I recently received this:
I wanted to take a minute to say thank you for closing the comments on Bp Robinson…[recently]. I very much enjoy coming to the site to visit and find much of what I read by you and others enlightening, but the current state of affairs is such that passions are inflamed. The vitriol at times is breathtaking and depressing. One of the gifts of being a conservative is a certain amount of reserve when dealing with trying circumstances. That has been lost both in political and now church dialogue.
I thank you for trying to keep things at a level that is respectful but allows for a range of ideas and opinions to be expressed.
Please note that strictly speaking comments were not closed, but they were pre-vetted, which is sometimes necessary on certain topics. In any event respectful and on topic discussion is what we are after–KSH.
The VGR stories are never closed on Stand Firm, yet the comments there seem to be within the bounds of decency. Why should it be any different here?
Good point Chris! I would like to add that by silencing voices….probably more conservative voices…..is just one way that the liberals have gained ten legs up and why we are where we are….keeping silent is not a way to bring light to a dark place or on issues that spread darkness!
As I usually say on this general topic, so I will repeat today: I could not disagree more with this emailer. Practically speaking, when comments are closed, it does not “allow for a range of ideas and opinions to be expressed.” To the contrary, it suppresses them – now, uniformly, suppresses them with respect to the individual that put himself front-and-center of the drive to rip the Anglican Communion apart. Why Mr. Robinson therefore deserves protection from his critics is beyond me.
I do want to add – I fully acknowledge that this isn’t my blog, and neither I nor anyone else has a right to comment here. I appreciate the privilege that I have to do so, and I appreciate the work, Kendall, that you put in to this site (I have no idea how you do it). This is simply my opinion of the policy.
Chris, the two blogs are very different — and deliberately so.
I’m glad we have a variety of blogs that appeal to different ranges of commenters, readers, thinkers, laypeople, clergy, etc. I read both T19 and SF [along with many others] and blog at one — and I enjoy the different stuff and tone on both as well.
Sarah, they are not different to the extent the commenters here are incapable of posting civily about VGR. I think the “email me your comments” stifles things unecessarily, and I have not had my comments posted when I have emeail them. Am I the only one to experience this?
Chris …NO you are not alone on that! I know of a few……
If the truth be told….no emailed comments get posted. Why can’t the owner of this distinguished blogsite from which I have learned so much just tell the truth and declare we will not and are not interested in your opinion but thanks for dropping by. I can handle the truth it is the deception that is so disappointing.
Intercessor
Kendall, this is your site, but I don’t agree with the selective ‘closing of comments’ or ‘pre-vetting’. If you don’t think Christian men and women can respond Christianly to a story you’re minded to post, maybe you shouldn’t post it?
The judgment of most people who read this site about Gene Robinson is that, whatever his legal status under US law, he is no more a bishop of the apostolic church than Jack Spong, and (to judge by his own statements on doctrine) probably as much a Christian as he.
I understand that this is Father Harmon’s blog to publish as he sees fit. I am less disturbed by the closing of comments than I am by the fact there sometimes seems to be a heavier hand laid upon conservative orthodox participants than those of the heterodox.
Since articles on Robinson are readily available on other blogs perhaps this and other subjects which will have comments blocked should be omitted all together or simply posted with a link to a blog that does allow comments.
I understand the comments above, but find that a lack of charity is common when we are speaking to those who (almost uniformly) agree with us. Speaking the ugly truth in love is one thing; speaking the ugly truth without love is another. Sarah’s point is good; there are different tones on the two blogs and I have chosen to spend more time on this one than on SF for that reason. I appreciate the emphasis; maybe not the method. (I, too, have submitted e-mail comments which were not posted. This is, however, Kendall’s blog and I fully recognize he may do whatever he likes with it, just as I may ask people not to smoke in my house.)
One of the things that often bothers me about “open” threads is that we tend to fixate on certain subjects- VGR first among them over the last several years. If Kendall+, in his wisdom, thinks it best to regulate or close comments on his blog occasionally, perhaps that is for the best. On SF, a “VGR thread” might draw 300 comments, of which 25 are really germane to the discussion, 100 are deliberate attempts to either throw the discussion off track or incense anger by throwing a verbal hand grenade, and the rest (my own included, often as not) are responses to the hand grenade throwers. Meanwhile, the discussion of say, Bishop Iker’s address at the Mere Anglicanism conference (much more important in the greater scheme of things than anything VGR has done lately) garners much less attention.
This is in no way intended as a criticism of how Stand Firm does things. For me personally, they are literally a Godsend- it is a place where I can learn a lot and blow off steam at the same time. But I also value the perhaps more formal atmosphere here. I have made many friends in both places.
I think that closing (or pre-vetting) the comments is wise. As others have noted, some of the responses on other blogs can get personal. While I profoundly disagree with VGR’s theology, I am a sinner just as wretched as he. My biggest quarrel is with ECUSA as an institution which has allowed the propagation of a false Gospel from its pulpits.
I agree with the thought that reappraisers are given more latitude on this blog than reasserters. Since I have not seen anyone doing the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater on this blog, it does seem that free speech is being somewhat stifled. As an aside, Gene Robinson is a public figure and thus is open to more pointed comments than a private figure. One might even believe that many of his actions are designed to provoke and provide him with the attention he seems to crave.
On the other hand this is an individual’s blog, and he is perfectly within his rights to do as he sees fit with it. What I would like to see is a deleted/edited comments section of the blog with the same threads and all the deleted and unedited comments collected there for those who want to see what violates this blog’s sense of propriety. Maybe this will instill some self-censorship and lessen the need for deletion and editing of comments.