Liberal Christianity Explained by Reverend Scotty McLennan

About last year I took a survey on the social networking site of Facebook which focused on what kind of Protestant you were. Strangely, for me, it concluded that I was “Liberal Protestant”. I was (and still am to some degree) disturbed at that notion. Former Ambassador Watch (now Otagosh) blogger Gavin Rumney declared, that I should be “Liberal and proud!”  I would actually like to start another post about my objections. They are very real concerns. At age 40,  I have outgrown and have absolutely no use for fundamentalism—that ship has sailed! With evangelicalism, it has had it’s problems and frankly has developed into another form of fundamentalism and yes, legalism (ie. the “Christian sidehug” for starters). That might upset some people but I think I need to speak from the heart as opposed to being under the “tyranny of nice”. Liberal Protestantism has it’s good points with regards to social justice and standing up for the downtrodden but theologically it makes God into some kind grandfather who is powerless to do anything on earth. While Liberal Protestantism or Christianity does not entirely do away with the supernatural and the immaterial world, they in effect minimize it. This, as I see it, has  definately has a domino effect when it comes to the ressurection of Jesus Christ.  Famous Liberal theologian Bishop Spong believes that the ressurection of Jesus  is not a literal ressurection from the dead but believes it is metaphoric in the terms of a ressurection of “our hearts”. I simply cannot in anyway come to terms with that concept. Even the Early Church in it’s inception had no issue with a literal ressurection of the dead with Jesus Christ as it’s firstborn. Take away a literal ressurection, you do not have the good news. A metaphorical ressurection in it’s place, is simply nebulous and fluffy to say the least. As I said, I hope to write about my objections of being labelled a “Liberal Protestant”  in depth in another post.

But in this clip,  form FORA TV,  Attorney and Unitarian minister Reverend Scotty McLennan would agree with Gavin Rumney that there is no shame in being called a Liberal Protestant or Christian. Wherever you are in the theo-political spectrum, everybody should watch and listen to this clip. Forget about what religious right wants you to believe about Liberal Christian Theology. Yes, you can have objections but slandering them as “ungodly” does no one any good. Speaking about Unitarianism, James Pate as of recent said he was considering to attend a Unitarian church. Everybody knows James is the “arch-conservative” when it comes to religion and politics. I can only conclude again, the American Evangelical Christianity is in trouble (unpopular as that may sound but tough). At least with Liberal Christianity, they are at least a little more pro-intellectual and maybe that’s a reason (but definately not the only one) why James may be attracted in attending a Unitarian Church.

The long version of this is here.


4 thoughts on “Liberal Christianity Explained by Reverend Scotty McLennan

  1. I recall HWA referring the the “liberals” who were attacking the church. The term liberal was pejorative. He would not have referred to the “conseratives” who were attacking the church.

    Yet if you examined the content of what these alleged liberals were advocating, their message was pretty conservative. So for HWA, as with many people, it is not so much a matter of content as it is that change is being sought. And, of course, HWA did not mind change as long as he authored it and it did not threaten his personal power.

    So the terms liberal and conserative are highly context sensitive and may not mean what we think they should. You really have to examine the issues in the case.

    But overall, in many quarters of our society, liberal means bad and conservative means good. This is a vast oversimplification that leads to many very strange people with strange ideas who wrap themselves in the “conservative” mantle receiving all kinds of support.

    — Neo

  2. ((This is a vast oversimplification that leads to many very strange people with strange ideas who wrap themselves in the “conservative” mantle receiving all kinds of support.))

    Like the teabagger group. They are a truly scary and strange bunch.

  3. We can play with the words liberal and conservative. Some Calvinists regard Arminians to be liberal. Armstrongites are hyper-Arminian so that would make them extreme leftists theologically. A good TULIP Calvinists would regard them as being way liberal on the doctrine of the Sovereignty of God. So we can construct a spectrum where HWA would be liberal.

    — Neo

  4. I actually think HWA deserved to be called a “pinko” and “commie”. After all the cult that he constructed was very “collectivist” in every sense of the word. Yes, the individual did NOT count in the historic WCG.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s