How do Christians define LIBERAL?

[coolbluehair]

How do Christians define LIBERAL?

[Corvus]

Political liberal - One who believes less government is best
Example: Libertarian party, Anarchism

Social liberal - One who champions the cause of the underprivileged (often through socialistic means)
Example: Democrats

Just out of curiosity, otseng, I thought you were a libertarian opposed to the redistribution of wealth? "Championing the cause of the underprivileged", especially through socialistic means, is usually considered by them an unnecessary inflation of government. I think I'm probably just misunderstanding something about what you have written.

A christian with morals that flex.

Not meaning to offend anyone... but when liberals support two gay men...

Phew, I'm glad I only support two gay women!

...and say it is okay to kill an unborn child, I have a hard time thinking thats very christian.

But surely allowing others the free will to choose immoral deeds, as God would have us do, is not the same as being immoral oneself?

I don't think it's quite correct to categorise a person's political views on the basis of where they stand on morality issues alone. If tomorrow the American Democratic Party were to take a stand against abortion and homosexual rights, they would still be classed as liberals.

[dangerdan]

I don’t mean to detract from the debate, but a funny side note is the fact that “liberal” , when describing Australian politics, has quite different connotations than when anyone else uses the term. This is because Australia’s “Liberal” party is actually…well…conservative!? So when we say “liberal”, often Australians don’t associate it with the system of thought championed by the likes of John Locke and Bertrand Russell and what not.

I get the feeling Corvus might have picked up on the difference though…

[otseng]

Social liberal - One who champions the cause of the underprivileged (often through socialistic means)
Example: Democrats

Just out of curiosity, otseng, I thought you were a libertarian opposed to the redistribution of wealth?

Yeah, that's why I put it in parenthesis. I believe in supporting the underprivileged, but not in using socialism to achieve it. It's another example of how a label is not easy to fix on people.

[BALLS2WALL]

thats funny corvus because a conservative in most liberal media is portrayed as a bigot.

and when they take a stand on those things i'll admit i was wrong but it's never going to happen.

[Corvus]

thats funny corvus because a conservative in most liberal media is portrayed as a bigot.

and when they take a stand on those things i'll admit i was wrong but it's never going to happen.

Sorry, BALLS2WALL, I'm unsure of what you mean. What's funny?

I don't understand what you mean by the second sentence, but I am guessing you mean to say you were wrong that "a liberal is a Christian with morals that flex", but you would never be one yourself - correct me if I am wrong.

[BALLS2WALL]

I don't think it's quite correct to categorise a person's political views on the basis of where they stand on morality issues alone. If tomorrow the American Democratic Party were to take a stand against abortion and homosexual rights, they would still be classed as liberals.

my last comment was aimed at that

[Dilettante]

Words are funny things. In my neck of the woods (continental Europe) a liberal is usually one who wants less state control, and a conservative is usually one who wants more.

In addition to this, homosexuals have no rights in Cuba. Does that make Castro a conservative?

[MagusYanam]

I'm what would now be considered a liberal Christian, and I grant you that it isn't easy to define 'liberal' in a Christian perspective. It used to mean, in the days of William E. Channing, that if you were a liberal Christian you were opposed to the doctrine of total depravity and were not sure what to make of the doctrine of the Trinity. Some liberal Christians were anti-slavery or abolitionist (such as Channing and Theodore Parker).

Then you got Bushnell, the Social Gospel, liberation theology and latitudinarian movements of the Victorian Era and the definition got somewhat broader. Then to be a 'liberal Christian' meant to be an Athanasian with a sense of moral obligation to help others and reform the society at large.

Nowadays, I'm not quite sure. I'm still ambivalent on the issues of abortion and gay marriage, but for pragmatic reasons rather than religious ones.

In terms of morality, I think liberal Christianity has the upper hand (otherwise, I wouldn't be one). The churches I've attended would not declare you anathema and kick you out if you don't believe in the doctrine of total depravity or have a sketchy notion of the virgin birth or disavow entirely the doctrines of penal-satisfactionism and substitutionary atonement. Why? Because they recognise that individual conscience and reason have infinitely more value than unthinking submission to authority.

Also, there is something to be said for the Social Gospel, latitudinarianism and even pacifism. Following Jesus in caring for the needy, seeking to bring people together and opposing violence as a solution to any problem (personal or societal) are all good moral aims, and (in my opinion) more weighty than trivialising over whether or not a minority of society should be allowed to marry or when a baby's life begins. It's often seemed to me that when it comes to issues of morality, conservative Christianity is penny-wise and pound-foolish.

[Corvus]

Yeah, that's why I put it in parenthesis. I believe in supporting the underprivileged, but not in using socialism to achieve it. It's another example of how a label is not easy to fix on people.

When the topic got buried I didn't get a chance to ask about this. I am interesting in knowing what methods you propose.

Words are funny things. In my neck of the woods (continental Europe) a liberal is usually one who wants less state control, and a conservative is usually one who wants more.

That's quite interesting, but appears to fit the traditional description of a liberal. The Victorian meaning of the word liberal was similar to the more modern word "libertarian" - one opposed to government control.

I would assume that the continental European definition of a conservative probably doesn't include the sort of state control American liberals wish to institute? I'm guessing the American sort would probably be called socialists.

[Dilettante]

otseng wrote:

I am a political liberal. That is, I believe in freedom. "Philosophy or movement that has as its aim the development of individual freedom." Infoplease

I am a moral conservative. I believe morality is important for a stable society. This includes, but is not limited to, standing up against abortion and against fetal research.

I am a social liberal. Though the term is nebulous, I define it as standing up for the rights of the underdogs and to help those who cannot help themselves.

I am a fiscal conservative. I believe in a real balanced budget and sticking to it.

I think what this demonstrates is that it is difficult to pigeonhole anyone to any particular label. So, I do not believe there is any pattern to how one is classified as a liberal in any context.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I see real contradictions in your philosophy. How are you going to help the underprivileged while sticking to a tightly balanced budget? Looks like you are all for individual freedom in some areas and not in others. This could be contradictory, in principle.