@&#*^%$! (Language Warning)
I know, I know, I said I'd get the follow-up to the environmentalism post out by today. But life has a habit of doing its own thing and expecting you to keep up. I've been very silent on most blog fronts this week as a combination of work, moving and computer troubles have kept me very busy. If I seem a little disjointed or out of it today, that's why. And I don't want to ruin or rush the follow-up post as it's very near and dear to my heart...
So. Instead, I give you this: A question on foul language and Emergent Christian blogs. It was called to my attention by an astute reader earlier this week that at emergent-no there was some issues taken with a particular commenter's use of the word "bitching" (as in, "Maybe you should stop bitching about the emerging church"). There was an immediate backlash against the choice of language, and apparently there was quite the heated discussion (is there any other kind over there?). Central to this discussion was the apparently widespread belief among the critics of emergent there that emergent blogs are full of foul language - just more examples of "moral degradation" and "worldliness" in the EC. This was interesting to me for a few reasons which I'll get into here. Needless to say, there is a language warning for the post ahead.
Still here? Good. Now, about "foul" language: I've got a bit of a potty mouth myself. My wife gives me a hard time about it - and with good reason, because I'm really a stickler for language among the youth in the drop-in I work at. For me, the issue is that it's inconsistent. I can hardly get after the kids for their words when I'm cussing like a sailor myself.
Of course, my language beliefs need some qualifiers. I don't always get on the teens' cases for what they say. If a kid is talking about his parents breaking up and says it makes him "feel like shit", I'm not going to make a stink about that. How inconsiderate would that be? But if the same kid is calling his friend an asshole, I don't stand for that. Maybe it's the spirit behind the words that makes it wrong.
Of course, I think that sometimes I've used that as an excuse to give into anger. Someone once challenged me when I was at Bible college because I wore a Poppy for Remembrance Day, saying that I was "supporting unchristian wars" and "advocating violence." So I told him to fuck off. I think that I was right in being upset - it's a Poppy for crying out loud, and my family sent plenty of young men off to war. I've had it drilled into me for years that Nov. 11th is a day where you give thanks for those who gave their lives in defense of freedom. And when you've got some specific names and faces to look at, it gets really personal. So it was for a good cause. But I gave into my anger and stooped to a lower level than I could have. Hey, I'm not without my foibles.
Sometimes language is artistic expression. Go to Neal Bailey's site (on my sidebar) and you'll see plenty of language in his articles. But engage with him personally and you'll find he's not cussing every other word. For him, it appears to be expression of emotion, art and frustration (especially in his "Chronicling the Fall" section) over the pitfalls and shortcomings of society. Although I'm sure he (like myself) uses those words in everyday speech as well, I don't think he or artist like him are necessarily doing something wrong when they write like that.
As far as the Bible goes, the book of James is pretty clear (in ch. 3) that the tongue must be "tamed," that it should be used for praise and not cursing. But that kind of cursing isn't the same as saying "fuck" is it? I'm pretty sure that what James was talking about was actual biblical cursing, like wishing someone ill or whatever. Or is this just splitting hairs?
We all know the commandment "thou shalt not take the name of the LORD in vain." I was always taught that this meant not saying"God damn" or "Jesus Christ" when you were upset. But an examination of the text show us that what it really means is swearing by God's name - as in taking an oath you never intend to keep. Although I'll admit there is still something that bothers me when a close friend of mine says, "Christ up a tree!" when he's upset. Perhaps this is more of a respect issue, with showing proper respect to God being the issue at hand. Does there even need to be a command for that?
Anyways, back to the emergent blogs. Is there alot of foul language in them? Someone tell me if that's true. I know that this post will offend some, but I have to admit I haven't seen any EC-er's blogs full of bad language. Am I totally missing something here? Jordon Cooper, Andrew Jones, Jamie from Voyageurs, Robby, I haven't seen a single expletive among the lot of them Where are they getting this apparent epidemic from?
That's all from me for today. If anyone who reads/comments at E-No cares to fill us in on where these foul emergent blogs are, that's be great. Because after running in these circles for most of a year I can't find anything like what they're complaining about - although I never have been able to before...
So. Instead, I give you this: A question on foul language and Emergent Christian blogs. It was called to my attention by an astute reader earlier this week that at emergent-no there was some issues taken with a particular commenter's use of the word "bitching" (as in, "Maybe you should stop bitching about the emerging church"). There was an immediate backlash against the choice of language, and apparently there was quite the heated discussion (is there any other kind over there?). Central to this discussion was the apparently widespread belief among the critics of emergent there that emergent blogs are full of foul language - just more examples of "moral degradation" and "worldliness" in the EC. This was interesting to me for a few reasons which I'll get into here. Needless to say, there is a language warning for the post ahead.
Still here? Good. Now, about "foul" language: I've got a bit of a potty mouth myself. My wife gives me a hard time about it - and with good reason, because I'm really a stickler for language among the youth in the drop-in I work at. For me, the issue is that it's inconsistent. I can hardly get after the kids for their words when I'm cussing like a sailor myself.
