Anna Arco writes...

Despite the growing reality that blogs are just as much part of our media landscape as newspapers, radio and television - so much so that Westminster auxiliary Bishop John Arnold mentioned the outpouring of emotion and joy in the blogosphere about the visit of the relics of St Thérèse of Lisieux from the pulpit at Westminster Cathedral last week - they are still viewed with a great deal of suspicion, especially in the Church.

...

But the common perception is that bloggers are polemicists who specialise in half-truths, rhetorical flourishes and rumours. They are seen to further the rule of the mob, in the form of comment boxes or on social networking sites. And it is common knowledge that in order to succeed as a blogger you have to be angry, you have to have a Twitter account, you need to be controversial, you need to have an opinion and you almost certainly need to have comment boxes.

One of the chief criticisms thrown at the blogosphere, especially the Catholic blogosphere, is that it unleashes a wave of anger and fury and that many commentators show a lack of Christian charity that they would never show in real life.

[link]

Anna, you have it all wrong. You don't have to be angry, you just have to be handsome, dashing and a hit with the ladies.

Um...

I didn't start blogging because I was angry. I started paying attention because I was blogging and it was when I started paying attention that I became angry. Any reasonable person who has been paying attention should be angry. There is a lot to be angry about.

As for this lack of Christian charity... how do people know? They keep using that word, I do not think it means what they think it means.

When he talks about difficult situations, he says: "The best thing for the Church sometimes means writing about difficult truths. Nobody likes them less than me, but at the same time there are always going to repercussions if people find out that we haven't been honest, that we haven't been as transparent as we should have, especially in these days. If we claim to have the capital 'T' Truth then we have to be realistic about the small 't' truth, because if you ignore the second for the sake of the first you're going lose both."

[link]

True dat!