I think this is one of the traps of having a popular blog that is referenced and visited by many. It starts to tempt one's pride.
The essence of blogs - publishing one's unedited and immediate thoughts and comments to a wide range of people - is somewhat at odds with humility.
As people have commented before, it would be interesting to see how this medium evolves. We've already seen the case of Fr. Rob and Michael Rose with regard to libel and blogs. Perhaps the immediacy of the medium and the easy temptation to have ones personality (faults and all) dictate the direction of the blog, is something that those who participate need to be more keenly aware of.
Of course, none of these considerations apply to us commenters in the peanut gallery - for we can do no wrong. 
Mark: a very fine e-mail to you by your reader and a very fine response on your part. Retain THAT tone of warmth and sincerity, with all artifice and snarkiness dropped, and you will reap much good will, even as you take positions on various matters that some--including me--may disagree with.
And I myself write as a sinner, whose shortcomings and failings are legion.
God bless you.
The differences existing between Mr. Shea's perspectives and mine do not inhibit me from making this observation in defense of the "harder edge" in his blog spoken of here. There is a place and a time for levity and laughter, but these things must give way to the mien of combat when all that is true, good, and beautiful is under attack from all sides by enemy forces gaining ever-more superiority by the day. These are red days, blood days, days of mayhem and ruin, with all that is worthy of civilization at stake....
Enough of you have made yourselves familiar with the Lord of the Rings storyline (through books and/or film) that you may recall how, as the adventures progressed, the storylines and even the locales took on progressively bleaker and direr overtones, and as this happened, all else more or less gave way to that negativity.
Those who too readily criticize some of us today for the same do not sufficiently realize what stands before us right now. Orcs are not just storybook creatures: they have taken their place among us, and the whole of our society's leadership has either enabled them (the Stupid Party) or actually joined them (the Evil Party), so that they will soon be in the position to do with us whatever they please! Sauron lives, and Mordor is taking hold in the West....
The films put into Galandriel's mouth certain observations about the increasingly dire straits of Middle Earth that, without too much adaptation, could be said for this all too real world we ourselves inhabit.
Even the merry Hobbits knew when it was time for grave seriousness.
I don't know, Mark. I really love your blog. Perhaps it has become too political in nature. You have always helped me to keep a good perspective on things. I have a tendency to drift too far to the right if I stop taking my Shea medication. Perhaps a return to more of a theology/apologetics and less of a political tone may be in order, while not totally eliminating political commentary.
Are you getting full of yourself? Not from my perspective, but as you say, you will have to put that to prayer.
God bless you!!
Kudos to you, Mark, for posting this thoughtful letter.
I dunno. It seems to me that striving always for decency, honesty and truth to both the people who agree with us as well as those who disagree is the way to go.
After all, we DO NOT fight against people themselves but against the Prince of this World and the Father of Lies.
Humor I think also has a role to play, no matter the rhetorical battlefield. Humor and a willingness to assume the best of everyone as a matter of policy as we remember the One to whom we are truly accountable.
My .02 cents as blogger who admittedly blogs far less than you do.
I think we're all guilty of the same thing, both here and - speaking for myself now - in our private lives. Sometimes it takes a brother or sister to point it out and gently remonstrate us. I was chastened reading your interlocutor's email.
In Mark's defense, I think the world in general has changed rather dramatically over the past few years.
Ten years down the road I think we will be able to look back and understand things a bit better.
The war in Iraq is/was VERY SERIOUS.
Didn't most people change as a result of WWII?
Well now that WWIII is underway, I think our attitudes are all affected.
It's not the ``hard edge,'' Mark, it's the freakin' sarcasm that wears me down. For example when you led into a quote from William F. Buckley with something like ``But of course he's just a bedwetting Euroweenie pantywaist...'' you do that * a lot * and it's pretty insulting to your readers - assuming that they're going to reply like that and basically daring them not to. And some of your comments (in the comments boxes) read like extended *gotcha* games. It's getting so that I often can't tell when you're being serious and when you're being a smart aleck. I for one find it pretty hard to converse under those circumstances.
I still come here, for the links. But for thoughtful, *civil* discussion I've come to look elsewhere.
Mark:
For your penance (if you feel you need any), organize a Blog Pilgrimage to the National Shrine in Washington, for those of us who can't afford Europe..
