Just a little bump--Nehemiah style.

*Peace Be with you RevJohn*

Whenever I read that verse "Anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple". It reminds me of how it ties in with another verse "Greater love has no man than this, That a man lay down his life for his friends"

This to me (Personally) has always meant that unless I am willing to LOVE all people unconditionally. And pay the cost of that unconditional love. I am not worthy to consider myself a Disciple of Christ.

*Willingly paying the cost without hesitation*

Wolfie

RevJohn,

I think your question asks

1)What is the Cross
2)What is community, and
3)What are secular rights.

Comprehensive indeed.

Perhaps it points to the task of
refining goals and objectives.
A process for such a thing may
be possible with parameters for
the above, established by some
doctrine of vision suited to such
a website as to what one might
expect be the final say on some
issues. Until then there are rules
for behavior and the beginnings
of many life experiences and
possible intents and "community"
will be a broad concept indeed.
Struggles will continue regarding
many parameters from the many
sources about what standards do
point to inclusion or exclusion on
an 'ad hoc' basis from a community
point of view, and rules of behavior
from the site controllers point of view.

We do a lot of talking in a barrel
around here where one only hears
oneself when it comes to the usefulness
of arguments on the level you are
appreciating. But at the same time,
there is no structure that rules on such
discussions so conclusions will continue
to vanish into the mist. On the web,
and on this site as well, today is today
and issues are issues as long as they are
on top of the boards.

The price I would pay I have paid in what
people choose to conclude about me based
on what I say, the effort I put into it, and the
progress or regression I display about myself
or my suggestions in the act of posting here.

I was in a drama once based on this verse. There were three people who had big wooden crosses. The first put it down to go inside a bar. He did not want to carry the cross. I took a saw and cut my cross to fit with my life. There were certain parts of the cross I chose to bear and certain parts I did not want to bear.
The third person carried his cross throughout his life.

The next scene we all stood before God individually. The first person whined because the cross was too heavy and big. God sent him to Hell.

I thought I was doing fine until God pointed me in the other direction (Hell) Then I argued with God that I "carried my cross" but He made it too big so I cut it down to size. But I still went to Hell much to my surprise.

The last person came and gave his cross to Jesus and then they went into Heaven.

I know that this is a parable. I thought it meant giving stuff up in order to carry your cross.

I am not sure how this relates to the community because belonging to a community I know there is some give and take but it should be an instrument of torture to belong to a community. I guess I am still caught up in the literal understanding.

*The Squirrel gags

EzEd:

I was TRYING to figure the parable out. If you keep bugging me I will have to print off your avitar for my cats so they can find you. :)

Wolfie,

Hi,

You wrote:

This to me (Personally) has always meant that unless I am willing to LOVE all people unconditionally. And pay the cost of that unconditional love. I am not worthy to consider myself a Disciple of Christ.

Fair enough.

What cost do you anticipate having to pay to love all who come into WonderCafe unconditionally?

Counting the cost speaks to readiness and preparedness. To being aware of what may be needed and required and one's ability to respond fully. To carry one's cross indicates that one is prepared to be hung upon on it. A decidedly unpleasant experience.

Are you willing to pay that cost or would you rather not be known as a disciple of Christ?

Grace and peace to you.

John

I'm going to need a chair again!

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

there is no structure that rules on such
discussions so conclusions will continue
to vanish into the mist.

While that is true of corporate community it does not prohibit the citizens of said corporate community from naming and acting upon thier own standards or does it?

We have the ability to abide by posted rules of conduct whether or not they are enforced or enforceable. We have the freedom to hold ourselves to a higher standard than what such rules of conduct might point to and we have the right to set a lower standard (bearing in mind that the lower standard might ultimately be deemed a violation and result in disciplinary action).

Is positive subversion possible? If so, is it desireable?

If it is desireable is it part of what it means to carry the cross?

You wrote:

On the web,
and on this site as well, today is today
and issues are issues as long as they are
on top of the boards.

I agree. Issues here are very much like the lilies of the field which bloom, wither and perish in their own brief seasons. How we respond to each issue tells another story though and one, which for community, is I think of deeper import.

I believe it is at this deeper level where the cross is to be carried.

It is not in the response to the issue solely where we must bear our crosses but rather in our responses to the posters.

The colour my neighbour uses to paint his house should not impact upon my love of my neighbour.

You wrote:

The price I would pay I have paid in what
people choose to conclude about me based
on what I say,

That is fair. I suspect that people pay a similar price based in part on what you have concluded about them based on what they have said.

You wrote:

the effort I put into it,

Is this more of an internal marker than an external one? How does one measure effort in a virtual environment?

Grace and peace to you.

John

Serena,

Hi,

You wrote:

I am not sure how this relates to the community

Let's re-image then.

The character who refuses to carry the cross treats community with contempt. There are no members or guidelines which this character will recognize as authority over thier wants or needs or behaviours.

The character with the modified cross treats some members and some rules with respect and dignity while affording none or little to those members and rules that are too difficult.

The character who carries the cross is prepared to hold all members and all rules in equal high regard.

Reimaging hell in this context is probably an argument best saved for another thread.

You wrote:

belonging to a community I know there is some give and take

Mutuality requires this. Does the give and take belong to the rules of conduct or is it something which is more specific to individuals?

You wrote:

it should be an instrument of torture to belong to a community.

I'm not sure I follow you here. Can you explain further?

Grace and peace to you.

John

revjohn positions himself behind friend squirrel and performs the life-saving maneuver formerly known as the Heimlich.

The abdominal thrust jettisons a large sized hairball.

