The Evangelical Outpost takes Jeff Jarvis of BuzzMachine to task, not for linking to the Hugh Hewit GodBlogCon, but for recognizing he would not be comfortable.
Joe does state the real purpose of the planned event, which is the right and proper one.
Community.
Like minded, like believing getting together to celebrate blogging, learn more about each other and how to connect.
I don’t think Jarvis was out of line of his reasons why he wouldn’t be comfortable at all. I think he nailed it with his ‘identities.’
Well, I am a Christian. But I don’t think I’ll go. I’m a Howard-Stern-loving, gay-marriage-backing, prochoice, Clinton-voting, separation-of-church-and-state, cabernet-guzzling Christian. Something tells me that I’d fit in there about as well as I apparently would at the Kos Konvention. Though I will say that Hugh and I have disagreed online about religion — and he has invited me on his air to disagree with him — and he was most cordial; just because we disagreed he didn’t call me an atheist … the way some liberals we know want to call me conservative just because we disagree.
It is impossible to leave the politics out of the faith, and that is the ongoing and current climate in the US. If we outsiders want community we have to acknowledge that.
Looking at the comments under the BuzzMachine post, they are predictable and varied.
Update: (My above statement is incomplete - it is impossible to keep the politics out of faith and that is the ongoing and current climate in the US and the rest of the world. And I have been corrected - Hewitt is merely the key note speaker. There will be forums that will look at cultural issues like home schooling blogging, etc)
The evangelical outpost talks about the purpose of the GodBlogCon and states the ideal.
Disagreements on deeply held political matters are trivial compared to what we share – or at least what we should share — in common. And whether a Christian is a teetotaler or a cabernet-guzzler is of absolutely no importance. What does matter is that we share a common Master: “By this all men will know that you are my disciples,” said Christ, “if you have love for one another.”
And then promptly slips into cultural/political sarcasm.
Perhaps Jarvis would feel more at home at a convention of wine bloggers or Howard Stern blogfans. There is, of course, nothing wrong with wanting to spend time with people you share a common interest. But if he doesn’t feel that he would fit in with his fellow Christians here on earth, what will he do when he has to share space with us in heaven? After all, eternity is a long time to spend around James-Dobson-loving, gay-marriage-opposing, pro-life, Bush-voting, church-and-state-in-their-proper-sphere-advocating, merlot-sipping Christians.
This convention is Hewitt’s stage and he is a evangelical pundit.
As I understand punditry, Hewitt is self-defined as conservative/right.
That fact isn’t going to change.
Nor are the politics.
It will be interesting to see the comments under Joe’s post.
I have asked some Canadian evangelicals if they would go. It isn’t about not wanting community. It’s an expensive trip and a rather weary wade through the political rhetoric to get there.
Ironic isn’t it? Jeff Jarvis linking up gives Hewitt’s GodBlogCon more exposure in a post than they have received in a month of planning.
Ah well.
Blessed are the peace makers and blessed are the pure in heart.
Search
Subscribe 
You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.
Related Entries
For blog design, Wordpress or MovableType coding or blog consulting, see cre8d design.
Bene,
***It is impossible to leave the politics out of the faith, and that is the ongoing and current climate in the US. If we outsiders want community we have to acknowledge that.***
I have to disagree with you there. I think it is the self-proclaimed “outsiders” who put too politics into faith. Christianity has obvious political implications and those who attempt to live out their faith will naturally find that it affects their views on policy. But I think most of those type of Christians (and I consider myself to be in that category) are open to those who disagree. But it appears that most of the time the “outsiders” simply stand to the side and complain about how they “don’t fit in.” (I’m referring more to people
***This convention is Hewitt’s stage and he is a evangelical pundit.
As I understand punditry, Hewitt is self-defined as conservative/right.
That fact isn’t going to change. Nor are the politics.***
I have to correct you there. Hewitt is the keynote speaker but his role is to talk about Christians and blogging, not politics. Before he was a “pundit” Hewitt was simply an evangelical who worked in the media and attempted to bring a Christian perspective to his work. That experience is why his involvement is useful and important.
***I have asked some Canadian evangelicals if they would go. It isn’t about not wanting community. It’s an expensive trip and a rather weary wade through the political rhetoric to get there.***
Have you noticed that so far the “political rhetoric” has only come from the “outsiders”?
