A moderate Christian is not someone who is moderate with respect to his or her Christianity, but rather is moderate with respect to liberalism and conservatism. The moderate believes that both liberal and conservative concerns have merit, but instead of always emphasizing one over the other, the moderate listens to both sides and then employs a balancing test to decide what to do on a certain issue in a specific situation. The moderate neither emphasizes one area of Christianity over another nor cites some passages from the Bible to the exclusion of other but rather looks at the totality of Scripture and spiritual guidance. Also, instead of mechanically applying a rule, a right, or a principle, the moderate uses his or her brain to consider the complexities of the dilemma. Although moderates employ similar methods in order to reach a conclusion, they may come up with different conclusions depending upon how they weigh the various factors which favor one side or the other. But the bottom line is that moderates believe that there is an overlap between conservative and liberal Christian philosophies and Christ Himself--not an identity.
My Definition Of Moderate
- Thread starter ChristianCritic
- Start date
LovebirdsFlying
My husband drew this cartoon of me.
Christian Forums Staff
Red Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
- Aug 13, 2007
- 28,763
- 4,236
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Thank you for that. I'm not going to base what I think, feel, and decide, on what the liberals or the conservatives say about it. I have some liberal values, and some conservative values. Whatever works for me, works, no matter who originated the idea, or who agrees or disagrees with it.
Upvote
0
Albion
Facilitator
The word moderate, as used on this forum means being temperate and respectful towards other POVs. It rejects the strident, self-righteous tone that sometimes has taken over other forums.
As such it has nothing to do with either liberalism or conservatism or, for that matter, with being equivocal or uncertain or "down the middle" with one's own religious beliefs.
As such it has nothing to do with either liberalism or conservatism or, for that matter, with being equivocal or uncertain or "down the middle" with one's own religious beliefs.
Upvote
0
Izdaari Eristikon
Well-Known Member
- Mar 12, 2007
- 6,174
- 448
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Episcopalian
- Marital Status
- Married
That would seem to describe me.
I also agree with what LBF and Albion said.
Also note: I'm not equivocal or uncertain about what I believe (except on certain issues that I haven't reached a definite conclusion on yet), but sometimes I come down on the conservative side, other times on the liberal side... and sometimes I think they're both silly.
Upvote
0
Qyöt27
AMV Editor At Large
- Apr 2, 2004
- 7,879
- 573
- 38
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
The primary impetus for me to describe myself as 'moderate' is part disillusionment, and part historical precedent.
I don't like the term 'conservative' because it's too loaded these days. Strictly speaking, Catholics & Orthodox are conservative, in that they preserve the formative church and resist the dramatic changes that have occurred in Protestant churches (I'd list Anglican as well, but there's too broad of a sample there; the ECUSA is not exactly a good representative, although Anglo-Catholic parishes would). But what most people these days think of when they hear the word 'conservative' is the politicized Religious Right, Protestant fundamentalists and other more or less reactionary groups. I would prefer not to be associated with those demographics at all.
Hence, I actually prefer the term 'traditionalist' to 'conservative'. Some may see traditionalist as being the same sort of hardlined stance I want to distance myself from, but I use it purely in the historically analytical sense, rather than in terms of me practicing my faith. And in the big picture here, those closer to historically traditional Christianity are much more 'moderate' than those most people label as conservative now. Like my political and social beliefs, though, there are some things I make concessions about concerning the difference between what may have been believed 1500-2000 years ago vs. today - this is because of the fact that there are issues we've been wrong about in the past, and being that rigid only makes one's faith brittle. It also works in reverse - some things that are assumed these days weren't true about faith then, or weren't as rigid then as some groups are about those issues now. The Renaissance period fundamentally changed the way we looked at everything, and some ideas became more legalistic afterward than they were before that happened, due to changes in society's sense of perception and need. Trying to read and interpret Scripture with those lenses in is a gross error, IMO.
Politically and socially-speaking, I'm much more left-libertarian, and this is primarily due to the immense disillusionment I have regarding conservativism in this country. It ties partially back into the connections with the Religious Right as well, in that overall I just see them as too short-sighted and trying to avoid being culpable as much as possible. That said, I'm not 'for' liberals just because I'm not with the conservatives. I remain critical of some of their choices too, but I'm simply willing to see how their ideas play out at the moment.
I prefer to call myself a Progressive rather than a liberal, as Progressivism (as a specific political theory, not a synonym for the left as it's often served as in the last 30-40 years, considering 'liberal' somewhat became a demonized term during that time, although it looks like that's changing now) is much much more closely aligned with the middle and populist thinking. If people don't want to accept that way of defining it, then 'Old Progressive' (Paleo-Progressive?) would be a better term. Think Bull Moose, albeit with modern concessions, not Greens.
