Metablogging: January 2006 Archives

I'm only noting that I deleted an entry so that the entry actually goes away. Many thanks to the people who commented, but upon review, it was not the type of thing I want to keep on the blog. I'm not steering away from controversy, but only certain kinds of non-edifying, my-opinion-is-superior-to-yours kinds of controversies that can crop up here and there. My apologies.

Also, so you know, I started on three different posts this morning--The Catholic Church and Community, The Vatican Pronounces on ID, and one other. Because these took the form of critique and complaint without offering useful help in dealing with the noted problems, they were deleted as well.

If I cannot say something that will help to build up the body of Christ (and constructive critiques fall into the category), then I do not need to be merely another voice complaining. No one is edified by my quirky complaints.

Now, this restriction will apply to all things other than the Arts, in which case almost everything is opinion any way and the whole point of the arts is to stir up discussion and make people think. So, I have no hesitation posting my opinions there.

But really, who needs yet another complaint about how the liturgy in my church is not up to snuff? Or a complaint about really much of anything that doesn't come with a suggestion that might improve the problem. My complaints are better borne by myself as little mortifications for my own improvement. So, I'll try very hard not to burden you all with them--but that's not a guarantee--only a promise to try. I trust you all will hold me accountable to my promise and alert me when I go off course.

Occasionally, I read TSO's "Spanning the Globe" and am frankly horrified by the stuff I've allowed to slip into print. Today is a case in point--I used the word predominate when I meant to use predominant.

This leads me to another thought. Might it be better to write less and revise more?

The reality is, whatever might be better, it probably won't happen, so I'll have to continue to take my lessons in humility. I will err. I appreciate those who assist with pointing these problems out. But I don't intend to not write something simply because I'm busy revising something else.

In short, unlike some blogs, this one is rough-draft world. The ideas are ideas that I want to get into some medium so that I can refer to them again. At that time they will be revised and refined, but until then, I'm afraid there will be mistakes.

It comes down to a trade-off--much better written and considered or the essentials as they come to mind. As this is a dual purpose blog, it is the secondary consideration that predominates (correctly used this time-though heaven knows what other errors might be here). Part of the purpose as I say from time to time, is to preach most to the one who needs it most (me). That requires capturing the thought however ineptly. These things can be fixed.

But I apologize to all of you who have to deal with such grammatical catastrophes. Not a good thing, I know. But I appreciate your stolid endurance, and I especially appreciate those who help me catch the problems. I won't always fix them right away, but there is at least a record to return to.

So, once again my thanks to TSO and to all others who while pursuing good purposes of their own help me to refine my own writing. God bless you.

Several people have tried to comment on the mysterious "ghost post" below. This post was to have been a draft. It made it public (somehow) and when I deleted it it wouldn't go away. I guess I should consider that a matter of providence and thank everyone for the very kind notes they have sent regarding it. I'm hoping a subsequent post will actually exorcise it, and with it some part of my embarrassment. Frankly, this is a mortification I could do without.

Later: Hurrah for the triumph of bell, book, and candle.