Due to the large number of comments to the quickie post last night, we have decided to wait until tomorrow to post. This will allow time for more discussions. We will post on both Thursday and Friday
The Wartburg Watch 2024
Dissecting Christian Trends
First? Thank you!
Due to the large amount of information deferred from this post, I have decided not to comment on it until tomorrow.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
🙂
@ Foot:
It is official!
Tennis:
Andy Murray plays Tomas Berdych at 8:30 GMT tomorrow (don’t know what that is in either US or Candadian dollars). The winner – and it could go either way – will play Novak Djokovic in Sunday’s final.
The women’s final on Saturday (I think) promises to be a noisy affair, with both of the game’s loudest shriekers – Serena vs Maria Shriekapova – on court. It’s hard to see past Serena for the title, though.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Let’s hope no reporter is dense enough to ask either woman to twirl.
Probably a good idea to take a break.
Mostly I lurk on this site, but may I say that Rachel Evans has been beat up a lot over this Tony Jones thing. Even after her statement that she and Nadia have separated the conference from Jones, she’s still getting dragged behind the bus.
900+ comments last week about this? Really?
@ Tim:
Actually, I had a great idea about that.
How about a social media campaign to get Ian Cohen to dress up in drag and do a twirl before the women’s final. Should any of the spectators deem that to be worth paying to see, a collection can be taken in aid of a suitable local charity (Women’s Health Victoria was the first one that came up in a cursory googling, but there must be many more besides).
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
My thought was that the men who win their matches should start twirling for the reporters. They should keep twirling until the reporters ask them to stop. Then the men can say “What? I thought reporters were more interested in how we look than in how we play.”
Ted wrote:
I don’t think you’re getting the point. It is not about whether JoPa appears as the producer of the conference. The fact that so many are commenting is some indication that this is important to some people, and RHE’s responses which certainly are not consistent with her prior stance have shocked a lot of people from her tribe. It’s surprising to me that a long-time lurker would emerge just to comment on how many comments were made on a post. How many comments do you think would be appropriate?
@ Gram3:
Gram3, commenting on the number of comments isn’t really what it’s about either.
As for Rachel’s response, to me it looks like silence. She hasn’t posted in nearly two weeks, she’s made it clear she can’t talk about it, and I imagine she’s embarrassed at being in the middle of this mess. Yet, even when she and Nadia try to resolve the problem by severing ties with JoPa and distancing themselves from this guy Jones, the hounds are still after her.
Thanks for reminding me that I don’t belong here.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
I found the piece, for a discernment site, rather lacking in discernment. It didn’t contain any information of much use. Little edification was to be found in it, and I wondered if Dee was beginning to lose her touch. You know, it kind of left my mind blank at the end of it, like reading an empty screen.
Mind you, the content was still better than that of a celebrity pastor’s sermon …
🙂
Latest on the tennis:
It will be Andy Murray who plays Novak Djokovic in Sunday’s final. Murray has a decent chance of winning a set.
Ted wrote:
Hi Ted
When you speak of *here* what do you mean? What is *here*? Unlike many other blogs, we allow for a full expression of beliefs even when they conflict with one another. It is our firm belief that the Christian community should be able to handle serious disagreement. We all need to see what others think of us.
Here at TWW, we (The Deebs) allow ourselves to be the subjects of stinging criticism and allow those comments to be posted. We want to be the example to others of transparency and willingness to listen to others.
The people who visit this blog are a diverse group and many of us do not agree with one another. That, to me, is the unity we can have as we battle out the issues of the day,
Ted wrote:
Those comments were less about Rachel and more about how a community let down the non-celebrity in their midst. That is worthy of discussion.
The other thing that might help this make sense to you is that this blog rarely deletes comments. When we do, we put a comment on the thread that a comment was disallowed. It is sometimes surprising to our readers when others do no follow suit.
Also, we are all different. What you think worthy of discussion may not be what someone else considers. Instead of looking down your nose at them and us, think about what they are attempting to convey. We must try to understand one another even if we do not agree with one another.
@ Ted:
One final comment: we are not the thought police. As much as possible, we want people to be able to express themselves in a manner that reflects their lives and thoughts. We want to hear what people think even if we might not express ourselves in a similar manner.
You should also know that even though we are more conservative than RHE, we link to her site and will continue to do so. We even wrote a positive review of her book on biblical womanhood. Several people do not want to be *here* because we do so.
