Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park, London, was once a bustling public space for soapbox speeches. Today, there are rarely more than fifteen or twenty people gathered in that corner of the park at any one time, mostly cranks and unsuspecting tourists. Television and Internet have changed the public square tradition as every city's "Speaker's Corner" has relocated to the Web and every blog is now a soapbox. Even blog "Comments" sections allow for immediate feedback just like in old Hyde Park, where heckling and sledging (a British cricket term roughly equivalent to American trash-talking) usually win out over agreement and applause.
In our digitally connected world, does the image of a soapbox in the public square still resonate culturally? More likely, I think, the soapbox-turned-Internet blog follows the example of 24-hour cable news. The dominant model for public intellectual life, then, is that of full-time punditry, with celebrity anchors refusing to surrender the soapbox for even a minute. The show must go on, in what some call "newstainment"’every night and every morning the lure of the spotlight and the need to say something has birthed a professional class of around-the-clock commentators and bloggers.
Accordingly, consumer-driven news has furnished evangelicalism with a model for public discussion wherein the pastor-theologian imagines he has been granted permanent status as an opinion shaper and public intellectual. Like 24-hour news, the commentator-blogger always has an opinion to share, despite the particular news of the day or the question of relevant knowledge. It used to be that Hyde Park speakers would outstay their welcome and then be dragged from their soapbox by an angry crowd. Not so in corporation-owned news, where controversy sells and is actually desired. As the consultants forewarn, unless there's a steady stream of content, no matter how amateur or trivial, shows and blogs simply won't gain followers’and, of course, having "followers" is the unquestioned goal. Even in evangelicalism, it's always the same "celebrity" bloggers who are ready to opine, never mind the issues at stake. Unfortunately, in our Christian circles today the blogs are where all the action occurs’which is not necessarily a sign of health. Clearly a shift has taken place from the public square soapbox to the 24-hour cable news model in terms of evangelical dynamics.
In the past twenty-five years there have been several important debates about what constitutes the best model for a "public intellectual." In a controversial book, Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline (Harvard University Press, 2003), law professor Richard Posner complained of a very real problem in American culture’and consequently, I would add, in American evangelicalism as well: namely, that public intellectuals frequently speak to issues for which they have no particular aptitude, and do so in ephemeral arenas where there is no accountability.
But there is another way to conceive of public intellectual life, one that borrows from Posner as well as Ronald F. Thiemann, former professor of theology at Harvard Divinity School. This model is less beholden to cable news and more akin to Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park. Thiemann and others argue that a public intellectual is a temporary role or space, rather than a permanent status. It is more literally a soapbox in the public square, never tied to specific individuals or organizations, and rarely occupied for any significant length of time. Translated into evangelical leadership, a pastor might step into this public role at a crucial moment when in possession of learned expertise or unique personal experience that is both relevant and useful, and then step down from the soapbox so that real discussion and debate can ensue.
Upon reflection, I want to praise the pastors and theologians who are patiently (and quietly) faithful in their callings. We should encourage this practice more than the self-promoting celebrity pastor-pundits. It's time to discourage pastors from moonlighting as professional commentators on evangelicalism, even if in the name of extending the sphere of their "ministry" beyond their local church. What's the use of gaining Internet followers from thousands of miles away if your local community of faith has to suffer from a distracted shepherd? Perhaps the occasion will arise for some pastors to mount the soapbox and have their say in the public square; but in the meantime here's a suggestion worthy of the Geek Squad column: What if pastors took down their blogs and returned to the weekly church newsletter in hardcopy? Here, the practical limitations (and expense) of printing and postage could offer some accountability and focus the pastor's and congregation's attention on the ministry of the church and real news within the local body of Christ. The benefit of Web communication is a cultural assumption; so also is the cable-news model of public life. Maybe it's better to return to old technology, such as a church newsletter, until we can acquire more responsible habits in the application of new technology.
