Well, the eNews didn't Publish My Comment

As I noted in my last post, I did comment on Brent Sleaseman's latest guest article in the eNews.

His article was brainy and thought-provoking, as you might imagine. It followed up an earlier article in which, at the invitation of Lance, he suggested that we need to be having important conversations with people whose opinions are at odds with ours but that to do so, we need to invest time and create space to make those conversations possible.

This article chose a specific issue on which we could have such a conversation: human sexuality.

My reply, I think, was direct.

And, like Brent's article, rather lengthy.

I didn't save it, so I'm recounting it from fading memory.

------------------

I suggested that it was not a quibble to challenge Brent's claim that, as followers of Jesus, we are "to engage the world." I recall noting that Jesus told us "to go" into the world.

To me, that's a huge point. Once we've gone, we may, in fact, engage the world. We may, on the other hand, confront evil. But, Jesus told the apostles, simple, "go."

And, I pointed out that I have given up my role as a CGGC pastor/parish priest in order to "go" into the world.

And, honestly, as you have realized no doubt, one theme of this blog is that I actually DO what CGGC leaders talk about...

...even, ironically, in this case, on the level of talking.

I actually do walk the talking of their talk while, they're still merely talking about talking.

Amazing. Typical.

For years, I actually have been taking time and creating space to have important conversations...as Brent's articles admonish all of us to do.

And, in my comment describing what I've done, the moderators of the eNews blog, for the first time, declined to publish my comment.

Fascinating. Ironic.

------------------

Brent notes, at the end of the blog, that many people who have strong opinions about homosexuality have never, to their knowledge, met a gay person, let alone have had a conversation with someone who is gay...and, no doubt, Brent's correct.

I pointed out that I myself do know gay people and regularly converse with them in the context of an ongoing relationship based in mutual concern and respect.

Again, it seems to me that I'd be the Poster Boy for what Lance wants Brent to convince us of because I've been walking the talking, even walking the talking talk...for years!

------------------

One other theme in my comment was to stress the importance of the so-called Priesthood of all Believers.

Brent wants our leaders to be preparing to have important conversations.

I made the point that, in our dynamic, movement days, we had a small number of "ministers" (that word means servant, not leader), as Hebrews 10 suggests, spurring Church of God people to love and good works.

I suggested that, in order to accomplish the Lance/Brent vision, pastors will need to repent of their clergy role and be disciples of Jesus in the world...and that our ministers need to cease providing our laity with religious products and services and that we need to spur each other on to love and good works.

-------------------

Anyway, this is a description of what I remember.

The nonpublication of my comment has intrigues me.

How to understand silence in the context of a call for conversation? Seems almost hypocritical, doesn't it?

Honestly, by the way, my sense of the tone of my comment is that it was respectful, certainly not as confrontational as my comment on Brandon's most recent post.

Ironic. Baffling...to say the least.

Not publishing a comment on having important conversations...

Oi...