Which upon further investigation bears a striking resemblance to LoveJoy's previous felinesque avatar.

revjohn pauses to consider the implications.

revjohn decides some things are possibly better not known and resolves not to post about himself in the third person because he finds it creepy.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Sharney,

Hi,

You wrote:

I'm going to need a chair again!

Hip! Hip! Hurray!

Oh, apologies. I thought you said cheer. Take all the chairs you need. Feel free to share from your chair whenever you care.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Rev.John : "For those who identify as disciples of Christ what cross do you carry here? What is the cost you are prepared to pay for WonderCafe to become what you believe it should be."

I'm not sure I follow you. Slapping myself on the side of the head.....
Perhaps people who associate mainly with other Christians view
the WC differently than I do. I'm not sure I feel I'm carrying a cross ?
I'm enjoying myself here, having fun and learning. I'm quite selfish....lol.
I wouldn't be here if I felt I was suffering.

The cost I might pay is that my family is going to miss Christmas
if I soon don't smarten up and take a break from the WC.
I'm way behind, just sent my cards out yesterday and no tree up yet.
WC is terribly addictive and there are so many topics.

Rev. John you're a busy person with your parish and all
so you sacrifice your time to be here.
I'm a bum not even doing volunteer work at the moment.
I don't work; lots of time! My husband is facing health issues
so I consider this a cross as it may be quite serious.

Is this more of an internal marker than an
external one? How does one measure effort
in a virtual environment?

RevJohn,

I do not know, but I have seen you put in a
lot of effort. I suppose it is an internal measure
and I really was not suggesting a corporate
measure. Some write little with great effort here.
It is a matter of individual opinion and experience
as might be the "weight" of the Cross you are asking
about. But what is a virtual Cross? I do not know.
I do know context is not easy to define around here
given the limitations of words. There are cases where
a lot is said with little effort such as the copy-paste
Bible verse people we used to see here some time
ago who would add so little comment other than a more
general condemnation.

RevJohn said Does the give and take belong to the rules of conduct or is it something which is more specific to individuals?

I think that it is something more specific to individuals because one can really hurt another person without actually violating any of the rules of conduct.

it should be an instrument of torture to belong to a community.

I'm not sure I follow you here. Can you explain further?

I meant should NOT be an instrument of torture to belong to a community. My house is very noisy now and I get distracted sometimes. :)

OK using my illustration you said the first person does not respect anyone including admin. The second person obeys the rules of conduct with some people and is nasty to others. The third treats everyone nicely and equally.

I can easily pick out members of wondercafe who fall within the three categories including myself.

That works and I see how the cross is a symbol because in addition to be an instrument of torture it is a symbol of love.

Rev. John

Oh...oh...I think I lied again. I've a big computer desk and chair that occupies the whole living room corner where the Christmas tree used to go. Now the tree is jammed into a tiny corner of the dining room behind the balcony door. Its the real reason we wait and don't put it up too early. We're very crammed for space. No fault of the WC...

:)

While that is true of corporate community it does
not prohibit the citizens of said corporate community
from naming and acting upon thier own standards or
does it?

RevJohn,

Citizens naming and acting upon their own standards
can create smaller communities within the larger one
and chaos insofar as they act on behalf of the community
in general. This can cause difficulty in terms of building a
community generally as a smaller community within the
large one may assume authority and give the appearance
of authority not belonging to it and run into violation of the
intent of the broader rules of the corporate community. The
issue is individual and collective rights as they come in a
conflict, and the construction of groups that can come together
by presumption of authority or the appearance of same as
against an individual with their own rules. Surely this is a real
issue as it created the idea of governments to control the
assumptions of collectivities. When I speak of the "mob" I am
using a generally accepted idea that naturally occurs when
there is no government or a group within a defined space does
choose to set up it's own and impose it's rules in favor of what
it thinks are the failings of the general government. This more
about reality, not insult. This is about form and how it acts as
a container for substance.

I keep coming back to this thread, stopping, re-reading what Rev John wrote and the responses, leaving thinking I can not post what I think because I'm not sure it will be understood with the intent that I wish.

Perhaps that is my cross to bear, but...

For me the meaning behind bearing the cross is one of supreme sacrifice, to take the weight of extreme pain and suffering - maybe this is just a reflection of that Baptist upbringing.

I have never borne such a load. I have had sadness and loss but never suffering. I think of others who suffer far more than I. They truly have crosses to bear. I do not want to trivialize their pain by implying that anything I do or say will add or diminish it.

There are times, both here in WC and in my own community; I bite my tongue because I know that no matter what I say it will not change the situation. There are other times, knowing this, knowing that my contribution may inflame the situation; I can not hold my tongue. That in doing so I will have, by my silence, condoned that which I can not condone, I would have sacrificed part of me.

Perhaps that is my cross to bear, but...

"Is positive subversion possible? If so, is it desireable?"

RevJohn, I do not know. Positive encouragement can
also be debated. The truth is the bottom line exists on
a higher level here. I know practicality and enforcement
are issues here if one seeks higher standards with tighter
rules. Enforcement is even difficult with the general rules.

I never said any of this was easy for any of us. For me,
positive subversion lies in the search for alternative forms
and approaches. But it really is "much ado about nothing"
if there is a king and commoner approach on the web based
on the form. No this is not a criticism of administration, for
now that is probably the best there is in such a floating world
as this when the reality of the commoner is greatly questionable.
It is what it is. For now the medium is seriously impaired. Real
governance implies the existence of real people in a more
concrete sense. This is more of a world of spirits.

