Of course there is an appropriate seriousness with which one needs to engage these matters. I only meant to say that there is also an inappropriate seriousness that is the mark of faithlessness, an anxiety arising from the attempt to control how we’re perceived and to affect a certain self-image.

Re: Peter’s first comment and Chris’ response – It has been narcissistic for me at those points when I’ve written in such a way as to garnish ‘support,’ real or perceived, from particular readers. That is when I may have been seeking to impress.

But for the most part I try not to do that. And while sometimes I like the sound of my own voice, I feel that the conversations exceed me as they are taken up by interlocuters and we are all enriched by that.

Why ‘narcissism’? Are you saying our reflections, on God, the Christian life, or whatever, are necessarily always self-absorbed and excessively self-serving? If so, I can’t agree. Such pessimism has more to do with Schopenhauer than Jesus, I believe. But perhaps you’re not saying that at all?

But yeah, blogging is a nice exercise.

Oddly enough, I think as we become more ‘adult’ (we must be careful here, because there are many voices crying to have the final word on what this in fact looks like) we become increasingly capable of playfulness because we are learning to not take ourselves–or our theological musings– too seriously. So long as humility undergirds what we’re doing, then I think theo-blogging is a fitting expression of faith-seeking-understanding.