Cowardice?

Posted by Anonymous On 10:46 PM

Prepare to be shocked, Cachinnatees, but my mouth has gotten me into it again. (Well... my fingers have really... nevermind...) I've done this kind of thing before. (See here and then here.)

So what have I done this time? Well, I left a comment over on a Southern Baptist preacher's blog. See, this particular SBC preacher is somewhat critical of the establishment. I admire this guy to a certain extent; not because I agree with him entirely theologically or with all of the conclusions that he draws, but because I agree with the things with which he takes issue.

I'd never left a comment there before - not because I wasn't inflamed by the discussion, but because it wouldn't have done any good. And yes, I think the world would be a better place if more people followed suit. I just can't picture Jesus being moved by a debate over who's liberal and who's conservative.

So anyway, Wade, the SBC preacher, left a post about how two of his more vociferous critics are comically quick with the "liberal" label whenever they disagree with him. He pointed out how one of them slams down all kinds of criticism on his own blog but then disables comments. So here's what I said about it:

Wade, I'm at Truett Seminary here in Waco, so if you're a liberal, I'd hate to hear what someone who thinks there aren't enough conservatives in Waco would have to say about me. And that's wretchedly sad. No one is better at distancing Christians from Jesus than Christians.

And disabling blog comments isn't only detrimental; it's cowardice. It's the little girl who sticks her fingers in her ears and yells, "La la la la!"

How pathetic and sad that we have become so adept at reducing nearly everything in life to meaningless categories like "liberal" and "conservative..."

Well, a few days pass and a commenter leaves this comment over on my supplemental site:

Hey brother,

I hope you are doing well, and I trust the Lord is increasing your joy each day. I know we've never met, but I wanted to contact you about something...

You made a comment over on Wade's blog about Jeremy Green being a coward. That actually struck me because I'm not so sure it's all that simple, so I emailed Jeremy about it (which is the form of interaction on his blog). Anyway, I actually thought it might be a time thing, rather than a courage thing. Here's what he said...

"I simply do not have the time to respond to the numerous comments that a blog such as mine would (and has in the past) received. Responding to comments is by far the most time consuming aspect of blogging, at least in my experience. As a husband, father of three precious children (ages 6, 4, and 10 months), Church Planter / Pastor, and student, I do not have any additional time to spare."

This wasn't his only reason, but it was the first and main reason. Anyway, I thought that might shed a little bit of light before we go branding people cowards. Some people just love their kids and their wives and their church. We both probably disagree with Jeremy on many points, but he's a brother, not a coward. He must have some hair on his chest for starting the blog he did...

Now be sure to read the comment there in context because the commenter, Patrick, was very respectful and completely sincere. And I very much appreciate what he had to say to me. But there are a few things here worth discussing. The first is that I didn't actually call Jeremy a coward. I described his behavior as cowardly, but that's a different matter. And I stick by what I said.

I'll grant that some people use their blogs as "online journals" that are more a personal exercise than anything, but there's no way to classify this blog as such. It's a public blog, its author is openly known, he comments on other people's sites, and he's not a 14 year-old girl.

Also, look at his blog! He clearly spends a great deal of time on his posts. So chuck the time-management argument out the window. It's not at all that he can't spend any time responding to comments, it's that he's more interested in saying what he wants to than dialoguing. And that would be fine if he were honest about it, but he doesn't say that he just wants to soapbox and defame people without conversation; he says he doesn't have time to do otherwise. (Yes, I am well aware that I am being provocative. That's what happens when I'm provoked. And Mr. Green provoked me by getting on a soapbox and making derogatory references to "moderates," "liberals," democrats, Baylor, ecumenism, and the CBF... and that's all only within one post of many.)

There's also no need to respond to every comment. Have we ever read blogs? No one responds to everything. Look at the target of his ire, Wade. He doesn't respond to everything - no matter how provocative it is. I don't respond to everything that is said on my blog either. That's a weak argument.

The thing is, Mr. Green knows that he's being inflammatory. He does it intentionally. He then hides behind not allowing comments on his blog. Those are the actions of a demagogue, not someone who wants to have loving or edifying discourse.

I don't think I'm being unloving or unChristian at all by saying these things. I'd gladly say them to Mr. Green, but he doesn't allow comments to his posts. I would much rather Mr. Green didn't act with that kind of cowardice in his blogging. That says nothing about him being a coward or acting cowardly in other areas of his life. It's simply true of this one bit of interaction I have with him: blogging.