Hopefully we all maintain our desire for a better world.

Blessings Be.

Stardust,

Hi,

You wrote:

I'm not sure I follow you. Slapping myself on the side of the head.....

No need for that! Let's just see how well you are following or not before resorting to flagellation.

You wrote:

I'm not sure I feel I'm carrying a cross ?

I think that is excellent. I think attitude and cross-bearing go together hand in glove. Had Jesus not, according to the narrative, focussed on the joy beyond the cross the story may have been different.

You wrote:

I'm enjoying myself here, having fun and learning. I'm quite selfish....lol.
I wouldn't be here if I felt I was suffering.

Fair enough, I think this is more attitude though. You are sharing, that makes you vulnerable. Whether or not that vulnerability is a cross you will have to pay remains to be seen. I truly hope that such is not the case.

You wrote:

The cost I might pay is that my family is going to miss Christmas
if I soon don't smarten up and take a break from the WC.

Technically that would be a cost you would force others to pay which is not you bearing your own cross so much as it is you forcing others to bear your cross for you.

You wrote:

I'm way behind, just sent my cards out yesterday and no tree up yet.
WC is terribly addictive and there are so many topics.

Our tree is in the garage, I cannot get it into the house with all this snow so it might be out there a while yet.

You wrote:

Rev. John you're a busy person with your parish and all
so you sacrifice your time to be here.

Not so. WonderCafe is like the holodeck for me. I can run test simulations here and that helps prepare me for congregational life. Plus I can "get away" from congregational concerns here and deal with other stuff that seems, at times, more mundane than sacred.

You wrote:

My husband is facing health issues
so I consider this a cross as it may be quite serious.

Ahhhhh so maybe that particular cross eclipses the WonderCafe cross at present.

God's blessing upon you and your husband and your family during this season of advent.

Grace and peace to you.

John

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

I do not know, but I have seen you put in a
lot of effort.

Fair enough. How do you measure what you percieve to be my effort?

Not a value measurement so much as say a workload measurement.

You wrote:

Some write little with great effort here.

It does seem that way sometimes.

You wrote:

It is a matter of individual opinion and experience
as might be the "weight" of the Cross you are asking
about.

Perhaps it is. Perhaps by pointing to the cross we bear we rob it of its symbolism. The cross is not meant to be a "Hey look what I'm doing" deal it is a more somber affair.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Serena,

Hi,

You wrote:

I think that it is something more specific to individuals because one can really hurt another person without actually violating any of the rules of conduct.

I agree with you. That does seem to happen here.

You wrote:

I meant should NOT be an instrument of torture to belong to a community.

That is a relief!

You wrote:

I can easily pick out members of wondercafe who fall within the three categories including myself.

Fair enough. I suspect everyone else could do the same. I don't think that ability actually is on topic though. I expect that the third option is the desired option and wonder about how we get there as individuals.

You wrote:

That works and I see how the cross is a symbol because in addition to be an instrument of torture it is a symbol of love.

Christianity has done some transformation with respect to the cross as symbol. There still is that element of the cross as weapon and the call to submit to such brutality with the same grace as Jesus.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Stardust,

Hi,

You wrote:

Its the real reason we wait and don't put it up too early.

Don't worry about that.

I pointed out to my wife the other day that the new puppy is pulling at all the branches on our cedars in the yard.

The pup will just pull the tree over and smash ornaments, cut herself on them and make a frightful mess.

The tree is going in the basement much to the annoyance of the rest of the family.

The basement is finished and we do spend time down there.

Grace and peace to you.

John

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

Citizens naming and acting upon their own standards
can create smaller communities within the larger one
and chaos insofar as they act on behalf of the community
in general.

That is a valuable point. Can such action be safeguarded against? Can I establish my own standards and adhere to them without expecting others to also adhere to them?

You wrote:

This can cause difficulty in terms of building a
community generally as a smaller community within the
large one may assume authority

This is also a valuable point. Even if such a sub-group did not assume authority it might be afforded more authority than is warranted based on any number of factors that are influenced by our social ease or awkwardness.

You wrote:

not belonging to it and run into violation of the
intent of the broader rules of the corporate community.

True. I would define that as negative subversion. Where the intent is to undermine authority. I confess that the definition is very grey because a group not seeking authority can still be elevated by others and in that instance unintentionally undermine legitimate authority.

You wrote:

This is about form and how it acts as
a container for substance.

Fair enough. What substance fills the cruciform?

Grace and peace to you.

John

lbmuskoka,

Hi,

You wrote:

leaving thinking I can not post what I think because I'm not sure it will be understood with the intent that I wish.

Possibly. That doesn't make you wrong though.

You wrote:

For me the meaning behind bearing the cross is one of supreme sacrifice, to take the weight of extreme pain and suffering - maybe this is just a reflection of that Baptist upbringing.

I think you are following my meaning and intent with my question.

You wrote:

There are times, both here in WC and in my own community; I bite my tongue because I know that no matter what I say it will not change the situation.

How do you know that for certain? Some there are who speak so much that their participation is a given and the reputation that they have built for themselves may be such that what they post is actually of little consequence. Do you know how you are esteemed here?

You wrote:

There are other times, knowing this, knowing that my contribution may inflame the situation; I can not hold my tongue.

Fair enough. Are you willing to own that contribution? If so I would percieve that a cross to bear.

You wrote:

That in doing so I will have, by my silence, condoned that which I can not condone, I would have sacrificed part of me.

Interesting observation. Sometimes the cross is carried by those who do not post at all. That might be the truer sacrifice because in that situation no one else can truly know the weight that is being shouldered.