@ dee:
Good morning Dee, thanks for asking.
By “here” I did mean TWW, but in reference to a barb that, since 900+ comments indicates a large interest in the sins of RHE and JoPa, and since I questioned that, that I had better get with the program or go back to mere lurking. Sorry. A nerve got hit.
My initial comment was that it may be a good idea to take a few days’ break. 900 comments have got to be tiring for everybody, whether they indicate a consensus against RHE and others or not. To me, 900 suggests the possibility of a feeding frenzy, or a lynch mob.
I’m waiting for more from RHE. She’s been remarkably quiet.
Dee, I answered in response to your first comment. Your second and third showed up after I posted, but I’ve read them. Thanks.
Ted wrote:
I had originally thought that as well, but it doesn’t appear that they are really distancing themselves at all. There is not one acknowledgement by either of them that there are troubling issues regarding Tojo’s fitness for ministry. In fact, RHE has gone so far as to delete any and all comments regarding the matter.
As far as distancing themselves from Tojo, that has all the appearance of a smokescreen. In an email to Dee by RHE, all she did was send a link to Tojo’s manifesto with no comment at all about there being another side to the story or about the questions raised about his fitness for ministry as if the manifesto puts an end to the discussion.
And here is NBW’s post on the Storify site for Tojo’s supporters to tell their “Truth About Tony” that was posted just yesterday:
https://storify.com/TruthAboutTony
“Message Received From Nadia Bolz-Weber, 01.28.15
I love your honesty…your devotion to your family… Emailed to lovefortony@gmail.com
byAvatar for TruthAboutTonyTruthAboutTony13 hours ago294 Views
Embed
“I love you, Tony. I love your honesty, your disarming wit, your devotion to your family, and your theological mind.”
Distancing themselves from Tojo? No Way.
Ted wrote:
The people who visit this blog do so independently. I respect those who comment and believe that the vast majority of them are autonomous thinkers. In fact, this blog attracts many who have been done wrong by the church. That experience has taught them to look critically at situations. In particular, many who visit here are interested in church abuse issues.
BTW-you will note that the majority of our critique on this blog involves more conservative churches. This is our first big post on the problems in the emergent crowd. We believe some of the Neo Cals are rejoicing that our attention has been diverted. 😉
Never fear, we will switch topics momentarily as is your habit.
Ted wrote:
No one said or implied that you don’t belong here. I questioned your focus on the number of comments on the thread. Questioning what someone says in a comment is not a statement about whether a commenter belongs. I understand it is your opinion that this issue is overblown. Obviously a number of people disagree. That’s OK.
Ted wrote:
I did not say that you should go back to lurking. I questioned why the length of the thread was the trigger that brought you out of lurking. The length of a thread doesn’t seem like a big deal to me because people are actively working through difficult issues.
Ted wrote:
Not really. She made it clear using social media that she had done a thorough investigation and found Tony Jones credible. then again she use social media to link Tony Jones is 12 page statement. She made her position clear albeit using fewer words than usual.
Her early on blocking and deleting surprised many people.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Either one twirling for the reporters’ cameras would be fine.
@ Tim
I don’t think either will be as polished as Matthew Golding in the Black Swan pas de deux coda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxedQUzRlx4
Ted wrote:
Hi Ted,
I think you make some good points and hope you don’t leave over this. I did not read all 900 comments but I did read at least a couple hundred. May I offer that most, to me, seem to be aimed not at RHE, per se, but about the general topic of how celebrity pastors can abuse their authority to silence critics unfairly. Many people are not comfortable with the power of the pulpit being abused this way. Seldom do we see such a clear cut example where the abusing celebrity pastor is so profoundly and completely in the wrong. I’m not sure that Jones is even qualified anymore to be a pastor. This situation gave readers an opportunity to articulate their general disapproval with such behavior from any pastor.
–
I think what was upsetting to so many, was that such a man was being elevated, celebrated and enriched (therefore rewarded) by people they trusted. It’s kind of a compliment to RHE. Let’s face it, if this was Joyce Meyers or TD Jakes people would just shake their heads but little more, because they expect such reprehensible behavior from them in the name of making money. But when RHE – a voice for many women – decided to elevate and enrich this man, people were astonished. Maybe the comments were aimed, in part, towards helping her not step into further trouble with this while JoPa mess. Personally, I praise her for backing away from JoPa.
JeffT wrote:
Jeff T,
Interesting. Is that on the level? I can’t imagine Nadia posting anything suicidal in the middle of this kerfuffle.
