In what is apparently another political bid, a letter was disseminated in the mailboxes of all the students which did three fairly amazing things. The first is that it unfairly caricatured the nature of the student demonstration. The claim the letter made was that they applied to have a representative from the systematic/historical theology departments (e.g. the heresy hunters) to speak against Enn’s at the demonstration which was in favor of Enns. The letter said this request was declined. The actuality is that this request was returned with a statement that “unless they had one representative from each side it would be unfair and that if the Hist. Theo. department wanted to prepare a statement it would be read EVEN THOUGH the other side would not get to have a statement be read.” Instead of presenting a prepared statement the historical theological department decided to directly circumvent the student demonstration and put a letter in everyone’s mailbox denouncing the original resolution passed in December as being misrepresentative, implying the demonstration was unfair and laying out some fairly harsh language.
Secondly, and almost hilariously, it presented their side as a struggling minority. It would seem that they are the oppressed party in this debacle. This represents either a psychotic break from reality or a lot of spin. The wages of spin indeed!
Finally, the letter formally accused Enns of heresy, which means (I would assume) he is going to hell, and so am I and anyone who agrees with Enns, apparently. There is nothing like being called a heretic by my esteemed professors. The language of this letter is damning and lays all the cards on the table. As I write the board is meeting to either exonerate Dr. Enns or cast the bull ex-communicatio against him.
Updates to follow…
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged board, enns, incarnation, inspiration, meeting, peter, westminster | No Comments »