Winding Up God for Summer

First, some housekeeping. Some of you may have noticed that in the Facebook and Twitter worlds I am little more than an apparition. To those of who noticed and took the time to comment through the kind ministrations of others, thank you. The simple fact is that I discovered the hard way some of the dangers of social media, and felt that deletion was the right and proper action to take at the time. It was a tough choice, but a needful one, and the resultant hole in my mediocre life is not insignificant. 

Secondly, my absence from blogging. I am a serious advocate of the view that if you have nothing worth saying, don't just say something to keep the hit rate flowing. Many bloggers fail in this and you the readers deserve better. I look back and see my own proclivities in the world of inane waffle and choose now to write only when a worthy thought (or not so worthy) emerges. 

Thirdly, I have found time that I didn't know that I had. Take life and subtract Facebook, Twitter and pointless blogging and you are left with a hole that can contain the reading of books and the embracing of twins! I have managed to read "The Godseeker's Guide" (Rabbi Blue) and am fast consuming "If This is A Man" (Primo Levi) - who would have thought that I would find time to read. There are lessons to be learned about managing social media, but only from the stand-point of the former addict presently absent. 

So, to the post. As a curate (and an idealistic one at that) I used to rail against the tendency to wind down ecclesiastical operations in time for the school summer holiday. I would be the first to observe that God didn't take a holiday so why should we. Oh, the simple life of curacy. My sainted Training Incumbent would do as he often did and utter "calm down dear" in the face of my protests. However, it is right to say that incumbency and all that Vicaring lark brings with it a more balanced sense of self-preservation. 

The thing is, during August you have two choices (as the Vicar). First is that you tear yourself a new tailpipe upon the stress of wondering where everyone is (the simple answer being 'on holiday'). Alternatively, you can be realistic and take the lead of the punters and thereby take the size 11 from off the gas. A lack of self-aware honesty is probably a significant cause of clergy stress and burn-out (aside from poor gin, another cause). August is a gift for stopping, or simply slowing to a less frantic pace. As ever, we measure our ministries in the volume assigned to task and not to the quality of our life's own experience. The other way of putting it is that God probably needs more of me at Christmas and not in August. Even God is telling me to give it a rest - perhaps the Omnipotent One does take a break in Ibiza after all. 

So, I have told the gang this end that during the summer holiday (framed and mitigated by the teaching profession, of which God is surely a member too) I will be less visible even if still available. I need to write, I need to pray, I need to rest and I need to think. For a whole manner of reasons, 2013 has been a shit of a year and I wonder if it isn't time to take ownership and make good. It isn't easy, that said, because this computer is an unforgiving matriarch who has a look - a knowing look - that observes that she has been neglected for too many moments. 

Unbalanced Church Leaders

Courtesy of #BigBible

Further to my comments yesterday, I also pondered on as to how social media relationships are bound up in a balance. As I can 'dispose' of my ether-friends, so it is that I too can be disposed of. Accepting that such disposals are broadly temporary, I am reassured.

However, there is a facet to all of this that is manifestly un-balanced, and it is closer to home than I would have first imagined. 

Let's talk tacks. Twitter is, to my mind, a device where people communicate with other people. It would seem to be a mutual gathering of 'give and take'. In addition to this, Christians are commanded to follow Jesus, pray to the Father and all that jazz, not gather disciples for themselves. Sling in a little Pnuematological expression into that and you have a church. 

I discovered, with some surprise and even more amazement that there are Christians who have tens of thousands of followers and yet they barely follow a soul. The few I have seen either bill themselves as archbishops, pioneers of something or other, or else are just too important to bother with me. 

If Twitter is a place for important Christians with important jobs to say important things like pronouncements, then it is not a place I wish to be. If Twitter is a place where disciples are as one, together, without the hierarchies of ecclesial frameworks, then count me in. If they are too important to read what I (or anyone else who loves God too) have to say, then something is very wrong. If by not following this humble priest states that they are better than me, then they are wrong. To be sure, such one-sidedness and apparent supremacism vexes me intensely. 