Of course, my language beliefs need some qualifiers. I don't always get on the teens' cases for what they say. If a kid is talking about his parents breaking up and says it makes him "feel like shit", I'm not going to make a stink about that. How inconsiderate would that be? But if the same kid is calling his friend an asshole, I don't stand for that. Maybe it's the spirit behind the words that makes it wrong.
Of course, I think that sometimes I've used that as an excuse to give into anger. Someone once challenged me when I was at Bible college because I wore a Poppy for Remembrance Day, saying that I was "supporting unchristian wars" and "advocating violence." So I told him to fuck off. I think that I was right in being upset - it's a Poppy for crying out loud, and my family sent plenty of young men off to war. I've had it drilled into me for years that Nov. 11th is a day where you give thanks for those who gave their lives in defense of freedom. And when you've got some specific names and faces to look at, it gets really personal. So it was for a good cause. But I gave into my anger and stooped to a lower level than I could have. Hey, I'm not without my foibles.
Sometimes language is artistic expression. Go to Neal Bailey's site (on my sidebar) and you'll see plenty of language in his articles. But engage with him personally and you'll find he's not cussing every other word. For him, it appears to be expression of emotion, art and frustration (especially in his "Chronicling the Fall" section) over the pitfalls and shortcomings of society. Although I'm sure he (like myself) uses those words in everyday speech as well, I don't think he or artist like him are necessarily doing something wrong when they write like that.
As far as the Bible goes, the book of James is pretty clear (in ch. 3) that the tongue must be "tamed," that it should be used for praise and not cursing. But that kind of cursing isn't the same as saying "fuck" is it? I'm pretty sure that what James was talking about was actual biblical cursing, like wishing someone ill or whatever. Or is this just splitting hairs?
We all know the commandment "thou shalt not take the name of the LORD in vain." I was always taught that this meant not saying"God damn" or "Jesus Christ" when you were upset. But an examination of the text show us that what it really means is swearing by God's name - as in taking an oath you never intend to keep. Although I'll admit there is still something that bothers me when a close friend of mine says, "Christ up a tree!" when he's upset. Perhaps this is more of a respect issue, with showing proper respect to God being the issue at hand. Does there even need to be a command for that?
Anyways, back to the emergent blogs. Is there alot of foul language in them? Someone tell me if that's true. I know that this post will offend some, but I have to admit I haven't seen any EC-er's blogs full of bad language. Am I totally missing something here? Jordon Cooper, Andrew Jones, Jamie from Voyageurs, Robby, I haven't seen a single expletive among the lot of them Where are they getting this apparent epidemic from?
That's all from me for today. If anyone who reads/comments at E-No cares to fill us in on where these foul emergent blogs are, that's be great. Because after running in these circles for most of a year I can't find anything like what they're complaining about - although I never have been able to before...
posted by Grey Owl at 3:25 p.m.
13 Comments:
I really haven't seen a lot of it either.
Can't help there. Don't go to those sites. Though, as you are aware, if these people find a little "bitching" offensive, one poster in particular on my blog might cause heart failure.
Grey Owl,
Having been a student at the same Anabaptist-dominated college that you went to (I went to a hyper-Calvinist seminary later; no wonder some people think I'm confused)...
I'll never forget when the speaker for chapel on Remembrance Day was one of the favourite profs in the college -- who happened to be a US Marine in a former life and had survived Viet Nam.
A bunch of students were threatening to walk out of chapel if a moment of silence was observed, because it would be "advocating war and violence".
The ex-Marine showed up in full dress uniform, medals and all. He stood up at 11:00 and announced:
"We will now observe a moment of silence in honour of those who gave their lives to preserve your freedom to be conscientious objectors."
Talk about a "word of wisdom"; that one was brilliant.
As far as language goes, two thoughts:
1. I have kids of my own; the eldest is in grade eleven and reads my blog, as do my extended family members and my dad. I want my language to be consistent with what I expect from my kids.
2. "Freedom in Christ" was hard-bought by the death of Jesus. Somehow, I have a hard time believing the freedom that cost Jesus His life means "now I can cuss my lips off". I don't get in peoples' faces about their language generally, but when they talk about it being evidence of their "freedom in Christ", I have to hide my gag reflex.
3. If "authenticity" is measured by profanity, then we need to give our heads a shake and get real. If cussing is a sign of our authenticity, then I'll settle for plastic shiny happy people instead. I think authenticity means so much more!
Okay, that was three things, not two. As Darryl corroborates, Grey Owl, I don't see much either, at least not on the blogs that I regularly frequent. But the violence of EmergentNO's language towards emerging Christians is no less offensive than the "f-bomb" in God's ears -- it's probably more offensive, because it hides behind a false righteousness (IMO).
Grey Owl,
It is funny your should bring this up, as it has come up several times around here over the last few months.
First, many "swear words" are culturally empowered. In and of themselves, they are amoral. Therefore, out of respect for culture, we have to be discerning in how and when we might use these words.