Grace and peace to you.

John

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

I know practicality and enforcement
are issues here if one seeks higher standards with tighter
rules. Enforcement is even difficult with the general rules.

I agree. On a communal level. On an individual level practicality and enforcement only beome difficult if the individual cannot control their self.

You wrote:

Real
governance implies the existence of real people in a more
concrete sense. This is more of a world of spirits.

As true as that may be I believe in a wholistic approach rather than a division of the real from the spiritual. Maybe that is a part of the problem, the compartmentalization of the whole into separate entities rather than dealing with the whole.

We do have limited communication here and we are missing close to 80% of ever message because facial expression, body language and tonal inflection do not exist in print based media.

Does that automatically render us one dimensional or can the spirit connected to flesh prevail?

You wrote:

Hopefully we all maintain our desire for a better world.

Hopefully we do. And if we do perhaps we must also build that better world here as well.

Grace and peace to you.

John

RevJohn said I expect that the third option is the desired option and wonder about how we get there as individuals.

And that is hard. It means that when I want to type a nasty comeback because another poster sniped at me that I walk away and do not respond. Or I respond in love ignoring the insult. That would be the "cross" I think. For some people it is harder to treat everyone nice regardless of who they are. That is why it is easier to "modify the cross" or drop it altogether.

How we get there as individuals is a hard question. I will think about it this afternoon and come back with a well thought out answer.

"Fair enough. How do you measure what you
percieve to be my effort?"

RevJohn,
We work at what we value perhaps?

LB There are times, both here in WC and in my own community; I bite my tongue because I know that no matter what I say it will not change the situation.

Rev John How do you know that for certain?

I know this based on experience both in forums and in the world. It is just easier in the world because you get to immediately see the glazed look come over another eyes.

Rev John Some there are who speak so much that their participation is a given and the reputation that they have built for themselves may be such that what they post is actually of little consequence.

Agreed, but I do think what they post has consequences. If for example, Pantheism suddenly started spouting bigoted rhetoric I would not hold him, or his words, in the esteem I do now nor would I respond to him with reverence. For others, if all they had ever posted was bigoted rhetoric and they suddenly posted the answer to life, the universe and everything, I would miss it because I don't bother reading them anymore.

Rev John Do you know how you are esteemed here?

I know how I would like to be thought of but whether that is actually how people perceive me is unknown. This is, IMHO, no different than the real world.

LB There are other times, knowing this, knowing that my contribution may inflame the situation; I can not hold my tongue.

Rev John Fair enough. Are you willing to own that contribution? If so I would percieve that a cross to bear.

Yes, most definitely, but I do not perceive it as a cross because, for me, there is no suffering on my part if I own what I believe to be important.

LB That in doing so I will have, by my silence, condoned that which I can not condone, I would have sacrificed part of me.

Rev John Interesting observation. Sometimes the cross is carried by those who do not post at all. That might be the truer sacrifice because in that situation no one else can truly know the weight that is being shouldered.

And such is life. Whether here in WC or out in the real wide world we can not truly know what is going on in the minds of others unless they share it with us. I can make assumptions but those assumptions will be based on my experience and thus will ultimately be a projection of myself.

Again, and this is based on my experience, those that do not post are forming opinions. Sometimes they share these opinions in private. I have done that myself and I have had others share with me either support or condemnation. I have engaged with lurkers whose opinions were changed because of what was posted.

While I can, and do, throw the stone that silence is acceptance, it really is not an accurate accusation. This is a difficult medium to communicate and WC particularly so. People may not post because they feel they have nothing to add or they are afraid they will not express themselves. Blessedly, WC has never had a spelling flame war but when I first started in forums they were rampant because the majority of participants were members of the ivory towers of academia. Imagine what that would be like here in WC with our tiny tiny font.

It takes chutzpah to post. One is throwing one's thoughts and words out there for the whole world to see, possibly condemn and probably ignore. That may be frightening to some. For others they may just want to sit back and watch. They may not wish to spend the time composing posts.

As a community all we can do is offer assurance that we give the opportunity to speak but I do not think there is a responsibility to agree or even acknowledge. As you said, my neighbour can paint his house whatever colour he wants but I don't have to tell him I like it, and if it keeps me awake all night because he used neon orange I think I have the right to tell him I don't like it and depending on how tired I am from my sleeplessness nights it may not be in my usual polite manner. The neighbour has to own his responsibility in the outcome just as I.

LB
Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea; massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it. Eugene Spafford

Fair enough. What substance fills the cruciform?

RevJohn,

This is the essential question, but have we the form
yet to hold the substance? Will we ever in such a
medium or will the form in the community context
always have to be cast anew? Such is the fate of a
world where questions of substance are not formed
into a constitution of even how rules or norms leading
to a community vision may be structured and so be
respected and observed by all and so enforced by the
agreed sanctions of a community standard. Many of the
debates are about the standards and rules to apply to
the form and outcome of sanctions. Such conflicts will
raise the tension between the ideas of individual natural
rights and community rights aimed to set standards for
inclusion or continued inclusion. This site accepts self
proclaimed atheists within it's behavioral limits. That does
suggest favor towards individualism as having a natural
right of expression by virtue of the presumed speaker, that
being an individual. In other words, the culture of religion
is not assumed as a precondition of inclusion as a speaker.
Such is the case on other issues as well. And whether I do
agree or disagree, the form and the substance must remain,
in a very real sense, different issues around what I disagree
with and how I would approach changing the community
view of approach and structure toward such views in sanctions.

