I don’t reject any implication at all. I just asked for a definitional clarification. Koinonia has a current meaning, as does community, a commonality of blogrolls doesn’t quite make it to the traditional meaning of either. I’ve no problem with assigning a new meaning to the word – I would just like to see a clear definition of that meaning.

For example, Amba, cited above, is the older sister of a girl with whom I went to elementary and high school.

I’d love to give you some but I don’t believe that they exist. When utilizing an existing word that has more than one meaning it would be appropriate to distinguish which meaning is being subsumed. If I’m not mistaken (and I may well be) the “fellowship” aspect of koinonia could have originally involved describing all those enjoying the the favors of the prostitutes in a Corinthian temple. Later it became a term used for those sharing common credal affirmations. There is no small difference between the two and the addition of a modern variant might be thought to require some explanation as to which original definition held pride of place among those choosing to use it.

I think it is a good thing to unearth the term and use it having appropriately exegeted the current usage but if you are going to eisegete a new usage then it is fair to ask for the new definition. “Pod” (to me) indicates a genetic linkage that unintentionally subverts the desired meaning. Koinonia (again, to me) commonly refers to a group holding similiar beliefs.

It doesn’t matter much if the reference is to an Apollonian temple or to a group of believers but to imply a community without boundaries is a disservice to logic. A simple koinonia = “those connected by ?” would suffice. If the query is “blogroll” then the limiting aspect is absolutely clear. I’m pretty sure that of what is being defined but the exclusionary factor explicit in the definition is rather extraordinary if the aim is to expand the community involved.

As to the pointer piece, I was just trying to make it easier to find some of the discussion; didn’t mean to do anything else.

As to praxis, I have been thinking about that, and will probably comment in the next few days on how koinonia can work to advance discussion of a particular topic, and how one can find/identify them in the first place.

Pedantic nit – the term has existed for quite some time and Roger’s learning of it from Gerard’s post is stated correctly.

Actual issue – I followed Roger’s link to Gerard and then Gerard’s links to the other blogs/pieces that you list. Do you think it necessary to link to all antecedent and corollary links within what amounts to a pointer piece? You guys are providing an excellent example of how a koinonia can develop and what it may become and I’m very curious about how you all see the development of praxis coming to be within the koinonia.

My compliments on all of your efforts to date. Reading about this sure beats the hell out of the Plame game.

In any case, in addition to the above, there are a couple of other posts at my blog, American Digest, The Glittering Eye, and Eternity Road, all from the last few days, that discuss the subject in more detail. Roger, I’m looking forward to your thoughts.

For the record, your blog is among the few that I’ve bookmarked because I admire your ability to write brilliantly and honestly. You somehow manage to make your points in a most gentle and understated way.

Is that what’s called talent? (ed.note) Yes, I believe it is.

It will definitely take a bit of thinking to digest this piece. Along with blogrolls there is the non-blogging reader or commenters Favorites list. Gerard suggests that the blogroll becomes invisible to the blogger over time but I rework my Favorites about every two weeks. The top five rarely change but the top ten to twenty have additions and deletions regularly. Are Favorites a totally individual factor or an element of commonality?

How is an unbounded community best described? I’m not sure that koinonia retains sufficient meaning when used in this context because of boundary issues but it is certainly worthy of consideration. I wonder what the communal praxis will look like?

The blogosphere evolves constantly. It is not an artifact, it is a moving, changing process. Look at your numbers, say, on Technorati. From one day to the next the # of links may not change, but your rating can go up or down a thousand points. Meaningless in the short term, or maybe just plain meaningless. It depends on what we’re taking up space on the ether net *for.*

The best way to understand (at least for me) is to read Teilhard de Chardin. He saw it coming; he even called it a web.

After you’ve digested koinonia, take a bite of metanoia, which is what you (and many of us) did after 9/11.

Interesting, how a fully grown entity can aggregate and display the same patterns observed under microscopes, something about a hammer, nails, chikens and eggs.

Am I exited?

All I know is Roger is the one!

A blog take over? bites for thougt.