Dear MNHQ, I didn't see all the problems kick off over poor Revjustabout...

pastoral care?

Tend to your flock rather than arguing the toss.

You haven't explained why that is a problem posting as a rev. Her posts are naturally kind, compassionate and funny. That's it. What is the problem with that?

Creative
No one told you to fuck off - although you really seem to want someone to be fighting with .
You posted twice how awful you thought it was here and were finding it difficult to consider staying.

I simply pointed out that such angst seems a bit

If you don't wantto stay then don't. If you want to then great.
People are not arguing with you because you have disagreed with them. It is because they don't agree with you.

which is actually kind of the point of a discussion....

You seem to be determined to involve yourself in an arguement which you genuinely don't seem to really understand.

It just seems odd and it is

Well exactly spirits.

Will i be cast out for roffling at "god gob"?

I cannot be arsed to trawl through nineteen odd pages, i would just like to say that i enjoy justabouts posts, her relucant worshippers has been a fab opportunity for me to lurk and reflect.
She also makes me laugh out loud.

Looking forward to reading her future posts.

ruty, are you saying that EVERY post she has made as Rev has been carefully thought out as 'if my supervisor read this would it be ok?' Because that's the problem with posting as a Rev.

I am smirking slightly at the idea of an established church for MN actually.
Or a MN chaplain.

Ah Mr JA you just outed yourself

be accountable is exactly what I meant MrJA! Much better word.

Oops, being here

I am not revjustabout, just a bad typist rushing to get home ...

she is careful not to do this tortoiseshell. I have noticed she is. So?

Well, firstly, I am not posting as a vicar/reverend/deacon/bishop - I'm not one. So what I say in this capacity is MY interpretation, and I am NOT a representative of the church.

However, it is standard for an employer to have certain expectations when you are speaking as an employee. When I used to work for a very high-profile employer, one of the things they impressed on us was that an email from a work computer was as good as using headed notepaper, and as such, anything we wrote from the computer had to be regarded as 'representing that organisation'. Posting on a forum like this, saying 'I am an employee of XYZ and I think ....' could be sackable, because it was not authorised.

According to the Clergy Discipline Measure, misconduct may be alleged for four things, the fourth of which is "engaging in conduct that is unbecoming or inappropriate to the office and work of the clergy."

Define that as you like. It is not talking about conduct whilst in church, it is ALL the time. And as such, I think could cover 'unauthorised preaching.' I'm not saying just about WAS doing this, simply that if posting as a rev you have to be careful NOT to do this.

Lemon - will do. Although I'm risking being locked into a building by still being her ... not sure I can get home :-)

I think justify yourself is possibly a little strong, tortoise - you need to be accountable, and justabout has done this by having someone more senior than her that she talks mumsnet issues over with. The anglican church knows that she posts and does the RW thread but that doesn't make her the official god-gob of MN - and nor should it.

Justine has outlined the MN position, which I think is very wise.

We wouldn't want anyone feeling like they had licence to throw their weight around and escape any consequences.

Or morningpaper?

MrJustAbout - when you get home, please could you give your lovely Mrs a big hug on my behalf?

Although I only lurk on her reflection threads (I do not label myself as a Christian but am interested in all viewpoints) but have found many of her posts not only interesting but also very thought provoking. Not my place on those threads to comment (not sure I could find the right words to express my cloudy, confused thoughts) but read them all with care. I really value all the time and effort, thought and consideration that have gone into them and just want to say that they were worth it. I am sure that I am only one of many people out there who have read her words and found them touching us somehow. For all of those out there who are being negative or questioning stuff, please let her know that there are plenty people whispering their thanks and appreciation too x

and abusive phone calls are the only thing you think are out of order? Not the repeated personal attacks, taunting?

tortoishell i don't quite understand your point. Everyone can be challenged here for their opinions, that is the spirit of MN, robust discussion. Rev is no different.
My father [vicar] went around telling everyone who would listen that nuclear weapons were evil and we should have unilateral disarmament. That was not the official position of the church. his bishop disapproved. Should he have been made to step down?

tortoiseshellWasMusicaYearsAgo, can you post the letter from the church explaining their position and their support for your point of view or can you explain what you are doing representing the church without their consent.

No, obviously I'm not saying everyone has to have the same views. What I'm saying is that if you are speaking as a priest, then you have to remember that you are representing the church. So my way of interpreting that would be to imagine you are speaking from the pulpit, possibly with your bishop there. So you have to be prepared to justify yourself.

Obviously vicars/priests disagree - for example remarrying in church after divorce. Some will, some won't. But if you speak with the authority of the church, then you also have a responsibility to the church. That's all I was saying really. And so taking your offline work into an online ministry, you have to be certain that the church is happy with this, and be prepared to be challenged on it I think. In RL a vicar can and should be challenged by their parishioners, if justabout regards MN as her 'ministry' then the same possibly applies. Obviously RL 'harassment' is never right - has she really received abusive telephone calls? Lots of people say she has, though I didn't read that from her? If so, that is definitely out of order.