[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote
(kebecer1 @ June 28 2002,3:16)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Bobby, my friend:
Perhaps, somebody (not me) should start a thread on "Who is a liberal?"
I've grown so discouraged by the term, of late; it has NOTHING to do w/ you. Over at the DoC chatsites, we've had an anonymous poster--well, heck, several--coming in, telling us "I have a prophet's heart" or "I've read the Bible" and 1) all of you DoC's belong to the whore of Babylon church as predicted in the Revelation to St John; 2) you're all liberal; 3) going to hell; 4) more than likely all closet homosexuals; and 5) nowhere near as righteous as me, the anon. poster.
The poster(s) have consistently--to a person(s)--admitted that s/he isn't a Disciple; just someone with a "prophet's heart".
Yeah, right. Jeremiah would weep over such cant.... :(
As to Cave, I see him as a modernist--dunno what a "true liberal" is.
Even Raymond Brown admitted that there are no modernists today. No one has that kind of confidence in human reason and ability to deny the mysterious. Auschwitz cured us of the conceit that humanity can achieve only the "upward spiral of progress."
I have come to understand so clearly that "liberal" is where you stand--to the LDS church, we are all doomed; to the Catholic dogmatist, we are only "ecclesial communities"; to the Russian Orthodox Church, the World Council of Churches, that august body, should change its name, since only the Orthodox faith can, properly, be called "church'. Ad nauseam!
...And to the grace-centered Christian, those who are liberal are X (name here); but, to the graduate of Freed-Hardman or Florida College, "liberal" means "someone to the left of me."
I'm tired of the names, folks! Nothing at you, bobby!
Just tired of all the names. No wonder the world won't unite to one church--why should it?
We're busy enjoying dis-uniting!
Now, who, by the name of Stone and Campbell, might have said that?[/quote]
I do not mean to weary you, but I am sure that you know what a theological liberal is. I do not use the term "theological liberal" of a person who simply disagrees with me on church polity and the like. I suppose that if I had to put it in a nutshell this is my definition of a "theological liberal." A theological liberal is one who no longer believes THE Story.
I had a Jewish prof at Tulane on the Dead Sea Scrolls. I learned a great deal from him and enjoyed his class greatly. He was however a theological liberal. We had many conversations about "faith" and what that means. In his particular view Judaism was simply a ethnic and cultural way of life. He not only rejected the basic historicity of the Hebrew Bible but was an outright atheist. I call that a theological liberal. I asked him one day why he was a Rabbi and his answer was he simply liked to help people.
I affirm the motto you have emblazoned on all of your posts "Let Unity be Our Polar Star!" I stand with Stone and I stand with Campbell. But unity must be on the THE story. You mentioned the Mormons. From my perspective we have different Stories and knowing Campbell the way I do (or Stone for that matter) I know for a fact that that slogan did not include Mormonism.
Cave was a theological liberal. He denied the Virgin Birth and most of the miracle stories, he denied that Jesus was the only savior of the world and on we can go. A true "modernist" as you put it. Theological liberalism was the offspring of Modernism. Modernism in the Disciples basically reinvented itself. Any one familiar with the Disciples of Christ history knows they owe as much to W.E. Garrison as Alexander Campbell. As Stephen Sprinkle has recently written in his book Disciples and Theology
Campbell is like a "poltergeist" that haunts the modern Disciple psyche.
I am sure we can hash this out a little more if we need to but for now I think I have addressed your question.
His Mark +