And an email address such as lovefortony@gmail.com seems like a parody. But then, you can’t make some of this stuff up.
lydia wrote:
I agree with that concern. I’ve been following the Mars Hill saga too.
LT wrote:
LT, that and your related points are probably the best summary of the problem.
Ted wrote:
So far as I know it is. It’s posted on the site on the Storify link I posted along with posts by a number of other Tony Jones supporters.
Estelle wrote:
That is lovely, Estelle, thanks for the link. And if either of them gave an interview after a performance I suppose a reporter is justified in asking about twirls and poses. (But asking the #7 tennis player in the world to twirl? So out of line.)
TED!!!
I’ve loved you as a commenter for years on I-Monk. You make your way down from Maine to Washington, D.C. and the beer will be on me! 😀 I’ve been busy and had had to cut back a but on the blogs. But I still follow and look forward to your comments. Given some of the stuff I ran into in the Evangelical Free, Crusade, Non-Denom churches and even being unsuccessfully recruited to Sovereign Grace, that’s why I like to read and engage her. I’m still on my journey and an evangelcial by the skin of my teeth. Sometimes it seems no matter where you turn that road is murkey.
For the most part I liked RHE, I disagred with her on a couple of things, but liked what she said about women, Neo-Calvinism, etc… I was dismayed becuase I wondered if I was looking and being drawn to someone like her in the same fashion I used to be into John Piper. But there is something about power, fame and status that corrupts.
Eagle wrote:
“But such is the lure of the limelight, how sweetly
It takes hold of the mind of its host;
And that foolish Pony did nothing to stop
The destruction of one who had needed her most…”
— Ponyphonic, “Lullaby for a Princess”
JeffT wrote:
Did Twitter’s 140-character limit cut off her “I WANT TO HAVE YOUR CHILD!!!!!”?
Because this sounds like Bella gushing over EDWARD (sparkle sparkle) or Harley Quinn gushing over The Joker.
LT wrote:
But it’s still really damaged RHE’s credibility.
@ Ted:
I hope it is a parody, but i fear thst it’s not. Agreed that it’s incredibly stupid, if gor real.
Hey, Charlotte’s Elevation Church is becoming a landlord!
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2015/01/28/5477523/elevation-church-buying-matthews.html#.VMqB6S75EXh
One of the tenants is an Ashley Furniture. So is Elevation a church or a business?
@ mirele:
Both. You can’t operate a church of most any size without having part of it operate as a business. And unless you are in a very rural area many times the way to build a church building is to buy up a commercial property. Many times one(s) with existing businesses.
Growing up my father was heavily involved in the operations side of our church. And SBC with about 500 showing up most Sundays. There was a LOT of business type stuff that had to be done to keep the doors open.
As much as Elevation has going on the odd, strange, and maybe wrong side of things, this is one I’ll give them a pass on. Unless they start recruiting stores and expanding the footprint for businesses. 🙂
And this is one reason out of 1000s the non-profit areas of the US tax code cause problems.
@ Eagle:
Thanks, Eagle. You’re a large part of why I read TWW.
And with HUG and Numo over here, I feel more at home.
Tim wrote:
Djokovic does a passable imitation of Maria Shriekapova, so he’d probably be up for it! All the same, I’d rather see Ian Cohen do the twirl…
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Well, yes. That’s exactly what it looks like, if it’s not a parody. 🙂
Sorry if this overlaps someone else’s post:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/10-spain-priests-charged-in-child-sex-abuse-case-after-pope-steps-in/ar-AA8Htk1?ocid=ASUDHP
Considering there is no post and we are not commenting, there are quite a few comments here.
Ted wrote:
🙂
Here’s what it looks like to me:
NBW – an unabashed Tony Jones fangirl
RHE – a passive-aggressive closet Tony Jones supporter
Interesting Tweet from RHE:”Sometimes it seems like we go to the grocery store to consume food, the mall to consume stuff, social media to consume one another.”
Reply by Julie McMahon: “Or to try and be heard for the first time.”
@ Tim:
You’re welcome, Tim. Lovely to see it shown ‘in the round’ for a change.
‘Matthew Golding in the Black Swan pas de deux coda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxedQUzRlx4‘
Sopy, thank you for introducing me to Matthew Golding in that wonderful Nutcracker you linked to last year. I hope you enjoy this Swan Lake extract.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
I know, I take a look, and there were 46 comments as I write this…. 🙂
49th!