Putting it bluntly, I follow Jesus. If I follow you, it is as an invitation to mutuality, not so that I can sit at your feet in wonder. 

Enough said. 

(I ought to mention that there many bishops, writers of courses and so on who do not fall into this category, and they are highly to be praised)

Social Media and Fainting by Numbers

Once upon a time, before even the Baby Jesus was a twinkle in the Father's eye, people first grunted and then spun out loquacious and erudite conversation with one another. Then, as the human capacity for invention increased, we started faxing papyri to one another and making use of the telephone. In the mano-a-monkey interaction, we learned how to pucker and wave our arms about to convey greater meaning to our grunts and tics. And so, dear readers, communication was born. 

Evening and morning. The first social-media. 

The measure of 'success' in that world was a reciprocal response, a reaction, a new friendship. That said, the moment was had and it vanished for ever. A word was whispered then never to be heard again. A smile stopped a heart-beat but was forgotten. The communication was transient, the effect lasting. 

And so it came to pass that there came the Wise Men (and Ladies) who, by their efforts, gave rise to the Dawn of the Gadget. God saw and knew that it was good. Evening and morning - the second social-media. During the geeky revelry, there came a serpent - its name was Wikio, and it was hell-bent on wreaking unholy havoc in the Eden of the Gadget world of Parlay. The doe-eyes gadgeteers installed the widget unto their bloggies and partook of the Forbidden Fruit - the age of innocence collapsed and so it happened that those caught in the new world of social media could quantify their activity. 

In other words, social media in the present age can give you numbers and reports. I get emails telling me who I have 'spoken' to, with what effect, under what level of reach and to which extent of influence. The serpent Wikio was quickly joined by the demons Klout and Feedjit, then the arch Leviathan Empire Avenue. All these things are, in one form or another, measuring devices. They chastise you when you have said too little, and reward you when you have been busy. For competitive men like me, it is like having an aggressive Mistress (not that I have the first idea how that would feel, you understand). I sometimes find myself making inane comments on Twitter because my Klout number fell, or posting some drivel on here because my Wikio number was lower than a snake's belly.

This is dangerous. I know I am not alone, but it is very compelling to those of us who care how we are perceived and received. Being social, in all its facets, is vulnerable under the auspices of self-measure. The much lamented Church Mouse used to post monthly the Wikio blog rankings, and the comments confirm that we bloggers and Tweeters really do care if we are successful in what we do. Gain is great; slump or decline is mortal tragedy. I regard this is a problem, and one I am trying to resolve. My rankings buttons will start to go as I try to be sure in my mind (and allow you the same) that I am doing what I do online for right reason, not simply for numerical success!

Is Social Media a Prawn Cocktail?

This last weekend saw my inaugural voyage in the great ship The Christian New Media Conference. 

Now, you will either fall into two camps: those who went or would have been interested in so doing, or else those who have no idea what sort of conference that may be. If you are of the latter disposition, then think prayers and know that we were described as "geeks" with alarming frequency, added to which we were all sporting a dozen gadgets apiece, and you will get the idea. It was, basically, a gathering of bloggers, Tweeters, Facebookers and those who aspire to such levity.

One of my own concerns with social media as a 'world' is that it connects with tangible reality in the way that Kermit the Frog's legs and arms do - which is to say, they are never in the same shot at the same time. It is, without doubt, a part of reality as real people have real interactions. The matter and the fruits of social media are very real and for that I love it, embrace it and do all I can to compel others to come in.

Then we went and had our "Geeks Gathering" where I met three people (among many others), and to whom this post is warmly dedicated. They are three Christian ministers, who, alarmingly, seemed to be on the wavelength that I seem to exist on. It was the first time I had met them in my life, and I am glad that I did. Through social media, they are gentlemen with whom I had had various quantities of interaction through the gadget-mitigated world - but Saturday was the first time that I had ever actually met them.

And it was good. I venture to say that it was better. We had lunch together and a couple of beers apiece and we sorted out the world. It was a truly wonderful time - so it begs a question. In the great meal of life, is social media a good hearty starter? Nothing beats that 'face to face' stuff for me, the main course - and I doubt I could have engaged with those people from Saturday over a month of Sundays on Twitter and cover the ground that we did in an hour behind a pint! 

