There ought to be some looseness allowed for improving the human race, I say. 
Posted on 01/26/2007 9:05:39 AM PST by Religion Moderator
I am the current Religion Moderator and have general responsibility for this Religion Forum on Free Republic. However, all moderators have authority on the RF as well – and prior RMs may log in with my handle. So the person handling your abuse reports may or may not be me, but usually it will be.
I diligently try to read all of your posts, but am not here 24/7 and cannot remember all of the slights and parties involved on every single sidebar much less when posters carry grudges between threads. So if you are wondering why I singled one guy out and not the other involved in a dispute, often it is because I either did not see a previous post or did not remember it as part of the sidebar.
If the other guy in the dispute was given a warning, consider yourself warned as well.
I make every effort to treat all confessions with an even hand. Some here say that is not so evidently because their own confession is the target of what they consider to be more challenges and ridicule than the other guy’s confession. First, there is no confession on the Religion Forum with “clean hands” – if you doubt that, check out the threads where the article is “for” the other guy’s confession. Secondly, some confessions are far more contentious than others evidently as part of the doctrine.
Some posters argue for their confessions as if their lives depended on it because, frankly, to many of them it does. Flame wars ignite over petty, miserably petty, minutia. Therefore, I hold all the Religion Forum posters to a tough standard:
1. Discuss the issues all you want, but do NOT make it personal. You’ll see this warning frequently on threads because the first offense in a flame war is often when one of the participants makes a personal remark about another Freeper, e.g. you’re an idiot, liar, heretic and so on. Attributing motives to another poster or otherwise reading his mind is “making it personal.” Stick with the issues and you’ll be fine. When in doubt, double check your use of pronouns before hitting “post.”
2. Thin skinned RF posters should stick with the “closed” threads. I can and do intercede to keep posters from “making it personal.” There is nothing I can do to prevent a poster from “taking it personal.” And, frankly, many posters come to the RF with huge chips on their shoulders. Such posters are as guilty of causing flame wars as the ones who actually do “make it personal.”
3. “Closed” threads on the Religion Forum include devotionals, prayer threads and caucuses. The header of the thread should make it obvious that the thread is closed, i.e. like a church meeting behind closed doors. Such assemblies will not be disturbed. Any challenges or ridicule will be removed. Any thread can be designated a caucus - e.g. labeled as a “[Catholic Caucus]” or “[LDS Caucus]” - provided that neither the article nor any of the posts challenge or ridicule any other confession. These are “safe harbors” for those who are easily offended or are ill equipped to defend their own confession.
It is disingenuous to complain that your confession is being maligned when you are NOT using the caucus designation to protect the thread from challenges!
4. All other threads on the Religion Forum are “Open” which means they are like a town square. Challenges and ridicule will occur. Expect them to be contentious, rough or even insulting. Your confession will be maligned on open threads. Your beloved religious figures will be ridiculed. Don’t complain because the author or a religious figure is called a liar, demon, heretic or whatever on an open thread. It is to be expected in the town square. Remember too that the Religion Forum is densely populated with highly educated theologians. If you are ill-equipped to defend your confession, you’ll get beat up on “Open” thread. When in doubt, ping one of your best defenders and withdraw to a “Closed” thread.
As much as is possible I try to use a progressive method with uncooperative Religion Forum posters – a warning, and if that warning is ignored, a cookie (making him log in again), and if that is ignored, an hour suspension … and so on up to a banishment. I do this because an occasional misstep on such sensitive matters as one’s confession should be tolerable. But I will not be ignored.
Posters who have been previously banned and try to come back with a different handle will be banished as soon as they are “found out.” Some retreads stay off the “radar” by behaving themselves, but once they start picking fights – they cause the moderators – any of us – to investigate. If you have been previously banned and want to come back on the forum, make a request, promise not to do whatever caused the first banning.
A poster may also be banned in an instant if he is discovered to be a racist, a hate monger including an anti-Semitist, troll, anti-Freeper, etc.
