<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What if?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/01/07/what-if/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/01/07/what-if/</link>
	<description>Secularism, religion, and the public sphere</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris Nealon</title>
		<link>http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/01/07/what-if/#comment-586</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Nealon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:17:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/01/07/what-if/#comment-586</guid>
		<description>Simon (if I may) -- a fascinating post, from which I learned a lot. I'd enjoy hearing more about "Christ of the Barricades" in particular. Meanwhile I hope you won't mind my quibbling with your remark that "Christian institutional practice" ... "constitutes the real, true Christianity" from "a hard secular point of view." I think the idea of a "real, true Christianity" ends up negating your own remark that we need to keep the histories and possibilities of progressive Christian critique in mind when we tell the story of critique's relation to Christianity. The dominant isn't the true, unless you're a really hard-line empiricist. 

I guess it's not just a quibble -- on my demurral from the idea of a "real, true Chrisitanity" hangs my hope that we can think about dissent within, as well as traditions without, Christianity as part of the story of "the secular," always already tending too much toward generalities -- a hope I found refreshed by the particulars you introduced into the conversation ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Simon (if I may) &#8212; a fascinating post, from which I learned a lot. I&#8217;d enjoy hearing more about &#8220;Christ of the Barricades&#8221; in particular. Meanwhile I hope you won&#8217;t mind my quibbling with your remark that &#8220;Christian institutional practice&#8221; &#8230; &#8220;constitutes the real, true Christianity&#8221; from &#8220;a hard secular point of view.&#8221; I think the idea of a &#8220;real, true Christianity&#8221; ends up negating your own remark that we need to keep the histories and possibilities of progressive Christian critique in mind when we tell the story of critique&#8217;s relation to Christianity. The dominant isn&#8217;t the true, unless you&#8217;re a really hard-line empiricist. </p>
<p>I guess it&#8217;s not just a quibble &#8212; on my demurral from the idea of a &#8220;real, true Chrisitanity&#8221; hangs my hope that we can think about dissent within, as well as traditions without, Christianity as part of the story of &#8220;the secular,&#8221; always already tending too much toward generalities &#8212; a hope I found refreshed by the particulars you introduced into the conversation &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