Social Media is one tool among many, in the various modes it exists, to bring people into contact with others. To be fair, I may not have been sat anywhere with anyone on Saturday without it, so from that point of view, I am endlessly grateful to my social-media life. I will always wonder though, if in the end, we are always called to move on to the main course and be with people, in proximity, like wot we used to. 

I want to thank the wonderful people with whom I spent time of Saturday, the lads and others who didn't bother joining us for lunch and everyone else who tolerated my tomfoolery, modest rages and all those other little facets of 'me' that emerge in lecture theatres. I was delighted to have met you!

So Your Church Wants Social Media ...

My firm belief is that every church needs to engage with social media and start to use it. To not engage with social media is about the same as not making use of email, telephones or the combustion-engine motor-car simply because they seem to be modern irrelevances. The simple fact is that more and more people in the West are engaging in dialogue moderated and delivered through social media. 

I also acknowledge that it isn't as simple as just wanting to engage with and harness the benefits of social media, because our congregations and parish councils are often populated by those unaccustomed to the electronic, regard their advent as suspect at best and who may in turn become isolated by its introduction. This said, if we took the same view over history, people wouldn't have Bibles in their personal possession and the art of reading would remain the province of the landed gentry. Progress is necessary and indeed vital, so long as it is tailored to bring with it those who are vulnerable to its effects (usually by immediate isolation).

With this in mind, and following on from conversations already had on the subject, I though I would jot down my thoughts as to the process that parishes could use to bring this development to life. I am mindful that parishes already have varying degrees of involvement with social media, though they may not use that label!

What Is It? Social Media is the overarching title for direct communication by way of the internet. Any parish with a website of any capacity or capability is already engaged with social media, albeit passively. The current understanding of social media is more specifically concerned with actions of communication, often in real-time and often solely over the internet - be those actions in the form of 'chat', instant message, blogging or micro-blogging. A parish community unfamiliar with this mode of communicating would need to appreciate the subtleties and drawbacks (as well as the great opportunities) of this form of faceless communication. 

Who? This may seem an odd consideration for a parish, but this is a decision not to be taken lightly. The one doing the communicating is placed in a position of considerable power, often speaking on behalf of the entire community to a very wide and unpredictable audience. Someone with some experience of social media (and its nuances and its vernacular), supported and moderated by at least one other person would be advisable. This ensures that the 'output' is broad and balanced, and not rooted in the aspirations and 'hobby-horses' of the operator. Needless to day, the person concerned should always hold in their mind that they always speak for their community, and anything that emerges in the social media is hard to remove. 

Planning - If a parish is to engage in social media, it would make all sorts of sense to have the agreement of the parish council (or its equivalent). To do something positive and new can be a risk-laden proposition and it is easy for the operator to be left high-and-dry if any problems arise later. The organisation as a whole should take ownership of the initiative, even if at the hands of one or two specific individuals (operators). They should also be familiar with the output as a matter of course. 

Planning 2 - Boundary setting is very important. What is off-limits to the wider world? What is the core message? How does the community preserve the operator? What happens if things go wrong? Do you discuss services or acts of worship? Do you comment on sermons or talks? What about images? Recordings and audio capture? How is orthodoxy maintained?These are all clear decisions that need to be made and probably a myriad more. 

Accountability - who is accountable - The operator? The council or leadership team? Someone needs to be, after all. If accountability is given, can it be taken back later? Who hold passwords and where? With accountability comes responsibility and the same questions need to be settled.

Document - to my mind, a document stating who does what and under what terms, on what media forum and to what purpose - all need to be documented. I would go so far as to state that they need to be filed with official papers like Minutes and votes taken. They are all layers of protection either for the operator or the organisation. 

Review - the leadership team/council should review the output in conjunction with the appointed operator, and on a regular basis. When someone speaks on their behalf in front of possibly millions of people (in the case of Twitter and blogs), the community needs to be aware of the essence of that commentary and respond accordingly. 