(Now, I haven't even touched on the substance of what Mr. Green has to say. Suffice to say, like I said in my comment on Mr. Burleson's blog, anyone who thinks that what Waco really needs is more conservatives isn't going to find much common ground with me. Waco's packed with conservatives. There's an old saying around here: In Texas, the liberals are moderates, the moderates are conservatives, the conservatives are fundamentalists, and the fundamentalists still think Texas is its own country. I also take extreme issue with Mr. Green's seeming inability to separate theology and politics. The labels of one arena are meaningless in the context of the other.)

So what do you all think? Am I out of line? What do you call being publicly inflammatory and then not engaging in public discourse? Am I being a jerk? Am I on target here? I realize I've been a bit inflammatory in this post and I would actually like to hear what you think about it.

, , , , | edit post

8 Cachinnations

  1. Anonymous Said,

    Don't even think about it, PB. You're fine. Nothing to forgive. And you're right about a few things too!

    I am not prepared to stick by what I said when I said that, "once and for all that “disabling blog comments isn't only detrimental; it's cowardice.”" I'm not there either. You were and are correct in that. That's why I wrote this post - to temper that statement. What I did and do mean is that if you're going to jump out and be publicly inflammatory, as Mr. Green is, then you should be ready to be publicly involved in the resulting discussion. Mr. Mohler is a bit of a different beast; he's a well-known author, speaker, and leader who doesn't routinely venture out into the blogosphere for random commenting. Is that a decent distinction? Or am I being obtuse? I'm perfectly willing to be wrong if so convinced.

    As for interacting with Mr. Green, well, I suppose I think it's a foregone conclusion that there can't be a conversation there. He shuts it down on his side, and the only thing that he puts out is derision towards anyone with whom he has a theological or political difference. And I'm talking about people who should be considered his brothers and sisters in Christ. I don't care who's "liberal" or "moderate" or whatever - they're brothers and sisters in Christ. And the way he uses those terms, who isn't to the left of him? And more importantly, who cares??? So, as sad as I find it, I don't think he makes interaction possible.

    As for Mr. Green doing the email thing, I think it weakens his time-management argument. It's way more time-consuming to email with people than to respond on a blog. It's a step designed to allow him to ignore those whom he wants to ignore, say what he wants to without challenge, and add an unnecessary step that will discourage people from attempting to interact with him.

    I don't mean to assume the worst about him, I just don't see the alternatives here.

    And don't worry, you're more than welcome as a brother here. I don't view any fellow Christian as a combatant. This is generally a very happy place - at least 90% of it is just me being an idiot. It's a very welcoming place too. I have zero problem with someone disagreeing with me, and I'm just as quick to admit I'm wrong as I am to slam that little 'publish your comment' button with statements like the cowardice one. Welcome, bro!

    Posted on 2/20/2007

     
  2. Chaotic Hammer Said,

    I love to see people with sharply divergent viewpoints carrying on a respectful and open on-line discussion, especially among Christians. Some of the most helpful, useful, and fruitful blog participation I've been part of (either as a reader or a commenter) has been in this form, and I sincerely believe the concept that iron-sharpens-iron is real and true, and can lead to growth, tolerance of opposing views, and all sorts of other beneficial side effects.

    When somebody is expressing strong opinions about controversial subjects, it has been my experience that as long as it's not allowed to devolve into name-calling and personal attacks, there is much to be gained by allowing competing ideas to be presented, and then hash things out.

    Having said all that, I personally could not say in good conscience that disallowing blog comments is in any way in indicator that the blogger cannot tolerate debate, or is unwilling to face opposing ideas. I can very much understand how lack of time, or more likely, lack of energy and passion to spend the time in debate, could be a very legitimate factor.

    There are also many other very legitimate reasons people could do this -- the internet is a wide-open and wild place, too many unaccountable hit-and-run comments can really detract from a reasonable conversation. It may be that the blogger has had bad encounters with too many individuals that have no intention of a reasoned dialogue, but simply want to argue, for whatever reason. And on and on.

    Ultimately, I feel that the blogger's position is more likely to be _strengthened_, rather than weakened, if he/she allows comments and participates in them, because it shows an ability to defend the positions one holds, and allows answers to legitimate questions that passers-by may have about the subject matter, and allows resolution of misunderstandings.

    But I just don't think that allowing comments should be expected as the norm by any means. Really, a blog without comments is pretty much the same thing as an article in a magazine. It's one-way communication, and expression of an opinion, and nothing else.

    Open communication is proving to be a much better medium, but I still don't consider it compulsory, even if it's easily implemented and available to the blogger.

