Reality distortion fields
But I'm finding it remarkable that, as of this writing four days later, you won't find any details here, or here. Two of the largest "conservative" blog sites, who are usually very quick to jump on the very latest goings on-- and not a mention, not a breath, not a word.
And it's not as though they haven't been made aware. Or that comments haven't been posted to them, mentioning it. But any comment or question about the incident has been deleted from these blogs, almost as soon as it goes up-- erased as though it never existed. I know, as I wrote one of them.
Anyone who has visited here with any regularity, knows the rules under which I operate my blog-- the basic expectations of civility that exist in this corner of the cyber playground. No vulgarity, no personal attacks, no sarcastic nastiness... If you want to play that way, there are other places to do it; but as Fr. Jake says, if you behave in such a way that I would show you to the door in my home, that is what will happen here as well. It's the reason I use comment moderation-- I got tired of coming back to my blog to find that someone had been spewing ugly in my absence (rather like returning home to find the dog has left a calling card on the living room rug). Disagreement is permitted, of course; but insults are not. You must play nicely.
Of course, that means I try to maintain those same standards when I visit other places. If I don't like it, I shouldn't do it, right? Treat others as I would be treated, etc. So I was very concerned that my post over at SF be nothing less than polite and respectful. Goodness, if anything I was treading especially carefully, knowing that it was likely to be touchy turf. I finally ended by simply asking a question.
My total comment (on a blog post asking for Outrageous Stories in 2007): "What about the actions of Bishop Schofield at St. Nicholas, Atwater?"
And I was deleted. Quickly-- less than half an hour later, it was gone. Erased, like some errant troll. And worse, I don't even have a copy to share with you as proof, as I didn't expect to get zapped for a simple question.
The good news is, I seem to be in good company. I'm not alone in having polite questions or comments shoved under the rug.
Even Mark got into the act (and, being forewarned, I did make a copy of this one):
I find it odd that a bishop who decides to leave the Episcopal Church (and I’m not condemning or approving, that was his decision), then tries to continues to influence Episcopal missions. It seems at least a little outrageous to say that he’s left, but then continue to try to exercise authority within the church he’s just left, doesn’t it?
Again, not defending him or condemning him… It just seems like he’s not “standing firm,” but trying to have it both ways. Posted by ChaplainJ on 12-28-2007 at 11:23 PM
But the elves have been vigilant, clearing out that as well-- and later, even banning one commenter.
Apparently Standing Firm means not allowing questions, and pretending unpleasant realities do not exist. If that's the case, I'll lean the other way. I do not care to be assimilated by the Thought Police.
From SF? Naught but the following:
We’re on a no-warning, immediate ban policy regarding this issue, as we have clearly and repeatedly explained the policy, and as revisionists have repeatedly and deliberately violated this policy by using our blog-space to attempt to promote whatever various humdrum stories they are touting.What a silly, sad, pathetic way to behave.