If there are substantial doubts - then don't do it until those doubts are assuaged or gone. Engines such as Facebook has caused concerns for many people, regarding secrecy and the dissemination of information to third parties. Because things cannot be unsaid or easily un-published, it is better to be positive about such a venture before launching forth on it, rather than stepping tentatively into a perceived minefield. One is a pleasure, the other a constant source of stress. 

These are my own thoughts. There is nothing to stop anyone doing anything, but 'in whose name' makes a considerable difference. In simple terms, the greater number of people who are involved in the evolution of such a development the better - given that in the early days, its outworking is in the hands of a small minority. 

Lastly, let social media not become the first word and the last. There are always people in our communities for whom this activity is exclusive and into which they could ever venture. Make social media but one means of communicating with the wider world, and certainly never at the expense of inter-personal or tangible means which grant access to all. 

Twitterquette

The subject of good manners within social media has been written about many times over. Only not here - so here I go.

I am focussing upon Twitter in particular following a rather annoying thing that peeves me just a little bit. In simple terms, I sent a Tweet (a message of 140 characters or less, if by now you are unsure) to a priest who knows me personally and who holds some authority in the church (I lean on the word 'some'). Said priest then ignored me despite being rather active on the site. It wasn't a world-class message that I sent, but did demand a reply. I was ignored.

There are always little rules that accompany social interaction. Were there not, then rudeness and poor behaviour would quickly reign. On the whole, these rules require no printing or formal drafting, because they are the rules of good manners, and are largely innate in most of us. 

I think I was peeved because the priest in question is a conspicuous self-promoter and manifestly ambitious. I have no real concern with that, until they become too levitous to speak to others. Exchanged messages with bishops, even archbishops - that is fine. Just not curates. Grrr

With all things concerning the social media, I believe in absolute terms that you should never utter a word there that you wouldn't be prepared to say in person. It is easy to be one person in the flesh and quite another in the online world. In the real world, when someone addresses me, I respond. In the online world, I am not rude about someone for fun (or even to be serious), though I am happy with being critical in appropriate measure. I am happy to take criticism if it is warranted and the person delivering it has the right or insight so to do. If I borrow something from someone else, I try to ask first and thank them after. If I like something, I tell others, but I remember not to accidentally let that thing become mine. 

And so it is with social media, and especially Twitter and blogging. Ideas are (more or less) property. Interactions are no less real than any that would take place in my lounge over coffee. Equally, that means that I listen as much as I speak and I don't keep repeating myself - frequent offenses in social media, especially Twitter. If I address someone, I fairly well expect a reply. I try hard to afford that behaviour to others and look back on messages received when I have been offline, and reply to them in one form or another. When people propagate my ideas, I like to thank them. It seems obvious to me. 

So, person-in-question - please stop ignoring us mere lesser mortals on the ground. It is rude and it is unacceptable, and after all, you are a priest and that demands even more good behaviour. Enough said. 

But don't just take my word for it ...

With thanks to the ever excellent somegreybloke

Social Media and The Church - A Critique

Hold on a moment Cloakey; what's this? Aren't you an author of the case in favour?

People in my position (which is to say a public minister of religion with a care to express a view to a wider audience) should always know where the failings are with those things that they would otherwise gladly extol. I will always write warmly about social media, especially blogging - but I would be acting in an imbalanced way if I were not to devote some time and effort reflecting on the weaknesses that exist within it, of which there are many. I don't think that there is a more effective way of undermining my own position than to ignore its pitfalls. I believe, too, that I have a basic duty to balance. 

I spoke in a recent post about how social media can work for a church, and how a gulf is broadening between those who are conversant with all of this, and those who are not. To be sure, social media is of profound value in attracting people to our doors and to the Gospel. Of that there is less and less doubt. Attracting people to the doors of our churches only deals with one section of our society however, and is in danger of ignoring that other section - the ones already within them. 