50th – Buwahahahahahahahaaaaaaa!
Ken wrote:
Wait, how did I miss this? Celebrity pastor’s sermon…:)
@ Ken:
Here’s your smiley that WP wouldn’t render: 🙂
NC Now wrote:
Take this for what it is — it is sarcasm. Aren’t they kind of copying the LDS who have their hands in businesses?
@ Ted:
Ted, I’ve been a regular here for several years, and slways like it when other imonk folks drop by!
I’m only commenting again on this post/non-post because this will be the 55th comment and I turned 55 earlier this week.
@ mirele:
Oh my. I read years ago that a wing of the IFB owns most of Hammond Indiana. The Jack Schaap wing of the IFB.
Tim wrote:
Give us a twirl birthday boy!
Ted, RHE is tweeting up a storm now.
Lydia wrote:
Ditto!!!!
@ Tim:
Happy Birthday. You look so young in your picture but you are an old coot like me.
JeffT wrote:
I liked that response.
@ Ted:
I hear you are an Monk fan. So am I! Guy Behind the Curtain has read there for years.
Lydia wrote:
Tweets about “Tiptoeing through the Tension”, going to social media to ‘consume one another’, “Rebuilding is a helluva lot harder than tearing down”, “thank you, thank you for your brave piece on @ThisAmerLife. I get trolls too and your story encouraged and challenged me”.
Sounds like ‘Poor Rachel under siege’ {sniff}. If you only had the courage to at least once post your honest thoughts on the Tony Jones fracas and respond to some of the the criticisms, maybe you’d get some sympathy. Instead, we get ‘nothing to see here, move along, and let me hawk my conference and books’
Yes, the self pitying “I am a victim in this” stance of RHE and her complaints about “trolls” and “they didn’t have a breakout session on how to handle online harassment at the young author’s conference” have really put me off.
I am a big fan of hers, generally. But the way she slammed the door on any questioning of her aligning herself with Tony AT ALL from the get-go including the deletion of honest, non-inflammatory comments, really bums me out. As does her lack of acknowledgment that the way she’s reacting to Tony looks – at least from the outside – exactly like the way that SGM and reformed folks circled the wagon, shamed dissenters, expressed alternate outrage and sadness at internet ‘mobs’, refused to believe that guys who they liked SO MUCH could possibly have acted badly, and (until public outcry got really bad) kept inviting the same dudes to their conferences. The apparent double standard and the ‘move along, nothing to see here’ return to business as usual approach – and the apparent complete ignoring of the implications of a diagnosis of NOD in an influential speaker/pastor figure as he tells everyone how awful he has it with his ex-wife . . . ugh. She has just really disappointed me. And I resent that my disappointment and honest questions seem to be dismissed by her as being part of some kind of irrational lynch mob with herself as the victim.
@ Lydia:
@ dee:
Stop it, the pair o’yeez.
Lydia wrote:
My black muumuu is flapping away as I twirl for y’all!
@ Karl:
The whole celebrity cult of personality in Christendom is a huge trap for folks. First the fame even on a small scale with followers then the income streams but over time the followers because an albatross. Over 25 years I have seen it time after time: The sell out.
That is why I don’t get excited about any of them. But I don’t think this will ruin her at all. I think she has enough disappointed followers who will start the rationalizations soon. People like to have a tribe.
@ Tim:
Don’t get dizzy, now, and fall over!
Gram3 wrote:
@Gram3,
Spot on. I liked all of the posts, people discussed many different issues (not just the parties involved in the family law case), and I found the discussions quite robust.
Tim wrote:
Happy Birthday from Northern California.
Ted wrote:
I would be careful insinuating that any and all commenters are doing anything other than asking questions about RHE. People here don't seem to take too kindly to anyone questioning any aspect of Julie's story or defending RHE or calling out the treatment of her.
Estelle wrote:
The story of me living up to my name and falling over without being dizzy in the slightest: Looking For A Fall Guy?
Foot wrote:
I sure hope the bishop does more than requiring those priests to lie on the floor. Is it a coincidence that the older guys (the grey hairs and the balding guy) don’t have their faces actually on the floor in this photo? That seems significant.
Janey wrote:
Being an old guy, it may just signify that they’re old and have trouble being as limber as they used to be. Arthritic shoulders and hands that are perpetually cold from poor circulation are a fact of life for some of us.