Originally posted by JohnV
Bruce and Fred:
I understand what you're saying. That is all well and good. I still have difficulty with this; and I guess its because of my own vested interests. The main point that I want to know is if it is indeed the case that a body of adjucators is made of individual adjudicators: that each member of a judicatory is to be considered an adjudicator individually. That is, that each member must have all the documentation before him to be eligible to have a say on the matter. It would seem irresponsible for an individual adjudicator to sit in judgment without all the facts to consider.
I'm still thinking through all this. May I take this just one step at a time? I'm having difficulty with a FV panelist sitting in judgment of a FV defendant on the charge of teaching FV, and doing that without bias. And if FV is not represented on the panel the FV-ists will cry "Foul!"
John,
I think you are putting the cart before the horse. There is no necessity to make sure that a doctrine has either adherents or no adherents on a judiciary before they sit in a discipline on a matter. There is no quota system. Also, if someone is a proponent of any view that is found worthy of discipline, he is bound by his vows to make that known after the fact to the ecclesiastical body.