Some Covenant Christian women have created semi-public forums—Slack channels and Gaggle groups—where participation is conditional. You’re welcome, as long as you don’t disagree with their narrative. Questions don’t open conversation; they quietly close it.
That pattern feels familiar to me.
Years ago, while attending the LDS Church, my temple recommend was removed after I asked questions in Relief Society. I was told by the bishop that I was there to learn, not to teach. Apparently my questions were too instructive. When I asked if I could simply read a scripture aloud, the answer was an emphatic no—you know too much about the scriptures. I was permitted to participate only insofar as my comments aligned with the narrative being presented.
I eventually left that community.
Today, I worship among a different group of people who call themselves Covenant Christians—a new community beyond church structure, yet with the same instinct. I’ve watched familiar dynamics resurface, driven by the same reflex: protecting unity by controlling who gets to speak and which questions are allowed to surface.
To be clear, there is one Slack channel still open to all Covenant Christian women, and I’m genuinely grateful for the integrity of the admins who keep it that way. Open spaces matter. They are rare—and worth protecting.
I don’t take myself or my situation too seriously. But I do take patterns seriously. Especially the ones that repeat themselves under new names.
So I wrote a song.
The Gaggle Slack Echo Chamber is a lighthearted folk satire dedicated to exclusive platforms that can’t quite tolerate disagreement. It’s not about individuals. It’s about process. About what happens when curiosity is managed instead of engaged, and when “safe space” quietly becomes agreement only.
Truth doesn’t need an echo chamber.
It needs daylight—and maybe a fiddle.
Nephi and I liked your song! We got a good chuckle out of it.
ReplyDeleteOne danger I see ( historically and spiritually) is when disagreement starts getting treated as contention and dissent is moved out of public conversation and into silence or private channels.,
History is not kind to that pattern. Athens did this to Socrates in the name of "unity" The English civil war era did it to the Levelers.... Institutional Christianity did it repeatedly during the Protestant Reformation. In every single case, silencing dissent came before real spiritual or moral collapse, not after....
Modern psychology just calls it "Groupthink" but the fruit"s the same. When unity's preserved by shutting down minority voices instead of testing ideas, truth is no longer the aim.
Also, it does feel like there has been a collective agreement to stop engaging with those of us who disagree. I doubt anyone thinks ignoring us will cause us to suddenly evaporate. We arent going anywhere. We're trying, (imperfectly) to keep the covenant too.
The irony is that pruning does happen in covenant communities, but historically it is often the branch that cuts itself off from open correction and honest disagreement that withers first, without realizing it. 😳
Words aren't violence. Disagreement isn't contention. And silence has never been a reliable substitute for peace