board activity

[srigdon]

Activity on this board has dropped off a cliff the last few months. Perhaps we need a thread to see if people are still reading with some regularity.

We have never had a big group, but it is nevertheless intellectually diverse, which is unusual, and I like it.

Is the moderator still active?

[Swick]

I check out the board several times a week to see if there's anything new.

During the summer actively on several blogs seems to be lower, but I think that in our specific case people might just be tired of fighting over issues. Also perhaps since the creation of ACNA, some of those who are now members of it have no interest in an Episcopalian board.

[angli_fan]

Aug 24, 2010 16:46:33 GMT -5 srigdon said:

Is the moderator still active?

The Moderator is alive and well, thx.

I have recently been experiencing a bit of burnout, as well as massive "Issue" fatigue. I'm glad to see that there are still some folks out there interested enough to inquire.

I would like for this board to become more active again, but I wonder if perhaps it doesn't need a bit of direction and/or focus.

If you readers out there don't mind, take a minute to let me know what sort of content you are hoping to find here when you stop by. News? Opinions? Resources? Events? Or something else entirely?

Let me know what should be here to make this board something we all will want to participate in.

Thanks;

angli_fan

[Canadian Phil]

Hi all;

Like Swick, I drop by a two or three times a week to see what is up, but my life has been so busy the last few years that I haven't had much time to think, much less write. (my own writing on my blog fell to almost nothing this year- I'm hoping to revive it this year).

What I do miss is our discussions, but like everyone else I'm really feeling issued out. At its best, this board has challenged all our assumptions in a civil and reasonable environment. I'd love to see that again and drop the sniping of the last few years. Mind you, I doubt if that can be done on THE issue and its ramifications, but perhaps we can set that one aside for now and see what else we can talk about? We will, I'm sure, get back to it.

So, what really does matter to us? What good (or bad) books on faith have we read lately? Who is God to us? Those are probably lame ideas, but let's see if they help.

Phil

[Sojourner]

I haven't checked in for about two weeks. Prior to that I checked in once or twice a week. As with the rest of the posters I have tired of the issue. Not only have I tired of the issue, but my positon has hardened to the point that I am neither interested in asserting my position or exploring it with others. However, the ISSUE was not the main focus of sniping. It may have been a presenting problem, but the major sniping, as I recall, related to attacking or defending TEC. I am not interested in discussing whether or not TEC is Christian, whether or not the Presiding Bishop is a Wiccan, or attempting to overlay a divine plan onto a civil and legal process for deciding property ownership. I am interested in the process by which people come to their opinions; I am not so interested in proving the rightness of such opinions. 50 years ago The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America existed in a tension of antithetical and irreconcilable opions. Anglo Catholics vernerated the Blessed Sacrament while there were Evangelicals and Broad Church people who were memorialists. There were Anglo-Papalists who were Roman Catholic in every way excepting submission to the Pope. There were Low Church adherents who were shaky, at best, on Baptismal Regeneration. Nonetheless, the center held.

I would suggest that the beginning of the break up occurred in the caldron of the 60's when many Episcopal lay and clericals openly supported the integration and voting rights activities in the south. Frankly, that was the beginning of the exodus from PECUSA. Add to that the vulgarities involved with the ordination of women -- Jackie Means, the first regulartly ordained female priest entered All Saints' Church in Indianapolis with armed protection (a precursor to Gene Robinson's consecration -- capped by the nastiness surrounding the adoption of the 1979 Prayer Book, and stage was pretty well set for the internal strife which we now see.

I believe that the events of the past decade were inevitable. I also believe that the crying and moaning over bricks and mortar, shrinking portfolios and name calling are natural human reactions to change. Ultimately, they are not about the things of God, no matter how one reads scripture.

I want to make an observation about civility. In my opinion it was civility that brought the hiatus to the Board. I sense, both personally, and from observations of the last months of activity that people grew tired of the tone of the board. I know that I began to refrain from posting because I was only regurgitating the same old nuts and it was boring me. Also, for me, argument between people holding antithetical positions, positions which are so strong that neither party is going change, is a waste of time. And, it generally leads only to harshness, anger and more. I believe that the reason the Board went defunct was because the basic civility of the majority of posters demanded a retreat from further participation.

Although Matt is the moderator, he has, from the beginning, cultivated the view that the Board really belongs to the participants. And, by doing so, he fostered a community. I think many of us enjoyed that community and would like to see it rise again.

[Canadian Phil]

Sojourner makes an interesting point about civility and our silence. I think that is very perceptive because, in a sense, we communually and tacitly all agreed that we needed a cooling off period and some silence. That is all to the good. I've been genuinely tired of the 'in or out' arguments as well as THE ISSUE, nor am I interested in reviving them again. That is why I chose the article I did this week- at least, it is something we can discuss that isn't the same old, same old.

Yet, what binds us together, I think, is that we have, for all our various reasons decided to stick together and stick with TEC or AC of Canada. So, why is that? Why, in the face of all the 'good' reasons to leave and provocations, did we not do so? That makes an interesting question, doesn't it? Those things which bind us together might be more interesting discussion matter than the politics still flying about the Communion.

I would almost suggest a moratorium on discussing the 'in and out' issues and THE ISSUE, but I don't think we want to be prescriptive. However, you can be assured that I, at least, will probably, at the most, let out a less than gentle snore if we do renew the debates and the fighting. I'm much more interested in how we move forward and how to live my life as a Christian now, today.

Peace,
Phil

[mewg]

Like Sojourner there are a lot of things I am not interested in. For example the old line defending the thought TEC is not Christian or for that matter anyone who differs from what someone who considers themself to be a True Beleiver thinks is not a Christian. I am perfectly happy to let Someone Else decide who are His sheep and who are not. What I am interested in is people sharing the glimpses thru the Glasss Darkly they have had (and I beleive everyone has them)