    Eventually, the choir who is in constant agreement with the blogger will become bland and boring with their constant "Amen"s, and those with opposing views will see the fruitlessness of spending time reading the thoughts of those with whom they simply do not agree or cannot relate, and everyone will go his own separate way.

    Posted on 2/21/2007

     
  3. Anonymous Said,

    Thanks, C-Ham, I always appreciate your input. And I will certainly grant that there are multiple reasons that someone may not allow comments. Both you and PB have illustrated that clearly. And as such, I do rescind my blanket statement about disallowing comments equaling cowardice.

    I still think, given the personal and inflammatory nature of Mr. Green's comments and posts, that his reasons are not as noble as he would have us think. Dealing with people is messy; I don't think he wants to deal with that mess. As a pastor, he should know that. You can't just go around tossing grenades in people's lawns and not expect them to be provoked to reaction.

    He knows what the result of his comments and posts will be. He appears unwilling to defend his words or engage in meaningful debate. I would posit that he knows his words and positions are indefensible on at least some level, and if he can avoid debating those things then he can avoid taking responsibility for them. And I still maintain that that is cowardly.

    Posted on 2/21/2007

     
  4. Chaotic Hammer Said,

    Patrick - Since it sounds like you are in contact with Jeremy, you might suggest to him that he enable comments, but also enable comment moderation. That would allow him to pre-screen out any inappropriate comments or attacks, while still being able to carry on a fruitful discussion with people who want to have a legitimate, open, reasonable discussion about the issues.

    Many people may not know that such an option exists. You can even moderate your comments via e-mail, without even needing to access the Blogger interface directly:

    Details here.

    Seems to me that would enable him to continue only interfacing by way of e-mail, but being able to allow and address legitimate comments right there on his blog. Pretty cool.

    This would quickly rid him of the "troublemaker" kind of hit-and-run comments, since anyone who wastes their time leaving unwanted comments will never get those comments published, and will eventually realize they are wasting their time on mischief, attacks, etc.

    Posted on 2/21/2007

     
  5. Anonymous Said,

    Fair enough, PB. And I agree, C-Ham, comment moderation is a much better way for Mr. Green to achieve his stated goals and also be fair and consistent. I have many friends who moderate comments specifically to avoid the kind of garbage that can pop up. It is amazing what one Christian will say to another.

    Along those lines, I still wish Mr. Green would allow comments because I would love to challenge his assertion that his is a "blog that seeks to honor Christ." This goes back to my suspicion that Mr. Green is fully aware that many of his comments and tactics are horribly inappropriate and don't even begin to honor Christ. I just noticed that the post to which I referred yesterday in which Mr. Green provoked me by getting on a soapbox and making derogatory references to "moderates," "liberals," democrats, Baylor, ecumenism, and the CBF has disappeared. While I applaud this seeming step of accountability and responsibility, I think he may have thought twice about saying some of those things in the first place if he were in an honest discussion with those of us to the left of him whom he so frequently berates. (And let's face it, you'd be hard pressed to honestly refer to me as liberal. Most liberals think of me as fairly conservative. Many conservatives think of me as quite moderate. Only those waaaaay off to the right could think I'm liberal.) But my point is that through dialogue, I would hope that we could begin to get passed this unnecessary hang-up over the false dichotomy of liberal vs. conservative. We shouldn't be each other's enemies or whipping boys. And we don't honor Christ by labeling and denigrating each other.

    So Patrick, I will follow your lead on this and believe that Mr. Green doesn't allow comments for the reasons that he gives. I still think his intent and the effect are miles apart. And I would sincerely encourage him to switch to moderated comments if he wishes to continue to engage in public discourse. I would also encourage him to allow comments that expressed divergent viewpoints and only screen the filth. After all, if you don't believe that your position can withstand criticism or challenge, then why do you hold it? And finally, I would hope that he would learn to embrace those of us who differ with him rather than denigrate and alienate us. The SBC is not the be all and end all of Christianity nor is conservatism the end of a road.

    Posted on 2/21/2007

     
  6. Anonymous Said,

    A pleasure, PB. You're welcome here anytime. I promise we'll be this serious as infrequently as possible.

    Posted on 2/21/2007

     
  7. TheCrazySquirrel Said,

    I'm glad you told me in person so I didn't have to read this really...really really...really really really long post!

    Posted on 2/22/2007

     
  8. Sarah Said,

    Wow. Nice to know my old pastor back home has become so well known.

    Posted on 2/24/2007