Accessibility - social media attracts and enters many people's lives in the space and time where they are. However, it is also as true to say that social media is a considerable obstacle to the majority of practicing Christians. If everyone reading this now thought honestly about the parish community of which they are part (if they are part), they would not perceive a population well blessed with the gadgets of our age or their means of communicating. Statistically, ours is a community of those of advanced years on average and of that number only single numbers of percents of them would, for example, have a Facebook account, let alone be able to do something with it. What is normal for our 'average' Christians (please forgive the term) are books, penned letters and telephone calls. How so many people can communicate meaningfully in 140 characters or less, Twitter-style, is a mystery to most of humankind, let alone my parish nonagenarians. In our quest to further the cause of social media, we need to be absolutely clear who is included and who is excluded by this development.

Infection - An important thing in my own missiological thinking, it is something with which we need to exercise care. Taking bloggers as an example, and as I have said before, among its joys are the freedom to write ones thoughts, engage in dialogue, and to learn new things through the widely acknowledged 'community' of blogging. That is great in the good times, but perilous in the bad. Blogs have, for many, a kind of mystique which is neither earned nor warranted. That it is written means that it must be true - or so some think. The danger is, that any whacko can write a blog (you are reading the words of one such person now). I am free, in absolute terms, to peddle any twaddle I like - dodgy notions, ropey theology, skewed personal prejudices, plain simple heresies. That I would do so wearing a dog-collar means that some could, and would, be seduced by my words. I see it in other places. Collusion in the blogger-reader-commenter relationship is considerable and in my opinion, dangerous. Infection is great when it the right virus that gets passed on. Social media at its least potent is a happy process of leaning on doors that are already ajar; preaching to the converted. 

Potential for harm - fortunately, in most civilised societies, it is still not acceptable to insult people to their faces simply for having a view different to our own. Name calling is still mostly found on the asphalt of school playgrounds. Invective is typically moderated by being in polite company who can challenge and moderate a good old rant. Except for social media. The playground for the passive-aggressive, the front-row seat for the name caller and the soap-box for the ranter - social media provides the 'behind the glass' phenomenon that allows civilised people to regress to a reduced base place! Only since I have ventured into the world of social media have I been insulted so aggressively, been called names that would shock most people, and witnessed the aggrandising withering of the perpetual victim (none of which would have ever happened had I been standing there with them, all 6' of me). This stuff I can handle. I know people who have also been subject to this stuff who could not, and were hurt by it. Social media allows a freedom that can promote growth and the best of encounters, but is also a gladiator's pit where the lions will, and do, bite hard. 

Community - Church is, and the Body of Christ is - community. Community, until the last two or three years, has been made up of people talking to and with other people, in proximity. Social media allows people at the opposite ends of the world to converse in real-time, and that is where it is at its best - but also friends and even married couples who have begun to rely on social media perhaps more than a chat over breakfast. I can, if I so chose, communicate with an entire world of people over an entire day - without speaking a word or moving from my seat. I have long been a supporter of 'e-churches' and was associated with i-church in its early days - yet I wondered how such a disparate gathering of eclectic folk (all wonderful, some still firm friends) could be regarded as community. It had a sense of the diaspora about it, yes, but also the feeling of a hidy-hole for the disaffected. Anything that stops people being in physical proximity with other people has the potential to erode communities if left unchecked. As a means of communicating with real-people, social media is priceless, but it needs to have a heart to galvanise people in the temporal arena too. In other words, social media should be a means, never the end. 

These are just some thoughts that, in the spirit of honestly and transparency, I express here. These thoughts have always been there and so you may be reassured that I am not having a change of heart. However, we are in the early days of social media, so it remains deliciously edgy and experimental at times. That is fine, until we use it as a potent tool among those who don't understand it. 

Technology and God

A Liturgical Luddite I may be, but in a wider church context I am the nearest you will find to a techno-geek. I am unusual, as a priest, or indeed as an English Christian, in that I use Twitter, I write a blog and I manage a Facebook page. I know more priests who don't do any of these things than those who do any, let alone all, of them. In the diocese where I minister, I am fortunate that one of our bishops (+Alan, of blogging fame) led the way for Christian bloggers, and was then an early Twit. It made a difference to me about what may be viewed as 'acceptable', and before the example set by Bp Alan, this social media lark would have existed way out of that circle of acceptability in my mind - quite wrongly.

