Where licentiousness begins, liberty ends — Samuel West, May 29, 1776, Massachusetts pastor, framer of the Constitution

Is Liberal Christianity Worth Saving?

July 25, 2012   ·   By   ·   0 Comments

empty churchThe recent General Convention of the Episcopal Church has prompted a broader discussion of the fate of liberal Christianity. No surprise—the Episcopal Church has been one of the most aggressively liberal influences in American Christianity in the past few years, pushing hard against the traditions of the broader Anglican Communion. In The New York Times, Ross Douthat goes so far as to ask, “Can Liberal Christianity Be Saved?” But that question necessarily prompts two others: What is Liberal Christianity, and Should it be saved?

Liberal Christianity is dying on the vine. Mainline denominations are taking big hits across the board. According to The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, among Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Episcopalians, more adults are leaving the church than entering it. Methodists, Presbyterians, and Anglicans are retaining less than half of their children. And in these denominations, no one is sitting in the pews! Gallup reported in 2005 that weekly and near-weekly church attendees made up less than 45% of self-identifying Methodists, Presbyterians, and Lutherans, with Episcopalians at a dismal 32%. And the numbers aren’t getting any better.

But what, exactly, is liberal Christianity? Over the past several decades, liberalism has primarily defined itself by what it is not. Its message is “We’re not like those stodgy old traditionalists—we’re hip and accepting” (as long as they’re not asked to accept unchanging morality or the truth of Scripture). Liberal Christianity rejects the core tenets of Christianity, including the belief that Jesus is God, that all of mankind is guilty of sin and condemned to hell, that God sacrificed His Son to bear the punishment for our sins, that Scripture is the absolute, unchanging, perfect Word of God, and that the only path to salvation is through believing in Christ’s sacrifice and accepting His gift of eternal life by grace through faith.

In place of these tenets, liberal Christianity embraces a series of denials: Christ is not divine, mankind is not inherently sinful, the Scriptures are not authoritative and unchanging, heaven and hell are not literal, morality and theology are not absolute, and social mores do not flow from Scripture, but are an ever-changing product of our evolutionary enlightenment.

All of these beliefs allow liberal Christians to be more “comfortable” in the culture around them. The common message of the liberal Christian is that “God is love” and we need to speak to the rest of culture in the language of loving acceptance. “Love” here is code for the conviction that there is no absolute moral standard which humankind has violated. Hence, to believe in justice, morality, sin, punishment or an unchanging God is to be “judgmental” and “unloving.”

If this is the heart of liberal Christianity, is it worth saving? Douthat argued in his article that conservatives “should not be smug” about the failures of liberalism, but rather value the work liberal Christianity has done to advance the social duties of the Church. While liberal Christianity might have gotten the Church talking more about social justice, it provided all the wrong answers. Liberal Christianity looks primarily to the government to shoulder our social responsibilities. But the social duties of Christians are clearly spelled out in Scripture, and they are directed to individual Christians and to the church. Christians—individually and collectively—are primarily responsible for this work, not the civil government.

It is not the message of “acceptance” but the truth of historic, traditional Christianity that has transformed society over the centuries. The spread of the biblical Gospel message throughout generations has changed the world. Christianity has grown and spread because Christians have taken seriously Christ’s great commission to go into all the world and make disciples. Animated by love for their neighbor (dictated by Scripture) and concern for their eternal future (heaven or hell), believers in historic Christianity have sought to spread the truth of the Gospel throughout the world. Concern for their fellow man and the belief that ministering to the poor and needy is the same as ministering to the Lord Jesus Christ himself (Matt. 25:40) has been the impetus to build hospitals, orphanages, soup kitchens, pregnancy care centers, water purification plants and the like around the world.

Liberal Christianity undermines the Truth that has motivated so much good work. Liberal Christians reject the core tenets of historic Christianity. They have embraced the contemporary fancies of an ever-changing culture. They have nothing to live for, nothing to die for, and nothing to work for. For them, church is just another social club, devoid of power because it is not animated by transcendent truth and accountability for living in conformity with that truth. They have no authority for faith or action. They embrace a counterfeit Christianity, a pale image of the real thing, a hollow shell, a thin gruel that offers little sustenance for its followers or the culture at large.It is no wonder that the ranks of liberal Christian churches are shrinking.

Liberal Christianity is passing with a whimper, not a bang. Increasingly, its adherents have concluded it is not worth saving.


Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.


Similar Posts:

Attorney Ken Connor is the Chairman of the Center for a Just Society in Washington, DC, and the former President of the Family Research Council. He served as counsel to Governor Jeb Bush in Bush v. Schiavo during the Terri Schiavo case, and is co-author of "Sinful Silence: When Christians Neglect Their Civic Duty."
Ken Connor
View all articles by Ken Connor
Kens website
Print Friendly

If you enjoyed this article, please consider leaving a comment below (subject to the comment guidelines listed at the bottom of the article), sharing it to Facebook or Twitter or another social media site, subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader, or have a daily digest of the latest American Clarion articles delivered to your email inbox each morning..

Featured Articles

On Guns and Voting

Dr. Theo

Hard cases make bad law is an adage or legal maxim. Its meaning is that an extreme violation of the law often generates extreme responses from judges and legislators because of the emotion the case arouses. General laws should not be written to specifically address an extreme, very uncommon situation. To do ...

taxes

GOP Should Call Dems Tax Bluff

Bill Wilson

Several mainstream media outlets are reporting that Congressional Democrats are making explicit threats. Unless Republicans cave-in to their demands to increase taxes on higher income families and small businesses, the Democrats will block all moves to address what is called the “fiscal cliff” and plunge America into a harsh double-dip recession. The hard leftists in Congress are playing a clever game. The GOP should call their bluff.

speech

What Makes Liberals Different From Conservatives?

Guest Author

It is obvious to me that liberals are entirely different than conservatives, but why is that? Like so many things these days I find myself thinking back to experiences that I had in the past to come up with answers for today’s questions. When I reflect back on my training in sales, it taught me that people generally have a dominant personality style or trait and they are secondary in another trait. As a result, when a person is dominant in a style such as analytical, they are usually quite weak in the expressive style and vice versa.

Chick-Fil-A_Laredo_f

Let’s Celebrate Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day!

Gina Miller

At what point did being right and normal become “controversial”?  Oh, we know the cultural tectonic shift from traditional moral values to chaotic debauchery began At what point did being right and normal become “controversial”? Since our culture has experienced a tectonic shift from traditional moral values to chaotic debauchery, we get a media storm of “controversy” when a prominent businessman makes a commonplace statement about his belief in traditional family values and biblical truth. I am speaking about Dan Cathy, President of Chick-fil-A, and his recent statements to the Biblical Recorder News and to a radio talk show.

Benjamin_Franklin_Electricity_f

Prayers Held in Assembly Ever Morning

William J. Federer

On JULY 26, 1775, Benjamin Franklin became the first U.S. Postmaster General, a position he held prior to the Revolution under the British Crown. Franklin's public career began when organized Pennsylvania's first volunteer militia during threaten Spanish and French attacks, and proposed a General Fast, which was approved by the Colony's Council and printed in the Pennsylvania Gazette. Franklin published the sermons of Evangelist George Whitefield, which helped spread The Great Awakening Revival. He set up the lighting of city streets and coined the electrical terms "positive" and "negative."

Archives

Other News

Other Commentary

Featured Blogs

Like American Clarion

"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." - Ronald Reagan, Nov. 10, 1964

Switch to our mobile site

NewMedia blog