The article does not have much goin for it as the assumption it is based on is pretty shaky- " Christianity has imploded ". It is because Christianity is expanding more rapidly in Islamic Countries, Africa and Asia that we have the powers that be is those areas feeling exactly the same as those Roman rulers of yore in tryin to supress it unsuccessfully. Perhaps liberalism is the creation of a corrupt Chritianity, just like Marxism and Islam

Crabsy,
I think liberalism infects most denominations and it would be inaccurate to name any one. Liberalism is such a slippery fish that it is hard to pin down. I am tempted to say that you can spot liberalism by the opening of worship. If the leader/presider says "good morning" then you are likely to be in the presence of liberalism. But, on the other hand, if the traditional opening is present (We meet in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit) then that may be but not necessarily, is a sign that things are taken seriously. It at least tells us under whose auspices we are there.

Perhaps it is the content of the preaching? Last Sunday the gospel told us "Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out." Did the preacher take this seriously? Did he/she stand in fear and trembling at this announcement?

Or perhaps it is the internal state of the presider at the Eucharist. Does he really believe that "This is my body"? Does the Eucharist "strike at his life"?

We find limp theology and worship in all denominations. I singled out the Romans and the Evangelicals who may have escaped through their own devices but that is not to say that those devices bring them closer to faithfulness.

Behind all of this is the idea that the gospel will make its way in the world whether we like it or not or even whether we aid it or not. It is not our possession, it has a life of its own and it will overturn all of our most cherished assumptions.

I am sure from your previous posts that this will make sense.

Peter Sellick

Sells, you've gotten heated responses here. This is largely because, as you acknowledge yourself, liberalism is a very broad 'church' and as such, when you have a piece which insults a worldview many people hold and put your own view on a pedestal, you effectively insult the views of these people and dismiss them as little more than misguided immoral fools.

Hence the negativity.

I imagine you wouldn't take too well to a piece entitled 'the trouble with Christianity' which proceeded to outline all the ridiculousness which many people view as an inevitable corollary to ritualism (Baptism? You wet the baby's head? How's that different to a moon-dance?).

I understand the core of your piece - an attitude of 'anything goes' leads to anything going.

I concur, liberalism is imperfect. We're human. It's inevitable. It's simply better than any of the alternatives.

It doesn't preclude people from objecting to things on societal grounds.
For example, I don't need god to state that alcohol and cigarettes kill more people than the illegal drugs combined. Naturally, people disagreeing can point out the futility of drug enforcement.

It's possible to make debates via reason, provided the individual has the right to comment -thanks to liberal ascendancy- which permits your attack on our liberal society.
You condescendingly dismiss liberal christians. What of those who bucked the Catholic church on issues such as the earth being round and the heinousness of burning women as witches?

Stances such as yours, which assert the authority of autocratic, god-given societal models, are rightly rejected.
There are many brands to choose from and none are as pleasant as our society.

Although I don't think you deserve the harsh responses this piece garnered, I don't think this piece shows 'tolerance' for other views.

Seeing as tolerance is the foundation of liberalism, perhaps that makes sense.

The alternative to tolerance is "I'm right, you're wrong, god says so."

Would you prefer "I'm right, you're wrong, Allah/Buddha/Ganesh/Thor says so?"

No? Then it's eternal conflict or liberalism.

More people each day reject "I'm right because my god says so."

Mr Sellick has the worst case of verbal diarrhea I have ever seen.

And what exactly do you mean by this?
"The freedom of the Christian is won with blood;"

Runner

The comment about Victorian laws was a gentle little nudge for David B and related back to a discussion we had in a previous Sellick post. That would have not been obvious to you because obvious is a word used by the desperate to imply a connection between facts where none exists.

I do not have God denying philosophies. I just do not support the manufactured Christian image of God.

You come straight in on 'lust' but totally ignored Guzman the Butcher and the burnings. Are these the Christian priorities? Throw you hands up in horror at 'sex' but pass off the crimes against humanity carried out in the name of Jesus even though Jesus had nothing to do with it. This is the worst kind of blasphemy imaginable.

You have no idea about the kind of relationship I have with my partner and yet you come in with the old damnation bit. A very Christian attitude. Even if there is a God you are not it. So when do you get over making god like judgments about things you know nothing about? You talk 'love they neighbour' but act bigotry, damnation and judgement.

If 'the end fruit of this belief is obvious to anyone with a brain' then I am not surprised haven't got it yet.

Glorfindel

Paul was a Pharisee and remained one all his life. Paul imposed the severe pharisaic structure on the Christian church, and it was only the question of circumcision for gentiles that stopped Christianity continuing as a minor sect of the Jewish religion.

Basically Paul turned Christianity into everything that Jesus opposed.

You quote the bits of the bible to prove your point. I quote the bits of the Bible I want to prove my point, and it all goes round in circles. Totally pointless so I will give the bible quoting a miss this time thank you

Great article, finally the tide is turning against liberalsim and the secular-progressives.

Keep it up and spread the word that liberalism doesn't reproduce itself. This message needs to be taught in schools and covered in the media.

I don't like the idea of theocracy, but they're gonna be around a lot longer than liberal democracies.