Shelton Smith, the editor of the Sword of the Lord, wrote an editorial regarding the blogosphere here. I don’t know how many people blogged about it, but I first became aware of it here, at paleoevangelical, a post linked by Greg Linscott at Current Christian. Later Bob Bixby unleashed on it over at Pensee’s. Paleo Ben, as I like to call him, linked to Bob’s post by commenting again on paleoevangelical here.
I finally got around to actually reading Smith’s article after all these links and commentary. I have to wonder what all the anxiety is about. Shelton Smith didn’t say that Christians should never have a blog or comment on a blog. What he said is that Christians should be responsible when they blog. What is wrong with that? By ranting and raving about Shelton Smith and his call for responsibility, I suspect that the rant is about something else. I wonder if those complaining (especially Bob and Ben) read the same article I did. They certainly got a different impression.
It seems that Bob’s offense with Smith’s words has nothing to do with what Smith actually said. It has to do with fundamentalist politics in general and in particular with Smith and the SotL’s practice of editing sermons they publish, especially Spurgeon’s sermons. They have a tendency to edit out the more Calvinistic bits. Well… I suppose that is true. What does it have to do with the content of Smith’s editorial? What, specifically, is ‘anti-blog’ about it? The editorial seems to accept that blogs are here to stay (they are until the next fad). It merely suggests that those of us who blog should be careful about what we say and make absolutely certain about the assertions we make.
I know first hand how easy it is to post something that one regrets later. I have done it more than once. The on-line world is self-corrective, they say. Yes it is. But one error can seriously damage an individual and his future ministry. (At least I haven’t gone so far as to damage my ministry — that I know of, anyway!) Surely Smith’s call for caution is well worth heeding. And it is well worth reading as well. Go over and have a look. Compare it to the reaction. Don’t you agree that those reacting are over-reacting?
Is the Sword the absolutely best periodical in fundamentalism? Maybe not. But the reactions to the editorial were weird. They had nothing to do with what was said and everything to do with an axe that keeps getting ground at certain blogs. Methinks those protesting protest too much and become an example of what Smith was editorializing about. From a knee jerk antagonistic reaction to Smith and the SotL, the invective becomes a rant against the whole of fundamentalism, caricaturizing it in a way consistent with the blogs involved, but not consistent with the reality I have experienced.
These are bro. Smith’s recommendations for the blogosphere. They are well worth heeding:
1. I’m all for free speech! Our First Amendment freedoms have come at great cost, and they are precious!
But Christians (of all people) should use their freedoms responsibly. Opinions, rumors, etc., should be checked, rechecked and fully certified before being repeated or published. …
2. Scandals (even Christian ones) should be exposed! If and when there are issues of scandal, the scoundrels should expect to get some bad press. But the blogosphere so often has no journalistic credibility whatsoever. It often is “my thoughts” and “your thoughts” which are given with no other purpose than to smear good people. …
3. Gossip is not a Christian activity! Even if you do it with a computer, it is not right! The fact that you have your own blog does not give you scriptural license to peddle gossip. …
4. Christian integrity demands accountability of all of us. Don’t open your mouth unless you’ve done your homework and know for sure whereof you speak.
5. It is neither faithful nor fruitful, neither pious nor prudent to tell everything you know—even if it is true! Some things serve no public good by being spoken. …
6. Some things are issues of sufficient public interest and for the public good that they must be reported. But even then, it should be done in a responsible manner. Facts must be checked and rechecked. Primary sources must be consulted. Be accountable for your actions. Sign your name to whatever you say or write.
7. Christians ought to be Christian! As I review the Christian blogosphere, I see a lot that doesn’t look certifiably Christian to me.
All Christian bloggers would do well to abide by these recommendations. In particular, the question we should ask is this, “Is it necessary?” Perhaps it would reduce our output, especially posts such as this one that holds others up to criticism. The temptation is to simply let fly. Better to wait. Think it through, and ask God’s guidance.
Regards
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Comments