Here’s A Thought

kinnon —  January 6, 2010 — 16 Comments

If you make your living as a Christian "idea-leader", have left your wife and family for reasons unshared, post pics of your kids while whinging about being a single parent on your blog, want to advise clergy on how to perform marriages, your girlfriend shows up on your blog to defend divorce while posting pics on her blog of the two of you dancing, your wife comments on the need to make divorce hard (which you delete) and then comments on another blog about adultery (also deleted), don't you think that this might be a good time to SHUT THE HECK UP!

Good grief, sir. A little humility might be in order.

kinnon

Posts

A television editor, writer & director since 1978. A Christian since 1982. More than a little frustrated with the Church in the West since late in the last millennium.

16 responses to Here’s A Thought

  1. Isn’t that a bit harsh? I mean, if you dislike that stuff, then why don’t you just ignore it? Am I missing something?

    Reply
  2. could you be a little clearer, and not so wishy-washy 🙂

    Reply
  3. I thought this was about Todd Bentley, but he actually married his “other woman” didn’t he?

    Reply
  4. Ya Dan he did. And Bill verified on twtter that it wasn’t Todd too. Don’t really want to know though; isn’t someone I follow, and were it, I probably wouldn’t be following them anymore…

    Reply
  5. All the links went “Page not found”

    Reply
  6. There are no links. Intentionally. The highlighted words at the bottom are Techorati tags.

    And what would have been harsh, Mark, would be to directly name the person and include a link to all the binary elements that exist in Google caches, Twitter accounts and webpages.

    Reply
  7. Bill,

    Thank you.

    For the love of God and truth and out of respect for the 10 commandments, I thank you.

    Julie Jones

    Reply
  8. This clarifies a lot for me, though it’s in fact none of my business…

    But now I feel I shouldn’t have entered a certain discussion about marriage on my own blog. I’ve never been part of the ’emerging’ conversation, so I don’t know of all the ballast and personal stuff it already has gathered…

    peace to all, may Gods light shine and take away the darkness!

    Bram

    Reply
  9. What’s interesting to me is that this only seems harsh if you know who it is. It’s very uncomfortable to see someone called out. If you pretend you don’t know who it is (or if you really don’t know), then it just seems like a big fat no-brainer.

    It’s also interesting to me that the emerging/missional folks (and I’d count myself in the latter category) have virtually no tolerance for social sins – being quick to openly condemn them publicly and even naming names – but have tremendous tolerance for the individual sins that only a generation ago would have been considered shameful.

    Recently a high profile ministry was publicly called out on a blog for being racist because they co-opted the already-exploited symbols of another culture for personal gain. There was an attempt to engage privately, which was rejected. Next came the public calling out. The E/M camp cheered, as did I. The results were painful, sobering, and, I think, healthy.

    Sins must be confronted. Public sin must be confronted publicly. It should be done graciously by people who know the person, but barring that, others can and should step in; the initial attempts should be private, but even if that is received well, there must be a public repentance (if there really was sin) or clarification (if there wasn’t). If it is not received well, the “calling out” should occur publicly.

    Bill complicates this by the fact that he doesn’t condemn a person, just a sin. Hence, it’s a no-brainer. I might as well post on my blog “If someone you know is a thief, don’t give him the keys to your house.” Well, of course. The question is, who will bring the confrontation that is needed?

    I’m pretty sure there’s a bible verse about this somewhere.

    Reply
  10. hmmm…

    interesting.

    all things being equal you may have a point, but i don’t think the situation in question really jives with what you’re saying..

    managing perceptions? yes, i guess i understand that.

    but i don’t see how divorce under any circumstances means that a person can’t have or shouldn’t share an opinion about the civil/political mechanisms of how marriage is obtained.

    could you help me understand?

    it seems that’s about socio-political structures…NOT the behavioral ethics governing any given marriage itself.

    thanks.

    Reply
  11. wow, bill – i look forward to future posts along these lines

    who will you call out next ? i suspect you will be consistent in the women & men you treat like this.

    somewhere Screwtape is laughing his a%% off

    Reply
  12. You know where I find Screwtape in this, Bob, is in the lockstep response of those connected to EV. Screwtape’s been laughing about this situation for a rather long time and you all have been laughing right along with him.

    Reply
  13. I am proud of any perceived connection to emergent, Bill.

    Lockstep ? As in: A way of marching in which the marchers follow each other as closely as possible?

    I suspect you are thinking of Bob Duncan or some other well-funded shop. EV can not organize ourselves out of a cardboard box – proudly so.

    Reply
  14. Well, at least I’ll buy the proud part, Bob.

    And might I suggest that you actually engage the argument rather than throwing out literary references to a personal devil that I doubt you or few of your EV connections actually believe exists.

    My friend, Wendy Gritter wrote a very good post on fidelity yesterday, Bob. You might find it helpful to consider – or not.

    Reply
  15. Bill, we have never met or spoke. I can not imagine how you might infer anything about my belief about a personal devil or about fidelity.

    I will ask again – when can we expect this type of post about individuals who you perceive as those you agree with – evangelical or Anglican leaders.

    No literary allusions or even clever repartee – you do not know the pain or personal side of this, but that does not keep you from embodying the very personal evil you write about.

    Reply
  16. What profound and typical arrogance to believe that I don’t know the details of what I’m talking about, Bob. You have no idea what I know or don’t know in the situation.

    And really, what’s with your hate of ACNA and Bob Duncan? Move on.

    Reply

What do you think?