Scott, dropping the 100-lb. pack on a 30-mile march is unacceptable. Whatever the consistorial issues were, your public inquiries, discussions, and points-of-view were essential to combat. Pulling down the entire blog...unsatisfactory. For this scribe, it is dereliction of duty in war. Scott, you are going to like me much these days. U just pissed off an old Marine.
@Reformation, You do realize that there is every possibility that Dr Clark was asked to remove the Heidelblog as part of the consistitory's judgement against him right? Also, as an internal ecclesiastical issue, he is likely barred from discussing it publicly.
2. My jeremiad is a narrowly tailored one. The Consistory was within its rights and, from my standpoint, was probably correct, although that's not an issue for me. Further, Dr. Clark's decision to stop blogging is not the issue--he's busy and has larger duties. No issues.
3. My narrowly tailored jeremiad is two-fold. (A) A brief explanation that he must return to the study. We at least could have adjusted to that. But no, we were left blowing in the wind. (B) The obliteration of the entire site.
4. Whatever the specifics, this scribe is moving on. Thank God for the Bible, the books, and solid liturgy that focuses upon the Risen and Sovereign Redeemer--the great leveller.
I doubt we will see a return soon and if we do see a return it will be drastically different.
ReplyDeleteI sure do hope the return is sooner than later.
ReplyDeleteIt's a sad day:
ReplyDelete"Hi Warren, thanks. I'm done blogging. I'm going back to my study. Blessings" — Dr. R. Scott Clark.
Scott, dropping the 100-lb. pack on a 30-mile march is unacceptable. Whatever the consistorial issues were, your public inquiries, discussions, and points-of-view were essential to combat. Pulling down the entire blog...unsatisfactory. For this scribe, it is dereliction of duty in war. Scott, you are going to like me much these days. U just pissed off an old Marine.
ReplyDelete@Reformation, You do realize that there is every possibility that Dr Clark was asked to remove the Heidelblog as part of the consistitory's judgement against him right? Also, as an internal ecclesiastical issue, he is likely barred from discussing it publicly.
ReplyDeleteKelly:
ReplyDelete1. Thanks, I have the sense of the issues.
2. My jeremiad is a narrowly tailored one. The Consistory was within its rights and, from my standpoint, was probably correct, although that's not an issue for me. Further, Dr. Clark's decision to stop blogging is not the issue--he's busy and has larger duties. No issues.
3. My narrowly tailored jeremiad is two-fold. (A) A brief explanation that he must return to the study. We at least could have adjusted to that. But no, we were left blowing in the wind. (B) The obliteration of the entire site.
4. Whatever the specifics, this scribe is moving on. Thank God for the Bible, the books, and solid liturgy that focuses upon the Risen and Sovereign Redeemer--the great leveller.
Best regards to all.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete