Bloggers, Journalists, and Other Verbose Writers (Part 2)

[In case you missed Part 1, you can go HERE. Below is where my brain was going with that portion of this post…]

Of late, I’ve read where bloggers are a bit disconnected from the reality of “facts”.  Bloggers really shouldn’t be writing about the things on their minds or challenging anyone for almost anything–especially if their opinion differs from one published in a bonafide news outlet.  To do so is as silly as a “journalist” writing and talking about President Obama’s birth was in Kenya instead of Hawaii.

Oh.  Wait a minute.  That is what the news media has been talking about ad nauseum as it challenged those silly “birthers” fanatical musings.  So we can’t just “make things up, that facts are not facts.” {Obama, press conference regarding his birth certificate release.)  Personally, I’m like Bart Barber; it’s not so much that President Obama was or wasn’t a natural born citizen–it’s that there are no checks and balances to assure all Americans that a candidate for President of the United States of America has fulfilled requirements of the U.S. Constitution.  It should never have been an issue in the first place, because it should already have been checked before any candidate is allowed to be put on the ballot.

If you ask me, and I know you haven’t, journalism today has slipped like a California mudslide into a sea of opinion, innuendo and wiki-leaks.  When we think of credible “voices” in secular mediums, whose name pops into our minds?  What makes that person’s “voice” credible?  What does it take to be considered a credible voice in the “faith” community for instance?  Is it because that “voice” is respected by the periodicals in which they are published?  or is it because they are renowned by their peers and their fellow Believers?  I can’t help but wonder.

Last Friday I read a comment from a writer (not sure if he considers himself a journalist or not), on a blogsite which I read and scan, now and again.  I clicked on his name, “Jonathan Merritt”, to see what he had to say for himself.  (Cute young man, by the way.)  His bio says:

“Jonathan is a faith and culture writer who has published over 200 articles in respected outlets such as USAToday, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, BeliefNet, Christianity Today, The Huffington Post, and CNN.com.”

He’s also been interviewed by another impressive list of places: ‘ABC World News, PBS’ Religion and Ethics Newsweekly, Politico, Fox News, The New York Times and The Washington Post.”

Don’t know about you, but I’m impressed.  Do 200 articles make him a journalist?  Does the fact that news outlets interview him and recognize him give him an edge over we, uh hmmmn, lowly bloggers?  Well, sorta.  After all, he probably got big bucks for those renderings.  Us?  nada.  His name recognition will probably even give him easier access to an audience with folks like Dr. Albert Mohler, SBTS President, or an audience with most any past president of the SBC, or present leader in the SBC.  I can’t do that…so Jonathan must have a leg up on we bloggers.

Jonathan has written for the “masses”, as Merriam-Webster credits toward journalists.  The periodicals are certainly among what most writers consider journalistic, expose` and news worthy…definitely not the rag-tag reporting found in tabloids.  Although–now that I think about it, sometimes the articles in those so-called news mediums are about as rag-tag as reports in the tabloids.

I remember reading something about Jonathan when SBC Voices had their March Blog Madness that a blogger inquired about Jonathan Merritt’s blog.  I don’t think his blog even made it to the first round….would go check that out, but I don’t consider myself a journalist–check it yourself if ya want.  LOL.  Just kidding folks, it doesn’t really matter, except to show, perhaps, that Jonathan is not in our league of inaudible “voices”.  I digress.

Merritt’s site says, “Jonathan is known for his ability to tackle difficult issues through both the written and spoken word.”  It quotes him as saying:

“I believe that it’s vital to navigate the toughest, trickiest, most controversial conversations,” he says. “I think we need to throw the hush off of the hidden things and blow the dust off the subjects we’ve stored in the attics of our minds. In bravely honest conversations, we find the power to radically change the Church, the culture, and the eternal destinies of men and women.”

“This passion has made him a sought after speaker by colleges, seminaries, churches and conferences on cultural and religious issues.”

I have a confession to make, friends.

As a house-robed, traditional-thinking, retired minister’s wife, who hardly meets the criteria of a journalist, I have to say Jonathan’s words bother me a bit in light of his article on homosexuality and his unwillingness to support traditional marriage in the cultural conversations which he is so well-respected to write about in the bonafide “news mediums”.

What exactly does he mean that we need to “find the power to radically change the Church, the culture, and the eternal destinies of men and women”?  His words have me all wadded up in a mass of confusion.  What exactly does radical “change” look like in the “church, culture, and eternal destinies of men and women”?  Is it anything like former “candidate” Barack Obama said when he told his supporters, “We are just…days away from fundamentally changing America”?

If so, I need to go on record, here and now, and say I don’t like President Obama’s fundamental changes.

Jonathan wrote (at that other aforementioned blogsite), a teensey bit like he wasn’t too concerned about the words pumped out by the likes of me, or you, “a blogger” who uses “second-hand sources” to write.  He chastized:

“This is the beauty of journalistic writing that still exists in some places today. It attempts to tell a story based on things like facts and interviews–all those pesky obstacles that get in the way of bloggers.” (emboldened mine)

Perhaps we bloggers are a bit inconsequential in the scheme of things since we aren’t “true” journalists who interview people and then write what we think they said without quoting sources or informing readers that we have firsthand quotes.  I don’t know.  It seemed to me that Jonathan didn’t like the fact that a mere blogger wrote an op which conflicted with his views on Southern Baptist treatment of homosexuality. It appears the “blogger” dared question the clarity of Dr. Albert Mohler’s asserted views as written by Jonathan.

Personally, in light of Jonathan’s quote, I’d kinda like to know if Dr. Mohler thinks we Southern Baptists have “lied about homosexuality”.  I haven’t been lying.  I don’t want to lie.  I haven’t been whitewashing other sins as if they aren’t registering high enough on some supposed spiritual Richter scale warranting discussion.  Why would the president of one of our most prestigious seminaries, broadbrush the King’s bride’s gown like that?  I can’t imagine.  I’ve read some of Dr. Mohler’s writings and I don’t come away from those with the same idea with which Jonathan punctuates his views.

My husband and I have done far more talking and counseling of people with those so-called menial sins and struggles than those with homosexual desires.  Just saying.  I’ve had a few gay friends I’ve witnessed to and I treated them with as much respect as I would anyone in need of Jesus’ saving grace.  However, I don’t agree with Merritt that we need to condone their sin any more than we condone murder, or cheating, or stealing.

While I agree that some Christians can sometimes get overzealous in preaching the Word on homosexuality, I don’t think any born again, evangelical Christian considers the sins of gossip, adultery, etc. any less worthy of confrontation than homosexual behavior. The thing is, the news media doesn’t show up to report that Christian preachers speak against gossip, gluttony, drunkenness, pride, and any number of other sins.  No. That would be a bit like attacking the 1st Ammendment, now wouldn’t it?  But to read Jonathan’s ideas, I come away believing a person’s sin trumps the first ammendment.  All we need do is take a deep breath and blow the dust weevils off the traditional mindset of the majority of Southern Baptists and we’ll all live happily ever after in our insignificant housecoats.

Then again, maybe I just don’t have enough “facts” to overcome and scale those little “pesky obstacles” that get in the way of we bloggers who fail to understand this thing about culture effecting one’s faith. Maybe I should just resign as a contributor to this website and turn in my laptop.  What say ye, my friends?