Increasing time is being spent by people interacting with the world around them by way of computer technology. Once, a computer was a Space-Invaders Box or a mainframe in a large building somewhere. Now, we can hold the capacity of those mainframes, hundreds of times multiplied, literally on the tip of our finger. It seems that more and more of the expression of industrialised humanity is to be found through an electronic device of one sort or another. This has to have an impact on all aspects of life, including its spiritual side.

Instinct would lead many Christians to a perceive technology as 'against' God. Technological advance connects people in many ways yet enables that in a profoundly disconnecting way. I can talk (literally or figuratively) to hundreds of people but without leaving the house, if I so chose. This can be viewed favourably or not, though I am now tending towards the positive these days. I am now in touch with a far wider sphere of people than ever before, and people who edify me and improve my life and aid my thinking in many good ways.

I have been musing this for a while now, and with the aid of Twitter and other 'streams of consciousness' have gathered much about the ways that technology and the implicit theologies of our Christian lives are beginning to fuse meaningfully. At a recent gathering called 'Thinking Digital Conference' (not a thing I attended, but followed its Twitter stream, so the next best thing) I saw a great deal about what the possibilities are for that fusion. There will be another gathering, Open Source at Pentecost Festival 2011 that will attend to this very subject. For this blog post, though, a couple of my own thoughts in splendid isolation:

Distinctiveness of Spirituality - A matter that was covered at TDC was, more or less, the possibility of a 'man space' (though not in any religious sense, but it got me thinking). I think that it is possible to talk about distinctiveness of gender spirituality without falling headlong into the debates on ordination and consecration, and to throw the baby out with the bathwater would be sad. The simple fact is, my experience of loving God is rooted entirely and squarely in my own existence as a male of the species. For well over a decade I have felt a very slight need to apologise for being male in the church and whilst I understand why other balances need to made, feel very strongly that our matriarchal church (which it is, at ground level) has left little space for male spirituality. You have Mother's Onion, World Women's Day of Prayer, WATCH - but I cannot name a group purely for men. We just daren't. This is a sad thing, but one that is increasingly superseded by technology where we can 'App' our lives as we wish. Technology allows us such levels of mutual individuality that we can be who we are without impinging on the rights of others to do the same. I love women, women in the church, women running the show if they wish - but I have never once wanted to give up being a man, or to be proud of the spirituality that I have been given. 

Infectiousness of the Gospel - This is very much 'my thing'. I have said here and elsewhere on numerous occasions that Christians are infected with the 'virus' of the Gospel. By any and all means necessary I will communicate that virus as widely as I can, and technology allows that in ways that are still not fully clear. The thing about "mission" that I dislike is how contrived and deliberate it seems to me. It seems, at times, to be exploitative and I don't favour that approach at all. Like a virus, I can no more force a person to become infected of the Gospel that I can of the common cold, with trying among some anti-social behaviours. However, I try to be authentically me (see above for the means), and through blogs, Twitter and Facebook, I seem to attract people to the Gospel without making a specific effort. I yap to all sorts on Twitter under the name @FrDavidCloake, and if I can be normal, fun, humourous, grumpy, angry and all those other things that normal people do under this label, then the world can know that at least this part of the church and its Gospel is not beyond reach in some holy cavern somewhere. 

Accessibility -  A little while ago I wrote an essay on a very narrow little topic that means nothing to almost anyone except me and the essay marker. However, I experimented with technology and its preparation. I had no books on the subject at hand, and I had no real idea what I needed to say, but the internet grants us all such considerable access to every conceivable theology and theologian. I could cite Augustine of Hippo, other Early Fathers in their native languages. I could access any number of versions of the Bible and commentaries (from all centuries) to match them all. I could translate into languages long lost or translate from them. I could find scholarly works that were written mere months ago. I did the essay, and only got brought up for not using physical books. Defence rests, m'lud. I know that millions of Christians (and non) are delving into the internet to edify their seeker experience. Technology allows people to learn and therefore to teach things that until recently were lost in books only to be found in libraries or vicarages. We can teach our children the Gospel in ways I wouldn't have been able to dream of even a decade ago. Beyond this, and through social media specifically, we can discuss our thoughts with spheres of people and indeed experts from all over the world. I have never for a moment thought that God had wanted all his God-stuff to be a privileged secret for the practitioner minority - and now it never will be again.

