Ship of Fools: Against gossip

Thread: Against gossip Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=023375

Posted by HenryT (# 3722) on :

The United Church of Canada is considering a motion against gossip. It has received some press coverage, and this reporter seems to get the point. Other coverage has been more flippant or dismissive.

I'd say it's good to see someone remembering that not all sin has to do with sex. I remember someone here a while ago making a similar point rather elegantly.

I heard one of the people from Brandon interviewed on the radio, and saying that if the motion passed, the church would embark on an educational program. Seems like a good move in general.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

Gawsh, isn't a campaign against gossip a little quaint? What next- whistling on the sabbath?

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

Ah yes, General Council is meeting right now in Ottawa for its triennial general meeting.

Seems like a good idea, but its a "Mom & Apple Pie" motion. Nobody votes against Mom & Apple Pie.

But that's not the General Council agenda item I care about. It's Remit 6 I care about, the first Doctrinal Remit since 1936 and the first time we have attempted to amend the Basis of Union since 1925. The question is to incorporate "A Statement of Faith, 1940", "A New Creed, 1968" and "A Song of Faith, 2005" as Subordinate Standards and therefore that they be doctrine.

The Remit passed for all three questions, a majority of Sessions and Presbyteries voting in favour, though there was 40% dissent on "A Song of Faith" and eight Presbyteries voted against it.

The Remit has to be approved by this General Council for it to become effective. I am against incorporating "A Song of Faith" as Doctrine and voted No to all three questions when the Remit was voted upon in my Session.

Nobody knows what happens to ministers who dissent from the new standards as we have never had new subordinate standards.

That's what this General Council is about for me. Gossip? [Snore]

At least it got a few headlines.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

Looks like Remit 6 got passed.

"A Song of Faith". [Projectile]

I only have to believe in the Holy Trinity as a Member. Ministers have to be in Essential Agreement with... our doctrine. The Postmoderns have taken over our Doctrine.

Boo. The Rads won over the Trads. I'm a Trad.

Posted by HenryT (# 3722) on :

Had to look up "A Song of Faith" and found an RTF file - Google link, may try to download.

Interesting. I think I can see what some of the controversies would have been.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

There are two parties in the United Church of Canada in general, the Radicals and the Traditionalists.

The Rads have long had a beef with the Basis of Union's Twenty Articles of Faith. Too old, too traditional, too liable to conservative interpretation, though more that they can be interpreted liberally and conservatively rather than them coming down on one side entirely.

The 20 Articles were not written to be mean and nasty, they were written to be the basis of a common expression on faith. They are also the first Methodist/Reformed concord on doctrine in the world, to my knowledge.

Last General Council the Rads cooked up a Proposal from Saskatchewan Conference to throw the Twenty Articles overboard. The Bay of Quinte Commissioners stopped that and substituted a Remit on all our faith statements. The 20 Articles stayed in in any event.

Another Elder noted that a "A Song of Faith" read like verbal diarrhea. My congregation will not pay them the least bit of notice. Our minister flat out disagrees with the whole document.

This same church has recited the Nicene Creed in regular Sunday worship multiple times, including at my niece's baptism. We are so Trad. (My niece's baptism was also a Scoto-Catholic Event, but see the Eccles thread on that).

Posted by Egeria (# 4517) on :

For those who think gossip is a silly or trivial matter--and not a sin--what about the commandment forbidding bearing false witness? Those psychologists who point out the "social usefulness" of gossip in warning of or discouraging bad behavior seem to be oblivious to the fact that much gossip is completely false, invented because the perpetrator wants to feel important or perhaps to gain some advantage over the target. The rumored bad behavior exists only in the "mind" of the liar who made it all up.

Zach82, maybe you should consider what happens to a straight person falsely accused of being a closeted homosexual, or a young professional falsely accused of being a racist, or a grad student falsely accused of being careless in citing sources, or a research fellow falsely accused of misusing grant money. The target of such defamation often has no way of clearing his or her name--often does not even find out what's been going on until months or years later, after the statute of limitations has run out. What that means is a career destroyed, personal life ravaged, friendships ruined or damaged, livelihood endangered.

