08.24.04

the liberal connundrum

Posted in culture at 6:00 am by

I’m a self-described liberal Christian. That deserves some unpacking. I’m a liberal–I tend to find myself politically at the left as far as social, environmental, or economic issues. I’m a Christian–within Christianity I would probably associate myself from within the Christian post-modernism movement. I probably don’t have my “liberal Christian” wings just yet as far as liberal relates to Christianity. To communicate the most clearly I would call myself a progressive, post-modern, democrat, and moderate Christian. (And that was supposed to be more clear!)

Why not a liberal Christian (in the sense of holding liberal Christian beliefs)? Well, it’s not that I’ll never be a liberal Christian–I certainly seem to be moving that way–or that I think liberal Christianity is inherently evil (in fact, I think that the conservative Church needs the liberal Church desperately!) But I would describe myself as a moderate Christian because of my belief in a literal bodily ressurection of Christ, a literal Virgin birth, and things like that. (By the way, if you’re looking for a fantastic book about issues such as these argued from 2 opposing but respectful viewpoints in juxtaposition I would recommend The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions by NT Wright and Marcus Borg.)

Nonetheless, in comparison to most folks in the circles I run in, it’s easiest to call me a liberal Christian. Because to them, that’s what I am. Playing the role of one serious about their faith and also what I’d like to term “biblically liberal”, I seem to be one of a token few in my neck of the woods (west Michigan, though not exclusively, is often thought of as Bush country.) As a token, and this is true of most token individuals liberal, conservative, protestant, or catholic, or whatever, I think there’s a tendency to adopt the party line. Rather than to truly think about an issue when challenged, it’s easiest to adopt an ideology that one is farmiliar with rather than to read and research and from that research to adopt a position that one would view as the most plausibly correct view based on evidence.

I admit–I’ve been guilty of this from time to time. One reason, perhaps, is that when one’s views are challenged it becomes difficult to say those three little words, “I don’t know.” Because, after all, as the token liberal group member I’m expected to have all the answers to all the questions instantly. If I don’t, my ideology can be written off as incomplete and incoherent. To stave off the embarrassment of such a situation, I pick up the party line and go back to the same tired arguments that may or may not have anything to do with the issue at hand. I obfuscate a particular point with far more than relevant facts and allow my audience to wade through the ensuing confusion. Hopefully, they’ll confuse big words for intellect, complex ideology for relevance; and give up.

This may be why much of fundamentalism is built up on a soft ideological foundation. Quick responses prompted pat answers and over time have created a house built firmly on the sand. Of course, this isn’t meant to imply that there’s no truth to be found in fundamentalism–it’s just that the truth has been supported by poor argumentation.

There’s a real danger in this poor argumentation. Hopefully, we can learn from this and begin to develop a strong and coherent system of ideology to support our belief systems. Perhaps, I’ll feel free not to tote the party line–liberal or conservative–just because I don’t have an answer to every question right away. Maybe some folks will think less of me, some will tire of my “I don’t know, I’ll have to think about that.” But I’d much rather bear the brunt of frustration with the tedium with which I treat each of my positions, rather than to discover one day that I’ve built my house upon the sand.

Permalink

Trackback URL »

http://www.badchristian.com/2004/08/24/the_liberal_connundrum/trackback/

the liberal connundrum

Posted in culture at 6:00 am by

I’m a self-described liberal Christian. That deserves some unpacking. I’m a liberal–I tend to find myself politically at the left as far as social, environmental, or economic issues. I’m a Christian–within Christianity I would probably associate myself from within the Christian post-modernism movement. I probably don’t have my “liberal Christian” wings just yet as far as liberal relates to Christianity. To communicate the most clearly I would call myself a progressive, post-modern, democrat, and moderate Christian. (And that was supposed to be more clear!)

Why not a liberal Christian (in the sense of holding liberal Christian beliefs)? Well, it’s not that I’ll never be a liberal Christian–I certainly seem to be moving that way–or that I think liberal Christianity is inherently evil (in fact, I think that the conservative Church needs the liberal Church desperately!) But I would describe myself as a moderate Christian because of my belief in a literal bodily ressurection of Christ, a literal Virgin birth, and things like that. (By the way, if you’re looking for a fantastic book about issues such as these argued from 2 opposing but respectful viewpoints in juxtaposition I would recommend The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions by NT Wright and Marcus Borg.)

Nonetheless, in comparison to most folks in the circles I run in, it’s easiest to call me a liberal Christian. Because to them, that’s what I am. Playing the role of one serious about their faith and also what I’d like to term “biblically liberal”, I seem to be one of a token few in my neck of the woods (west Michigan, though not exclusively, is often thought of as Bush country.) As a token, and this is true of most token individuals liberal, conservative, protestant, or catholic, or whatever, I think there’s a tendency to adopt the party line. Rather than to truly think about an issue when challenged, it’s easiest to adopt an ideology that one is farmiliar with rather than to read and research and from that research to adopt a position that one would view as the most plausibly correct view based on evidence.

I admit–I’ve been guilty of this from time to time. One reason, perhaps, is that when one’s views are challenged it becomes difficult to say those three little words, “I don’t know.” Because, after all, as the token liberal group member I’m expected to have all the answers to all the questions instantly. If I don’t, my ideology can be written off as incomplete and incoherent. To stave off the embarrassment of such a situation, I pick up the party line and go back to the same tired arguments that may or may not have anything to do with the issue at hand. I obfuscate a particular point with far more than relevant facts and allow my audience to wade through the ensuing confusion. Hopefully, they’ll confuse big words for intellect, complex ideology for relevance; and give up.

This may be why much of fundamentalism is built up on a soft ideological foundation. Quick responses prompted pat answers and over time have created a house built firmly on the sand. Of course, this isn’t meant to imply that there’s no truth to be found in fundamentalism–it’s just that the truth has been supported by poor argumentation.

There’s a real danger in this poor argumentation. Hopefully, we can learn from this and begin to develop a strong and coherent system of ideology to support our belief systems. Perhaps, I’ll feel free not to tote the party line–liberal or conservative–just because I don’t have an answer to every question right away. Maybe some folks will think less of me, some will tire of my “I don’t know, I’ll have to think about that.” But I’d much rather bear the brunt of frustration with the tedium with which I treat each of my positions, rather than to discover one day that I’ve built my house upon the sand.

Permalink

Trackback URL »

http://www.badchristian.com/2004/08/24/the_liberal_connundrum/trackback/