There will be people on the forum who are anti- your confession whether anti-Christian, anti-Calvinist, anti-Catholic, anti-Protestant, anti-Mormon, anti-Atheist, anti-Scientologist and so on. As long as they are arguing for their position on an “Open” thread – and are not using hate mongering material such as the false “oath for Knights of Columbus” or Jack Chick cartoons – and are otherwise abiding by the guidelines, their challenges will be tolerated.
Threads that become “toxic” – which is to say have devolved into an unredeemable mess of hurt feelings will be locked or pulled. I prefer to lock the threads because many posters put a great deal of effort in their replies and would like to keep them bookmarked.
Trying to get rid of me so soon? LOL! Actually, no, I'm not aware of a fixed term.
Not at all. I think you are fair to all sides and do put up with good amount of nonsense. (counting myself as one of the ones dishing it out)
It's just kind of interesting to get a glimpse into the inner sanctum.
Were you to pick a mod nickname, what would it be?
(Recall last November we got "Control Freak Mod", "Out of Control Mod", etc., all in good jest.)
Fr. Mod? Mod the Great?
Welcome, new Religion Moderator. I wish you luck, and lots and lots of patience.
Mama always said, "Do not get involved in arguments about religion."
Good advice, but hard to heed here on FR.
LOL! I'd like to know what you'd pick.
Then again, if everyone listened to your mother, I'd be out of a job. LOL!
Hehee...
LOL! That is hilarious!
There ought to be some looseness allowed for improving the human race, I say.
Is that the principal reason we get so much opposition?
I don't know for sure, but if I were to venture a guess it would be that your confession is the "establishment" relatively speaking.
Yes. Established is just the right word to use.
Were you a frequent poster on the Religion Forum before becoming a mod?
I would like to make a distinction. Idiot and liar are insults (well, rarely, a lie can be proven, but not likely on an Internet forum). Heretic has a technical meaning, and when used as such should not be taken as insult. For example, if you profess to be Christian but deny the Virgin Birth of Christ, you are objectively a heretic.
More narrowly, the Catholic Church defines as heresy denials of certain Catholic doctrines, even if other Christian denominations disagree with them. For example, some Christians believe that The Virgin Mary did not remain virgin after the birth of Christ. This makes their belief on that score objectively heretical.
There is also a distinction between holding a belief that is heretical and being oneself a heretic. This is because in order to be called a heretic one has to have a full understanding of the correct doctrine. An ignorant person cannot be a heretic. So, there is in fact a dose of respect that comes with the term.
I don't know if other confessions use the word at all, but this is how Catholics use it. Please, do not think that if you are described as a heretic someone is trying to insult you. All that is typically meant by the epithet is that your belief does not conform to the teaching of the Catholic Church.
Another word with a potential to be taken as an insult is "anathema", or its English and Latin cousin, "excommunication". This is used to describe the same thing: that the anathemized belief or the excommunicated person is in contradiction to the Catholic (or Orthodox) belief system. It does not mean that the anathemized person is condemned to hell, or even that he is forever barred from communion. The purpose of excommunication is to call the person's attention to this unfortunate fact and invite him to correct his views and come back to communion.
I am not sure if confessions other than the Catholic and the Orthodox use these terms in the precise technical sense, but this is how we use them, and we mean no personal offense when we do.
Bump for future reference (and, of course, thoughtful contemplation)
The Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church tends to use the term "heretic" only in reference to member of the ELCA.
I guess that makes us antidisestablishmentarians ...
Heresy, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, is a "theological or religious opinion or doctrine maintained in opposition, or held to be contrary, to the Roman Catholic or Orthodox doctrine of the Christian Church, or, by extension, to that of any church, creed, or religious system, considered as orthodox. By extension, heresy is an opinion or doctrine in philosophy, politics, science, art, etc., at variance with those generally accepted as authoritative."[...]
the term "heresy" has no purely objective meaning: the category exists only from the point of view of speakers within a group that has previously agreed about what counts as "orthodox". Any nonconformist view within any field may be perceived as "heretical" by others within that field who are convinced that their view is "orthodox";
You are sesquipedalic. That is a sign of Divine favor.
So you got that going for you; which is nice
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.