The magazine Lutheran Woman Today once ran an article that argued that malicious gossip also violates the commandment against killing, because gossip does such harm. Lutherans might remember that the Small Catechism teaches that "thou shalt not kill" really means that we should do no harm. So it is entirely appropriate that the Church of Canada should take up this matter, and I hope other churches follow suit.

And in case you're interested, yes, I am speaking from painful experience .

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Gawsh, isn't a campaign against gossip a little quaint? What next- whistling on the sabbath?

Whistling on the Sabbath is permitted, since singing is permitted.

Gossip, on the other hand, is evil speech, Loshon hara in Hebrew. I've just pulled a children's book off my shelves: 'Purity of Speech: Protect Yourself From Loshon Hora.' In it I find that the Second Temple was destroyed on account of the people's tale-bearing, arguing, baseless hatred, and gossip.

It also advises the reader to eschew the dangerous habit of newspaper-reading, and it has several sections on repentance.

It would be so refreshing if the people in the Church who bang on continually about other purity matters would, for a change, devote their attention to this one. They'd learn humility.

[ 14. August 2012, 06:24: Message edited by: Amos ]

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
It would be so refreshing if the people in the Church who bang on continually about other purity matters would, for a change, devote their attention to this one. They'd learn humility.

Without knowing any of the background or detail about this proposal, I think it's quite a good idea. I mean, sure, it would be very hard to enforce any anti-gossip measure (perhaps that's not really the point) but I like the idea of saying publicly and officially that gossip is harmful and ungodly.

Like a couple of others have said, it's refreshing to see something other than sexual behaviour being focused on.

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

Gossip is murder by accusation in secret. It is character assassination.

At least if someone stabs you with a knife you have a chance of seeing them - with the stabs of gossip, you have little to no chance.

Gossip is the refuge of the insecure, the chancer, the back stabber and the plain malicious. Time and again the bible warns of the danger of the tongue and bearing false witness. I've seen lives destryoed by gossip and know of at least one death by suicide as a result of it.

Some are pretty good at condemning same sex sin, but not so good as condemning other errant sexual behaviour - at last someone is prepared at least to raise the issue of the insiduous danger of gossip.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

I've just preached on 1 Thes 4. Exhortations not to live an immoral life are followed by exhortations to mind one's own business. This is just as important. And I expect a lot of the gossip is about sex.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

I hope those who are against gossip never watch TV soaps - they are in the gossip business in a big way!

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Gawsh, isn't a campaign against gossip a little quaint? What next- whistling on the sabbath?

I just love it when people minimise the sins that don't matter to them. Makes me feel so much better about my own attempts at self-justification.

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I hope those who are against gossip never watch TV soaps - they are in the gossip business in a big way!

Isn't that like saying 'I hope those who are against murder never read thrillers.'?

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I hope those who are against gossip never watch TV soaps - they are in the gossip business in a big way!

I don't watch them. In fact not much TV at all bar a few historical programmes. It's easy when you're one of the (few?) men who doesn't like football and/or most sports!

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

Well, James would agree with the principle at least. And yesterday's reading from Ephesians telling Christians to speak the truth, not to slander or speak maliciously, bitterly etc, seems to indicate gossip isn't a small matter.

I guess the point about gossip is that taken the wrong way, it ruins reputations, wastes precious time, disrupts individual and community relationships and is false and wrongly motivated. Not exactly anything a Christian community would want for itself, or for its witness to the world.

I'm not sure you can legislate against it, except within a small in-house sort of way of self-regulation, which sounds horrendously open to abuse or misinterpretation to me. But gossip - or speculating with people's reputations in potentially untruthful and hurtful ways, as it often is - is incredibly harmful in church circles.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amos:

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I hope those who are against gossip never watch TV soaps - they are in the gossip business in a big way!
Isn't that like saying 'I hope those who are against murder never read thrillers.'?

Yes - I didn't word that very well.

What I was trying to say was the only place we can deal with gossip is in ourselves. As soon as you start telling others you're pretty much gossiping yourself in calling them gossips!

It's so easy to see other's sins.

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:

It's so easy to see other's sins.

And such fun!

But nothing beats the thrill of sharing them with others. [Eek!]