In general, technology and social media grant many people a 'way in' to theology, praxis, dialogue and even belief and discipleship. That a priest of limited education but of all faith can write words that mean something to people in Angola (this I know to be a fact), then God has a use for me I hadn't even predicted at ordination. This is the tip of a very large iceberg and I would welcome opinion. However, without technology and social media, God's plan for me would never have found life. 

Facebook, Twitter and the Church

I have just been caused to consider the appropriateness of the social media in day-to-day church life. In other words, whether it is right or proper for a parish or other church community to have for itself a Twitter account or a Facebook group. My thoughts were as follow (saves me re-typing, for among my many qualities, bone idleness rates highly):

Twitter

In a Midlands diocese, it is now regarded as good practice for curates to Tweet. This and all other things like this speak of marketing, whatever that thing is that you are marketing. Spreading the Good News, perhaps! My own experience is that those who Tweet are only vulnerable from themselves and their own poorly built personal boundaries. I hold an account for my church which I confess I neglect through lack of time, but as fast instant marketing of events and services, nothing rivals it if you use hash tags effectively. With my personal account I have entered into helpful and reciprocal ‘relationships’ with locals, civic community etc. and I know for a fact that one person came to Midnight Mass as a result. ‘Twurch of England’ will then add you to their lists and the scope for spreading the word is limitless, as Christian tweeters often hook up to it fairly quickly. Bp. Alan Wilson  advocates it, and we have used it to good effect between us in the past. See a former post for an example of the good that Twitter can do, in the middle of the many perils! It is a common sense thing, in essence!

Facebook

If it is alright for the Queen ...

Again, the same as above. There is little risk with this, and perhaps less even than typical parish websites as Facebook accounts are administered member-only access Groups. I believe a Facebook account exceeds a parish website for various reasons, partly because of the ability to more freely use imagery as it is restricted access, but also because access and privacy settings can be controlled. Another good marketing tool, especially if anyone in the community blogs – Twitter and Facebook bring more readers to my blog than any other source.

In general, what you are facing are the preconceived ideas of those who are fearful. I face them too, but they are issues I manage to work around easily enough. Most of our older generation do not understand the way that websites work, let alone 140 character exchanges! ... 

The age that we are in demands a higher level of communication if churches are to remain present in the flow of life as lived out electronically by the world at large. I have never had a bad experience Tweeting, blogging or anything else [as it relates to my church life] (though I have yet to enter into a Facebook group – we have a website that takes enough time at the moment)....

These are hastily drawn together thoughts, but address an issue that is perhaps gaining momentum in the present age. I'd value some comments, partly for the person who made the enquiry in the first place, but also for the edification of others perhaps later! 

Armchair Living

A second post in one night, Cloake? What is going on? 

[I had caffiene too late!]

I am not wishing to presume that all of you that read this are fully conversant with the form and nature of the Tweet or indeed of the thing we call Twitter. If you are that person, Twitter is a fairly new social-network device which allows the user to communicate electronically to the world (or varying strata within that number) in 140 characters or less. Life by statement, in other words. There is an emergent language too, which would would be seen as (for example):

@FrDavidCloake RT @revdlesley I am having a gr8 time at #gb10

Loosely translated, that Tweet (for that is what that array of symbols is called) states that Lesley Fellows [Twitter name @revdlesley] was having a good time at Greenbelt 2010 [hash-tag '#gb10' so all those who 'follow' that tag can see what she had written]. I  myself had read that and 're-Tweeted' it, hence 'FrDavidCloake [me] and RT [re-Tweeted]. Clear, dear? Keep up! 'Re-Tweeting' is bouncing a Tweet that I have read at all the people who follow my Twitter-feed [all the 140 character or less statements that I make, and that others read]. I've made it worse, haven't I?!