Second, context is a huge in this regard as well. Should you use them as explitives of casual angry or intentional crudeness, obviously it is wrong. However, I believe there are times when the power of these words can be used redemptively. This is controversial to some, but I have seen it done well.
Third, the etymology of swear words is fascinating. My Dictionary of Word Origins is well used. It is exploring how words gain their power.
Finally, as to this language showing up in emergent blogs, I have only come across it once or twice. As blogging is an open forum, I choose not to use it in my posts. I think the nature of the medium makes it a challenge to use it appropriately (though not impossible).
P.S. Check out this great site for word origins:
http://www.etymonline.com/
I'm with you - I don't see much of it. I do see it from time to time (occasionally on my blog, no less ;) which is probably enough for our fine friends at e-no. But I think there's reason for it - I don't know that it's so much "freedom in Christ" as it is changing sensibilities about what such language represents. In other words, I don't think something like "what the hell" carries the same moral force that it once did. The language has changed and become mainstream; on some level, I think it's just a matter of context. The reality is that scriptural injunctions about language are notoriously vague, and necessarily so - language changes too quickly to create a list of once-and-for-all permitted or banned words, so to speak.
I don't think that reflects a nonchalant view of language on the part of emergent-minded folks, however. If anything, I think we tend to be perhaps more cognizant of language than our more traditional friends. In general, I think there is more of a consideration to not use language that is demeaning about things such as ethnicity or gender, as well as about other traditions. There is more of a sense of the power of names, I think, and (generally speaking) more restraint in using that power.
Hmm, didn't expect such a quick response here...
Darryl - Excellent! I'm not crazy.
Wanderer - if you're referring to Mc, then I understand completely. I get the feeling that Mc on a conservative christian blog would be like Christopher Walkin at a child's birthday party...
Robby - good story, and good point re: language. I agree the "saved to do whatever I want" camp is theologically dodgy at the best of times. But...
...as Jamie points out, " I believe there are times when the power of these words can be used redemptively. This is controversial to some, but I have seen it done well." I remember being at a Steve Bell concert and he told the story of when a new convert came to speak at their church. Problem was this convert just got out on parole for some B & E. Steve said his little Baptist church was treated to a 15 minute sermon on the grace and mercy of God, punctuated by some of the most astonishing language ever heard in their little church. BUt hey, Christ was preached...
Marc - I may change my "No E-No" Policy and drop by to read that. I'll have to check with my physician first, though - don't want my blood pressure up too high. Seriously, though, I'm glad to hear it's calmed down a bit. I'd love to chat with E-Critics as long as it stays respectful. My conversations with tooaugust always proved to be enjoyable, despite the fact we disagreed mightily on many issues.
Scottb - I think I get what you're saying, and I agree - the language has changed, and as Dr. Gus Konkel is so fond of saying: "There is no meaning outside of context." I'm not sure what you mean about the "power of names", though - care to elaborate?
Perhaps there will be some more dialogue with E-No in my future. In any case, I hope it can be as respectful as Marc says it is over there.
Grey Owl - He does have some strongly anti-religious feelings. I think it would be more like inviting Jason Voorhese (sp?)
By "power of names", I'm loosely referring to the use of labels to discredit or marginalize another's opinion (or even personhood). A classic one that is used in my tradition (evangelical, although I hold that loosely) is "liberal". Invoking the label "liberal" is intended to dismiss someone's thoughts without engaging them substantively.
For clarification, I'm not saying that emergent folks never use labels like this. Speaking personally, I've done it more than I care to admit (I have, at times, used "fundamentalist" in the same way.) But I think there's at least more of a conscious recognition that names mean things and carry baggage, and there's less likelihood that they'll be used in this way - I know I'm constantly trying to be more aware of it, and I can see the tendency in others as well.
But that's a big distinction to me - a lot of folks who get up in arms about language are referring specifically to cussing, and may never engage the idea on a deeper level that there are more issues at stake with language than just the f-bomb.
Hey folks, sorry I've been out of touch.
Wanderer - Jason who?
Marc - poked my head in, but I don't want to comment for fear of spoiling the goodness. I see what you mean, though.
Scott - that's an interesting thought. Thanks for clarifying.
I should have my next post up by friday or possibly earlier. Life is insane.
Grey Owl - The hockey mask wearing killer from Friday the 13th. I probably butchered his last name.
this was a fun one to read - comments too. i did have a story to share, about the time i used the "f" word in a speech i gave in speech class in my all girl catholic high school...never mind
I have a brother who is a pastor of a good sized Nazarene Church. I was perusing his son's Facebook the other day. It was fairly peppered with language that neiother my brother nor I would have used without the fear of having our mouths washed out with soap. When I asked him about his son's use of soem of those words (F#%&, etc.) I was told that this generation says it is our problem for pouring such negative and offensive meanings in these words. Because they are after all, just words.
So, let's all gather into a dark theater...
While...
I...
yell...
FIRE!
No problem, it's just a word.
Post a Comment
<< Home