Standpoint Conference launched for "Disaffected Fundamentalists"

You can easily reach the website at www.standpointconference.com

Just so everyone knows, the word “disaffected” is probably more who we’re trying to address rather than who we (the conference organizers) are.

Main Entry: dis·af·fect·ed Function: adjective Date: 1632 : discontented and resentful especially against authority : rebellious

I’ve asked Aaron to adjust the heading.

Our concern is that nobody is really creating a place where these “disaffected” ones can gather and talk about their concerns without undue criticism or suppression. The concerns are real (see the lead article on the www.standpointconference.com website for a sampling), but are too often discounted. And yes, while the concerns are not characteristic of all Fundamentalists, they’re still very real to those who grew up in that part of Fundamentalism, thinking that’s what Fundamentalism was throughout.

Suggest the Standpoint Conference avoid the use of the term “disaffected” because the meaning is “resentful and rebellious, especially against authority” (from my American Heritage desk dictionary).

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disaffected] MW Online

I don’t think the Standpoint organizers are “resentful and rebellious”. If not best not to label oneself as such.

[Mike Durning]

Our concern is that nobody is really creating a place where these “disaffected” ones can gather and talk about their concerns without undue criticism or suppression.

I had thought SI was that place. I thought that was WHY SI was started—or at least one of the reasons.

[Becky Petersen]

[Mike Durning]

Our concern is that nobody is really creating a place where these “disaffected” ones can gather and talk about their concerns without undue criticism or suppression.

I had thought SI was that place. I thought that was WHY SI was started—or at least one of the reasons.

SI has been that place, but Standpoint has one focus, whereas SI has many. Also, we intend to use the discussion at Standpoint to hone the focus of our conference a little more precisely.

[Jim Peet] Suggest the Standpoint Conference avoid the use of the term “disaffected” because the meaning is “resentful and rebellious, especially against authority” (from my American Heritage desk dictionary).

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disaffected] MW Online

I don’t think the Standpoint organizers are “resentful and rebellious”. If not best not to label oneself as such.

Jim, the disaffected term was applied to the Young Fundamentalist movement in general, rather than the conference organizers in particular.
However, it IS too strong a word for most YF’s. So it has been replaced with the word “disillusioned.”

Whether I’m a disillusioned fundy or a disaffected one, I am VERY excited to hear about this conference. I think it could be a very, very valuable time for younger fundies to kind of regroup and refocus on what the important things are and should be. I’ve been praying for a conference like this off and on now for a couple years and I’m glad to see it come to pass.

I’m sure I’ve missed the criteria somewhere, but how does one qualify to fit in the category of “young(er) fundies”? With the conference emphasis on concerns of “young fundies,” is there a subtle (or not so subtle) message that “old guys” (define??) should stay away?

[BryanBice] I’m sure I’ve missed the criteria somewhere, but how does one qualify to fit in the category of “young(er) fundies”? With the conference emphasis on concerns of “young fundies,” is there a subtle (or not so subtle) message that “old guys” (define??) should stay away?

Bryan, I first heard the term “Young Fundamentalists” in the early 80’s when I was young. As one of the conference organizers, age 47 (though I am the oldest on the team), I think you’d be welcome to the discussion if you share that set of concerns.

[Mike Durning]

[BryanBice] I’m sure I’ve missed the criteria somewhere, but how does one qualify to fit in the category of “young(er) fundies”? With the conference emphasis on concerns of “young fundies,” is there a subtle (or not so subtle) message that “old guys” (define??) should stay away?

Bryan, I first heard the term “Young Fundamentalists” in the early 80’s when I was young. As one of the conference organizers, age 47 (though I am the oldest on the team), I think you’d be welcome to the discussion if you share that set of concerns.

After I posted the earlier comments, I found the article by Christian Markle where, in a footnote, he explains that “young fund.” is more of a mindset than an age-determined category. In this whole discussion, though, I (as a 50+ guy) often feel lost in the middle. The young guys would likely view me with at least some suspicion…the old guys make their own assumptions. Likely, neither have me pegged quite accurately. Ahhh…the joys of midlife! Maybe I’m a “tweeny fundy”??

[BryanBice] After I posted the earlier comments, I found the article by Christian Markle where, in a footnote, he explains that “young fund.” is more of a mindset than an age-determined category. In this whole discussion, though, I (as a 50+ guy) often feel lost in the middle. The young guys would likely view me with at least some suspicion…the old guys make their own assumptions. Likely, neither have me pegged quite accurately. Ahhh…the joys of midlife! Maybe I’m a “tweeny fundy”??

Bryan,

Christian just called and told me that he was glad that he left the footnote in for exactly this reason. In fact, he mentioned that when he asked his father, Pastor Jim Markle, to comment on his article, that his dad indicated that he’d been dealing with those problems in Fundamentalism for his whole ministry.

It’s not just a problem of the young, nor is it recent. I believe that the reason for the powerful arising of the YF “rebellion” now is that the internet age has finally made it possible for the “disaffected” to connect, whereas the entire movement was defined and promoted by a few prominent leaders in years gone by. It’s much harder to speak out when you think you’re the only one who sees a problem.

Mike Durning

[Mike Durning] It’s not just a problem of the young, nor is it recent. I believe that the reason for the powerful arising of the YF “rebellion” now is that the internet age has finally made it possible for the “disaffected” to connect, whereas the entire movement was defined and promoted by a few prominent leaders in years gone by. It’s much harder to speak out when you think you’re the only one who sees a problem.

Mike’s right - we talked about this at length in the dorms when I was in school, but then everyone graduated and went their separate ways. When I was at Shepherd’s, I talked with a couple guys from this website about the issue as well, and we would have never even brought it up if it hadn’t been for the ‘glue’ of the internet keeping the links and emails active.

As for age - I wouldn’t worry about that. Like Mike said, it’s more about people who are dissatisfied with the current state of affairs than it is a chronological cutoff. Besides, I’ve been a young fundamentalist now for something like six years, which means [I suppose] that I’m a kid fundamentalist, and not a young one.