I don't like the term 'conservative' because it's too loaded these days. Strictly speaking, Catholics & Orthodox are conservative, in that they preserve the formative church and resist the dramatic changes that have occurred in Protestant churches (I'd list Anglican as well, but there's too broad of a sample there; the ECUSA is not exactly a good representative, although Anglo-Catholic parishes would). But what most people these days think of when they hear the word 'conservative' is the politicized Religious Right, Protestant fundamentalists and other more or less reactionary groups. I would prefer not to be associated with those demographics at all.
Hence, I actually prefer the term 'traditionalist' to 'conservative'. Some may see traditionalist as being the same sort of hardlined stance I want to distance myself from, but I use it purely in the historically analytical sense, rather than in terms of me practicing my faith. And in the big picture here, those closer to historically traditional Christianity are much more 'moderate' than those most people label as conservative now. Like my political and social beliefs, though, there are some things I make concessions about concerning the difference between what may have been believed 1500-2000 years ago vs. today - this is because of the fact that there are issues we've been wrong about in the past, and being that rigid only makes one's faith brittle. It also works in reverse - some things that are assumed these days weren't true about faith then, or weren't as rigid then as some groups are about those issues now. The Renaissance period fundamentally changed the way we looked at everything, and some ideas became more legalistic afterward than they were before that happened, due to changes in society's sense of perception and need. Trying to read and interpret Scripture with those lenses in is a gross error, IMO.
Politically and socially-speaking, I'm much more left-libertarian, and this is primarily due to the immense disillusionment I have regarding conservativism in this country. It ties partially back into the connections with the Religious Right as well, in that overall I just see them as too short-sighted and trying to avoid being culpable as much as possible. That said, I'm not 'for' liberals just because I'm not with the conservatives. I remain critical of some of their choices too, but I'm simply willing to see how their ideas play out at the moment.
I prefer to call myself a Progressive rather than a liberal, as Progressivism (as a specific political theory, not a synonym for the left as it's often served as in the last 30-40 years, considering 'liberal' somewhat became a demonized term during that time, although it looks like that's changing now) is much much more closely aligned with the middle and populist thinking. If people don't want to accept that way of defining it, then 'Old Progressive' (Paleo-Progressive?) would be a better term. Think Bull Moose, albeit with modern concessions, not Greens.
Upvote
0
Albion
Facilitator
I agree that "Progressive," a term that once meant "Communist," sounds better than "Liberal"...and "Traditionalist" may have some advantages over "Conservative.
I can't agree, however, that merely because the "Progressives" AKA "Liberals" have worked hard to stigmatize Conservatives as nothing more than religious fanatics, theocrats, or worse, that the term "Conservative" has lost its meaning. There's never even been a clearcut definition of "Religious Right" anyway, whereas "Conservative" is a very well-defined term and signifies nothing at all extreme, whether or not most people care to use it properly.
But then again, none of this matters very much on this forum where the term "Moderate" is used in an completely non-political sense to mean only that we are pledged to treat each other calmly and respectfully.
I can't agree, however, that merely because the "Progressives" AKA "Liberals" have worked hard to stigmatize Conservatives as nothing more than religious fanatics, theocrats, or worse, that the term "Conservative" has lost its meaning. There's never even been a clearcut definition of "Religious Right" anyway, whereas "Conservative" is a very well-defined term and signifies nothing at all extreme, whether or not most people care to use it properly.
But then again, none of this matters very much on this forum where the term "Moderate" is used in an completely non-political sense to mean only that we are pledged to treat each other calmly and respectfully.
Upvote
0
LovebirdsFlying
My husband drew this cartoon of me.
Christian Forums Staff
Red Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
- Aug 13, 2007
- 28,763
- 4,236
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
So many get the impression that moderate means "lukewarm" or "on the fence." I appreciate seeing someone giving out reminders that it doesn't. Any more than conservative means "stingy" (as my father used the word) or that liberal means "immoral."
Upvote
0
Qyöt27
AMV Editor At Large
- Apr 2, 2004
- 7,879
- 573
- 38
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Teddy Roosevelt was a Communist?
As far as "Religious Right" goes, perhaps I should have specifically said the Moral Majority, considering that was an actual organization with defined goals, and it's at least in the same spirit that the nebulous "Religious Right" of today operates, even if the issues are more numerous now than they were back in the 80s.
