blogging against the church
Add a comment | Jump to posted comments | 
Share this post
the washington post has an interesting article regarding this issue.
i’ve considered doing this.
but then i think: why should the whole church be punished for the actions of a few?
i guess it’s difficult no matter what you do in church leadership, as you’re not just leading a flock of people, you’re also running a business. where does the “tending the sheep” end and the “business” begin? at what point does the responsibility for an individual’s spiritual and mental health end and the responsibility to the business-end (financial?) of the church pick up?
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds
Posted on the April 30th, 2006
with 3 responses (latest is displayed first).
Filed under frustration, ministry.
For more posts, browse in the archives :
Share the love:
For more posts, browse in the archives :
May 1st, 2006 3:15 pm
# 1
hey JM - not really talking about “regulating” as much as using restraint (or not).
more on this later.
May 1st, 2006 1:29 pm
# 2
Hehehe… Dipping into regulation of the internet. I love it!
Regulating the internet is tough enough, but blogs are especially tricky. It’s my understanding that blogs are basically online journals or diaries and therefore, completely opinion-based. Does this mean no one is allowed to air vents, frustrations and questions about their religious leaders, rules and traditions? At what point does it stop being opinion (aka free speech) and start being slander?
I don’t have any answers except to say we should all remember that blogs are different peoples’ online diaries. A place to share and vent and weigh in on thoughts. Before anyone should start believing certain postings as absolute truth, do us all a favor and do a little research first, and I don’t mean look at other blogs.
April 30th, 2006 3:00 pm
# 3
I have a feeling that this is a major question that no one can answer but we all ask. Good wonderment.