I'm down here from Toronto on contract at a job in Dulles and, after going to a completely excellent parish in Sterling for Sunday Mass, I have started going into Washington on Sunday for the glorious 12 Noon sung Mass, followed by Rosary (scriptural rosary, of course)with one of the many congenial ad hoc groups down in the IM chapel in the lower Church during the afternoon.
And the altars to all the ethnic Madonnas are a wondrous experience of the Universal Church, as well as a mean of reclaiming Mary once again in our lives after her 30 year absence.
The Nation Shrine exemplifies a back-to-the-future spirituality that is Roman/Petrine, Marian, Biblical and Eucharistic.
Mark: this is our Church - Catholics like you and me and most of your blogsters. If Chartres is a bible in stone, the Shrine is testimony in stone to the Catholic Church as it was in 1961 before everything started going bad. Its ambience and its liturgy is a map back to the future of what Vatican II was supposed to have been in the life of the Church. Down in the crypt, Babe Ruth is only one of thousans of names carved on the walls.
In its bookstore, your friend Scott Hahn is very prominently represented. Need I say more.
And the massive image of Christ in the dome is the most noble and masculine image of Him I have ever seen in modern iconography. Only Cazivel's rpresentation in The Passion comes close.
Do it Mark. God willing, my contract down here will run to September. I (and many others) would like to meet you face to face and join you in touching the living stones of the Faith of Our Fathers in Our Lady's House.
What do you say?
You are doing so much more good than harm.
I think Charles de Nunzio's Mordor comparison was apt - although frightening to think that we are walking a similar road to Frodo and Sam. I would rather read about Mordor than actually visit!
I would suggest that your blog is a powerful force for good; you are a courageous man, who, like the rest of us, falls from time to time. (I fall rather a lot.)
In your blog alone you must have helped many a struggling soul to find Peace.
Yes, you sting at times; but you also float quite beautifully.
I have been foragainst Mark Shea's blog for years. I supportreject his ideas and have always admiredloathed his wit and wisdom. Hell, a vote's a vote.
I dunno, I thought "bedwetting Euroweenie pantywaist" was funny.
Sinner here.
I guess I contribute to the harsh tone on occasion. I do take Mark's tone as a cue; at least I think I write more gently, most of the time, over at Amy Welborn's blog, since she is less prone to be harsh and more ready to shut down a flaming thread.
On the other hand, I'd be lying if I didn't say I enjoy what I take to be a freer reign over here. I've learned some remarkable things that would not have been possible in a gentler setting (and the reverse is true). And I give Mark credit for being able to take it as well as dishing it out. In that vein, when I've seen some items that I thought were outrageous, either by Mark or another poster, I have reacted harshly.
Whether his blog should be dishing out anything is, of course, up to Mark. And there is a dramatically different tone to almost all of his true apologetics postings. And the truth is, that's the indispensible offering that draws me here. I'm a political junkie and I'll read all of it, but Mark's insight about Christ and the Church is something I can't get anywhere else.
fenwic has a neat idea.
Thank you for the link to the beautiful story about the Anabaptists meeting the Holy Father.
Catholics stopped slaughtering pacifist Anabaptists hundreds of years ago.
Isn't it time for us all to stop fighting each other ?
God Bless
Very thoughtful, charitable letter and response.
You're doing more good than harm. Don't quit. It seems to me that the blogs, especially the ones by people who write professionally (or who should) really are developing a new form of journalism. This may not make you feel better, but I tend to read the blogs instead of the newspaper. The news is filtered by people whose pov I trust more than that of the WaPost, and there is a (somewhat) monitored "letters to the editor" section.
Your (and others') blog has helped me to think through some of the implications of Catholic teaching vis a vis current events. Even with the occasional hot tempers. That's been helpful to me. The Post never did that.
Your sarcasm may be getting away from you sometimes ... maybe there's a bit more Belloc than Chesterton sometimes. And there may be a temptation to pride, a bit. But on balance you're doing a Good Thing.
Anne:
It was NRO's David Frum who labeled conservatives who opposed the war "unpatriotic" (to *loud* cheers in conservativedom) when the war was launched. I was lampooning the arrogance of that magisterial judgment (made, mind you, by a man who humbly writes a book called "An End to Evil").
