr. Leth?)

Then of course there is the title of the site I already mentioned, “from the lighthouse…the blog of lighthouse trails research.”  Well, at least to me, the fact that this is a blog “from” something and “of” something, means that there is a something, or something else.  I know a half dozen Pastor’s on Naznet that have “blogs.”  Maybe it’s just me but I’ve never confused a Pastor’s “blog” with his churches website. 

Maybe that is too technical, but then again right at the top, about 2.5 inches to the right (on my monitor) from the “About Us” link is the link for “Our Websites.” This too leads to the information about the folks at Lighthouse Trails within one click.  So at the very outside it should take no more than two clicks to find out the info.

Is it too much to ask for a College Professor to click twice before inferring some sort of “hidden identity” conspiracy?

Fellow NazNetter
As you pointed out, SOME of that information can be found with additional surfing to other Lighthouse sites, but it is easy for me to understand Dr. Leth giving up at this point. 

Really?  Really? Are you serious?!  I expected better fact checking from my son’s when they were in the eighth grade!

George
[Fellow Naznetter], your post # [?] here that is this one, the one I am responding too; with the quote from me you posted; contains 184 Words.  On this so-called “shadowy” website’s “About Us” page all the necessary links and info are revealed in only 174 Words (that’s less than one minute at proof reading speed according to Wiki).  Is it too much to ask him to read 174 words, less verbiage than your own post and to click twice??? Really?!

Now I know what those guys on the Limbaugh thread are talking about when the say some people will go to any length to defend “one of theirs.”

Let us recap, shall we?

How does one get from Dr. Leth article to Manny Silva’s website….I don’t have a clue.

Once you somehow find Manny’s site and click the link to the Lighthouse blog, it takes two clicks It make no difference whether you click on the Lighthouse Trails Research (LHTR )site or the Lighthouse Trails Publishing site (LHTP) 

So it is Manny’s link, click “About Us” click LHTP move mouse over “Customer Service” click “Contact Us.”

OR

So it is Manny’s link, click “About Us” click LHTR Project, move mouse over “Contact Us” click “email, call, or write”

Ooooooohh shadowy!

Let’s call Jim Phelps, Ethan Hunt and the whole IM Force to get to the bottom of this.

Original Response to Dr. Leth's Open Letter (Epsworth Pulpit)

Fri, 03/09/2012 - 18:42

--Dr. Leth, You seem to also have trouble with the truth either that or your research skills are appallingly sub-par for a man so educated and involved in educating others. Lighthouse Trails has (3) separate web sites. One is the Publishing arm, next is what they call the Research Project and finally they also have a blog. (Since Publishing is the $ generator, yes, you can find links to their products on each site.) You actually referenced the Research Project site. 'It is revealed that "Epsworth Pulpit and you in you Open letter to Manny Silva", do "not require speaking truthfully, or at the very least, is not averse to misleading statements."' There is no lurking in the shadows and zero deliberate identity hiding effort at Lighthouse Trails, nor any effort or foster anonymity. All you have to do is click one time on "email, call or write" which appears just by mousing over "Contact Us" on the very first or "Home" page, there you will find address, phone number and emails for the Dombrowskis. If you had/have further interest mouse over "About Us" and click "Who we are" or better yet try "New to Site." You'll find all the information there is to know. Now as to accountability and church affiliation, that is hardly the standard for any Internet research site or blog. Do you know bloggers who seek Elder approval before posting? Does Zondervan get permission from an Archbishop or General Superintendent before publishing? Of course not! So basically any validity your words here may or may not have had turned into blah, blah, blah (Think Charlie Browns Teacher). What a shame that an educator such as yourself is either so inept or so bent on deliberately misleading as to spout that Bovinium Escrementum about Lighthouse Trails and their supposed 'shadowy-ness' Shame on you! 

George Wallace--http://www.epworthpulpit.com/pressing-matters/open-letter-manny-silva