My last post clearly sparked some interest.
Since the date of that entry, "The Reach" has registered well over 2,000 unique visits to the site, over 5,000 page views, with about 150-200 visitors a day. Regular and returning readers hail from such places as the UK, Germany, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Thailand, Japan, Singapore, Australia, South Africa, Brazil, Canada, and a bunch of other global locations I have forgotten - not to mention the heaviest traffic from all corners of the US, with a growing cluster of visitors near the University. Apparently I am being "outed" by super sleuths.
By the way, if my knowledge of your location is unnerving, don't worry, I can't tell who you are, just where you're network is located...oh, and what you're wearing.
For the record, I continue to maintain my anonymity and to protect the identity of the school, because my purpose is not self-promotion or aggression. I clearly have some pointed things to say from time to time; but the intent is not to harm, but to reach.
Speaking of reaching, where's the reach on this topic? Those of you who have been around awhile will remember that the original purpose of this site was to boost reaching over grasping. If all this discussion achieves is the polarizing of supporters and detractors, victors and vanquished, I will move on to other topics. Sure, it's fun to watch a dog snarl and try to pull an old sock out of your fist (although it's arguably more fun to watch a dog try to find her way out from under a blanket), that's just novelty, a parlor trick. I'm not interested in just creating spectacle here. If all you want is polarizing media, switch on Hannity or Franken. I want our conversations to matter for more than boundary work.
Clearly the topics of intelligent design, academic freedom, and Christian higher education are compelling to lots of people, but where does all this get us? If your interest is in wounding your opponents, please leave me out of it. If my interest is scoring more more hits on my site, I could achieve a better result by abandoning conversation for porn.
So, where do we go from here? Do we just retreat to our predictable corners: conservatives over here, liberals over there? Do we blindly defend an idea or a university simply because we like them? What do we say to each other? How do we say it?
How do we reach each other through all this? While I deeply appreciate all the supportive comments - public and private - that I have received on this topic, there's something immensely more satisfying about seeing those who are separated by ideology or allegiance come together through their common interest in reaching beyond their grasp.
How do we make our world? How do we treat each other in times such as these? Where's the reach?
11 comments:
I think it takes very special people to look outside of their comfortable day to day and try to see the larger picture of the human race, society, and how it all fits together. I know there is more out there than what I know, and I enjoy seeing new ways to view old topics. Your blog seems to spark that conversation. But conversation doesn't do much if there is no action. That's the hard part. It's like all of the New Urbanist developments. They are doing a good job of revitilzing cities, but they are catering to the wealthy. It's great to have mixed use development in lieu of suburban sprawl, but it still doesn't address the problems of mixed class development. But I digress. I am learning one of the interesting things in life is to see yourself grow and develop. I hope to look back in 50 years and think I figured it out, but I also want to know that there is so much more out there that is beyond me. What fun would it be to be a know-it-all?
Holy smokies, I just finished a little blog of sorts and I somehow managed to delete it. Silly me. Reacher, the reach is in the conversations that are spawned at a lunch table over a topic that would not otherwise be discussed was it not for recent attention brought to it. The reach is in having the courage to confront topics that seem a little scary. The reach is in realizing that topics do not have to be black or white. It has been interesting this past week to talk to people who are ultimately curious about all that has reached a campus. I do believe that one can go about change without wounding opponents. This is done by not personally attacking an indvidual but by standing for what one believes in with respect to others. The answer to ur question is not in retreating or starting porn websites for more hits, and not even in defending ones views as a "I'm right and your wrong mentality" , but in finding personal freedom in Christ's love. The Beetles had some idea of love, but Christ's love, in my personal opinion is being left out of all the topics you have mentioned and have been replaced by something that scares me. Forcing personal interest or opinion on others.This is why I will stand up for those that I see this happening to. Not that I'm being "polarized" but for the fact that others are not playing by the rules I am. Those rules being respect for others beliefs regardless of how I feel about those beliefs. If good people say nothing or do nothing what will happen to our world? This is my challenge to you Reacher. By all means I totally agree with your opinion on reaching, but if all one does is reach, who will be there to stand when others grasp?
Heather, I think you're on to something: Action and mystery. Action that is rooted in certainty can become destructive, and mystery that is sedentary just becomes wishful thinking.
Anon, I hear what you're saying, but I'm a little confused. I think you wish for more overt declarations about Jesus. I guess I refer back to Heather's comment; I am more interested in performing faith than invoking the mere language of faith. I realize it might not appear as righteous, but I've never been much for appearances. And, I'm not saying that reaching means you can't hold on; just that a tight grip makes it difficult to let go.