Posted by PerkyEars (# 9577) on :

As well as gossip being destructive to the people it's about, it's destructive to the teller too. It promotes a feeling of self-righteousness, and is all about trying to look better than other people.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

quote:
Originally posted by PerkyEars:
As well as gossip being destructive to the people it's about, it's destructive to the teller too. It promotes a feeling of self-righteousness, and is all about trying to look better than other people.

And that's the problem about pointing out other people's sins. Theirs always look so much worse than our own, which are soo easy to ignore.

Much better to preach the positive imo. Helping us all to see the good in others.

As my Mum used to say 'If you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all'

Posted by Galloping Granny (# 13814) on :

Had a very quick look at the Song of Faith.
The Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand came out with something similar a couple of years ago. My friends and I read through it once and then confided it to the bottom of our various theological cupboards, with some sympathy for the respected people we know who'd been involved – working to a requirement from Assembly. It was basically the same old same old in similarly turgid but would-be contemporary prose.
As for the 1968 Creed – we use it often; I could say it is much loved.

GG

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
[QUOTE] As my Mum used to say 'If you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all'

That's a great way to look at it, always assuming that sometimes what's "good" is open to question and may be needed to get someone back on track.

If you combine that with never saying something behind someone's back that you wouldn't say to their face - then you are a long way down the road to taking gossip out of the equation. In fact, why not make sure you say the good things you tell others about someone, to their face. It's called encouragement!

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:

It's so easy to see other's sins.
And such fun!

But nothing beats the thrill of sharing them with others.

Always bear in mind that they will be doing the same to you and at you too in other contexts.

Would you rather join the crowd or break the mould?

[ 14. August 2012, 10:39: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

If you combine that with never saying something behind someone's back that you wouldn't say to their face - then you are a long way down the road to taking gossip out of the equation. In fact, why not make sure you say the good things you tell others about someone, to their face. It's called encouragement!

I know.

Posted by justlooking (# 12079) on :

Interesting thread. The link in the OP referred to the impact on a group of people when the topic was introduced: "I think what it was about was that almost everyone in the room has been a victim of gossip". What it didn't say was that almost everyone in the room has also been a spreader of gossip, which I think is equally likely.

Intention matters. Gossip may not always be malicious or thoughtless as these two points from the link explain:

quote:
"Gossip for the sake of gossip is a horrible thing, it destroys people's lives. But you also have to be made aware if somebody's doing something that's going to undermine your life or welfare," ....

"We shouldn't feel guilty for gossiping if the gossip helps prevent others from being taken advantage of,..."

When is gossip idle or malicious and when is it legitimate?

ISTM that if some gossip is considered legitimate it should be open to challenge. Natural justice demands that any allegation against someone should be put in writing so they have an opportunity of defending themselves and challenging the accuser. So a safeguard against idle or maliciously motivated gossip in a church might be to ignore anything that someone would not be prepared to put on record and to defend, if necessary in court.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

I hate to deprive orfeo of another opportunity to feel superior to me, but I am not saying gossip is OK. I just think having a synod vote saying it is bad is a little silly. It brings to mind the Puritan days of New England.

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

Delving back to 2005, I offer Josephine on gossip , one of the most memorable posts I have yet seen.

Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
[QUOTE] As my Mum used to say 'If you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all'
That's a great way to look at it, always assuming that sometimes what's "good" is open to question and may be needed to get someone back on track. ...

I have heard this attributed to a variety of sources, and I find it works in pretty much every situation. Before opening your mouth, ask yourself:

1. Is it true?
2. Is it kind?
3. Will it help?

If the answer to any of these is "No", say nothing. Soror Magna

[ 14. August 2012, 16:05: Message edited by: Soror Magna ]

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:

It's so easy to see other's sins.
And such fun!

But nothing beats the thrill of sharing them with others.
Always bear in mind that they will be doing the same to you and at you too in other contexts.

Would you rather join the crowd or break the mould?

Mmm. You must've missed my first post on this thread where I make it quite clear that, imo, gossip is often dangerous, as well as being generally unacceptable behaviour for a Christian?

The 'eek' emoticon perhaps doesn't reek sarcasm but I reckon it's pretty clear, given what I've posted, where I am in 'the crowd'.

