it's next door...this is the insult room

Being Episcopalian right now can make one a little jumpy. In all the discussion and prayer over Canon Robinson and same-sex unions, we find ourselves divided. Some of those divisions are heart-felt, real moments of conscience and faith. But some of the expressions also have the feel of being more a political campaign than a church fight.

I support the consecration of Canon Robinson as the new Bishop of New Hampshire. But I probably have re-thought and examined these issues much more than if it had been an unanimous decision at General Convention and there were no controversy within the Anglican Communion.

AKMA posted comments on his blog this week about a news story in Georgia (and he also links to the story and to the blog friend that alerted him to it) where an Episcopal priest/history teacher lost his job at a private prep school because he wrote an opinion piece about his support of Robinson. He had been asked to write his opinion, and it brought down upon him the wrath of some parents and his school's administration. It's a sad story for the man, but it also is a story about what most of us actually believe, that people shouldn't challenge or think differently than us. Call it one of the unwritten rules of human behavior. Particularly people associated with us or our institutions.

Of course, if we lived in a Monty Python world, I would be the fellow assigned to the Confrontation Room ("No you wouldn't. Yes I would...). I don't like confrontation. I really don't like confrontation.

But I must also say that I am fascinated by what makes us so angry at each other when we disagree.

During FDR's presidency, Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934. The bedrock philosophy behind that act was to protect the public's interest in broadcasting because we as a society believed in a marketplace of ideas.

But I often don't think we really do believe in this marketplace. There is something supportive about finding ourselves sitting around the table, agreeing. Yes. Amen. I agree. A marketplace of ideas is a nice liberal notion. How challenging. How thought-provoking. But it means coming across people who challenge us, our assumptions, and our cherished and sacred beliefs.

Do we distance ourselves from the whiplash of cognitive dissonance by hewing to our paradigm/world view, protecting ourselves from some chink in our rhetorical armor? I don't even think it is connected to the left-right continuum.

In his blog, AMKA wrote about the value and honesty of disagreement. I've mulled over those words and I am trying to take them to heart. He also listed some important questions to consider in dealing with disagreement.

Meanwhile, in another seminary related blog, Hoosier Musings on the Road to Emmaus, Jane describes her reactions to friends and colleagues who heard she had gone to a Baptist church to see a friend's ordination. She challenged her friends to let go of their stereotypes and knee-jerk reactions.

I know that I am often guilty of not tolerating the tension between what I believe and the presence of someone strongly disagreeing. This is not a confessional blog, but I admit it. I can easily make judgments about folk based on an opinion that they state, particularly if I have never met them before and have nothing else to go on.

On the other hand, I have wonderful friends with whom I can easily enjoy while totally disagreeing with them about something. I like people, and sometimes what makes them interesting is that they are passionate about something. While not agreeing with them, I learn something about them, about issues, and about myself.

The internet is a marketplace of ideas. I've been involved in three on-line communities and have lurked around in others. People gather, they confront, they teach. It is incredibly amazing the amount of freedom on the internet to express opinions.

But often the conversation can become either violent or hackneyed around issues of politics or religion. People can be extremely rude or they can continuously repeat themselves so that we could all swap identities and guess what pieties the newly-borrowed identity would say about most subjects. Whether I own up to it or not, I prefer people to agree with me, but I am also bored by being around people who agree with me (or each other) too much -- a good temperament for being Episcopalian. And I am tired of people who disagree all the time with harsh and sarcastic language.

Rodney King probably asked the wrong question (why can't we all get along). It's the human condition that we don't get along. But I bet there are a lot of mechanics going on inside us. I wish I knew more about what it is.