What It Means to be A Liberal Person of Faith

holla

I agree.

I share with conservatives a basic motivation of following Christ, and a belief that the only reliable information we have about him comes ultimately from Scripture.

Where I differ is that I am willing to adopt beliefs that aren't the same as traditional ones when evidence leads there.

I see two different heritages from the Reformation. As I see it, the Reformation was largely due to new understandings of Scripture that came from going back to the original Greek, and a willingness to abandon tradition when our current understanding of Scripture suggested that we should change.

The majority have taken 16th Cent Protestant beliefs and made of them a new inerrant tradition. I consider that Catholic Protestantism, because it's just like the Catholics, but using a different tradition. Just as with pre-Vatican 2 Catholics, scholarship for the Catholic Protestants has a pre-ordained outcome of justifying current tradition.

A minority has taken the 16th Cent Protestant approach of following Biblical scholarship and other types of evidence (e.g. science), even when the results contradict tradition. I consider this Protestant Protestantism.

In my opinion "liberal" is a funny word to use for Protestant Protestantism. But since just about everyone considers accepting evidence in preference to tradition "liberal", I accept that term of myself.

In support of the OP, when you take Jesus on his own terms, I think it does tend to lead to things like concern for the needy, and social justice. After all, those were the priorities of the prophets, shared by Jesus. But to me that's not the core of my religion. Rather, I take positions like that because Jesus did. Of course there's still a difference between goals and implementation. Political liberalism hasn't always taken positions that I think are best for anyone, much less the poor. But at the moment I'm pretty disgusted with US political conservatives, on many fronts.

Interesting read.

One way to summarize all is to say that being a liberal Christian is all about conceiving religion as liberty and freedom. Christianity as a free choice, freedom of choosing to follow Christ's words with your Heart and Reason and Conscience, freedom from external constraints even the "big ones" of Scripture, Tradition and Church (which you are also free to embrace if you want, but even in that case at least you're not trying to bound others to them).

Conservative Christianity is quite the opposite, it is all about complying, obeying, binding yourself and demand that everybody else does the same.

Rao said:

Interesting read.

One way to summarize all is to say that being a liberal Christian is all about conceiving religion as liberty and freedom. Christianity as a free choice, freedom of choosing to follow Christ's words with your Heart and Reason and Conscience, freedom from external constraints even the "big ones" of Scripture, Tradition and Church (which you are also free to embrace if you want, but even in that case at least you're not trying to bound others to them).

Conservative Christianity is quite the opposite, it is all about complying, obeying, binding yourself and demand that everybody else does the same.

Click to expand...

This is why the term "liberal" bothers me. It covers too wide a range. I'm not conservative, but I don't conceive of my religion as freedom from all limits. I'm committed to following Christ, and to Scripture as authority. What I'm not committed to is an inerrant tradition. That provides freedom, but not independence. Not from Scripture, because it's freedom to use our best understanding of Scripture and the world. Not even from Church and tradition, because we are better off doing our investigations as a community, even though individuals have a right to disagree. Unfortunately I don't know a good term for this. The term ought to be "Protestant" or even "evangelical." But those terms have been hijacked.

In trying to get my head around this I found it useful to abbreviate Rabbi Yoffie's statement. The key points seem to be:
1) deep belief in God
2) relevance of faith to public policy
3) understanding 'person of faith' as inclusive, not exclusive term
4) concern for poor and needy ('justice')
5) acceptance of sanctity of committed gay relationships
6) shared concerns with conservatives: family values, erosion of culture
7) desire for dialogue, including with conservative Right

I know a summary leaves out important details, but it helps me grasp the Rabbi's vision. It seems very good to me.

For me though, being a liberal is also a response to the sense that some aspects of the religious conservative wing are positively dangerous, and must be opposed because they are leading people away from God, however well-meant they are, and however much they are believed to be done in the name of God. These include refusing to accept many aspects of modern science, and preaching the damnation of non-believers, among other things. Many people today reject God for all the wrong reasons: because they think belief is anti-reason and based on a God less just and compassionate than most human beings.

I am not one who really considers myself liberal (especially in the line of Biblical topics and theology, mainly). However, I am actually quite moderate when it comes to basic political views, and I don't doubt that there are some who think "moderate" is no different than "liberal". Actually, the only place politically where some might think I'd border on being somewhat liberal is that I personally believe that the creation of government programs to help our nation's poor, within reason, has its place in the political arena because the economy has gotten so bad, and I just don't think all poor people brought their conditions on themselves through foolish spending, laziness, and reckless lifestyles (although there are some who have). And while I agree that the burden should be on individuals to make a move and help those who are less fortunate, it doesn't always happen that way. Our world has, as a whole, become selfish and rude, and some people are too busy nitpicking and making unfair assumptions about the needy population, as a whole. And while there are a fair number of unselfish people in the world who do try their best to help others, it doesn't begin to scratch the surface of creating a long-term solution to the problem. And while I am fully aware that poverty will never completely end in this lifetime (unfortunately), we are certainly not powerless to make an effort to minimize it just a little.

But the mere fact that I hold the views I do (in the paragraph above), even combined with issues in which I would agree with some conservatives, would still leave me at the moderate portion of the spectrum -- too strict in the eyes of some, and not strict enough in the eyes of others. Some have called this being "wishy-washy", but I don't believe that's the case.

Just my two-cents.

(Sorry for the double post.)

Rao said:

Interesting read.

One way to summarize all is to say that being a liberal Christian is all about conceiving religion as liberty and freedom. Christianity as a free choice, freedom of choosing to follow Christ's words with your Heart and Reason and Conscience, freedom from external constraints even the "big ones" of Scripture, Tradition and Church (which you are also free to embrace if you want, but even in that case at least you're not trying to bound others to them).

Conservative Christianity is quite the opposite, it is all about complying, obeying, binding yourself and demand that everybody else does the same.

Click to expand...

Nice :~)

Here's a quote for you:

Harriet Tubman: "I freed a thousand slaves and I could have freed a thousand more ... if only they knew they were slaves."

Very interesting read. I like it.

rayodeluz said:

we liberal persons of faith draw on the sacred texts of our tradition, but we don't claim to have a direct line to heaven, and we aren't always sure that we know God's will.

Click to expand...

The one approach that shows up time and again in this post and pretty much every one responding to it is a rebuttal of conservatism based not on logical argument but rather on dismissive definition. Take this comment, for example. I'm sure there are individuals delusional enough to believe they talk to God but it is equally delusional to believe that this is a mindset defining conservatism. Unless this is an indirect reference to Catholicism, in which case we have an entirely different conversation on our hands.

It means being concerned about the poor and the needy, and giving a fair shake to all. When people talk about God and yet ignore justice, it feels downright wrong to us. When they cloak themselves in religion and ignore mercy, it strikes us as blasphemous.

Click to expand...

I think this highlights one of the major difference between conservatives and liberals: liberals feel conservatives are evil while conservatives believe liberals are foolish. Each side believes positions taken by the other are wrong but the liberal appears to believe the conservative fails because of moral deficiencies while the conservative believes the liberal position has no logical foundation.

but we oppose, absolutely and unequivocally, unprincipled gay bashing and hateful rhetoric that fuels the hell-fires of anti-gay bigotry.

Click to expand...

Well goodness, who doesn't? Oh ... right - that would be those evil conservatives.

we believe that the public interest does depend, at least in part, on private virtue -- even as we know that justice requires not only good individuals but also the actions of government.

Click to expand...

Again with the rapid breathing. It's almost as if a conservative was some ogre thought up by the Brothers Grimm. EVERYONE believes the public interest requires both private and government involvement. The debate is (or ought to be) over where to draw the line between one and the other.

And finally, it means that we welcome dialogue with our fellow citizens who have a more conservative religious viewpoint.

Click to expand...

I am impressed that the rabbi is willing to talk to unprincipled, gay bashing, hate filled scoundrels with their blasphemous ideas and their indifference to mercy and justice. He is truly an open minded fellow.

JMC

I like the good rabbi's statement.

The division of Christianity into liberal and conservative factions bug me, and I don't like its division into denominations much better.

I'm liberal in that I agree with WWMC's SoP, and I'm all about freedom, grace, inclusiveness and tolerance. And I identify with the "emerging church" though some people in it are too liberal for me theologically and/or politically.

But I don't think conservatives are in any sense bad people, of ill will, hateful or morally deficient, though some are, as is the case with any cross-section of humanity.

I'm conservative in that I'm theologically orthodox, though a 'Protestant Protestant' in Hedrick's sense. But I'm cool with tradition too, so long as it doesn't lead us to bad, unbiblical places, and I enjoy liturgical services.

Politically, I'm a libertarian and member of the Libertarian Party, though much more moderate and pragmatic than most.

Izdaari said:

But I don't think conservatives are in any sense bad people, of ill will, hateful or morally deficient, though some are, as is the case with any cross-section of humanity.

Click to expand...

They just need to get out more.

It's easy to judge another person's walk when you don't have to put on his shoes!

[Izdaari]I like the good rabbi's statement.

The division of Christianity into liberal and conservative factions bug me, and I don't like its division into denominations much better.

I'm liberal in that I agree with WWMC's SoP, and I'm all about freedom, grace, inclusiveness and tolerance. And I identify with the "emerging church" though some people in it are too liberal for me theologically and/or politically.

But I don't think conservatives are in any sense bad people, of ill will, hateful or morally deficient, though some are, as is the case with any cross-section of humanity.

I'm conservative in that I'm theologically orthodox, though a 'Protestant Protestant' in Hedrick's sense. But I'm cool with tradition too, so long as it doesn't lead us to bad, unbiblical places, and I enjoy liturgical services.

Politically, I'm a libertarian and member of the Libertarian Party, though much more moderate and pragmatic than most.

Click to expand...

Nice post

I pretty much see a liberal person of faith as someone who applies liberal politics, the Enlightenment movement to their faith.

Point in case...a moderate Christian will never go the way that say Bishop John Shelby Spong has. Look him up if you are curious. I do not see him as the standard of liberal Christian but I personally see him as a really good example. If you look him up then look up liberal theologians. You'll get the picture quite clearly.

Im_A said:

I pretty much see a liberal person of faith as someone who applies liberal politics, the Enlightenment movement to their faith.

Point in case...a moderate Christian will never go the way that say Bishop John Shelby Spong has. Look him up if you are curious. I do not see him as the standard of liberal Christian but I personally see him as a really good example. If you look him up then look up liberal theologians. You'll get the picture quite clearly.

Click to expand...

Spong would certainly be an example of one whose faith is the result of an Enlightenment mentality and left-liberal politics applied to it. He has some good ideas, and I own a few of his books. But, as he rejects most of Christian orthodoxy, he's not the kind of liberal Christian I would want anyone to follow.

Izdaari said:

Spong would certainly be an example of one whose faith is the result of an Enlightenment mentality and left-liberal politics applied to it. He has some good ideas, and I own a few of his books. But, as he rejects most of Christian orthodoxy, he's not the kind of liberal Christian I would want anyone to follow.

Click to expand...

This is the problem of dividing Christians into liberal and conservative. Liberal then means anyone who doesn't think we should be stuck in the 16th Cent, whether they are off the left wing with Spong, or a reasonably orthodox Christian who just wants to use recent scientific and scholarly knowledge.