Pensees: Resignation, Closure, and Apology

Resignation, Closure, and Apology

For those of you who read my blog and are wondering where my post entitled “My Take on Dave Jaspers’ Resignation – And Five Suggestions,” read Dave Jaspers’ letter here to see the first reason of two why I have taken my post off.

In my mind, it is a good letter. And, according to SI, he wants it to be his final word on the matter (at least on SI). There must be closure. Closure comes for certain people at different times depending upon their relationship to the conflict and persons. As for me, I think the whole issue is over. “Love believes all things” and I have no authority to snoop for more. Dr. Jaspers wrote a letter of explanation and apology, the school has made a statement, and there is no reason for outsiders to “read between the lines.” Now the goal for outsiders who are under the Headship of Jesus Christ is to help both school and former president to move forward in their service for God. That would not be helped by retaining on blogs information that is really no longer necessary. I do not want my blog to be a source for muckrakers. I have always striven to keep it “muck free.” I do not want to be a source of dirt on other people. Therefore, I am canning the whole post.

However, I cannot “can” the post without the straightforward acknowledgement of my own faults in my own post. The first paragraph of my post revived a grievance I had with Dave Jaspers and some men that I did not name. I say, “I had” because I have sincerely forgiven, but in my first-ever mention of this cataclysmic event in my life (at least with detail) on my blog, I provided a living illustration of the very thing that I was warning against in my “Five Suggestions.” In short, we don’t have all the information and what information we do have can be too easily mishandled or tweaked to serve our own purposes.

The nuances of information are so important and it is easy to get them wrong either through a subtle self interest or by a memory that has been hurt. Either way, misinformation (or the exclusion of bits of information) results in a flawed statement. It has happened to me so many times that I hate it. But I have found myself to be guilty of the very same thing that I despise. And, in so doing, I who have been so often slandered, slandered. And for this I repent.

In my post I said that Dave Jaspers moderated a five-hour “trial,” thereby wrongfully suggesting that he (or others) had predetermined a meeting to “try me.” This would make Dave’s insistence on my not being there (something I reiterated in my post) even more egregious than it actually was, and I am thankful to my friend and co-laborer, Mark Garard, for pointing this out to me. Since I had just resigned, Dave did not think it was necessary for me to be in the meeting where, in his mind, there was going to be a simple up or down vote to accept my resignation after some questioning of the men who had driven me to resign. He certainly could not have imagined a five-hour meeting. And, though I had pleaded with him just before the meeting to not let it turn into slander and misrepresentation of me apart from my presence, he insisted that he would control the meeting and not allow me to be misrepresented. The net result was that slander did occur.

But that was the result, not the intention of the meeting. This mitigates Dave Jaspers’ responsibility. Although the result was still misrepresentation and slander of a person who was only one hundred yards away and could have/should have been asked to speak for himself, the meeting was not designed by Dave Jaspers to be that way. Naturally, the men who were being questioned deflected the scrutiny off of themselves on to me and justified themselves by the villanizing of me. I have obviously been more aware of the result of that meeting in the aftermath than the intention of it. I was wrong, however, to assign an “intention” to Dave (even if only by implication) even though I believe that he was largely responsible for the “effect.”

A pastor friend that I respect says that we show maturity when we accept responsibility for the effect of what we do even if the intention was totally different. That is why children often first defend themselves by saying, “I didn’t mean to.” We as parents respond, “You didn’t mean to, but the effect of your decision was harmful and you need to be chastised so that you learn that you are also responsible for the effect of what you do or say.” Yet a loving parent does, nonetheless, acknowledge that the intention was pure. I lived with the effect of Dave’s mismanagement of a meeting where accusations and counter-accusations were flying and I think he would do it differently now. But, nonetheless, it was wrong of me to communicate my story in such away that blended the effect with the intention.

Also, an excellent insight was given to me by a young person who is on the “opposite side.” She misread my story of the charges by a particular group of men as intended to slander them and cause men to start “digging for the facts” thereby disrupting their lives and contradicting the very point I made that it is not always our duty to know all the facts, that it is a trademark of ungodliness to “hunt for the scoop” (Proverbs 16:27). That was not my intention, but it may have been an effect. And I must own up to the effect. I am sorry for that. Clearly, I should have thought through the ramifications of my first paragraph before I posted it.

I intend to rewrite the “Five Suggestions” without the anecdotal support, because it was the “Five Suggestions” that was so helpful to so many based upon the responses I have received via email. But the effect of my original version illustrated perfectly to me that the faceless Board of Directors in the MBBC/Jaspers situation is comprised of real people with real families, and those who have heaped criticism on “the Board” must remember this. Sometimes those who would be disinclined to castigate a person’s name will do so to a faceless board without the slightest hesitation. I unintentionally did the very same thing in my effort to give background to my piece. I sinned against my own conscience by causing an effect that was inconsistent with what I am striving to do.

In my case, my “enemies” are comprised of real people with real families who, like me, are basically driven by good intentions, and I pray for them regularly. I love them, and my heart yearns for the day when we shall all be reconciled. Sometimes I even dream in the night of happy reunions. That is why my own contribution to misunderstanding is even more odious to me. It stirs up within me godly sorrow that leads to my repentance and more energetic prayers on their behalf (2 Corinthians 7:10-11).

Their God-given blessing and my God-given blessing cannot be incompatible. Obviously, I think they are wrong. They think I am wrong. Maybe only God can sort it all out. But I want peace (as I’m sure they do too), even if it is only a placating of sensitive emotions. True peace will eventually come. The effect of my post was not peaceable and wisdom from above is “first pure, than peaceable” (James 3:17). Because I had Dr. Jaspers and myself in the focus of my post and not the “faceless” group of men, unwisely thinking that since they were not named, there would be no effect. Lesson learned.

I have no authority over other people’s blogs, but I would appeal to them to consider the practice of removing certain posts once a discussion has been hashed out and settled. In the case of Dr. Jaspers and MBBC, I think that each blogger who has commented on the situation ought to humbly consider whether the retention of that discussion will contribute to the healthy restoration of MBBC and Dr. Jaspers. It is my opinion that some of the details of their situation are such that provoke unnecessary inquisitiveness. Do you want people to go to your blog in search of dirt on one of God’s elect?

Blogs are like conversations; very helpful, very lively, very edifying, but very prone to be tainted by our sin nature. Thankfully, we don’t record all of our conversations. Although, perhaps it should be noted that God does. Every word. So says the Lord of me, my friends, and my enemies:

“But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment” (Matthew 12:36).

That’s sobering.