According to the following story what mortal sin consists of for  the
millennial generation is opposition to other values (or others'  values);
virtue consists in being for what you cherish and affirm.
 
This viewpoint, of course, is pure multi-culturalism. But it can also  be
pure "Quaker" pietism, unrelated to political ideology of any kind.
 
I know the phenomenon best  -at least recently-  from "issues" I  have had
with the Eugene religious establishment in the persons of a local  Leftist 
pastor
who has been a prominent community leader for the past twenty years or  so,
with the local comparative religion teacher in the public school system,  
and 
with the Human Rights Commission.
 
Briefly the position these worthies take is that the ONLY way to  discuss
religious differences is to seek conciliation , to focus on  commonalities,
to affirm one's beliefs and listen respectfully to others and never  argue
with anyone. That is, the "golden rule" is: "Accentuate  the positive."
The corollary is:  No "thou shalt nots" are  allowed.
 
 
It is easy enough to understand the motivation for this viewpoint.
If peace and harmony is the goal, then any kind of acrimony is not a good  
idea.
The same principle applies if the goal is persuading people to "buy  into"
a broad-based program. Or buy, literally, a product or set of  services
You want valued "customers," not people at each other's throats.
 
However,  this kind of thinking has decided limitations and  explains
why the ecumenical movement got so far and no further, and even has
declined in some areas. There are limits to the usefulness of  kumbaya.
And in some spheres the concept is prima facie  dysfunctional.
 
People have honest differences about many things. Each and every  religion
on Earth, for example, not only defines itself in terms of what it is  for
but also in terms of what it opposes. Moreover, the scriptures of
just about all faiths include overt criticisms of other religions, which 
clearly is the case for the Bible, but this is also true for various  
Buddhist
scriptures, Mormon scriptures, Hindu scriptures, and so forth.
 
There are important reasons for explicit opposition, "thou shalt  nots,"
and to overlook these reasons is not a good idea.
 
To put it simply, not my original observation, regulations are the result  
of
market failures.  This goes too far, sometimes regulations are the  result 
of
social engineering theories, but basically the axiom is true. We need
a "thou shalt not" for each failure in any "anything goes" social  regime.
And it turns out that, as sinful beings, as imperfect human beings, we all 
make a lot of mistakes and some of them are horrendous. "Thou shalt   not" 
makes us well aware of our limitations, and we all need this  awareness.
 
Sure, we can debate the merits of particular "shalt nots," but the point is 
that we cannot live without a good number of them, for if they don't  exist
in our consciences we become nihilists  -or even in a best case  scenario,
good people who empower the nihilism of others.
 
Are all criticisms of religion for the good?  I don't think so. But  some 
surely are
and for each such valid criticism we are far better off for the  awareness
it gives us.
 
This is basic Radical Centrism: Generally speaking we need  a balance
of positive and negative, pro and con, advocacy and opposition.
Reductionism, reducing morality to one principle, or politics to
one principle, or philosophy to one principle, is the antithesis
of Radical Centrism.
 
 
 
 
Billy
 
 
----------------------------------
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
W Post
 
The new religious fundamentalists? Millennial  Christians.
 
By Jefferson Bethke, Published: August 8, 2013 


 
There’s been a lot of craze about Millennials leaving the church the past  
couple weeks. 
All the articles going around centered around the church being the problem  
(or the fact that it isn’t). But, and I know I might get Internet stones 
thrown  at me (boulders for that matter) for saying this, what if we 
Millennials were  just as much to blame? 
In this conversation about young people’s faith lives, I think that we put  
all the blame on the church. Sure, the church has, in the past, become 
servants  of GOP, to ‘family values’, to sin gerrymandering, rather than being 
followers  of Jesus. 
But, what I haven’t heard many talk about is the fact that my generation 
can  actually be quite prideful. Quite self-centered. Quite addicted to what’s 
 newest, quickest, fastest and easiest. And because of those things, if we 
are  not careful, we will turn into exactly what we are critiquing. 
(We also have to notice, by the way, that we aren’t the first to critique 
our  mom’s generation. Every generation of late thought their mom’s church 
was lame.  That’s youth; that’s not Millennial.) 
My peers and I have too quickly caricatured “fundamentalists,” without  
realizing we are eerily close to becoming what we say we hate. We can think  
fundamentalists only wear suits and play boring Christian music, or we can  
address fundamentalism for what it is—an issue of the heart. An easy way to  
define fundamentalism is adding rules to the Bible, or elevating things 
beyond  how Scripture elevates them. It’s an attitude of pride. It gets in 
shouting  matches (or tweeting matches) with anyone who disagrees. And in 
American  Christian culture, I still see a lot of that.
 
There is a weird subsection of young Christians today who are almost 
reverse  fundamentalists, but they are still fundamentalists. They look at the 
older  generation who say in good conscience Christians shouldn’t drink beer, 
and they  respond, “We are definitely drinking beer. Freedom in Christ!” Or 
they see those  Christians who say you have to dress up for church service, 
and they say, “We  are only going to wear skinny jeans and v-neck T-shirts 
in church.” They are  better defined by what they are against than by what 
they are for. They are  doing the exact same thing as what they are defining 
themselves against. They  are elevating behavior, clothing, and other 
secondary issues as requirements to  gain access to heaven. It’s a sickness in 
all 
of us to put our righteousness and  dependence in absolutely anything except 
Jesus, and if we think we aren’t doing  that, it usually means it’s even 
worse. 
The fundamentalists of our parents’s generation are still around, but they  
are not nearly as prevalent today. Fundamentalists don’t always wear suits. 
 Sometimes they wear skinny jeans. Sometimes they have a Macbook pro, a 
vanilla  latte (soy of course), and wear that beanie on their head that barely 
looks like  it’s hanging on. Sometimes they say you have to be able to drink 
beer to be a  real Christian. Sometimes they only allow dirty grunge rock 
in their church  service and make flannels mandatory to play in the worship 
band. 
Here’s a quick note though: if you care more about flaunting your Christian 
 freedom than promoting Christian unity, you’re probably not free. You are  
actually a slave to your so-called freedom. 
True freedom is being able to give up all your rights for another out of  
love—and that’s what the church is supposed to be. A peculiar people who 
serve  one another, give up possessions for each other, who love each other, 
and who  depend whole-heartedly on each other. And if we are honest, my 
generation is not  just repelled to some of those concepts, but we are actually 
terrified. 
To be frank, we need to get over ourselves. Now hear me say this loud and  
clear—if there’s hurt, if there’s shame, and there’s bruises from the 
church on  you—I’m not talking to you. We owe you an apology. Jesus isn’t like 
that. You  didn’t deserve that. You are more than what happened to you. 
But to those who would rather go to church behind a computer screen, rather 
 than flesh and blood, person on person, we need to realize we are heading  
towards destruction. The beauty of the church is in the vulnerability of 
its  people. And with our social media culture, where we are more cropped and 
edited  than ever before, we have to try even harder to be intentional about 
this. If we  aren’t, we might just become the thing we hate. Defining 
yourselves by what  you’re against is like running in a circle. At first you 
think you’re running  away but sooner or later you’ll be right back where the 
problem was in the first  place.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to