***Ironic isn’t it? Jeff Jarvis linking up gives Hewitt’s GodBlogCon more exposure in a post than they have received in a month of planning.***
Um, not exactly. Hewitt – who has double the site traffic as Jarvis — has been writing about the convention since its inception. The only reason that Jarvis’s comments are receiving so much attention is because he was the one who inspired the convention. He was a panel member on blog forum that did not include any overtly religious bloggers.
Dear M. Diction and Mr. Carter,
I will respectfully disagree that faith necessarily shapes political views. My personal take is that the concern of the faithful over political matters for reasons of faith is the strange fruit of Constantine and has been a “Christian” tradition ever since. My political views are divorced from my faith. I do not believe that Scripture supports the mixture of the two in the midst of our earthly sojourn, nor does it offer example of Christians holding any concern over the polity of the magistrate.
Don’t get me wrong. I have political views. Pretty strong one I’d wager. Only I don’t base those views upon my faith. Nor do I think it appropriate to do so.
I will not deliberately contribute to division, and I’m prepared to be called on it if I do.
Joe, I have to respectfully disagree. I admit I have only read Hewitt a couple of times. He is a pundit. Politics are right up there, and heaven help anyone that doesn’t get it. The comments under posts indicate and will continue to indicate otherwise. The political influence isn’t divorced.
I would be very amiss if I didn’t commend you for every attempt you make to cast aside some of the foolishness and be a peace maker. You have worked as hard as any blogger I have ever seen to do so, and it’s been refreshing.
What if you invited Jeff Jarvis instead of picking apart his thoughts and feelings?
Bloggercon at Harvard had a faith blog panel over a year ago.
I am happy to promote this - in doing so allow me the luxury of not kidding myself eh?
Er, lets also be realistic about cost.
Anyone outside the US would have to pay a king’s ransom to get to Biola. Hopefully some will be able to. I’m sure many bloggers will be travelling on shoe string budgets to participate, and I hope it is all they want it to be.
I think Jarvis just reached an audience Hewitt couldn’t. It shouldn’t be about the number of hits.
I’m looking forward to what the bloggers that attend have to say.
I agree with Jeff Jarvis. I don’t enjoy being around conservative Christians and would prefer being around the group that he mentions rather than be around a group of Chrisitan bloggers. Sad to say but the non-Christians are more graceful and fun to be around.
I applaud Jarvis for stating what he feels and thinks, and interestingly he will be talking about god-blogs on MSNBC today. He didn’t put Hewitt down.
It’s going to take more than a blogging convention that isn’t political to get people listening.
It’s an honest attempt, and I’m sure the organizers know how much attention they’ll be getting. Hopefully no one involed will get too prickly if it isn’t what they hope for. It’s months away and focus will only build.
***What if you invited Jeff Jarvis instead of picking apart his thoughts and feelings?***
I’m not sure that disagreeing on him about Howard Stern would exactly qualify as picking him apart. Jarvis is an ordained minister and for him to support a misogynist like Howard Stern is rather disappointing.
But I did send Jeff an email and told him that he would not only be welcome but that his knowledge and experience would be valuable for the rest of us.
***Anyone outside the US would have to pay a king’s ransom to get to Biola.***
I agree. I’m going to have to save my allowance to be able to afford it myself. There is certainly nothing wrong with not wanting to go, whether for financial or other reasons. But Jarvis’ primary reason was because he would not fit in with Those Types of Christians.
***Jordan: I don’t enjoy being around conservative Christians and would prefer being around the group that he mentions rather than be around a group of Chrisitan bloggers.***
I’ve noticed that, for lack of a better term, “non-conservative Christians” are more apt to be standoffish and judgemental than so-called conservatives. Jordan’s comment is a prime example. What does it say about him that he prefers to be around people who joke about flatulence and anal sex than he would around his fellow Christians who differ with him politically?
*Jordon prefers to be around people who joke about flatulence and anal sex, than he would around his fellow Christians who differ with him politically?*
Whooooh.
You two are on your own on that one.
I always thought “Good Families Don’t” was a classic.
Joe - you are going to be in the spotlight whether you want to be or not.
My readership is far, far different than yours.
Jordon certainly deserves better than that.
I also know readers here will show you kindness and not fire back.
If you are uncomfortable with me disagreeing, I’ll back off, you don’t need attention for your convention from me. It’s not worth it.
Joe,
I am not that fond of Howard Stern although as a Canuck, he is not broadcasted in Canada so my exposure is limited to when I am travelling south of the border.