What if fair is not necessarily true, and what is true is not always
fair. The social order must attempt a balance of error, most of the
democracies will free a certain number of the guilty to protect the
error of condemning the innocent. Social orders that catch all of
the guilty will punish a certain number of the innocent.

Can I establish my own standards and adhere to
them without expecting others to also adhere
to them?

RevJohn,

We all wish a community to grow in the way we think
is best for it. But are not the most difficult people and
challenges sent to us so we may grow as well? I do
not believe in good answers, but in the struggle for
better ones based on an analysis of processes that may
occur regarding assumptions of what is eventually good.
There is good, good for now, and good for now but not
so good later. The issue is usually 'good enough' I suppose.
And 'good enough' will always frustrate ideals. The sword
with the right temper will be both flexible and sharp. The
best swords were made with two types of bonded metals by
the ancient Japanese artisans. The sword with the wrong
temper will either fail to stay sharp or, if too forged, will
break when struck in battle. The word temper, like many of
our words, do have origins in battle images.

RevJohn wrote:
Wolfie,

Hi,

You wrote:

This to me (Personally) has always meant that unless I am willing to LOVE all people unconditionally. And pay the cost of that unconditional love. I am not worthy to consider myself a Disciple of Christ.

Fair enough.

What cost do you anticipate having to pay to love all who come into WonderCafe unconditionally?

Counting the cost speaks to readiness and preparedness. To being aware of what may be needed and required and one's ability to respond fully. To carry one's cross indicates that one is prepared to be hung upon on it. A decidedly unpleasant experience.

Are you willing to pay that cost or would you rather not be known as a disciple of Christ?
===============================================================

*Peace Be with You RevJohn*

At first your response made me go..????

Then I reread my post and realize there was a punctuation error on my part. There was suppose to be a , between love and I am not worth to consider myself a Disciple of Christ.

The cost I anticipate having to pay to love all who come into Wonder Cafe unconditionally is"¦ humility.

I do not view myself as better or greater then any other human being. Just the opposite, I view all other people as having a greater importance then I. I am here to serve not be served. That to me, means accepting all people no matter what their views or thoughts on the world or even myself. I pass no judgment. I respect every person's views, their theologies.

There are two verses in the Bible that hold the most meaning for me. I've mentioned them before in different posts. They are:

From the NRSV

a) [John 15:13] No one has greater love than this, to lay ones life down for one's friends.
b) [John 13:34] I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another.
c) [John 13:35] By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.

If I have no greater love, and I love others as Christ loved me, then I am prepared to pay the ultimate price. I have no hesitancy in taking up my cross and following Jesus. Even if that means dying for those I love unconditionally.

*Peacefully Paying the Cost of the Journey*

Wolfie

Serena,

Hi,

You wrote:

And that is hard. It means that when I want to type a nasty comeback because another poster sniped at me that I walk away and do not respond.

I agree it is difficult. Not like the broad path that allegedly leads to destruction at all. It also shows, I think, that the real difficulty is not external guidelines established by an Administrator or the community but the internal guidelines which focus our intent towards both.

You wrote:

For some people it is harder to treat everyone nice regardless of who they are.

I agree. I think we can accept those people for who they are. I don't think that we can afford to allow them to remain that way though. There needs to be some pointing to error and correction. I think it needs to be done gently, all the same, I think that there needs to be real result.

Again, this external measure and correction would have to hold the external/community values as target.

You wrote:

That is why it is easier to "modify the cross" or drop it altogether.

True that is the easier path. Is it in the end any less costly than simply carrying it in the beginning?

You wrote:

How we get there as individuals is a hard question. I will think about it this afternoon and come back with a well thought out answer.

Fair enough. I will wait for that response.

Grace and peace to you.

John

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

We work at what we value perhaps?

That seems to be an effective measure. Very reflective of the location of one's heart to one's treasure.

Grace and peace to you.

John

lbmuskoka,

Hi,

You wrote:

I know this based on experience both in forums and in the world. It is just easier in the world because you get to immediately see the glazed look come over another eyes.

There is that. All the same you appear to be making an argument for similarity of all events. What has happened before is what will happen again and is happening now. Did you write Ecclesiastes? Is there really nothing new under the sun?

You wrote:

If for example, Pantheism suddenly started spouting bigoted rhetoric I would not hold him, or his words, in the esteem I do now nor would I respond to him with reverence. For others, if all they had ever posted was bigoted rhetoric and they suddenly posted the answer to life, the universe and everything, I would miss it because I don't bother reading them anymore.

Well put.

You wrote:

I know how I would like to be thought of but whether that is actually how people perceive me is unknown. This is, IMHO, no different than the real world.

Well it is a bit different isn't it. As you point out above eyes glazing over are difficult to spot in a text based medium. As are the nods of approval, smiles or thumbs up

(note to Admin--EMOTICONS)

You wrote:

Yes, most definitely, but I do not perceive it as a cross because, for me, there is no suffering on my part if I own what I believe to be important.

Is perception required for cross carrying?

According to the narrative Jesus felt that carrying his own cross was a necessity, it involved a great deal of suffering which the Gethsemene narratives point clearly at and yet we are also told it was for the joy before him.

Can the cross also be a happy place if the sacrifice is for the betterment of others?

You wrote:

And such is life. Whether here in WC or out in the real wide world we can not truly know what is going on in the minds of others unless they share it with us. I can make assumptions but those assumptions will be based on my experience and thus will ultimately be a projection of myself.

This is a good point. I wonder though if the assumptions are only a projection of ourselves? Do we not, even in this limited format get something from other posters?