Anyway - Twitter is (and I have said it before) like being everywhere yet no-where. I was at Greenbelt today, in the Tiny Tea Tent, the Jesus Arms, listening to Maggi Dawn (though not ignoring my wife this time), getting a feel for the Edgy Mass - all from my settee in Aylesbury as the kids played dutifully at my feet. I am very frequently in the mind of some very dodgy folks, in their sober times and otherwise. I have seen governments fall and sports reporters rise, all without moving an inch from my sedentary position. 

So, if you are ludicriously nosy, Twitter is for you. It is like Eastenders without Dot; like Coronation Street but less amusing; like Top Gear but not as good and lacking Clarkson which is not an advantage; like Antiques Roadshow but digital (people air their dusty nick-nacks a lot on Twitter, but not for valuation) - it is a life you just can't afford not to lead (double-negative, I'm off to bed).

Twitter - cos my friend is WRONG

Reverend Doctor Mother in Christ Fellows offered some reflections on the phenomenon that is Twitter (to read the woman, press here). 

Her offering is virtuous, but just plain old good old wrong. She would tell us that it is like Cyberbucks where you can grab a latte and barf no more than 140 characters to the other regulars. 'Good Morning' she says - I know this 'cos I read it. 'Good morning back' they say - I know this 'cos I read it. Bleh ...

I fear to inform you all that a vile coverup is taking place, and that my mate is pulling the cotta over your be-freckled noses and with a sleight of hand, lets you think that this is warm bonhomy. No mate ...

...we tweet because we are nosey.

There you have it. Twitter is the electronic equivalent of phone tapping. Mrs Pankhurst did not burn her D Cup so that we could sit and eavesdrop, legitimately. My iTouch (the prince of gadgets, I might add) is now the glass tumbler that I put up against the wall of the world's private boudoirs, the grubby key hole, the chintz curtain pulled back but a little. Jimmy Carr and ++John Sentamu alike, I listen and watch. I feel like M.I.Farv. 

What is worse, I then go and pour my giblets onto the Tweetdeck for the watching world to paw over. No longer am I merely nosey but a nosey exhibitionist to boot.

And a lesson to the rest of you, if like popster Hayley Williams you opt to snap your boobs and Tweet the picture, don't be surprised how widely they become distributed in four-fifths of a second. Needless to say, I looked away ... good curate I am.

Tweet Tweet

I have set to thinking about my Study as a result of reading Alan Crawley's blog posted earlier today. With thanks to the ever insightful, Twurch-hating cartoon-monger Dave Walker, I can offer you all a little insight into the midden that is the place of my work. 

This cartoon represents my study on a very tidy day.

Anyway, to the point Cloake. Crawley (and in no way creepy) was ruminating on the community of the social meejya, and Twitter featured as part of that - he isn't a Twit yet, so has yet to sample the delictations of this electronic art.

I am a recently converted Twit (in the past tense, does a Twit become a ... never mind) and have learned that it is a powerful tool. In conjunction with the Bish (as in +Alan, as in Blog), I learned that Twitter allows the Twit a front seat in just about any situation. The visit of the EDL was a case in point - we knew where they were arriving, which pubs they were parking at and when, and so on - I knew what they knew.

The General Election is another case in point, and more especially the terminal moments of the last government. It's all in the hashtags (#ukelection for example) - find one and follow it, and you are in the middle of what is going on. I sat and filled a whole evening (yes, I am one sad degenerate) with my iTouch - with the journos twittering, members of the parties twittering and those of us following the hashtags sensed the events minutes before they became manifest in the media glare.

So, if you have a penchant for peering through keyholes, standing outside bedroom windows in the dark at night, placing glasses against walls, or tapping the phones of acquiantances, become a Twit. You know you want to.

... then kiss goodbye to family life, friends, nutritional meals, sleep, focus, sense ...... whibble

I ought to say that much good can be done with an immediate communicative device as this - read my earlier post to see just how. Having an 'audible' voice in the middle of just about anything can't be a bad thing, in the right hands!