Our conforming and performing element within the CMA prevent this CMA blog site from functioning as a healthy blog connection. And I am most likely going to get mangled for what I am going to say, but that is what blogging is really about - like Tim Crouch once told me, I am a political idiot. (My apologies to those who read my daily blog directly at my blogspot site, rather than through the CMA e-community. Some of this will make no sense to you at all, but the principles still rock if you want to read on).
So here goes . . . Blogs are web logs and most people put bloggers (web log users) into at least three categories: Personal, Business and Organizational. The stated purpose or definition of a blog (as found on the CMA website) is “an online journal of personal thought and commentary.” We connect to one another in this fashion, and we create new “tribes” to use a Doug Coupland’s term. I read certain blogs because those people challenge me, encourage me, spank me or any other 100 me’s. I am generally more into thought-provoking blogs rather than devotional varieties and those are the one’s I tend to gravitate toward. But the blog is my thoughts or views on a particular occurrence, event, subject or idea. It in no way represents the CMA official position, trend, thought, perspective or ignorance. Its just David talking, out loud in a fashion . . . making public my private thoughts. You are not required to read my blog. In fact you are encouraged NOT to read my blog if doing so raises your blood pressure, or makes you feel like you need to make certain that I color (play, draw) within the CMA lines . . . or if you wish to trivialize holiness by making rules that cannot bear the weight of scripture. Read someone else’s blog my friend. This is MY diagnosis, if you disagree (and please feel free to do so, as often as you like) then leave a comment so that everyone can see you disagree, don’t snipe privately via email. If your comment may cause someone’s blood pressure to rise, perhaps you should just write a blog about it :-)
One recent critic, suggested that were not my blog linked to the CMA’s e-community here, that then my blog would be OK and I could be as outrageous as I chose to be on any given bad hair day. Hmmmmmm. Do my views sometimes contrast with stated CMA policy? Clearly they do. Should I state in a blog that I have a different point of view? Not if I want to be well thought of by certain individuals who want to have a smooth sailing ship (read, no waves Aderholdt). But now we have gone from prudence to just plain old dishonesty. If you agree with every single tiny thing that an organization as huge and as diverse as this one does, then you are a robot, not a homo sapien. I know some in the CMA who will not dare write what they really think, because of the censure of their CMA peers. I know people who have told me that they worry about the security of their jobs were they to write what they really think and as often as they think it! And I know people in the CMA who will immediately doubt that I am speaking truth, because I have chosen to protect those who said these things to me (remember when I challenged you about an issue while riding to a hotel on the mountain, and you said “I don’t believe you!). But that is OK, you don’t have to believe me nor do you have to read this blog. That is the beautiful awesome postmodern ultimate pick-n-mix side of the internet, you are not required to read my blog.
We generally believe people who conform and perform in life to be insecure, but why do we want this in our denomination? I mean my own daughter told me to ”go jump in a swimming pool Dad“ left as a comment on one of my blogs this week. I am so proud of her, because she can think for herself. She thought I was full of it, and politely and humorously told me so. That’s good, not bad. That means I raised an adult, not an insecure conformist who must be told what to think.
The primary challenge to blogging here in this forum is that many of us gain our livelihood from the CMA in some fashion or another . . . so . . . are we so insecure as an organization that we need to fear for our livelihoods? Whatever happened to the official line that we ”embrace those who challenge us and who are entrepreneurial.“? Folks our greatest strength is our diversity (not our sameness) and how we each are pursuing God and seeking to accomplish the Mission together, but also as individuals who think, feel and believe differently than one another, yet have a common purpose - to fill heaven completely full.
So here goes . . . Blogs are web logs and most people put bloggers (web log users) into at least three categories: Personal, Business and Organizational. The stated purpose or definition of a blog (as found on the CMA website) is “an online journal of personal thought and commentary.” We connect to one another in this fashion, and we create new “tribes” to use a Doug Coupland’s term. I read certain blogs because those people challenge me, encourage me, spank me or any other 100 me’s. I am generally more into thought-provoking blogs rather than devotional varieties and those are the one’s I tend to gravitate toward. But the blog is my thoughts or views on a particular occurrence, event, subject or idea. It in no way represents the CMA official position, trend, thought, perspective or ignorance. Its just David talking, out loud in a fashion . . . making public my private thoughts. You are not required to read my blog. In fact you are encouraged NOT to read my blog if doing so raises your blood pressure, or makes you feel like you need to make certain that I color (play, draw) within the CMA lines . . . or if you wish to trivialize holiness by making rules that cannot bear the weight of scripture. Read someone else’s blog my friend. This is MY diagnosis, if you disagree (and please feel free to do so, as often as you like) then leave a comment so that everyone can see you disagree, don’t snipe privately via email. If your comment may cause someone’s blood pressure to rise, perhaps you should just write a blog about it :-)
One recent critic, suggested that were not my blog linked to the CMA’s e-community here, that then my blog would be OK and I could be as outrageous as I chose to be on any given bad hair day. Hmmmmmm. Do my views sometimes contrast with stated CMA policy? Clearly they do. Should I state in a blog that I have a different point of view? Not if I want to be well thought of by certain individuals who want to have a smooth sailing ship (read, no waves Aderholdt). But now we have gone from prudence to just plain old dishonesty. If you agree with every single tiny thing that an organization as huge and as diverse as this one does, then you are a robot, not a homo sapien. I know some in the CMA who will not dare write what they really think, because of the censure of their CMA peers. I know people who have told me that they worry about the security of their jobs were they to write what they really think and as often as they think it! And I know people in the CMA who will immediately doubt that I am speaking truth, because I have chosen to protect those who said these things to me (remember when I challenged you about an issue while riding to a hotel on the mountain, and you said “I don’t believe you!). But that is OK, you don’t have to believe me nor do you have to read this blog. That is the beautiful awesome postmodern ultimate pick-n-mix side of the internet, you are not required to read my blog.
We generally believe people who conform and perform in life to be insecure, but why do we want this in our denomination? I mean my own daughter told me to ”go jump in a swimming pool Dad“ left as a comment on one of my blogs this week. I am so proud of her, because she can think for herself. She thought I was full of it, and politely and humorously told me so. That’s good, not bad. That means I raised an adult, not an insecure conformist who must be told what to think.
The primary challenge to blogging here in this forum is that many of us gain our livelihood from the CMA in some fashion or another . . . so . . . are we so insecure as an organization that we need to fear for our livelihoods? Whatever happened to the official line that we ”embrace those who challenge us and who are entrepreneurial.“? Folks our greatest strength is our diversity (not our sameness) and how we each are pursuing God and seeking to accomplish the Mission together, but also as individuals who think, feel and believe differently than one another, yet have a common purpose - to fill heaven completely full.
6 comments:
Smiling here in Colorado :-)
Who said that line: we ”embrace those who challenge us and who are entrepreneurial.“? I've never heard that and think it is a lovely idea.
Thanks for having the courage to challenge our tendency to conform and perform, which should be the antithesis of Christianity. As always, your post was a breath of fresh air!
I don't know about others, but I read your blog to know that I'm not alone in the CMA.
I was trying to redo my comment so deleted it but didn't get the little box option to delete completely - Oops :-)
Just going to say, Steiners, I am sure you are not alone. Wherever two or three are gathered one of them is bound to be someone like Dr. D, who says aloud what the other two are only thinking.
Post a Comment