You wrote:

Again, and this is based on my experience, those that do not post are forming opinions. Sometimes they share these opinions in private.

Which testifies to the power of the public post even if there is very little public response. It is like a seed in soil which has yet to germinate.

You wrote:

I have done that myself and I have had others share with me either support or condemnation.

The condemnation is disturbing. Disagreement I would understand but objection of that magnitude seems misplaced even in private conversation.

You wrote:

I have engaged with lurkers whose opinions were changed because of what was posted.

And I likewise.

You wrote:

While I can, and do, throw the stone that silence is acceptance, it really is not an accurate accusation.

Agreed. Any particular poster can be inactive for any length of time. To assume that they accept or support something posted that is ugly is not genuine but dishonest conversation.

You wrote:

Imagine what that would be like here in WC with our tiny tiny font.

I'd really rather not. It might interfere with my ability to sleep at night.

You wrote:

It takes chutzpah to post. One is throwing one's thoughts and words out there for the whole world to see, possibly condemn and probably ignore.

That is very true. Posting requires one to become vulnerable.

You wrote:

As a community all we can do is offer assurance that we give the opportunity to speak but I do not think there is a responsibility to agree or even acknowledge.

I agree. Although as you point out lack of a public response is no true indicator that a comment has not had some impact upon others.

You wrote:

As you said, my neighbour can paint his house whatever colour he wants but I don't have to tell him I like it,

No. I suspect everybody in the neighbourhood wearing sunglasses and shielding their eyes from the glare of his house would communicate plenty.

When the police arrive and tell him his house is too loud and there is a by-law against that kind of thing he should get the picture.

You are right though. You need to tell him gently that it is something of an eyesore or forever hold your tongue.

Grace and peace to you.

John

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

This is the essential question, but have we the form
yet to hold the substance?

We may not have the proper form yet. Is the substance so valuable that we dare not access it until we have just the right container? If we wait for perfection do we happen upon it any faster than if we work toward it?

You asked:

will the form in the community context
always have to be cast anew?

Until perfected I would imagine so.

You wrote:

Such is the fate of a
world where questions of substance are not formed
into a constitution of even how rules or norms leading
to a community vision may be structured and so be
respected and observed by all and so enforced by the
agreed sanctions of a community standard.

Even so. Every citizen of every community holds in their personal power the ability to upset the apple-cart whether that be for good or for ill. The community might be ineffectual in holding me to communal standards unless I am so willing to abide by them.

And what if I don't will such? How may the community respond to my obstinancy?

You wrote:

Many of the
debates are about the standards and rules to apply to
the form and outcome of sanctions.

True. I gather that is so because the standards are seen as the means to a communal end.

You wrote:

Such conflicts will
raise the tension between the ideas of individual natural
rights and community rights aimed to set standards for
inclusion or continued inclusion.

Which I expect. I don't think that conversations about rights should take place without a corresponding conversation taking place with respect to obligations. Community gives to the citizen and it takes from the citizen at the same time.

You wrote:

This site accepts self
proclaimed atheists within it's behavioral limits.

Is Atheism simply behavioural?

You wrote:

That does
suggest favor towards individualism as having a natural
right of expression by virtue of the presumed speaker, that
being an individual. In other words, the culture of religion
is not assumed as a precondition of inclusion as a speaker.

The right of expression is a part of the community norm here as I understand it. WonderCafe is primarily about discussion. That discussion is a bit loaded since WonderCafe is a vehicle of The United Church of Canada (which is too Christian for some and not Christian enough for others).

So while WonderCafe is please to give any and all a platform to speak from the stated norms do not shout "Anything goes!" Everyone has a right to express theirselves provided that expression is reasonably civil.

Or so I interpret.

You wrote:

What if fair is not necessarily true, and what is true is not always
fair.

Agreed.

Grace and peace to you.

John

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

We all wish a community to grow in the way we think
is best for it.

I expect that is a given.

You asked:

But are not the most difficult people and
challenges sent to us so we may grow as well?

Decidedly so. At the same time though a good garden is not made better by allowing the weeds to thrive. Climbing plants require a trellis of some sort or they will falter. Non-climbing plants will not climb even if you tie them to a trellis.

I guess the trick is knowing when one is able to go around the wall rather than to continue to run headlong into it.

Difficulty presents a challenge and how we respond to that challenge tells us a lot about ourselves.

I am no mountaineer. Everest would be an incredible challenge and one that I would unquestionably fail. I would be most fortunate if that failure did not cost me, and others their lives. Some challenges need to be avoided because they are not merely obstacles but threats to living.

You wrote:

The word temper, like many of
our words, do have origins in battle images.

Which appeals to narrative imagery of iron sharpening iron. The clash of ideals allows us to test our respective metals. There is a difference though in the duel as sport and the duel as the demand for satisfaction of honour. In the former all skill is used to score a point in the latter all skill is used to drive that point home with the intent to cripple or kill the opposition.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Wolfie,

Hi,

You wrote:

The cost I anticipate having to pay to love all who come into Wonder Cafe unconditionally is"¦ humility.

An excellent value.

You wrote:

I do not view myself as better or greater then any other human being. Just the opposite, I view all other people as having a greater importance then I.

A word of caution. You are slipping from a position of humility to false humility. Seeing all others as having a greater importance than yourself is untenable. it will interfere with your desire to serve.

You wrote:

That to me, means accepting all people no matter what their views or thoughts on the world or even myself. I pass no judgment. I respect every person's views, their theologies.

