The only way to stay sane and be courteous is to pass a rigid self-denying ordinance that “I will only use of other people designations they use of themselves.” This could helpfully be supplemented by a simple Bart Simpson Blackboard resolution: “I will not hi-jack other people’s labels to spite my enemies.” If all that came out of this Lambeth were a few people resolving along these lines, that would be grief to the weasels, and joy to the world.
I find the Bishop of Buckingham’s resolve:
[blockquote] “I will only use of other people designations they use of themselves.†[/blockquote]
to be good for understanding each other across the divide of positions.
But his understanding of “orthodox” seems incredibly narrow and lacks the knowledge of it’s most basic definition which is the recognition that there is “right doctrine” or more properly “right praise of God.” It seems that those who use the term “orthodox for themselves and saying that they believe that there is such a thing as “right doctrine” which is in contrast to those who believe that there can be no such thing. So he ends up violating his second suggestion:
[blockquote] “I will not hi-jack other people’s labels to spite my enemies.” [/blockquote]
when he turns the use of the term “orthodox” by others into a way to denigrate them.
And then there is this reference to grieving weasels. I confess my ignorance. Who are these weasels? Why would one want to grieve them? Is this a term they would “use of themselves?” Is causing them grief the “courteous” thing to do?
The Bishop seems to quote some nice principles, but it would appear that he has little ability to apply them.
No, the bishop is trying to make all the differences seem inconsequential. They are only words, not real differences, and if only we would all stop calling each other names, peace on earth would begin.
I am all in favor of taking opponents seriously, and understanding that they believe sincerely in the positions they take. Pretending that the differences don’t exist is not helpful.
RE the comment from #1, note also the shrewd comment of someone called “Sarah” in response to the bishop’s statement: calling people “weasels” is only one part of this supposed “self-imposed ordinance”. A few postings later he talks fetchingly about “ambitious and egotistical lobby group people out there, exploiting the situation hard, lobbying, manipulating — wittingly or unwittingly doing the Devil’s work”. No doubt they exist, on both sides, and they grieve me too (whether or not I qualify as one of his “weasels”!). But he offends egregiously against his own principle without knowing it, which does not inspire trust in his integrity.