[XianAnarchist]

Unfortunately, I must confess that I need to read this thread more thoroughly before posting something of significance. Time constraints at the moment make this difficult.

Yet, I wanted to comment briefly on something mentioned earlier regarding structure. Structure is important. When organizational structures are aligned with the "family romance" (a vision of how families and societies should be structured in order to be authoritative) of a culture (and here I'm most concerned with what I would call the "Postmodern Family Romance"), then it is possible for the organization to be culturally meaningful. As the organization's structure becomes more and more disconnected with the dominant family romance, it naturally becomes more and more meaningless as it cannot relate or be related to dominant cultural narratives.

Flowing from that understanding, I want to offer this TED video for thought.
TED: Clay Shirky on Institutions vs. Collaboration

Sorry for the run-n-gun, but I've gotta get back to work. Will try to pop in another time...hopefully soon

[minsocal]

As a Progressive Christian I have come to understand that the progressive 'experiment' is certainly not new. I believe it began before the time of Jesus but it was Jesus who gave the perspective a giant 'kickstart'. It was, as Whitehead put it, a light that was lit in Galalie and "flickered uncertainly down through the ages". My initial involvement with PC traces back to the late 1950's where, as an adolescent, I learned that PC and progressive politics has long been intertwined. The relationship of PC to political activism walks a fine line as the separation of church and state remains crucial to the preservation of religious freedom. However, as MLK correctly noted, injustice frequently becomes institutionalized in governement, where 'government' is taken to mean any governing (controlling) entity (including the Church itself).

Recently, I realized that I needed to take a step back from the philosophical perspective of PC and open up to the emotional experience of community and care. These days, it is a rare Sunday that I am not moved to the point of tears during worship at my church. It varies from week to week. One Sunday it was the Chancel Choir singing the 23rd Psalm, then it was a frank sermon about ending child abuse. Most importantly, as I look around the congregation during these moments ... I know that I am not alone.

[XianAnarchist]

Adi Gibb, on 04 October 2009 - 11:38 PM, said:

...there is a difference between the FAITH of Christianity, and the PHILOSOPHY of Christianity, which is adhering to Jesus as a great wisdom teacher and a template on which we should live. ...By becoming a philosophical school of Christianity, it doesn't have to go through the processes we believe it would have to if it set itself up as another 'church' or 'denomination' within the umbrella of the 'faith' of Christianity. It is this which perhaps the PC movement should be progressing to.

I'm not sure yet whether I agree with the idea of separating the faith and philosophy of Christianity. Yet, I can see Christianity as a philosophy first, and a faith second (quite an inversion). In other words, it is possible to uphold a Christian philosophy and be an atheist, but it is not possible to have a Christian faith and not uphold a Christian philosophy.

I really like the implications you have drawn out of this. It allows for two different "structures" to emerge. One could be the general "church" structure, with liturgical worship as its primary function. The other could be, well, something else, if anything. Effectively, it legitimizes the non-church-going Christian as a valid identity within Christianity (something that is generally rejected by the institution). No longer would the church have the right to say who's in and who's out, who's Christian and who isn't.

The more I think about this, the more I like it.