Fair enough. Service of the other accepts the other as is. Does that service of the other allow the other to remain as is?

You shared:

If I have no greater love, and I love others as Christ loved me, then I am prepared to pay the ultimate price. I have no hesitancy in taking up my cross and following Jesus. Even if that means dying for those I love unconditionally.

Well done.

You are prepared to die for those that you love. Are you prepared to correct them?

Sometimes dying for them is the easier path than living for them and helping them to grow.

Which brings us back to the cross and community.

Is our cross to die for community or to offer correction when warranted?

Grace and peace to you.

John

We may not have the proper form yet. Is the
substance so valuable that we dare not access
it until we have just the right container?

RevJohn, No but if you want to bake a cake on
a cookie sheet expect more of a large pancake.

"You asked:

will the form in the community context
always have to be cast anew?

Until perfected I would imagine so."

RevJohn,

I think this is a general problem for web
sites setting the standard by endurance
more so than civility.

Imagine reloading all of your computer
software every time you come to Wondercafe.

The difficulty is where forms are constructed
like houses on sand waiting for the next wave
to pull them back into the sea.

Does moving ahead on such a basis create
any sense of participation in the rules or is it
a thing of personal power and presence that
sets the stage? I am not sure I see any stability
in that. I suppose that is why I am so big on form
as a reference for things seemingly decided or
not. I just wish there was a way to reconcile your
vision of community with a discussion post board.
There might be less fighting over the same yard
of earth over and over again. Now it is more about
who can stand on it the longest, or keep a horse
there to make claim to it, etc. The web is more of
a wild west really, or guns at ten paces. As long as
the rules are followed, anything does go.

Some of us may suffer what Neitzche called "the
morality of exhaustion" sooner than others as well
as the instinct of the "herd". In other words. a lack
of form, stability, or construction of tradition of any
kind will create behaviors for all not seen in more
stable or government-like contexts. Seeking community
without these can be very much a 'group urgency' and
not an 'importance' exercise as fashions come and go
in the wind. Examples can set standards rather than
standards setting examples for not only ideals, but also
for acceptable group behaviors.

RevJohn asked: For those who do not identify as disciples of Christ, who participate here as an exercise of rights and privilege what do you understand your duties and obligations to be? How do those duties and obligations build this place up and help it to become what you believe it should be?

I haven't read carefully through all the responses, so I hope that I'm not rehashing old material.

Although I certainly find my roots in the Christian tradition, I rarely consider myself Christian any longer so I thought that I would answer question number 2 (although I truly believe that the answer is the same)

I am here to show the values by which I live (sometimes more successfully than others). I try and find common ground and to show others that my world view, though not the same, is not that scary. We can all come together under common ideals. What does it cost me? Well I've been more open with people here than I sometimes would be "in real life" and on occasion, that has brought me damnation or ridicule. And that is ok because it is encouraging me to be more articulate.

...c

*Peace 2 u RevJohn*

RevJohn wrote: A word of caution. You are slipping from a position of humility to false humility. Seeing all others as having a greater importance than yourself is untenable. it will interfere with your desire to serve.

*That would be true were it beyond the context of this discussion. I shared openly a quality about myself that motivates my life. You would have no clear way of knowing how I view myself in relation to others if I had not shared it.*

RevJohn wrote: Fair enough. Service of the other accepts the other as is. Does that service of the other allow the other to remain as is?

*Yes.*

RevJohn wrote: You are prepared to die for those that you love. Are you prepared to correct them?

Sometimes dying for them is the easier path than living for them and helping them to grow.

*Yes, I am prepared to correct them, and have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. By gently correcting them in a non threatening, non judgmental way.
It is like watering a plant. When done gently and in a loving manner the plant flourishes and grows. It is the same with people.*

*Peacefulness to your Journey*

Wolfie

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

No but if you want to bake a cake on
a cookie sheet expect more of a large pancake.

So high hopes and great expectations need to give way to butter and some syrup then?

Grace and peace to you.

John

VillageIdiot,

Hi,

You wrote:

I think this is a general problem for web
sites setting the standard by endurance
more so than civility.

Fair enough. It doesn't have to be that way though does it?

You wrote:

I suppose that is why I am so big on form
as a reference for things seemingly decided or
not.

Fair enough. Form must always be on then I would guess. I would also expect that there would need to be a more rigid administration of the form in order to allow the form to keep its shape and not be warped.

You wrote:

I just wish there was a way to reconcile your
vision of community with a discussion post board.

Do you believe such reconciliation impossible or just improbable.

You wrote:

The web is more of
a wild west really, or guns at ten paces. As long as
the rules are followed, anything does go.

While that is true. I don't think either of us is particularly happy with that. So how do we set about establishing something that both of us could be happy with?

You wrote:

Examples can set standards rather than
standards setting examples for not only ideals, but also
for acceptable group behaviors.

I agree with that also. Which is why I have lifted up the cross bearing standard as discussion starter. It is a standard from which examples can be taken.

Grace and peace to you.

John

cjms,

Hi,

You wrote:

I haven't read carefully through all the responses, so I hope that I'm not rehashing old material.

Don't worry about that it will be just as informative.

You wrote:

What does it cost me? Well I've been more open with people here than I sometimes would be "in real life" and on occasion, that has brought me damnation or ridicule.

So you have risked being vulnerable and found an even return for that risk? Sometimes it pays off and sometimes it pays out.

You wrote:

And that is ok because it is encouraging me to be more articulate.

So you are learning and growing even as you are sharing.

Grace and peace to you.

John

RevJohn wrote: So you are learning and growing even as you are sharing.

