Joel over at connexions has a great post about what truly comprises theological liberalism. Here is his list of 22 items which he considers to be a part of “theological liberalism.” My comments are in italics next to each:
1. View of the Bible as inspired and not inerrant. I’m somewhere between inspired and inerrant. 1/2 agreed.
2. An understanding that some passages in the Bible are metaphorical or “myth based.” Agreed.
3. An emphasis on the need to apply human reason, experience and tradition in interpreting the Bible. Agreed.
4. Application of insights from the social sciences (which are also not
inerrant) is crucial to interpreting the Bible. As the social sciences
are themselves God’s revelation of truth, they complement rather than
compete with Scripture. Not sure.5. An emphasis on Biblical criticism and literary analysis. Agreed, to a point. I think I hold the scriptures in a bit higher regard than those who would throw out whole sections of it through Biblical criticism, but I do believe that there is value in these tools.
6. Scripture must be viewed through the lens of time and culture. Agreed.
7. Doctrines, church authority and Scripture cannot be divorced from subjective personal experience. Not sure.
8. Community wholeness in relation to God is as important as a personal
relationship to God through Christ. (“Shalom” creation.) Agreed.9. An understanding that the Bible contains “all things necessary for
salvation” but not necessarily all things related to salvation. Not sure.10. A refusal to make creeds a test of faith. Agreed.
11. Openness to “finding Christ in the culture.” Not sure.
12. Doubt is not inherently the enemy of faith, but can be used by God to engage that very faith. Agreed.
13. A strong commitment to social justice. Agreed.
14. The idea that self-reflection is a necessary component of faith. Agreed.
15. Acceptance that the Bible incorporates an intentional tension
between “universal” and “exclusive” salvation. (To remind us that God
alone judges?) Agreed.16. The possibility that not only may we acquire new understandings of
God’s revelation but that it is possible that God is still revealing. Agreed.17. Humans, while tending toward depravity, are capable of responding to divine grace. Agreed.
18. As “imitators” of Christ, we must engage the essential unity of faith and works. Agreed.
19. That Christian existentialism is criticized but effectively
practiced by the “orthodox” and fundamentalists but honestly admitted
to by many liberals. Not sure.20. Rejection of an over-emphasis on a “personal relationship with
Christ” that fails to adequately place faith in the context of
community. Agreed.21. A strong emphasis on “corporate sin” as being as evil and destructive as personal sin. Agreed.
22. That while miracles happen, God does not ordinarily suspend the laws of nature. Agreed.
That puts me with 15 agrees, 2 half-agrees, and 5 not sures. Which, it seems to me, would put me rather firmly in the theologically liberal camp if his definition holds (and here I always thought I was a theological conservative since I hold to rather orthodox views of the virgin birth, bodily resurrection, and so forth). I’ll be interested in following the discussion which develops on their site.
September 17th, 2006 at 3:08 pm
Steve,
Or maybe you are somewhere between orthodox and liberal. As there is no official defintion of liberal theology, one might never be sure.
As for finding Christ in the culture, I approach that with some trepidation. I consider Christ as Savior of the World and the Lord of all Creation. I don’t find equal validity in all religions. And yet, if Christ truly came to save and not condemn the world, then Christ’s saving action may be broader than the traditional understanding of professing Christ by name. I reject universalism, but I’m also leery of placing limits on whom God will save. Rev. Adam Hamilton, a social liberal on some issues and conservative on others but generally identified as a conservative evangelical United Methodist pastor regards John 14:6 as something of a hyperbole.
As far as #4, that is what allows me to both believe the creation story and to accept that the universe is billions of years old. It also allows me to place human sexuality in the context of both Biblical purposes and of modern scientific understandings of sexual identity.