Reacher,
The things I have always appreciated about you is your ability to engage people in dialogue about things that matter and your desire for authenticity.
One of your tactics is perhaps to be a bit controversial in an effort to get people to look at things from another angle, if only to see another dimension and have a broader understanding.
I think this blog is achieving these things.
It appears to me your frustration is coming from those people who don't want to step outside the box to see if it really is a box or not.
Please don't be discouraged. I appreciate the conversation.
Since the dialogue featured in the comments section of this blog tends to be a few notches higher in sophistication than most of what I see in other internet rumble pits, it feels like enough for me.
I can’t save the world, but I can try to spend some thought on the issue before I post a comment, if for no other reason than out of respect for the author of this blog, who seems to have high standards of thought.
If sometimes it seems like I am “scoring points,” then it is only because it is difficult to express what I stand for without expressing, implicitly or explicitly, what it is I do not stand for.
How do we make the reach across the divide? This is a powerful question, one full of hope and doubt, and in many way, full of the future.
To be honest, I have no clue how to make such a reach on my own. My faith calls me to look to the cross for how to conquer the divide, how to make the right choice in the face of the great divorce. As simple as it comes across and sounds, I see love as the only way to survive these days.
The fence is no place to sit. Take a stand and do so in humility. Love those who disagree, love those who agree. Push aside pride, that most deadly sin, and love. Behind issues and opinions, we are all created in the image of one greatet than us. Seek out that beauty and love.
I think Stephanie is on to something. I guess my modus operandi is to provoke people (including myself) to the point that they may become dislodged from their moorings. Then try to engage in authentic dialogue in this new place, free from all that entangles. I know it's impossible to get completely free, but without the provocation we just stay in our normal places dancing our normal dance...with the same old partners, stepping on our toes.
I guess here's the reacher test: If your visceral response to one who disagrees with you is to completely ignore them as a person and start to formulate a response as to why they are wrong, you are not reaching. You're holding on to something so hard, you can't make yourself vulnerable and reach.
I'm not saying that the substance of the response is automatically wrong, just that the impulse to win might be. Or, maybe the impulse of fear. We also fail to reach when we are scared of the consequences. Like I said in my very first post, reaching exposes us to injury. It’s a vulnerable position. But without it, we would all ball up like fists.
No doubt, Aslan, that wisdom should be excercised. I'm with you on that. What I struggle with is the tendency we have to justify caution and timidity as wisdom. If we are too careful, we end up doing nothing of any real consequence.
I don't know, I'm just doing some digital noodling here. What do you think?
I read this post on Friday night and replied. Then, somehow, it never showed up. It must be out there somewhere floating around. Let me recap.
This here blog. This is the blog I come to when I want to be challenged. There have been things written on this site both in posts and comments that I did not agree with. There have been others that I have been two thumbs up.
In the past, I have been the guy that heard the viewpoint I didn't agree with and just dismissed it. "Tree-huggin Liberal!" -I'd think. Then I would go about my business.
Or I'd here another viewpoint and think, "Blow hard conservative!"
Once again I'd go on about my business.
Though I am not yet ready to debate the big topics in this arena, I have been challenged to see that people, no matter their convictions, don't come to them on a whim. I have had to stop and think about whether or not I did.
As to reaching and grasping...
In "Four Witnesses" the writer Rod Bennett found that his interpretations of the scriptures sometimes differed from that of early christians like Clement of Rome or Irenaeus of Lyons. He said,
"...I noticed that thier interpretations often differed from my own. Don't get me wrong. I still held firmly to Sola Scriptura (Only scripture.) But honestly, what's a young fellow to do when he finds himself in a theological disagreement with four men who got their Bible training more or less directly from the Apostles?"
That's humbling to me.
All that to say, thank you. Keep putting it out there. Who knows, maybe I'll learn to through out an opinion from time to time.
Nah, I like silly little one liners much better.
Oh, and sorry about not gettin' in touch over Turkey weekend. Much got in the way.
I just noticed that I've begun two comments with "you're on to something." Maybe I should rename this blog "On to Something."
Skip, you may not think you are ready to debate the big topics, but you are. Sometimes your one-liners, or your confessions and encouragements, are as big as the topics get. Thanks.
As for Turkey weekend, we sat by the phone and sat by the phone. Did you call? You never called. You. Never. Called.
Were you reaching for the phone or keeping a tight grasp on it?
Burn!
heh heh...shut up
Post a Comment