Are the terms "conservative Christian" or "conservative Protestant" unproblematic?

[FireDragon76]

Are we in fact delegitmizing other approaches to being Christian, by using the term "conservative"? After all, conservative suggests "to preserve something", typically something presumed important or essential.

I sometimes wonder about this. I use the term myself, mostly because I think "Fundamentalist" may be interpreted uncharitably in the wake of 9/11. But I also realize that by talking about white, evangelical, non-mainline theology in the manner I and many other mainline Protestants do on this forum, it makes us sound defensive or apologetic about our own ways of being Christians, because we need to qualify that some way in contrast to "conservativism".

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Are we in fact delegitmizing other approaches to being Christian, by using the term "conservative"? After all, conservative suggests "to preserve something", typically something presumed important or essential.

I sometimes wonder about this. I use the term myself, mostly because I think "Fundamentalist" may be interpreted uncharitably in the wake of 9/11. But I also realize that by talking about white, evangelical, non-mainline theology in the manner I and many other mainline Protestants do on this forum, it makes us sound defensive or apologetic about our own ways of being Christians, because we need to qualify that some way in contrast to "conservativism".

I guess people could use the term reservativism but conservatism is already in wide use.

 

[HTacianas]

Are we in fact delegitmizing other approaches to being Christian, by using the term "conservative"? After all, conservative suggests "to preserve something", typically something presumed important or essential.

I sometimes wonder about this. I use the term myself, mostly because I think "Fundamentalist" may be interpreted uncharitably in the wake of 9/11. But I also realize that by talking about white, evangelical, non-mainline theology in the manner I and many other mainline Protestants do on this forum, it makes us sound defensive or apologetic about our own ways of being Christians, because we need to qualify that some way in contrast to "conservativism".

I am myself an extremely conservative Christian. I follow the teachings of the Orthodox Church. You will not find a more conservative Church. I am also a fundamentalist for the same reasons.

But I am not a "conservative Christian" within the meaning of conservative politics among many protestants in the United States. I also do not hold to Christian fundamentalism which is a theology only around 100 years old.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Are we in fact delegitmizing other approaches to being Christian, by using the term "conservative"? After all, conservative suggests "to preserve something", typically something presumed important or essential.

I don't think so. Christians are not monolithic. The "conservative" label is handy for when one wants to differentiate oneself over and against somebody else. "I'm a Christian... but not like Kirk Cameron or something" uses more words to convey the same idea.

Mind you, I typically call those types fundies and be done with it but ymmv.

 

[FireDragon76]

I guess people could use the term reservativism but conservatism is already in wide use.

In the Anglican world, they used to have a term to describe the dissenters in the Episcopal Church and elsewhere that did not agree with Gene Robinson's consecration as bishop and who decided to leave the church, and who were typically unified in ideology that traditional readings of the Biblical text outweighed what the Anglican Communion's primates conference called a "listening process". It was accurate without implying they were conserving something essential, but at this point it slips my mind, as its been a while since I dealt with the Anglican world (over 5 years). It also clearly communicated that they were disagreeing with an emerging, informed consensus.

I would say we need to resource that term for ourselves, so I'll have to look it up. Perhaps some Episcopalians here are familiar with the term.

 

[Paidiske]

I find both "conservative" and "liberal" really unhelpful terms. Both are hard to define consistently, often resorted to as terms of abuse, and easily confused (eg. the differences between religious and social and political conservatism; or between conservatism in one country and in another, and so forth).

Also construing our communities along these sorts of polarities tends to lead to us dealing with people as if such a label actually defines them, when of course for most people it's more complicated than that.

 

[dzheremi]

I'd rather have a discussion on if the term 'problematic' is problematic, but sure, I could see how 'conservative' could be a source of confusion, mostly due to the political climate in modern western societies, which thankfully has nothing to do with my Church, which is more conservative than any of those which self-identify as 'conservative' (i.e., no divorce or remarriage except in cases of spiritual or sexual infidelity; 200+ days of fasting per year; laity expected to keep the daily prayer rule via the Agpeya; no marrying outside of the communion except to Greeks in the Patriarchal territory of Alexandria proper; etc). I certainly don't like having any of what we do confused with what self-described 'conservative Christians' who are not Orthodox do, because they are often very different at their root, but I suppose it's better that people know we are theologically and liturgically conservative than that they not know that, even if it means we must spend some time explaining how we are to be differentiated from groups XYZ.

That's part of the deal, especially as a non-Chalcedonian.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think @thecolorsblend has a good point, "fundamentalist" might not be the nicest term but it does describe the mindset. It's the idea that certain doctrines or practice are fundamental, and typically this is couple with hostility to other viewpoints, rejection of consensual discourse, and so on. And it looks remarkably similar across religions.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Are we in fact delegitmizing other approaches to being Christian, by using the term "conservative"? After all, conservative suggests "to preserve something", typically something presumed important or essential.

I sometimes wonder about this. I use the term myself, mostly because I think "Fundamentalist" may be interpreted uncharitably in the wake of 9/11. But I also realize that by talking about white, evangelical, non-mainline theology in the manner I and many other mainline Protestants do on this forum, it makes us sound defensive or apologetic about our own ways of being Christians, because we need to qualify that some way in contrast to "conservativism".

Conservative Christians are more in favor of orthodoxy, liberal Christians tend to take a more modern/relative approach to doctrine and scripture

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

I don't think so. Christians are not monolithic. The "conservative" label is handy for when one wants to differentiate oneself over and against somebody else. "I'm a Christian... but not like Kirk Cameron or something" uses more words to convey the same idea.

Mind you, I typically call those types fundies and be done with it but ymmv.

