homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » An Ecclesiantics Hosting "Call"

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.    
Source: (consider it) Thread: An Ecclesiantics Hosting "Call"
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144

 - Posted      Profile for Dubious Thomas         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Okay, I hope this is "in line" ... I'm having trouble finding an explicit statement that it is okay to express disagreement with a Host call here ... though that's what I have been given to believe.... So, if I'm out-of-line, please forgive me! I really don't wish to be "planked"!

So ... in Ecclesiantics, in the thread titled, A Good Friday Flick, the following Host note was posted, directly mainly at me:
quote:
Dubious Thomas and others -

scattergun assertions about the behaviour of Roman Catholicism in the middle ages doesn't really belong on this thread. We were being pretty permissive by allowing the tangent on graphic imagery to keep running - but at least that is clearly relevant to the wider question of Good Friday observances.

Time to get back on topic, methinks.

dj_ordinaire, Eccles host

I believe this intervention went too far in closing off relevant debate. I regard my comments about Late Medieval Catholicism (referred to as "scattergun assertions") as germain to the discussion: I used strong language, yes, but I was making a point about how to evaluate aesthetic judgments made by the Late Medieval Church, specifically with regard to the depiction of the "Passion," the topic of the thread. As dj_ordinaire notes, discussion about how the "Passion" is imagined and represented is "relevant to the wider question of Good Friday observances," which is certainly an Ecclesiantics topic.

So, I would like to ask for reconsideration of the ruling, so that robust debate may continue. Or, at least, I would appreciate a bit of clarification about whether Ecclesiantics operates with stricter rules than, say, Purgatory, when it comes to offering sharp criticism of particular religious communities.

Thanks for your consideration!

[ 11. April 2014, 15:39: Message edited by: Dubious Thomas ]

--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6

Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The comment by the host is perfectly clear.

If you want to discuss "blessing bloody crusades, persecution of Jews, and the torture and burning of "heretics."" then go ahead and start a thread in Purgatory. They are not relevant to a discussion of portrayals of the Passion in art.

Given your repeated statements in that thread (eg: likening RCs to pizza with everything wrong, and your "You can take the Roman Catholic out of Roman Catholicism, but you can't take the Roman Catholicism out of the Roman Catholic...." response to the post of a Catholic) the introduction of past actions of the Roman Catholic Church (that probably everyone would agree were wrong) could be viewed as an attack on the Roman Catholics posting on the thread. Count yourself lucky you only got told to stick to the subject rather than getting a warning for personal attacks.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144

 - Posted      Profile for Dubious Thomas         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The comment by the host is perfectly clear.

I agree. It was "perfectly clear." I'm questioning if it was right. If that's not permitted, if there's no appeal against Host decisions, then I'll shut up.

quote:
Count yourself lucky you only got told to stick to the subject rather than getting a warning for personal attacks.
Honestly, I don't understand Hosting policy here. It appears that robust criticism of a religious tradition is being equated with "personal attacks," at least when Roman Catholicism is concerned. But sharply worded attacks on various other traditions appear to be given wide latitude. I mean it. I don't "get" the policy.
Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dubious Thomas:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The comment by the host is perfectly clear.

I agree. It was "perfectly clear." I'm questioning if it was right. If that's not permitted, if there's no appeal against Host decisions, then I'll shut up.
Of course you can question, or even appeal, host decisions. I've given my view, which is that I agree with the host - you were introducing a tangent that was a) not relevant to the subject of the thread and b) outwith the scope of Ecclesiantics. I see you've taken another tangential discussion to Kerygmania, so you clearly understand the reasoning.

I take it that you consider blessing of Crusades and burning 'heretics' as somehow related to portrayals of the crucifixion of Christ. I can't see the relevance.

quote:

quote:
Count yourself lucky you only got told to stick to the subject rather than getting a warning for personal attacks.
Honestly, I don't understand Hosting policy here. It appears that robust criticism of a religious tradition is being equated with "personal attacks," at least when Roman Catholicism is concerned. But sharply worded attacks on various other traditions appear to be given wide latitude. I mean it. I don't "get" the policy.
Robust criticism of religious traditions is not a problem. There can be problems with where such criticisms are made. In this case, on a thread discussing suitable films for a particular audience at Easter people aren't reading and posting expecting their tradition to be robustly criticised, especially when those criticisms relate to parts of their tradition irrelevant to the subject. Also, Ecclesiantics is a board for discussion of worship practices - if you want to have a robust discussion of the theology and history of a particular tradition Purgatory would be the appropriate board.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dubious Thomas
Shipmate
# 10144

 - Posted      Profile for Dubious Thomas         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I disagree with the "ruling" and your defense of it, but I won't contest either any further.

[ 11. April 2014, 21:49: Message edited by: Dubious Thomas ]

--------------------
שפך חמתך אל־הגוים אשר לא־ידעוך
Psalm 79:6

Posts: 979 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
FWIW, in context, I read the comments as directed toward Mel Gibson, about whom I know has some less mainstream approaches to his faith.

--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/

Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged


 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools