All social reality is viewed through the lens of a conflict between oppressors and oppressed, victims and victimizers. The Judeo-Christian understanding of sin and morality is transformed into social categories so that we no longer speak simply of justice or racism but target institutional racism and social justice (a redundancy at best; at worst a mischievous Orwellian abuse of language used to rationalize unjust actions in the name of justice or compassion as in the case of affirmative action). Our contemporary society is flush with attitudes that flow from this anti-institutional animus. This attitude is reflected in the following expressions: I love God (Jesus), but I want to have nothing to do with organized religion (the church); Why should we get married, we love each other, isnt that the important thing and not some ceremony or piece of paper (Thats all that public vows mean?); What can possibly be wrong with two men or two women marrying each other if they truly love each other? Common practices such as easy divorce, cohabitation before marriage, social disrespect for parents, teachers, policeman and various offices such as minister, judge, senator and the President (this includes those who show disrespect for their own office by their conduct as well as those who act disrespectfully toward persons in office); disrespect for place (backward baseball caps in church; cell phone conversations during funerals; public conversation about intimate, personal matters that usedto be private [Oprah, et. al.]); all these are indicators that the individual personand his or her feelings, wants, needs, are king and that all social reality must accommodate that royal prerogative.
John Bolt, "Catena sive Umbilicus: A Christian View of Social Institutions," Journal of Markets and Morality 4, no. 2 (Fall 2001): 316-322