As to the phrase,"bedwetting Euroweenie pantywaist" you are not quite accurate. The phrase was, if memory serves, "bedwetting cosmopolitan, pacifist, anti-American" and was seriously applied by a--wait for it--"faithful orthodox Catholic"--to characterize people who thought that torture was a bad thing. His fear was a sort of perverse "slippery slope" argument. Start demanding that we take the electric wires off the groins of innocent men and pretty soon our dedicated law enforcement official won't be able to hurt people at all! I don't usually make up such phrases. I simply point them out and quote them.
Of course the remark about Buckley was tongue in cheek! I loved it.
Mark: One of the things that happens to most of us who work with a really broad segment of the public is that we run up against types who really aren't very nice and who don't mean well. Then there are those who just rub us the wrong way. If they start to form a substantial subset of the people one deals with every day, it is very easy to start developing defense mechanisms like sarcasm.
If you feel this is happening to you, you are ahead of the game. Some of us don't know it until we so offend someone we value, that we lose the friendship.
Maybe a strategy for dealing with it is a cooling off period before replying, discussing the offensive message with a friend and, above all, prayer! Please do whatever you need to. I couldn't do without this blog.
Actually, I have notice not only a harsh tone on occasion, but that it particularly breaks out when we are rehashing something.
Some advice (for everyone) that might help somewhat, from Lewis Carroll's Eight or Nine Wise Words About Letter Writing:
A few more Rules may fitly be given here, for correspondence that has unfortunately become controversial.
One is, don’t repeat yourself. When once you have said your say, fully and clearly, on a certain point, and have failed to convince your friend, drop that subject: to repeat your arguments, all over again, will simply lead to his doing the same; and so you will go on, like a Circulating Decimal. Did you ever know a Circulating Decimal come to an end?
For what it’s worth, I think that this host’s tone is in general better than some others and especially more reasoned and charitable than the inhabitants of comments boxes all throughout blogdom, where I have discerned a culture of rabid dissention. I think that the medium itself is part of the problem…enforced brevity, the comparative seriousness of the written word, a lack of relationship, on and on. I do see where blogs (particularly this one) have a tendency to angry up my blood, which kind of makes it difficult to be the peace of Christ. Religion, ideology & politics…there’s the hotbed. The observation that we’re up “against the Prince of this World and the Father of Lies” may be true, but I think that it still (even if it’s not personal) sets up a mindset of if I can only prove my point in this little box, the world will be saved…and a pox on any other with a different perspective. People constantly end up misunderstanding each other likely because they don’t know one another from Adam, and I know I rarely like to make any comments because I’m not all that keen on anyone unnecessarily getting down by back.
mark:
Please continue to blog-on as you hav ealways done. I think that you are making a great contribution on the side of light in the culture wars. Put this matter in Our Lord's and move on.
God bless
Richard W.
You keep learning about yourself and your apostolate - I hope you have a good spiritual adviser.
Mark,
Don't question the goodness of your blog. Many of your readers have come not only to a deeper understanding of the Faith, but to question some of the assumptions they take for granted about certain issues. The latter can often happen even in the midst of a flame war with you. .
Mary's points are spot-on: when we repeat ourselves, our posts look like horror movie sequels. If Flaming Comment I didn't get 'em, wait 'til they see Flaming Comment II!
I've done plenty of that myself.
Time and Tides.
Sometimes your sarcasm is strong and language cutting, other times it is humorous and kind.
That's the way you see things, and you have a gift with language that I find unique. I say keep on keeping on.Saying things as they are is not going to meet everyone's approval all the time.
What amazes me is the amount of material you post, and I find it impossible to check every one. If anything, I would suggest cutting back to about a dozen items per day, so that we can have a decent look at it all - over the usual topics - political, societal, world events, scripture and apologetics, and very important - Humour.
I actually enjoy the sarcasm and style of wit - but I guess I'm a bit bent. Sin makes me stupid too 
Mr. de Nunzio has a point, but I think it a very risky one. Look again at the movie analogy. Yes, there are orcs afoot, but do the men of Gondor and Rohan fight like orcs? No. They fight like men for whom "honor" is not a lost and meaningless word. It is NOT right for us to lower ourselves to the level of the orc when discussing important matters. We mustn't confuse verbal combat with intelligent debate.
The WWII/WWIII analogy isn't quite right either. If you want to go with that, then you should look at this as China in 1938 and we're the Flying Tigers. We're already engaged with the enemy, but the main event has yet to begin. In this case, the question becomes - are we ready for the blitzkrieg on Poland.