Growing and sharing - yes - and it's mostly because of all that wonderfood and drink!!!! Did you know that the average person gains 5 lbs during the holidays and will lose approx. 2.5 of those lbs in the next 12 months. You see my problem after being here for a year!!!...c

Wolfie,

Hi,

You wrote:

That would be true were it beyond the context of this discussion.

I think it may be true even within the context of this discussion.

You wrote:

I shared openly a quality about myself that motivates my life. You would have no clear way of knowing how I view myself in relation to others if I had not shared it.*

Very, true. I was responding to what you shared.

You wrote:

*Yes, I am prepared to correct them, and have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. By gently correcting them in a non threatening, non judgmental way.

That doesn't seem to me that you are allowing them to remain as they are then.

You wrote:

It is like watering a plant. When done gently and in a loving manner the plant flourishes and grows. It is the same with people.*

True. So we are not allowing the seed to simply sit, we are encouraging it to germinate and grow which is, I think, different than simply allowing it to be as it is.

Grace and peace to you.

John

cjms,

Hi,

You wrote:

Did you know that the average person gains 5 lbs during the holidays and will lost approx. 2.5 of those lbs in the next 12 months. You see my problem after being here for a year!!!...c

Ahhhh but WonderTonnage doesn't translate into physical poundage does it?

If it were physical mass that was growing retention would be considered problematic. I gather we grow more in knowledge than mass here so such retention is more blessing than curse.

Or so I hope.

Grace and peace to you.

John

RevJohn wrote: Ahhhh but WonderTonnage doesn't translate into physical poundage does it?

If it were physical mass that was growing retention would be considered problematic. I gather we grow more in knowledge than mass here so such retention is more blessing than curse.

Well I'm not sure of the physics of it all however it is one of the risks that I am willing to take in order to be part of the community. Waistline be damned!...c

LB I know how I would like to be thought of but whether that is actually how people perceive me is unknown. This is, IMHO, no different than the real world.

Rev John Well it is a bit different isn't it. As you point out above eyes glazing over are difficult to spot in a text based medium. As are the nods of approval, smiles or thumbs up

Not really, someone can smile and nod at me, conveying acceptance but what is really going on in their mind is another thing altogether. They may be being polite while thinking "Oh crickey is this woman ever going to shut up". There is no way for me to know unless they say it, or in this media write it.

Rev John (note to Admin--EMOTICONS)

Gack!!!! ;-)

RevJoh Can the cross also be a happy place if the sacrifice is for the betterment of others?

I am sure it could, although I doubt it is for a pedantic ;-) The sacrifice for the betterment of others should bring joy but more often than not it brings anger. The anger will result when those that have sacrificed see that sacrifice being tossed aside or trivialized.

LB And such is life. Whether here in WC or out in the real wide world we can not truly know what is going on in the minds of others unless they share it with us. I can make assumptions but those assumptions will be based on my experience and thus will ultimately be a projection of myself.

RevJohn This is a good point. I wonder though if the assumptions are only a projection of ourselves? Do we not, even in this limited format get something from other posters?

That would be dependent on the individual. Do I get something from the other posters; most definitely. I have learned much but that is because I want to, I am open to their opinions and experiences. That is what motivates me; it may not be what motivates others.

I share with you, again, my experience for it is all I have to offer. When I first discovered that something new under the sun, Usenet, or what came to be known as the Net, I was a naïve provincial Canadian cast adrift in a sea of highly educated techno geeks. There was a clear line between those that had military backgrounds and those that had academic.

The academics were often dry, pedantic, pompous and demanding the imposition of their code of conduct. Much like me in fact. The military types were often loud, brash and angry. It was the latter that fascinated me, for in my quintessential Canadian politeness I did not understand their rage. So being the curious cat that I am, I asked.

I didn't ask the safest, the ones I thought would tell me nicely what I wanted to hear. I asked the angriest of the bunch, because in them I saw raw honesty. They might not tell me what I wanted to hear but they would tell me the truth or at least their version.

These men, and they were all men there were few women on the Net in those days, were blunt in their explanations. They didn't sugar coat their anger. They had made tremendous sacrifices. If they hadn't actually fought in a war they had been touched by it. One young man about my age had grown up on active military bases, he had seen the wounded, the dead. The others had been in battle. They had been wounded, watched other men die.

They were brilliant, articulate but very impatient men. They were angry because they perceived the values they had fought for, rightly or wrongly, were being threatened. They viewed time as a precious commodity, life as fragile and because of this they didn't pussy foot about with niceties. They expressed their impatience against those they saw, actively or passively, promoting what they had fought against. They were not speaking to those people; they were speaking to others who had not formed opinions. They were speaking to me.

Now some can argue that that is all melodramatic but those that do, do so from the comfort of their secure lives. They haven't made sacrifices. They haven't carried heavy crosses. They haven't lost time, friends, lives fighting for something.

So, most definitely, when those men shared their stories with me I took something. It changed the way I look at people. The way I look at life. Those warriors taught me that life is short. To grab at it with passion and not let go until there is nothing left. There was a message in their anger but I had to be willing to listen. That is the power, the potential, and the limitation this medium has to offer.

I also took from them that I would rather be in the company of the brash and the honest, than the rarefied air of polite society. That I want to be in a community that includes people like Atheisto and Mike Paterson: People who will immediately tell me if I just stepped in a pile of sh*t without taking the time to figure out how to say it politely or to ponder whether telling me may some how offend me.

I want that person to say, when necessary, out loud "Crickey, woman, shut up already".