I agree. I would go even further that people can vary on the conservative/liberal spectrum on different theological issues. For example, someone may have a more conservative positions on Christology but also have a liberal view on creation. In the same way that politically, people can have a conservative position on gun control and a liberal position on abortion.

 

[FireDragon76]

Conservative Christians are more in favor of orthodoxy, liberal Christians tend to take a more modern/relative approach to doctrine and scripture

I think that oversimplifies things. A great deal of modern theology actually takes the ancient orthodoxy seriously in important ways that fundamentalism does not.

And it's arguable that John Henry Cardinal Newmann and several popes were modernists, but this didn't stop them from being see as orthodox Catholics and even beatified. Modernity and orthodoxy are not necessarily at odds. This is not necessarily apparent to white, American evangelicals, who have politicized their religion and live in a worldview steeped in polemicism, but a broader view of the Christian world reveals it.

 

[FireDragon76]

I agree. I would go even further that people can vary on the conservative/liberal spectrum on different theological issues. For example, someone may have a more conservative positions on Christology but also have a liberal view on creation. In the same way that politically, people can have a conservative position on gun control and a liberal position on abortion.

Considering Augustine himself didn't take Genesis' account of creation literally, how does American-style YEC really fit into being a truly conservative reading?

Luther's emphasis on a literal reading of Genesis, followed by Calvin and others, was really the liberal innovation.

 

[FireDragon76]

I find both "conservative" and "liberal" really unhelpful terms. Both are hard to define consistently, often resorted to as terms of abuse, and easily confused (eg. the differences between religious and social and political conservatism; or between conservatism in one country and in another, and so forth).

Also construing our communities along these sorts of polarities tends to lead to us dealing with people as if such a label actually defines them, when of course for most people it's more complicated than that.

Most mainline Churches in the US, just like the Anglican church in Australia, have to encompass a variety of perspectives to at least some degree, so we don't typically use "conservative" and "liberal" in our discourse more than we have to. In fact our church does not necessarily have a "liberal" self-understanding. If you read certain parts of our website, we could sound very conservative and very much concerned with orthodoxy. Our pastors have had to pledge to teach what is in accordance with the Book of Concord, so we take doctrine seriously. But we are also averse to religious fundamentalism and controversy, two things that might make us seem liberal in an American religious context. Americans, after all, seem to increasingly gravitate towards strong, even idiosyncratic opinions.

 

[Paidiske]

I do find it strange that in Australia I tend to be considered conservative, but American Christians seem to mostly automatically assume I'm liberal. Clearly these terms do not mean the same thing on either side of the Pacific.

I try not to make second- or third-order issues out to be of the same importance as first-order issues. That seems to be problematic in American thought, as if somehow everything is a first-order issue? Or is that a misunderstanding on my part?

 

[The Faceless]

I find conservative vs liberal Christianity only actually means where you stand on homosexuality/same sex marriage and abortion. Everything else is a farce. That's all most people actually mean.

 

[FireDragon76]

I do find it strange that in Australia I tend to be considered conservative, but American Christians seem to mostly automatically assume I'm liberal. Clearly these terms do not mean the same thing on either side of the Pacific.

I try not to make second- or third-order issues out to be of the same importance as first-order issues. That seems to be problematic in American thought, as if somehow everything is a first-order issue? Or is that a misunderstanding on my part?

Yes, you're recognizably identifiable as a very middle of the road Anglican. Sorry to disappoint you, but there's not much exceptional about you in that regard.

What you describe in your second paragraph is symptomatic of religious fundamentalism. Religious fundamentalism is more common in the US, I suspect, owing to our history.

 

[Paidiske]

Well, you guys basically invented Christian fundamentalism.

 

[archer75]

To my mind, these terms as used in US discourse have come to mean nothing more than a kind of tribal identification loosely associated with certain poorly defined notions about what the public face of our society should include or not include.

My liberal friends think I'm some kind of nutty conservative. My conservative friends think I'm Che Guevara.

 

[dzheremi]

I find conservative vs liberal Christianity only actually means where you stand on homosexuality/same sex marriage and abortion. Everything else is a farce. That's all most people actually mean.

And therein lies the problem, my friend: everything else goes out the window, as though there are only two or three not-coincidentally identifiably politically partisan issues which identify a church's Christianity as 'conservative'. I've called this phenomenon on the EO forum here (TAW) "wedge issue religion", since it breaks everything down according to a very limited number of political wedge issues, and I'm not sure how distinctively American it is (I would suspect very, but that might not mean anything in itself given how much more religious the USA is than most other developed western nations), but man...it sure is annoying to someone who sees there being much more to it than that.

I think our good friend Paidiske has it right about how much this varies according to where you are geographically and culturally. In Egypt, Christians tend to be more on the socially 'liberal' end of things (probably because the 'right' in Egypt is Islamist and scary as all get out), all without compromising our Church's position on issues like divorce or abortion (on which Islam is much more 'liberal', believe it or not), much less our theology and praxis.

So it doesn't break down evenly along the left/right political axis that you might expect it to if you think being a conservative Church means being a (U.S.) republican Church.

 

[FireDragon76]

Well, you guys basically invented Christian fundamentalism.

The 50's and 60's in the US were the last time that religious fundamentalism didn't at least have a strong hold on American conceptualizations of Christianity.

I think Billy Graham and the Jesus People changed alot of that. Billy Graham wasn't really responsible for politicizing fundamentalism (he was actually against that), but he did contribute to reducing Christianity to a very simple formula of Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism in many Americans minds. Jesus People made Fundamentalism acceptable to the counter culture, a place one would not normally expect it to be well received. In some ways, that was probably even more problematic for American religion because it separated Christianity from stable patterns of community engagement and belonging.