I enjoy non-Christians and people who are outside the church. Even though I am a conservative theologically, I prefer to spend time outside the flock as I resonate more deeply with their issues than I do with people inside the flock. Also, while I am theologically conservative, I find myself more welcome in the more liberal camps politically. Although being a Canadian, my context probably lends itself to me being more comfortable with political liberals then conservatives south of the border.
Plus, I find this kind of dialogue disheartening. Why does it matter to anyone if Jeff Jarvis decides he doesn’t want to participate in the conference or if I enjoy hanging out with some Clintonistas? There are surely more important things to be undertaken.
Pax,
***Whooooh. You two are on your own on that one.***
I guess I shouldn’t have assumed that non-Americans are familiar with Howard Stern. All I meant by that was that Stern (who *is* a rather talented media personality) spends an inordinate amount of time on those subjects. Since Jordan was agreeing with Jarvis that those are the types of people he would be more comfortable around, I was simply following it to its logical conclusion.
***Jordon certainly deserves better than that.***
I apologize if it came across that I was unfairly attacking Jordan. Perhaps I misunderstood what he meant by the comment.
***If you are uncomfortable with me disagreeing, I’ll back off, you don’t need attention for your convention from me. It’s not worth it.***
C’mon, now, you know I have no problem with disagreement. Few people (including my own wife) ever agree with me. I certainly don’t take it personally. I was only trying to clear up some misconceptions about the convention. For example:
–It is truly open to all Christians who
are “Christ-based.” The only groups that are excluded are Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, etc. (The line had to be drawn somewhere.)
–Reading Hewitt book is not a prerequisite. (I wasn’t sure if you were kidding about that or not.)
–It’s not about Hewitt. He was the one who suggested the idea and is one of the keynote panel speakers (he will be joined by a pastor and a philosophy professor) but he has no great role, other than promoting it.
To be honest, though, my concern is not really about the convention at all. I just get a bit sensitive when people (i.e., Jordan and Jeff Jarvis) turn up their noses at the idea of associating with “conservative evangelicals.” It’s hard to encourage my fellow evangelicals to do more in reaching out to others when all it gets them is scorn.
BD,
On this particular matter, I think you have overreacted a little to Joe’s points.
I admit that at times I bring in some of my past grudges against some conservative evangelicals. All of us carry some baggage from prior encounters or interactions.
Okay Joel. I can’t aruge the truth.
Passionate people often over-react eh?
We live in such different worlds.
Sorry Joe, I didn’t mean to hurt you.
Joe wrote: “I’ve noticed that, for lack of a better term, “non-conservative Christians” are more apt to be standoffish and judgemental than so-called conservatives.”
That hasn’t been my experience, either in “real life” or online. But I don’t fit in the conservative camp.
Exclusion is an artform practised by all human beings, and sadly Christians have proved themselves to pretty adept at it. After all, we’ve been perfecting our skills since “one says, ‘I follow Apollos’ and another, ‘Cephas’”. I’d have to concede that non-conservatives are just as good at it as conservatives.
I long for the day when Christians can converse without resorting to sarcasm or point-scoring. It’s possible in the one-to-one or small group, but something happens to us when we debate in public and it is very, very ugly.
I repent.
I repent of linking to this.
Summary:
-Jeff Jarvis states his personal reasons why he doesn’t think he’d be comfortable at a god-blog convention.
-Joe Carter takes exception to the statement and posts this isn’t about politics or liberal believers
-I disagree with how Joe posted
-comments at Joes start out nicely, degenerate into religious and political whatevers, finally winding up in some cultural sewer about homosexuality
-Jarvis has 27 comments, some scornful, some accepting, some ho hum
-Joe gets 40 some last count
-Joe disagrees with me, what else is new:^)
-a bi-vocational Canadian pastor makes a comment and we wind up in some weird place with who gets to listen to Howard Stern and basic misunderstanding about what conservative/liberal means inside and outside the US
-Joel jumps in as peacemaker
-apologies all around
-Joel goes to Joes and jumps in as peacemaker
-Richard H pops in here with a pastorly ‘ahem’
-over at Joe’s they are still talking
This thread stays quiet here because readers have enough sense to stay out of the obvious.
This is blogging?
Man. I take the stupid award.
I stuck my nose in where it doesn’t belong.
I really regret this.
Did I miss anything?