You and this blog can keep up in any way you like. But which path prepares us - you, your readers, other bloggers - to stand before the Black Gate or to survive the real Pearl Harbor when it comes?
Mark, you do a very good job at the things you do well and I've stood behind you far more often than against you. But the rancor needs to end. If you lead the way others will follow.
Mark,
when I took my course in seminary on virtues and morality it came as a revelation to me. To think of morality as the good we are called to perform as well as the evil we must avoid opened my eyes. It is a question of virtue that your letter writing friend brings up.
The virtue needed here is prudence. I can't tell snark from smurfs sometimes as my own blog demonstrates. But I know that I have to ask myself when I post something, "Is this a good thing I am about to do and is it the best thing to do in this situation?" Prudence is the virtue which sorts out good acts from other good acts to find the best act in a particular set of conditions. Humor can occasionally be an opponent of prudence because it goes for the yucks rather than charity or even correcting in a spirit of charity. Instead of taking the problem seriously, and calling a spade a spade, humor tries to duck its responsibility.
So let me encourage you and suggest that you pray for prudence. You, in my opinion for what it is worth, are doing good here and in other places. Would I invite you to speak in my parish if I didn't think you were doing good? (On second thought, that might not be a ringing endorsement.)
I have been reading this blog since 'the troubles' began in the church. I find it by turns thought-provoking, moving and hilarious. I appreciate all these tones. I think it's fine as is. When discussing a serious topic like the Iraq war or abortion I believe it's perfectly appropriate to express outrage, to snipe, to be sarcastic, etc. I think Mark does a terrific service for his readership. I appreciate his stance on the wacky left and the coldhearted, radtrad right. I think he's an outstanding writer who works hard for the money, the Lord, the people of God on earth and not in that order, either. As a resident of the Puget Sound region, I'm glad that not every American theologian worth listening to lives in Ohio...
I used to read this blog a lot, but then slowed down, not because of any perceived change in tone but just because I have much less free time at work these days.
Mark, my only uneasiness with the current trends in your blog is that you have too many inside jokes. A link to John Paul II meeting with a Buddhist will probably have a blurb like "Proof that the Lidless Eyes were right about Assisi." But the vast majority of people -- even the vast majority of orthodox Catholics -- think of a 13th-century saint and not a 20th-century interfaith gathering when you say Assisi. And the term "Lidless Eye" (in reference to ultra-conservative catholics who call Scott Hahn fans "neo-catholics") is a term virtually unknown outside blogdom (and maybe now First Things).
There's nothing wrong with inside jokes. But you've got to decide if you want new readers. New readers won't jump in if the learning curve is too high. It's like jumping in to the fourth season of Babylon 5 or the sixth season of Buffy -- the newcomer is left bewildered, wondering "What did I miss?"
Part of that is inevitable. How many times do you really want to explain what the Immaculate Conception is? After a while it's easier to talk just to those who have been with you for a year and have moved on to the more advanced stuff.
And that's why Iraq is so big. There are no new developments on the Mariological front, and we've covered all the old ones. But news is always new, so it remains "fresh".
Just my two cents.
Just one amplification: For a reader to understand "Proof that the Lidless Eyes were Right about Assisi", they need to not only recognize the two terms, they also need to know you and your blog well enough to know that you indeed do not agree with the LE's about Assisi.
This is not quite the same thing that Anne Butzen was saying about sarcasm (above), but it's related. Amy Welborn occasionally does this too -- makes an abortion-related comment that only makes sense if the reader is already aware that Amy is pro-life.
Anyway, that's my perspective. I write technical documentation at the Evil Empire (no relation to the Lidless Eye) and we are trained that on a website, any page could be the first page a surfer encounters. That's true of a blog as well.
Mark --
I think you should take a break from the blog. For a long while -- at least a month or two. Just let it go, for now. Come back to it when you feel ready to stick to the work of Witness, rather than dabbling in the work of self.