BTW, as a priest, I'm very well aware of how much I'm the focus of gossip for a very large number of people, a lot of the time. My most recent discovery is the fact that I apparently have a sister (which I don't), was on leave (when I wasn't), and refused to take part in a funeral (which I didn't).

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :

were there to be such a motion, it would wipe out the entire Mothers Union in our parish.

And who would take any notice anyway?

Posted by Loquacious beachcomber (# 8783) on :

There was an ancient parable that may apply here, and I have not been able to find a link to credit its source. At any rate, it told of two birds able to fly across a vast desert.
One was a vulture, the other a hummingbird.
The vulture sought out rot, decay, failure, error, hopelessness; it nourished itself upon the destruction of others. Its very presence cried out of foulness and sadness.
The hummingbird sought out the desert's bright, hopegiving, beautiful flowers; it nourished itself upon the fruits and nectar of the beauty, hope and accomplishments of others.
The hummingbird's very presence delighted with the promise of hope and beauty.
Gossip is the vulture; would you not prefer to be the hummingbird?

[ 14. August 2012, 18:52: Message edited by: Loquacious beachcomber ]

Posted by saysay (# 6645) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:

quote:
Originally posted by Amos:

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I hope those who are against gossip never watch TV soaps - they are in the gossip business in a big way!
Isn't that like saying 'I hope those who are against murder never read thrillers.'?
Yes - I didn't word that very well.

What I was trying to say was the only place we can deal with gossip is in ourselves. As soon as you start telling others you're pretty much gossiping yourself in calling them gossips!

It's so easy to see other's sins.

You do realize that there's a difference between saying 'don't gossip, gossip is bad' and calling someone a gossip, no?

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I hate to deprive orfeo of another opportunity to feel superior to me, but I am not saying gossip is OK. I just think having a synod vote saying it is bad is a little silly. It brings to mind the Puritan days of New England.

Temperance got a little old. My church still has a certificate from the "Youth Christian Temperance League".

Speaking of Puritans, the UCCan is partly Congregationalist, thank-you-very-much.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

It's a bold move for a Church to flag-up the matter of gossip and the damage it can do .
OK you'll always get a degree of 'chatter' , but what starts as tittle-tattle, or a whispering campaign, can quite easily escalate into character assassination .

Like the lynch-mob we are all vulnerable to be carried along with gossip , and when each of us returns home we should ponder just how big a part we played in the outcome.

"Christian cancer" is an accurate description of gossip in Church . Whilst we are all sinners and bring our sins to Church, the hope is we go there to have them rectified not exasperated.

Posted by justlooking (# 12079) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:

The hummingbird's very presence delighted with the promise of hope and beauty.
Gossip is the vulture; would you not prefer to be the hummingbird?

It's a nice story and it makes a useful point, but in RL there is much that is rotten, evil, dangerous and destructive. If we're all busy humming around in the goodness and loveliness who deals with the rot? Carelessly bad-mouthing people is wrong but going to the other extreme and never saying anything that isn't kind can also be wrong if it means evil can flourish unchallenged.

ETA I'm thinking about safeguarding issues in particular.

[ 14. August 2012, 20:36: Message edited by: justlooking ]

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
[QUOTE]]Mmm. You must've missed my first post on this thread where I make it quite clear that, imo, gossip is often dangerous, as well as being generally unacceptable behaviour for a Christian?

Sorry Anselmina must've done but I didn't intend my response to be personal in any case. Apologies for poor english, east anglian/fen is my mother tongue [Yipee]

Yeah gossip about priests can be quite illuminating. Ha ha! Apparently my dad owned a big farm and is fabulously weathy. The truth? He WORKED on a farm all his life and I was brought up in a council house. I was asked (seriously)a month or so ago, whether I was still a member of the Conservative Club. My politics are openly rather lefter than Trotsky.

