And he’s at it again…
In her excellent blog for The Times, Ruth Gledhill raises the question of why religious people are so nasty to each other on the internet. She writes of a “blog eat blog world”, where “authors and commenters sip vim-and-vitriol under the cover of Christian sanctimony.”
But luckily we have Fraser who will show us how to be fair and generous to others…
Ms Gledhill points the finger at conservative blogs such as Stand Firm, after having been referred to as “an instrument of evil and cultural sickness” by one contributor on that site. I went to have a look at it, and picked on a thread at random. The first comment said that the Archbishop of Canterbury “has been continually and intentionally doing, writing, saying and teaching evil. He should be dethroned.”
Fraser is a hoot. When he writes “by one contributor on that site” what do you understand? Of course, you understand it to be one of the bloggers. That’s the implication.
When one follows the link it becomes obvious that these are the words of one of our many many commenters at Stand Firm. They “contribute” in the same way that people who call up radio talk-shows contribute to what the guests on the show are saying. In other words, they are individuals in their own right.
But surely this was just some sort of simple mistake on Fraser’s part? Sadly no. When Ruth made the original statement on her widely-read and informative blog she put it this way:
And only today, I find myself denounced over at StandFirm as ‘an instrument of evil and cultural sickness.’
Which, again, makes it look as though we, the authors of this blog, made the accusation. This needed clarifying so Greg left a comment:
Just for the sake of accuracy, Ruth, you were not denounced as an instrument of evil BY STAND FIRM, but BY A COMMENTER at Stand Firm, of whom there are many.
Which you would have thought clarified the issue and warranted a little care of language by those picking up on this issue later on.
But not Fraser. Again, I’m going to assume that Fraser is an intelligent man. I’m going to assume he knows how blogs work, else why write about them. And I’m going to assume that he does his homework since he singled out our blog for special attention - it is the only one he mentions by name.
So you would assume that he checked up on this issue rather than just winging off a few words. Fraser is not stupid, he taught at Oxford for goodness sake, so why describe the comment as though it came from the authors of the blog themselves? Not, surely, because he is himself prone to a little vim-and-vitriol under the cover of Christian sanctimony? It couldn’t possibly be.
And why pick out “conservative” blogs for special mention? My experience of the blogosphere is that the consistently petty-minded and downright spiteful stuff is all being written by theological liberals. We get called the most appalling things on a regular basis. I, for instance, have my own personal cyber-stalker. A parish priest from Durham Diocese in England who has nothing better to do than trawl through my latest postings in order to pour scorn upon them. Not interact in a meaningful way, of course - just mock and deride.
[Warning, the links in this para. are not pleasant] Matt and Anne Kennedy have had some pretty horrible things written about them. So, for example, popular liberal blogger Clumber started up a quite nasty website aimed directly at them and let’s not remind ourselves of the stuff that Kaeton wrote about Anne Kennedy. Who remembers Jake? Who dares even read Mad Priest’s stuff? I think I’ve made my point.
Despite all this Fraser still points the finger at us “conservatives” as though we’re the problem. That’s not to say that there’s simply no such behaviour on this side of the fence. Far from it. But if he’s looking for a consistent pattern of, well, abusive writing then he’s looking in the wrong place. There is a whole world of liberal Anglican blogs that excel in this stuff, and encourage one another in it. I am, frankly, astounded at some of the things I read there. I met up with a guy that moves in those circles and he had no explanation for it. Very nice guy, but could only affirm for me the “loving community”. Last time I checked love didn’t go out of its way to mock and deride others. So, frankly, it’s no good holding up this community as “loving” if they are also sources of sustained and deliberately insulting mockery. At least not if there’s any claim to be Christian. That ordained clergymen are part of the whole thing is, frankly, beyond me.
I wonder that Fraser isn’t aware of all this. I’m quite sure that he is. It doesn’t take long in the Anglican blogosphere before you become aware of these people. And yet he still singles out Stand Firm with no parallel example on the other side. Very telling. Here’s how he finishes up:
The quick-fire argument on the internet has cut itself adrift from this sensitivity, and has become cruel. This is why too much time going through blogs and comments can be bad for your spiritual health.
Well then, Fraser, you should write and email to all your friends on your side of the table. And, quite honestly, you should do it not only for your sake but for theirs. That much bitterness and hatred cannot be good for a person, no matter what the initial cause of it was. Your criticism will find a far more necessary target far closer to home.
52 Comments •
Vaunting pride and inaccuracy, too. He has the whole package. A little jaunt on the Integrity blog sites will certainly clear the air for him. And a nice slice of the HOBD listserve. Someone send him the info on how to observe whilst not commenting….