Wow. Reading your books (thanks for the autographed copies, btw!) has helped me to understand and want to learn more about my Faith. But I have noticed that the you in your books and the you here on the blog don't read the same. I keep wanting to send one of my friends here but shy away from it fearing that it might not give the best impression to a non-Catholic Christian. Nevertheless, I do appreciate a good laugh, too, and you do provide some good ones. Anyway, I've got enough on my own plate, but thanks again for the terrific apologetics work and all of the good work.
p.s.- fenwik is right, the Shrine is spectacular, not to mention all the other nearby attractions. C'mon, how bout an East coast visit?
Mark, why did you want to start this blog in the first place (beyond your stated reason of having no thought go unpublishes, of course)? Are you serving your purpose with such biting sarcasm and harsh tones? If you are, then continue as is. If not, maybe a course correction is due. But ultimately it's your blog and your thoughts and you do what you need/want/consider doing.
Dude...you opened yourself to this thread? You must be humble. I appreciate what everyone has said.
First, this is not a newspaper, and I for one, find it a bit more objective than most newspapers. No
one could accuse you of towing a party line here.
Second, it's a Catholic blog. There's been a lot to be snarky about and it doesn't bother me, even when I don't agree. But then I spent 11 years in NYC so most things roll off my shoulders and I don't get easily offended.
Third, and last: if you go away from this blog I will roll around on the Capitol steps and howl towards the moon. I will be arrested and it will all be your fault.
You are invaluable to me Mark. I wish I could do more for you on PayPal (which I know has nothing to do with this post).
You have a good sense of humor, an ability to call a spade a spade and have a great overall coverage of things important to orthodox Catholics.
I've been around here long enough to see the fights on comments and whatnot. I would suggest that anything you dish out in terms of tone, is given back, ten times. I think that this moderates any damage you think might have been done (and I'm not sure much has been done). If you were simply trying to editorialize a point of view, you would not have comments, so, I think, give yourself a break. No one has to come here and read and comment. I don't have to pay to read your site, so have on.
How you feel about where you are spiritually is up to you and your advisor and frankly is no one's business.
My point is, don't sweat us. We can come and go as we please. I would be sad not to have the opportunity to come.
99% of the time, I find your judgment to be sound,even when I want to fight your opinion in comments.
I haven't walked on water lately so I think you should just do what you do. It is a public service to those who choose to ruminate on what you post and it leads to support for your family in writing engagements, so continue.
Someday Mark you might write a Russell Shaw letter to the bishops of America. You're not a party line person and I think that that alone, regardless of tone, is very worthwhile.
You don't always get more with honey, than vinegar.
Have at it. That's my .02.
Some of what Mark writes does confuse the senses ie. it is difficult to tell whether he is being funny or serious. Even so I have learned so much from Mark and want to give him more donations because I think what he does is extremely valuable. He is a trooper, a leader, a warrior and a guide. I can't imagine Heaven without him. I agree sometimes his words are somewhat sarcastic and biting which does on occasion lead me to wonder what his spiritual director tells him.
But Mark has allowed God to work through him and form me - another relapsed Catholic - into a much more politically aware person. I am a stronger Catholic who has been able to really use what I know from reading the stuff on this site to really and truly help people wake up to what is going on out there.
My only suggestion to you Mark is maybe be less scathing or something.
But most importanly - WE LOVE YOU!!!
The Culture of Niceness run amok.
Mark, keep on typing...
The problem is not your tone, it's the frequency. And hey, if people learn by repetition - people ought to teach by repeating. Now, I think you are spending too much time making comments like you did about WFB. But if you are still getting people who are making comments like that...maybe you aren't doing it too much (are you REALLY still getting comments like that?).
So I think you've misjudged the amount of instruction that is necessary in that particular area, but what do I know? Maybe too many of us really do think that America's ways are right by defintion, that all who don't support "the war" are in fact, feckless, pacifist, euro-weenies, that torture is necesary. Maybe we DO need a stern talking to. Several times. Or more.
But your other constant refrains:
Gay Brownshirts, Sin Makes You Stupid, The Wonders of Gayness, Show Me a Culture that Despises... etc. are obviously necessary, as evidenced by the links that lead to your comments. I, for one, am glad to see some muscular writing and position-taking. Me like meat, and wine, and song. Me like drums and loud explosions, too - but that's irrelevant.
It's your blog. Some read for the pain, others the pleasure (and some both). If someone calls you on something, admit it or defend it and move on. That's your objective anyway, isn't it? Get people to think, to react, to learn? To *live* catholicism, not just go to mass?
