It’s interesting how people can judge you, your mental health, and your spiritual life, without having met you, but based solely on what is written on your blog. I won’t get more specific than that, but I do have a point to make.
It seems obvious to me, and it’s probably obvious to most of you, but it’s clearly not obvious to some people: I am not my blog.
I do not spend all day complaining about bishops. I don’t have long conversations with my friends about the Scandal.
I am funnier than my blog and more easygoing. I don’t complain all the time. I care more about sports, especially local sports. I like to drink good wine, cold beers, or fine Scotches, and talk with friends about the piddly stuff of life: work, women, vacations, cars, what’s on TV and so on. I am not as serious as my blog might lead you to believe.
I am both more shy and more gregarious. In person, I tend to be reserved around people I’ve only just met and I don’t do awkward small talk well. But get to know me and become my friend and we’ll laugh or talk seriously together for hours on end with all the intensity I have.
I am also more prayerful than my blog. I purposefully don’t put my spirituality on parade. I don’t usually discuss my prayer life, and I don’t give spiritual discourses. That’s not why I started this site. There are others who do this well, and I’ll leave it to them. Here, I prefer to discuss current events and the news, because that’s what I do well.
My point is that you shouldn’t judge anyone by their blogs, because there is no way that a web site can convey the true, complete person, such as what you would experience in a face-to-face meeting. And, honestly, I’m wary of people who tend to air their most private, intimate selves in public on a web site. It doesn’t seem proper or prudent and so I’m not going to do that.
I just thought that needed to be said.