Liberals Can’t Be Christians? I did not know that?

Christian Bible, rosary, and crucifix.
Christian Bible, rosary, and crucifix. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

But let’s define the terms first. The term “liberal” really refers to a person whose primary interpretive authority of reality is the Self…

By contrast, the term “conservative” refers to someone who seeks to “conserve” an external authority (a religious book, a religious body, a tradition within culture)….

The question then becomes, Can both of these maintain their essential identities and accept genuine Christianity at the same time? In other words, can one simply adopt Christianity within either grid? My answer is, No, and here’s why.

via Theological Sushi: Why Liberals Can’t Be Christians.

Oh? I wasn’t aware that Christ had excluded anyone from being a Christian. It is nice, however, that the author of the above ‘post’ has provided us with terminology, but the terminology is too well laden with the overtones he wishes to ignore. He essentially given those ignorant souls who boil everything down to democrat v. conservative some ammunition.

I don’t want to really discuss his straw men, and there is enough to build a shoddy house, but I do want to discuss the idea of the denial of the Self. This is really an ascetic method which is more liberal than the author would suggest. After all, each person who practices self-denial must, subjectively, invest in an outside force of their own choosing a measure of authority. What the author is actually suggesting is his version of Christians have divested themselves of authority and instead invested it in what they have chosen. (Isn’t this what Islam does as well? And secular humanism?) I’ll break it down further. Protestants have made themselves the authority of what the Canon is, what the Creeds should be, how theology should be interpreted, and for some, who can be and cannot be a Christian. Yes, they have invested into a book a certain amount of authority, but they control this investment and the returns (interpretation and theology).

This history of theirs, book, and the such, have given them their own interpretations. These are the interpretations which they have chosen. They have chosen the Christ which they feel best suits their theological interpretations. So then, it is possible that our new friend is still rather a liberal. I would also wager that he is a Christian as well. I hope that he will allow Christ to separate and refrain from doing such heavenly work.

Enhanced by Zemanta

You Might Also Like

2 Replies to “Liberals Can’t Be Christians? I did not know that?”

  1. I think it would be really hard to address this without talking about the straw men.

    I mean, the whole thing is premised on redefining words. Wow. But, yeah. This is just more stupid “let’s rationalize the hatred of people we don’t agree with” stuff.

  2. The irony of BC Hodges post is that it relies on defining these terms not as they are commonly used nor recognizably as how individuals apply them to themselves. Which means his whole argument is self-centered. Meaning centered on BC Hodges individual interpretive authority.

    Also seems that he doesn’t really understand liberalism (which he described as something most would recognize as Randian libertarianism), conservatism or Christ’s vision for how we ought to live. While I agree that being Christian includes a component of self-denial, it does not end at self denial (which Hodges sees as its essence), Christ’s ultimate Word is we are to love God and to love neighbor. And we are to love neighbor as we love ourselves.

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.