Ellen Painter Dollar, a religion blogger, downplays “niceness” while contemplating how controversy plays out in the Christian blogosophere:
I resist the continual pressure from readers to be “nice,” which is frequently presented as the primary Christian value (it’s not) and a reason to avoid writing criticisms of Christian institutions, practices, or sociopolitical positions. Incensed readers hold up critique (miscast as un-Biblical judgment of fellow believers) as an affront to Christian unity.
Our deep cultural divisions, and an online milieu in which harsh name-calling and withering dismissal are the norm, do indeed challenge the unity to which Jesus called his followers. But unity achieved via tacit acceptance of other Christians’ opinions and practices, because to question them wouldn’t be “nice,” is not a valuable unity. Such superficial unity doesn’t require anything more than silence and good manners. True unity costs something; it happens in the midst of, not in the absence of, passionate disagreement and debate. …
It’s not that hard to manipulate the rampant divisions within American Christianity to benefit a writing career. It’s much harder to foster the thoughtful conversations that must happen for our faith to remain relevant and vibrant, because doing so costs something — a sharp retort held back because its target is someone I know, an opposing idea treated with respect instead of ridicule, my opinion offered to a diverse community of readers, knowing that some will reject me with the harshest language possible, in the hope that at least a few will engage with insight and kindness.
The Dish 