How any of that affects my ministry, I don't know

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
There was an ancient parable that may apply here, and I have not been able to find a link to credit its source. At any rate, it told of two birds able to fly across a vast desert.
One was a vulture, the other a hummingbird.
The vulture sought out rot, decay, failure, error, hopelessness; it nourished itself upon the destruction of others. Its very presence cried out of foulness and sadness.
The hummingbird sought out the desert's bright, hopegiving, beautiful flowers; it nourished itself upon the fruits and nectar of the beauty, hope and accomplishments of others.
The hummingbird's very presence delighted with the promise of hope and beauty.
Gossip is the vulture; would you not prefer to be the hummingbird?

An ancient parable? Really? It sounds like it came straight from Hallmark.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
It's a bold move for a Church to flag-up the matter of gossip and the damage it can do .
OK you'll always get a degree of 'chatter' , but what starts as tittle-tattle, or a whispering campaign, can quite easily escalate into character assassination .

It's the house specialty in the United Church. The difference between a bold move and shooting ourselves in the foot is the success of the venture.

"Gossip" is particularly noisome in our polity because of its insidious effect in every case of clergy/congregation conflict. Congregations can dismiss their ministers and it's always a train-wreck for Presbytery to clean up when it happens.

Posted by Loquacious beachcomber (# 8783) on :

quote:
Originally posted by justlooking:

quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:

The hummingbird's very presence delighted with the promise of hope and beauty.
Gossip is the vulture; would you not prefer to be the hummingbird?
It's a nice story and it makes a useful point, but in RL there is much that is rotten, evil, dangerous and destructive. If we're all busy humming around in the goodness and loveliness who deals with the rot? Carelessly bad-mouthing people is wrong but going to the other extreme and never saying anything that isn't kind can also be wrong if it means evil can flourish unchallenged.

ETA I'm thinking about safeguarding issues in particular.

Interesting POV; but how do you feel that spreading gossip helps to challenge evil?

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

For a short while I had a pastor who was obsessed with gossip, he fairly frothed at the mouth when he preached about it. I remember one incident that inspired yet another anti-gossip sermon; he had seen two women whispering together in the supermarket.

Now, I know first hand that gossip can be damaging. When I was a young married woman a co-worker who lived in my neighborhood spread it around the business that she frequently saw a man going in my backdoor while my husband was away. It was quite true. My good looking father-in-law stopped in about ten times a day to see his baby grandson.

But what about those women in the supermarket? Maybe they had heard that a mutual friend was sick and were discussing what cassarole to take over for dinner. Maybe if some of the people in Jerry Sandusky's life had compared notes about the suspicious things they had seen, he wouldn't have had 30 years to abuse little boys. One single person doesn't always have enough evidence to make a formal written complaint.

I really don't know. False witness can ruin lives, it's a terrible thing, but don't we need to have some interest in our neighbor's lives in order to love them well?

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I hate to deprive orfeo of another opportunity to feel superior to me, but I am not saying gossip is OK. I just think having a synod vote saying it is bad is a little silly. It brings to mind the Puritan days of New England.

Well how else does a church, as opposed to its individual members, express a view on a subject?

(Oh, and not everything is about you, you know. In fact, I nearly didn't comment precisely because it WAS you who said it and I expected this kind of reaction.)

Posted by Jahlove (# 10290) on :

"I hate to spread gossip - but what else can you do with it?"

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

quote:
(Oh, and not everything is about you, you know. In fact, I nearly didn't comment precisely because it WAS you who said it and I expected this kind of reaction.)

Look, can you just stick to the issue and keep your weaselly pettiness confined to hell?

quote:
Well how else does a church, as opposed to its individual members, express a view on a subject?

But what is the urgency here? If the vote fails does that mean the church thinks gossip is AOK? This smacks more of an institution hurting for relevance.

[ 15. August 2012, 00:13: Message edited by: Zach82 ]

Posted by justlooking (# 12079) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Loquacious beachcomber:
Interesting POV; but how do you feel that spreading gossip helps to challenge evil?

Leaving aside the idle chit-chat another kind of gossip is the sharing of worries and concerns. This can be just a mask for spreading malicious rumours but it can also be genuine and justified.