Challenging assumptions is good for us, whether or not we change them. I for one have learned tons about Catholic economics on a couple of threads here...fantastic.
Don't be morose. Write on. Damn the torpedos, full speed ahead.
It really depends what the point of your blog is. Mostly, it's people of like or similar minds reading your posts. The points where I don't agree with you, your snarky posts don't change my mind one bit.
So if you don't mind that you're not changing anybody's mind, then - what the hey. Be sarcastic if you want. That's your niche. I can go to Disputations or Bettnet if I want to read an argument. I come here for links to Catholic-related stories, and skip posts that don't interest me. After a point, I ignored all your posts on Iraq, war in general, or torture -- the way you have presented items on those topics makes me not take you seriously, just as a Democrat would stop paying attention to your "Evil Party" refs. You're singing to the choir, and that's a fine place to be, if that's what you want to do.
It's your blog.
Mark, I continue to find your blog a valuable read, but I don't think that it's immune to a problem that seems to afflict all high-traffic blogs: feuds sustained and exaggerated by comments. It seems like there's a critical threshold above which comment boxes become a net loss, with people attacking and trolling each other, rehashing old feuds, and otherwise doing things other than engaging in entertaining and/or worthwhile exchanges. You would not be the first to decide that it would be a good idea to put comments on hiatus. It's a problem that seems to afflict everyone: liberal, conservative, believing, unbelieving, whatever, on any subject. It's a problem of traffic, pure and simple.
It's not like you'd be unreachable without a comment box, and you could continue to post and respond to mail that you want to deal with. But you wouldn't be providing a forum for the Friday night fights. So I suggest it as a course of action, even though it'd mean one less place for me to hold forth along with others.
Supplemental note: Without the Friday night fights ready to break out all the time, you might find it easier to reach and maintain the balance of personal and social that makes blogging such a distinct kind of activity - with less accountability for others' voices, you'd have more freedom to speak in your own more fully. I notice that high-traffic blogs often end up losing the wide range of individual human intrest that they used to have, as an audience builds up for one particular sort of traffic. But this is not a syndicated column, it's your personal place, and I'm in favor of whatever you think might help it continue to be obviously the kind of personal expression your delightful manifesto in the upper left corner suggests.
Mark,
The snarkasm has never bothered me; we're all grownups here. Keep up the good work, and don't let anybody get you down.
Mark is the best headline writer in blogdom, and if he gets a little tired of being nibbled to death by ducks in his comments boxes and turns sour sometimes for a minute or two, he's entitled, since it's his blog.
He's been invaluable to me as a blogger and an author, and I appreciate his efforts, his love of the Church and of Jesus. I have NEVER heard him be blasphemous or irreverent to God. To sinners? You're damn right, and tough noogies to them, they should be brought up against the straight truth with a edge sharpened by Mark's wit.
Blog on, brother in Christ!
Mr. Shea,
Attempting to lead people in an intellectual manner without the glue of social interaction invariably has its risks. At the end of the day, I'd rather argue with someone face to face than over e-mail. I'd also rather argue with someone who trusts me (and whom I trust) than with a stranger, since both sides will treat the discussion with charity. Lask of honesty and trust can lead to sophistry and lies on the part of the speaker and stubborness on the part of the interlocutor.
That some readers would point out your tone indicates a bit of a breakdown in trust, unfortunately. However, having the integrity to address the issue openly and with humility was a great step.
You do great work here, Mr. Shea, and it's great that you have so many intelligent and curious readers willing to do intellectual work themselves. How's about we all commit ourselves to honesty and trust and assume the best of others (unless they force us to consider otherwise)? Then we can see that a sarcastic tone or a wisecrack is not malicious in nature; at best it's an attempt at humor, at worst the result of momentarily flared tempers (and we're all subject to that). If we aren't good enough to do that, we all might as well ust give up on public discourse entirely, let alone on this or that blog.
Let us not accept the mistrust and dishonesty that has caused public political discourse in this country to turn into shouting matches. Let us speak truly, with confidence and not hubris, while at once being open to the possibility that our friends here are correct and can lead us to the Truth.
I enjoy your blog immensely. I have avoided entanglements in the most heated arguments. I'm not interested in dishing out or receiving attacks in comments, but in discussing and debating the issue at hand, or adding information that might be useful. We cannot make our debates personal among us, though that is an extremely hard thing because many of the topics raised mean so much to us--eg, our faith and our families. I have thought that you pushed hard on some matters, but you were trying to make a point that we were not getting. It's your blog.