My only reason for preferring 'traditionalist' is because it emphasizes the viewpoint better, I wasn't saying that 'conservative' has lost its meaning. I just won't contribute to confusing people when I know that kind of misinterpretation exists. I could just as easily label my political stance as 'populist' and still be generally correct, but I like to make a clearer point of trustbusting and similar views that pre-WWII Progressivism advocated.
But yeah, the general civility of this forum is the main issue compared to the others. The reason these political/social threads end up being created is because the respective Conservative and Liberal forums also focus on such issues, and those posters that don't tend to fully agree with either of the two generally want to congregate on their own as well, even if they frequent the others.
Upvote
0
Albion
Facilitator
Qyöt27;51554788 said:
That was an earlier use of the word. By the WW2 era, when the Communist party and its sympathizers had taken a beating in this country, for serveral different reasons, the term Progressive came to be adopted by a different cause. This use of the word continued throughout the Cold War era.
It was only because the word Liberal was relentlessly, and effectively, stuck on Democrats and the Democratic Party by the GOP during the past several decades that they sought to escape that stigmatization by referring to themselves as Progressives.
I guess I just can't agree with that assessment. But that's all right; good people can disagree. In addition, I'm mindful that "Religious Right" is overwhelmingly used as a put-down in our society, whereas Progressive or Conservative, for example, are happily used by many groups to identify themselves.
Upvote
0
Qyöt27
AMV Editor At Large
- Apr 2, 2004
- 7,879
- 573
- 38
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Yes, I know. I said something to this effect in my first post (although I said 30-40 years rather than the 60+ since the end of WWII, namely because I didn't think a lot of the flared tensions over the word 'Liberal' started to occur until the '60s or '70s). I also said 'Old Progressive' and made an allusion to the Bull Moose Party. 'Reformer' would be another term, but that one tends to be rather vague - a reformer of what? There's dozens of things in our current situation that could apply to.
There's just too many words/phrases that get contentious, I guess.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
That may have been the case and may still be at least in part, but I asked the moderators for clarification in my post "Moderators, please clarify what this forum is about" and the one moderator who responded said that "moderate" for purposes of this forum does relate to conservative versus liberal and that this forum is for those who don't fit perfectly into either category of Christianity.
So, moderate in tone, moderate in terms of listening to both sides, and moderate in terms of not always on one side or another.
Upvote
0
Albion
Facilitator
Well, that's a mistake and I'm sorry you were told this. Moderators change, and that's the only explanation I can guess at. The forum and its founding members discussed this point at great length when it was started up and I can assure you that the word was chosen to mean moderate in tone, not as a synonym for "centrist." At that time, but not so much anymore perhaps, the Conservative and the Liberal forums were said to be very harsh in tone, and we wanted to be able to discuss contentious issues with a moderate tone. There was no intent to say that you couldn't advance a Conservative or Liberal POV here, just so long as it was done respectfully.
Upvote
0
Izdaari Eristikon
Well-Known Member
- Mar 12, 2007
- 6,174
- 448
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Episcopalian
- Marital Status
- Married
Right. And in the tradition of this forum (about one year long so far), all opinions have been welcome, so long as they're offered respectfully.
Upvote
0
- Jun 3, 2007
- 38,441
- 1,566
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- Politics
- US-Others
Before I answered that question I went back and looked up the forum request - many of the posts reflected a need for a forum for those not coming from a strictly conservative or liberal view, and a concern about fitting in. So a bit of both, perhaps...
The bolded bit of your post - I left out of my earlier answer in that other thread but is absolutely true.
RHSC
~Afore mentioned moderator and lurking member of BB-MC.
Upvote
0
WannaWitness
Shining God's Light for a Lost World.
"Moderate" seems to me to be a very misunderstood term. People interpret it in so many different ways that it is sometimes confusing. Some will say "lukewarm", some will say "keeping peace", some will say this, or that, or whatever....
I guess that's why the title "Bridge Builders" was chosen for this forum?
I guess that's why the title "Bridge Builders" was chosen for this forum?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Albion
Facilitator
Exactly.
There was a Conservative Forum recently created, and there was the older Liberal forum. The idea was to have a place for those who could see more than one side and evaluate, calmly and respectfully, the arguments of various sides. So, yes, there is an element of "moderation" in there and also of something somewhat Centrist. I don't mean exactly halfway between the Liberal and Conservative ends of the political spectrum, but at least being willing to kick ideas around before deciding who has the better argument. There's no reason that a dedicated Liberal or a convinced Conservative shouldn't join in, so long as he's willing to give and take with fact-based arguments, on equal grounds with others of different persuasions.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
