It’s not the size of the Peter Rollins in LA

you should host a conversation with him and adam kotsko

@natecook7 agreed! Thanks for the suggestion!

@CarrieWNettles glad u liked it!

Peter Rollins could read a shopping list and it would sound interesting. I have to admit that I was left wondering what exactly his point was when it came to a practical application of his ideas in the real world, in communities that are not intentional or that don't sign on to postmodernism. How to translate this perspective to people who live their Christian lives without the intellectual comfort of philosophy which might be interpreted as self-certainity in their faith, perhaps even self-righteousness. I don't know that much about his books, but with respect to being meek and humble in your life, within the context of say, living as a Catholic, where does he stand?  The reason I ask this is because I recently started attending a Catholic mass in a church close to my work and have become somewhat friendly the people there. These people don't philosphize or deconstruct anything. They live their lives with their parish as the center of their lives. They live nondescript, perhaps mundane lives and aren't "cool."  How to translate what postmodern Christianity to them? Is there a need to? From what I see they seem to be live faithful lives and aren't really concerned with heavy existential questions.  Maybe in their time alone, in their secret place, they have doubts, fears, trials, etc. and my bet, given from what I see and hear from them, they have a deep, personal relationship with God as they understand God in their images, symbols, and icons.  Is there a need to translate postmodern Christian thought, then for some greater good?  Anyone can point out what's wrong with conservatives, liberals, fundamentalists, progressives, etc. What I have learned, from being exposed to a spectrum of Christian thought and Christian lives, everyone is essentially saying the same thing, but they all differ in how they say it or how they express it.  So, what good, then, is a sweeping critique of "the other"? What is the point, other than to sell books or get paid on the lecture circuit? What is the logical outcome?