Strong Presumption of Guilt in the Case of Jeff Meyers

November 30, 2011 at 5:05 pm (Federal Vision)

The SJC panel decision (not binding) has been released. The panel ruled that there was strong presumption of guilt in the case of Jeff Meyers. The Missouri Presbytery is directed to conduct a trial. The importance of this case can scarcely be exaggerated. If confirmed by the full SJC, it will have a bearing on other FV-related cases in the future. Furthermore, it is a relief to get at least a preliminary vindication, as a signer of the original letter of concern: at least some of the SJC members do not believe that we misrepresented Jeff Meyers. Go here for more information and more of the reasoning of the case.

11 Comments

  1. reformedmusings said,

    November 30, 2011 at 5:20 pm

    Great news, but I expect that MOP will follow in the path of LAP (before they repented) with Wilkins and PNWP recently w/Leithart. So far, presbyteries seem incapable of holding their buds accountable to the Standards. After the usual hand wringing at the presbytery level, this will be back at the SJC for final adjudication. There’s no learning curve exhibited – it’s more like a horizontal line, maybe even sloping downward a bit.

    Maybe seminaries should create mandatory, robust courses in leadership emphasizing making the tough but unpopular calls.

  2. PCAConcernedChild said,

    November 30, 2011 at 7:32 pm

    RE-1 – You could get 2 presbyteries to overture GA (BCO 34-1) since MO Presbytery failed to institute process (‘refused to take action’).

  3. Reed Here said,

    November 30, 2011 at 8:10 pm

    PCA Concerned Child: read the SJC panel’s remand explanation. They provide a specifical rationale for why they believe assuming original jurisdiction is is NOT the correct course of action at this time.

  4. jedpaschall said,

    December 1, 2011 at 1:38 pm

    Some procedural questions:

    1) Does the TE Meyers case now get heard before the SJC?

    2) What happens to the MOP if their ruling is reversed?

    3) What happens to TE Meyers if the ruling is reversed?

    4) Does this have any implications for the PWNP/Leithart trial?

  5. Jason J. Stellman said,

    December 1, 2011 at 2:55 pm

    Jed,

    My understanding is that the Meyers case will follow the exact same path as Leitharts:

    Study committee exoneration –> complaint abotu exoneration –> complaint sustained by SJC panel –> complaint sustained by full SJC –> trial.

    If things continue to mirror the PNW, then from there it goes:

    Acquittal by presbytery –> complaint against acquittal –> ???

  6. Jed Paschall said,

    December 1, 2011 at 5:56 pm

    Thanks Jason,

    Just to be clear this retrial takes place in from of the SJC, rather than the MOP for Meyers, and by implication the PNWP if the Leithart complaint process follows along the same lines. Right? I am assuming this leaves the presbytery for the higher court.

  7. Reed Here said,

    December 1, 2011 at 6:58 pm

    Jed: clarification – there has been no trial for TE Meyers. His presbytery DID NOT initiate process, stating that there was not a strong presumption of guilt.

    The SJC panel’s ruling is that Missouri Presbytery erred in this finding. If adopted by the full SJC, this ruling will require Missouri Presbytery to initiate a trial against TE Meyers. This will be the first trial in this matter.

  8. Jed Paschall said,

    December 1, 2011 at 9:29 pm

    Thanks Reed, that clears it up a bit. One has to wonder how that trial will go given MOP’s findings and SJC’s conflicting findings. Is a Presbytery accountable to at minimum consider the findings of the SJC in their decision?

    Since Leithart has had a trial though, if there is a retrial it goes to the denominational courts though?

  9. Jason J. Stellman said,

    December 1, 2011 at 9:54 pm

    Jed,

    My guess is that there will not/cannot be a retrial. If SJC sustains the PNWP complaint, it may reverse the verdict or discipline the presbytery for failing to uphold our constitution, but I don’t think it would retry the case. The evidence is all there for anyone to read.

  10. Jed Paschall said,

    December 2, 2011 at 10:03 am

    Thanks Jason, Presbyterian politics are nothing if not interesting.

  11. Jeff Meyers said,

    July 25, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    In case no one noticed, the transcripts from my trial are now available.

    https://sites.google.com/site/meyerstrialtranscripts/


Leave a comment