I still think I made a good point
LoL The Dane. I always enjoy what you have to say.
Blog on!
*grin* For now. P.s., because it’s local, I may indeed stop by this convention thingy - despite its political overtones.
It’ll be our little secret.:^o
Oh yes. Certainly ;P
Oh come on you guys didn’t see this coming–this is just the beginning of the coming split between left and right Christians which will be front page news during the next campaign cycle. Part of it is because us lefties are tired of being having to defend how our faith pushes us toward being liberal politically–the last thing I want to do is go to a GodCon and hear only the politics of the right.
I would be considered an emerging church blogger but have started reading more evangelical blogs like Evangelical Outpost and Smart Christian–I find them good, but its interesting that there is little cross over on blog rolls between emerging church and evangelical bloggers.
Jordon Cooper or Tall Skinny Kiwi are on almost all the usual suspects in the emerging church blogosphere–but I have yet to see them on an evenelical/right conservative blog (I have not done a study, just my observation at this point). Same with emerging church blog rolls, no links to EU or Andy Jones there.
Since it seems emerging churchers tend to be more liberal (or at least less politically dogmatic in nature)–it seems to be natural that there are a lot of other who would echo Jarvis’ statements.
I find this troubling and I don’t know who to blame?
We especially in the emerging church ought to be better at having conversations even with people we disagree with…
Hi Tim:
Jordon, Richard and I are trying to be respectful and keep our distance since we don’t live in the US. It isn’t part of our election cycle.
The Dane and Joe - I’ve never asked them if they are left/right/emerging/conservative/liberal, because I don’t care.
I don’t need to have that kind of identifier to talk to people.
A couple of hundred bloggers tops at Biola - a kind of blog meet up with more noise and a bit more time.
The comments section over at Evangelical Outpost about this conference are kind of a clue where things are headed.:^)
The comments aren’t any worse than what we saw in the build up to the Iraq war by other godblog pundit comments, it’s just that because some bloggers are new and a bit more connected it seems the numbers are there.
No, the cross over isn’t happening, I quite agree with you.
Individual bloggers making significant efforts, yes, but overall, no, the demographic study still holds up I’m sorry to say.
Tim points out the last thing he’d want to do is go to a GodCon and hear only the politics of the right. I think a better question is, “Dammit, why do I have to hear politics at a GodBlogCon at all?”
It’s not like every third blog out there doesn’t innundate us with political ho-hummery on a daily basis already anyway. I say, if there’s gonna be a gathering of Christians who blog, why not let the focus be Christ - the only thing we all hold in agreement. Why alienate each other from the get-go by making something so thoroughly disagreed upon seem like the focus. It’d be understandable if the thing was entitled: NeoGodCon Thingy 2005. But otherwise it’d be like calling a class Christian History 101 and only covering Lutheranism.
If I do go, I really only hope to meet some nice people and have some decent conversations (screw the politics). Plus, I’m interested in the vidblogging guy - seeing as how I helped pioneer vidblogging back in the day, I’d like to see where its going nowadays.
p.s. not that you care, but I’m a vaguely isolationistic, Libertarian Christian who doesn’t believe that politics and faith should necessarily be mixed. I think the conservatives are scary and the liberals are flakey (but that’s me talking, not my faith). And I’m frightened by anyone who uses their faith to justify their political perspective (though I’m comfortable with people showing how their politics don’t violate their faith).
The Dane is right. No politics.
I think Steve Knight is right that the Internet Evangelism Conference is GodBlogCon 1/2–and may actually be more about God than the so-called GodBlogCon.
As someone who passionately believes in the spiritual value of blogging, it feels like a missed opportunity. But then on the other hand, it does represent a grassroots (by that I mean not led by a pastors) gathering of belivers which I always support.
It just seems that this perception is out there (liberal Christian bloggers not welcome) and they need to deal with it whether its true or not, as in a big cheery PR blitz on how its a big tent event, blah blah blah…
BTW: why doesn’t The Dane have an RSS feed?
It is entries like this in particular by Hewitt that bug me living in MN, being a democrat, and loving MPR…not that I haven’t said sarcastic things about the right, but I’m not headlining GodBlogCon either…
http://www.hughhewitt.com/#postid1418
Although, I don’t read the Star Tribune. He just needs to make a PR effort to be inclusive, not that he HAS TO (as in threat) but it would just seem a nice idea given his rhetoric.