The roots of liberalism. . .

Though you would not know it today, the very word liberal has its roots in liberty.  It was, at least in the beginning, a word used to describe those who loved freedom.  It originated from the Latin word liber, which means "free."  It began to include ideas of generosity, selflessness, and a person of magnanimous character.  Of course, the word “liberal” has evolved into many different meanings, many of which are decidedly not liberal at all. In political and social theory, “liberalism” did not necessarily mean progressive but was also rooted in the ideals of freedom, rights, and democracy.  In this way, it is quite correct to speak of the American constitutional idea as liberal and embodying the highest institutional attachment to freedom or liberty, to the enshrinement of rights meant to protect the minority from the dictatorship of the majority, and authority which is conferred by democratic vote.  It also contained the idea of laws and a society free from prejudice -- although the implications of that are still being worked out.  As recently as the 1800s, this meant holding to the essentials of individual freedoms over the collective will but at some point it also began to include the idea of government action to compel what was considered to be freedom when that collective will demurred.  Social action began to enter its heyday in the 1960s as this idea was structured into laws over racism, feminism, and poverty.

At some point, however, this took a turn from which we have not yet seen correction.  Liberal has come to mean those who insist upon the minority surrendering its rights for the common good.  It has come to mean the liberty of government to strip away once sacred rights in pursuit of a particular vision of what society and common life looks like.  The once profound tenets of liberty have been willingly surrendered by the masses in pursuit of safety, equality of once unpopular ideas which have now taken root, and in the effecting of a progressive state unhinged by those things which were once considered to be its foundations.  It is not simply that liberal has come to mean those who now trade their principles for the sake of their political or social ideology but those who have become enemies in combat against what were once considered allies of a generous freedom.  Most notably, religion and, in particular, Christian religion has suffered this fate.  There is no prejudice allowed today except that prejudice against ideas once common but now forbidden and that includes most of the moral character of Christian faith and life, rooting in marriage and family.  Antagonism against Christianity and against its ethical and social support for everything from justice to children has become the singular mark of liberalism today.

In other words, liberalism has become decidedly illiberal.  Individual rights and freedoms no longer are sacred or worth preservation and liberals enthusiastically supported the artificial restriction of many of those rights and freedoms during the pandemic.  That single event has had lasting and profound consequences for the individual rights and freedoms of the individual and of religion in America.  We should have seen this coming.  After all, the abortion controversy would have presumed that the liberal path was to protect and defend those with the least status or ability to defend themselves -- the unborn.  But that is not what happened.  Liberal meant not simply allowing but championing the murder of the unborn at the whim and desire of the woman.  Liberal took the same tack with homosexuality.  It did not simply advocate for the extension of rights accorded to heterosexuals to the gay but the wholesale redefinition of marriage away from children and family.  The problem today is not that marriage was redefined but it was effectively stripped from the foundation of family in which selfless love and life was offered for the sake of the spouse and the children everyone expected to be born to that family.  That is not what marriage means today and it is revealed by the appallingly high rate of abortion and the shockingly low birth rate.  The liberal position has come at the expense of love that costs you something and children so that the highest value attached to liberty is the freedom NOT to marry or to end it when you want and NOT to have children even it that means killing the unborn in the womb.

Theologically, liberals are not simply advocating for the freedom of interpretation of traditional Christian values and ideals but is at odds with the Scriptures, creed, and confession.  It has grown to the point where it seems the liberal task to prove how what once was believed, taught, and confessed was in error and cannot possibly be held by a reasoned and educated mind today.  While this is certainly true with Christian teachings that have historically conflicted with modern social ideas of sexual desire, gender identity, marriage, abortion, and such, it is not only about these.  It is a modern idea to presume that the Old Testament is filled with myth and legend, that its stories are incredible and therefore not factual, and that its transmission down through the ages corrupted and distorted the text to the point where no one can really know the truth behind it.  The Scriptures which were once a common anchor for both Roman Catholics and Protestants have become a deep, dark, imagined book in which nearly everything is suspect except the principles of love and self-fulfillment.  Liberalism is a threat against any regular orthodoxy of who Christ was and is and what He accomplished.  It is not simply that some disagree with orthodox Christian doctrine but they insist that it is untenable to hold what was once considered sacred.  Even more so, they seem determined to fence off what was once orthodox and catholic until it is forgotten or erased from memory.  There is no liberty left in such liberalism and it has taken on its sole mission to render traditional and orthodox Christian truth and proclamation offensive.

The problem of compromise and dialogue is made impossible since the liberal has only one goal -- to make what was once held impossible or untenable to be held anymore.  You actually see this working out in Rome when the Latin Mass folks insist upon the right to continue what was once the norm for ove3r 400 years while the liberals (Cupich) insist that no one has the right to anything except the post-Vatican II Mass (as done by those who have stripped it of all its traditional practices).  You also see in in Lutherans who have dismantled the institutions of marriage and family and have rejected the liturgy in an ill-advised separation between so-called style and substance in worship.  The liberal would have refused such animosity while preserving the freedom to disagree but, in religion as in politics, modern day liberals refuse to grant such freedom to those who continue to hold to what was once normative for all.  In this way, again, liberals have proven themselves most illiberal.