What this blog (and the world) needs is more uniform policies -- policies governing all manner of things.
The first policy I would like to adopt (doubtless in order shortly to abandon it) concerns the best terminology governing the divide between the various parties of our current theological dissensions. I have in mind something like this:
A person who believes the consecration of Gene Robinson was a good thing is X.
A person who believes the consecration of Gene Robinson was a bad thing is Y.
Now, I know that this gets into the debate about universals (cf. William of Ockham for the right answer -- Ahem, Johnn Awesomo) and the categories (cf. Aristotle for naming the problem) and what not. I am also aware that it involves, by definition, generalizing. Nevertheless, I believe that generalizing helps us get on in the world (cf. the various aformentioned debates). We just function better in life if we can divide stuff up into genera.
So, some options are:
Conservative / Liberal
Traditionalist / Progressive
Theological Republican / Theological Democrat
Reasserter / Reappraiser (a la Fr. Harmon's terms of choice)
Griswoldian / Akinolite
It is now time for you, Beloved, to post a comment on what you think might be best. Yes, Beloved, your Blogmaster needs you. I wouldn't call this a "vote", as in the end I will just decide how to proceed. But I am interested in hearing what you think.
Personally, I like the subtlety and nuance manifested in a question once asked me by a monk at Mount Athos: "Are you Orthodox or are you heretic?" I showed him, though. I out-subtled him with a short excursus on the via media. For the duration of my stay they made me sit in the exonarthex of the church during the offices.