Churches can be targets for sexual predators and we are all aware of the need to safeguard children. But someone who may pose a danger won't announce their intentions openly. Different people may pick up worrying signs however and sharing these - gossiping - may help clarify what is true and what isn't or at least put people on guard. Even churches with no children or teenagers can be an attraction because they provide an opportunity for someone to establish themselves as trustworthy. Membership of one congregation can be an introduction to a wide range of contacts and activities.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Look, can you just stick to the issue and keep your weaselly pettiness confined to hell?

LOL. I'm not the one who started referring to past history!!!!

Posted by saysay (# 6645) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
But what about those women in the supermarket? Maybe they had heard that a mutual friend was sick and were discussing what cassarole to take over for dinner. Maybe if some of the people in Jerry Sandusky's life had compared notes about the suspicious things they had seen, he wouldn't have had 30 years to abuse little boys. One single person doesn't always have enough evidence to make a formal written complaint.

I really don't know. False witness can ruin lives, it's a terrible thing, but don't we need to have some interest in our neighbor's lives in order to love them well?

Yeah. Personally I don't think that talking about another person always qualifies as gossip - that gossip is more about spreading information about a person you know when you've made no attempt to verify whether or not the information is true.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:
Well how else does a church, as opposed to its individual members, express a view on a subject?
But what is the urgency here? If the vote fails does that mean the church thinks gossip is AOK? This smacks more of an institution hurting for relevance.

If the vote fails it means that the church doesn't think that gossip is important enough to say that it's bad. Which is perhaps not quite the same thing as 'AOK', but does suggest some minimising.

I don't know the reasons for it being on the agenda in the first place, but once someone puts it up they are saying "I think this is important". And the rest of the church as the opportunity to either say "Yes, we think it's important too" or "No, we don't think this is important".

Posted by catthefat (# 8586) on :

If you can't find anything good to say about someone...come and sit next to me. [Big Grin]

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Sorry Anselmina must've done but I didn't intend my response to be personal in any case. Apologies for poor english, east anglian/fen is my mother tongue

And I'll try to be less confusing next time. My second post wasn't very clear [Smile]

.

Gossiping about our clergy is a well-exercised past-time indeed. If ever I want to know what I'm thinking, doing or not doing I only have to wait till the grapevine let's me know!

Posted by The Rogue (# 2275) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jahlove:
"I hate to spread gossip - but what else can you do with it?"

Not spread it and kill it stone dead.

A while ago youngest Rogueling was in a paddy and accused Mrs Rogue and I of talking about her which "isn't very nice". Our natural reply was that talking about the good things people do is absolutely fine. Is it gossip to remark how well someone has painted the church fence?

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
Personally I don't think that talking about another person always qualifies as gossip - that gossip is more about spreading information about a person you know when you've made no attempt to verify whether or not the information is true.

The attitude of those spreading information is very important. Someone who has a wonderful time telling bad stories about other people is evil, even if the stories are true.

Moo

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Re. something not being as it should be in a Church. Disclosing an observation to a relevant church member is by no means gossip.

A good acid test for gossip spreaders is the sentence that starts with "Here, have you heard ....etc", or "I've heard so an so"

The passing or receiving of gossip could well be addictive . I not claiming to be any White Knight in the matter , but as the hymn says ...'In part my weakness I know'.
As it's often said on here 'don't feed the troll', the same goes for gossips imo.

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:
Well how else does a church, as opposed to its individual members, express a view on a subject?
But what is the urgency here? If the vote fails does that mean the church thinks gossip is AOK? This smacks more of an institution hurting for relevance.
If the vote fails it means that the church doesn't think that gossip is important enough to say that it's bad. Which is perhaps not quite the same thing as 'AOK', but does suggest some minimising.

I don't know the reasons for it being on the agenda in the first place, but once someone puts it up they are saying "I think this is important". And the rest of the church as the opportunity to either say "Yes, we think it's important too" or "No, we don't think this is important".

orfeo, that's not quite how things work out in practice.

For a while the trads in the Episcopal Church were putting the Nicene Creed and the Apostles Creed upon on diocesan convention agendas for a vote so they could show the rads as heretical innovators who obviously ignored the authority of holy scriptures.

The rads, who mostly are in the majority, would then fecklessly vote the motions down. It wasn't that they disagreed with the creeds, but rather they found the entire exercise silly.

The same silliness happens in the the US Congress to the same effect.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0