I have not set firm parameters for my own participation in the blogosphere, but I sense when I've spent too much time or emotion on it. Sometimes it's time to turn off the PC, spend time with family, friends (people I actually know and see in person), do some neglected task at home. Sometimes, I neglect work at the office if the web is more interesting.
This is your apostolate and you do this from home. You may want to set parameters as to how many or during what hours of the day you will tend to your blog, whether you will participate in the comments boxes yourself and to what extent. [ie, maybe just post and let others have at it. If you feel compelled to respond/correct, do it tomorrow, later that day.] I don't know precisely what you might want to do or if you need to consider such things at all. These are just ideas that I consider when something I enjoy which is good, seems to have gotten out of kilter. You, or at least some reader, seem to be questioning that.
Thank you for your dedication to this work. Let the Holy Spirit (& a spiritual advisor) guide you.
I've read some of your books. I've read your blogs. I've even received thoughtful responses by email, on personal matters.
My own opinion about the "snarkiness" creeping in is based on personal experience: you're probably more tired these days, and cynicism might be setting in. I know you'll continue to fight that as we all must, as we are all susceptable, but keep blogging. As you can see from all these responses, we love your work.
God bless you!
The only thing I've noticed is that the volume of the posted material is getting very high...I'm having a tough time keeping up!!
I suppose there are also postings which many consider "snarky" or "sarcastic" which are probably more like inside jokes to those who read regularly.
God bless you, Mark! Keep up the good work!
I enjoy your work, and I keep coming back nearly every day to check it out. When you delve into apologetics......that's my favorite part. You are a gifted teacher of the Catholic faith. I'll always look for more of that, and I enjoy checking out some of the rest of your posts. Just a note of thanks and encouragement from a sister in Christ!
Mark, you are an amazing witness to share the comments with your blog community. Your statement that "It's good to have honest and charitable folk who can speak the truth in love." witnesses to the humility needed in blogdom. As mere humans we can only hope to grow in perfection and sincere practice of our shared faith. We need others in the community to call us to reflection, repentance and renewal. It's a gifted soul who can hear the call, evaluate what resonates as true in their own experience and let the rest go. Be well.
Mark,
Don't worry about the critics. You might get cranky sometimes but that's only human. On the whole you have been an unabashed force for rightness, helping to arm us with ideas to fight the demons we face everyday, especially the ones in popular ideology. Just be careful that in going to war you don't take too a personal pleasure in vanquishing your foes.
I peruse your blog every couple days, always with pleasure. I am flummoxed wondering what dulcet tone people expect of you.
Your admonisher said it's hard to hear Jesus say "come unto me and I"ll give you rest" in your blog. Why the Sam Hill would she (this COULDN"T be a man complaining) be coming to your blog for rest, as if you ought to be the editorial equivalent of a barcalounger?
I'll find rest at Mass, fellowship, and prayer, thank you--here I need to stimulated, braced, reminded of the fray and my duty to get out into it with fresh ammo—meaning not only facts and boldness, but humor, divisions of which include irony, sarcasm, and parody (though that's by NO means the full range of your voice).
You got your hand to the plow; don't start getting wobbly on us. We ALL struggle with pride, God help us, even those who gently correct from the sidelines the man who's doing the heavy lifting. If you got arrogant, we'd all leave. We're still here. When you feel doubt coming on, talk to your confessor and let him intervene, and meanwhile thank you and God bless you.
Mark, your prodigious output is enlightening, edifying, entertaining, provocative, informative and incisive -- sometimes by turns, other times all at once. Your blog's a treasure; it's durn near indispensable. Don't let the nattering nabobs of negativism get you down. Keep on truckin'. Please!
I haven't been here lately as much as I used to be, but blog reading and blogging in general have been down for me. Only lately, with my newly redesigned blog, have I put a lot of time into it.
You have described a situation that I have felt that I myself have been in. I wonder if I'm becoming someone who takes pleasure in slamming weird stuff. This is certainly not something to base a spirituality on.
However, one sees a total change in tone when a sincere question is asked. I think that makes the difference. All of St. Blog's needs to be careful in reference to our opponents. Do pray about it, and perhaps you can teach all of us.
4 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
