Four Things Christian Libertarians Believe
Last year, quite a bit of space was spent on this blog discussing Christian libertarians. Seriously, a lot of space. And as predicted, people were left with more questions than answers, making it a continued topic of discussion.
Recently, I sort of instigated a friendly fight with Joe Carter of the Acton Institute when I took issue with his treatment of Christian libertarians in a recent post about bias versus neutrality in the realm of public policy. What I didn't anticipate, was that our fundamental assumptions were not the same.
Whereas I believe that Christian libertarians exist, and are in fact a very important demographic of Christians as well as voters, that assumption was not accepted by all participants in the conversation. Joe Carter, joined by Values and Capitalism's own fearless leader Eric Teetsel, questioned the existence of such a demographic. I deeply appreciate Mr. Carter's thoughtful response, and have dedicated some time to an (hopefully) equally thoughtful answer to his question, What is a Christian Libertarian?
In his post, Mr. Carter identifies five types of Christian Libertarians. Another V&C family friend, Joseph Sunde, summarized these five types quite succinctly.
- Type #5: Those who are Not-all-that-Christian and/or Not-all-that-Libertarian
- Type #4: Christians who are really conservatives, but don’t like the label conservative
- Type #3: Those for whom the “Christian” in Christian libertarian is a weak modifier
- Type #2: Those who mash the two words together
- Type #1: Those who have developed a consistent philosophy in which libertarianism and Christianity are fully compatible
The first four, Mr. Carter says are either not Christian enough or not libertarian enough to claim the title of Christian libertarian. These are all very true caricatures of certain Christian libertarians, and I will graciously concede all those points to Mr. Carter and Mr. Teetsel. The point that bears discussion is libertarian type number 1:
"Type #1 Those who have developed a consistent philosophy in which libertarianism and Christianity are fully compatible. – Although I’m not sure I’ve ever met a Type 1—and I’m not sure it’s even possible—I believe this is the ideal use of the term."
Eric Teetsel goes farther than simply doubting their existence, by declaring that they cannot exist. Period.
"My view is pretty straightforward: Christianity's self-sacrificial love of neighbor is irreconcilable with the libertine ideal of radical individualism. That's it."
To address Mr. Carter's doubts, and to counter Mr. Teetsel's unbelief, here is my layman's attempt to articulate four of the fundamental beliefs held by Christian libertarians that synthesize their faith with their political ideology. For a more developed understanding, please visit Norman Horn's website: http://libertarianchristians.com/.
1) Christian libertarians are libertarian BECAUSE they are Christian.
This is why this discussion is so important. This is why Christian libertarians take such issue with and offense to attempts to dismiss their existence. They do not simply "mash the two words together" or "don’t like the label conservative." For many Christian libertarians, their acceptance of the political ideology of libertarianism came after, and as a consequence of, the acceptance of their salvation through Jesus Christ.
To simply write off the fact that they are libertarian is to them analogous with writing off their faith. And while the rest of this post will focus on the specifics of being a Christian libertarian, I chose to begin with a warning that this is the case for most Christian libertarians. It is fine to concertedly ask questions about what they believe, but to discount that they believe it is deeply offensive. Especially if you are a Christian yourself, do not think so lightly of your brothers and sisters in Christ—even if you disagree with them.
2) Christian libertarians believe in individualism because of their own salvation. Eric Teetsel called "radical individualism" the "libertine ideal." But to Christian libertarians, individualism isn't about one individual, it is about two: Christ and the one who accepts his salvation.
Salvation is voluntary and it is individual. I do not wish to wander into the debate of predestination, but simply to present the scripture.
“Though you have not seen [Jesus], you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the end result of your faith, the salvation of your souls.” 1 Peter 1:8-9
Mr. Teetsel takes his argument straight to the "self-sacrificial love of neighbor" by jumping over who first loved his neighbors. Partaking in communion at my church recently, my pastor reminded us that while Jesus died for the salvation of the whole world, he did not do so corporately. Jesus died for each of individually. He died for Eric Teetsel. He died for Joe Carter. He died for Martin Luther. He died for Elvis. He died for your cousin. And he died for you, the reader.
And as Christians, we believe that when we die, we will not be judged corporately, but that we will be standing individually before God. And we have hope in the fact that Christ alone will be standing with us.
Since our very salvation starts individually, and grows into our Christian community working self-sacrificially for the building of the Kingdom of God, Christian libertarians orient their whole lives in the same manner. They start with the individual, celebrate the individual's opportunity for salvation and inherent dignity, and grow outwardly into community and kingdom.
In his original post Mr. Carter says, "By placing an overemphasis on individual liberty without an equal accent on individual virtue, the libertarian unwittingly erodes the foundation of order on which her political theory stands. Order is a necessary precondition of liberty and must be maintained from the lowest level of government (the individual conscience) to the highest (the State)."
To which I responded:
"Christian libertarians do place high values on both individual liberty and individual virtue. They recognize the levels of order from individual governance to the authority of the state, though they would likely call the individual the 'highest level of government' and the state the 'lowest level of government.'"
Which leads into the next point.
3) Christian libertarians believe that social engagement is a voluntary, but imperative of our Christian faith and the course by which we develop individual virtue.
It is entirely incorrect to think that Christian libertarians do not place an emphasis on individual virtue. For clarification, Mr. Carter was not referring specifically to Christian libertarians in the previous quote, but to areligious libertarians.
Christian libertarians understand that any social obligation put forth in the New Testament is voluntary. There are no calls for governments or even church leaders to force servitude, only encouragement to voluntarily serve others.
“Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.” 1 Corinthians 9:19
“You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love.” Galatians 5:13
While not a theologian, the father of free markets, Adam Smith, was foremost a moralist. Before he wrote the much-famed Wealth of Nations, he wrote a lengthy book on ethics called The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Smith strongly believed that free markets were capable of cultivating morality within individuals. Capitalism, by design, marries a man's moral and material growth so that both will be fully achieved.
Christian libertarians believe that freedom is engaging and experiential. It is through social and market interactions that relationships with fellow human beings are built. In turn it is these relationships that foster within individuals virtues including honesty, civility, prudence, restraint, industry, frugality, sobriety and reliability.
4) Christian libertarians take a very literal position on Christ's message of liberty.
There is no way to ignore the significance of liberty in the message of Jesus Christ. For clarity, the words liberty and freedom in the New Testament are both English translations of the same Greek word, ἐλευθερία (eleutheria, pronounced: el-yoo-ther-ee'-ah). The Strong’s Dictionary reference number is 1657.
“Jesus said, ‘If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.’” John 8:31-32
“Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” 2 Corinthians 3:17
“It is for freedom that Christ has set us free.” Galatians 5:1
Freedom means the ability to make one's own choices. It means the ability to make the wrong choices. It means partaking in the consequences of our choices.
We see our freedom in our choice of salvation—to accept the salvation and lordship of Jesus Christ or to accept our own lordship. Christian libertarians believe that a civil society must do as much as possible to encourage choices and must do as little as possible to separate the choice from the consequence.
Myself and V&C podcast host, RJ Moeller, have blogged before about the saying, "Capitalism without bankruptcy is like Christianity without hell." Christian conservatives and libertarians could agree on that. But Christian libertarians extend that principle to social issues as well.
Christian libertarians believe that people should live wholesome, productive lives because they have a conviction to do so. They also believe that people should be able to choose not to live in such a way, and those people will suffer the consequences in their lives and before God. Christian libertarians believe that people should commit before their family and community to their spouse for life, because they believe that is God's plan, not because the government has tax incentives for them to get married and not simply live together.
Christ came to set us free and calls us to use our freedom for his purposes. Christian libertarians believe that the government should not limit that freedom for everyone because some people chose not to follow Christ.
Conservatives will say that there are negative externalities in a society if these aspects of social order are not enforced by government. Christian libertarians absolutely agree. But they believe that those negative externalities are the consequences of our own moral decay. They believe the answer isn't in government action, enforced by violence and financed by plunder. But in the kingdom-building actions of the church, enforced by love and financed by self-sacrificial giving.
Fundamentally, Christianity is about our freedom, or rather our ability to choose to have a relationship with God—our choice to believe in him. To the understanding of Christian libertarians, freedom in our everyday, utterly practical lives means the free exchange of goods and ideas, the freedom to speak one’s mind, the freedom to travel, the freedom to pursue happiness, the freedom to reap what one sows, and the freedom to come to one’s own terms with God.
Lest there be any doubt remaining, Christian libertarians have not only developed a consistent philosophy in which libertarianism and Christianity are fully compatible, but have a developed a philosophy in which their libertarianism is dependent upon their Christianity.
10 people are talking about this
Point #1 was certainly true for me. I also was heavily influenced by the biblical teachings about nonviolence. It's hard to look at II Cor. 10 and not see the non-aggression principle:
"Though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world."
There's not much evidence for freedom in the Bible, in the sense of free will to choose salvation. Yahweh was hardening hearts all over the place. And he wasn't shy about commanding unbelievers to be put to death. Not much free will there: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_verses_in_the_Bible_advocate_killing_non_...
Agreed, Clay. Christianity is hardly a philosophy but more a delusion, a "philosophy" of hypocrisy and contradictions. Someone identify me some primary principles which remain uniform throughout the scripture...
Brilliant post. Profound, finely elaborated, greatly argumented. It clearly shows the weaknesses in Joe Carter's statements that led him to the wrong conclusion.
Can't see a blackspot in the whole reasoning.
Congrats and thanks!
PS
Lonnie: how about the ten commandments. Anyway, don't assume the Christianity is just the literal reading of the scripture.
Clay: we are talking Christianity here, not the Bible. Christ is the summit in the history of redemption of men. No mention whatsoever of commanding anybody to death for salvation within Christ messages, nor within the whole New Testament.
Reasoning based on shallow and false disqualifications will likely lead to nowhere.
I absolutely love the description of the true Christian libertarian. We are free to make our choices, but we do live and sometimes die as a result of those choices. Since we as Christians know that we have to individually answer to God at our death, we will stand there accounting for the choices that we have made; the first choice being to have a relationship with Christ. And our greatest test will be that we have shown the love of Christ to our "neighbor". This isn't about who we voted for so that the government can do the job that Christ mandated for us to do. If we want to change society, we can't vote to have the government create laws. We are called be Christ on earth to those who don't know Him, and thereby changing people's hearts and minds.
Good stuff Jacqueline. My take on this is that labels such as "libertarian" and "conservative" and even "Christian" tend to be fuzzy around the edges. They represent a set of beliefs, centered around a core concept, but there is a lot of room for variation between individuals under the same umbrella. Thus, the debate is faulty from the beginning—there's no true answer.
I take libertarianism to be a view about the role of law, which is a question outside of, though related to, individual and collective virtue. According to my conception, then, a person can certainly be a devout Christian and believe that government has no role in correcting the behavior of individuals. The ultimate question for a Christian flirting with libertarianism is: can coercion bring glory to God?
Clay and Lonnie: both comments are just anti-Christianity red herrings. The point of the article is to illustrate how we Christian libertarians have been able to find compatibility with our Faith in Jesus Christ as our own personal Lord and Savior, and our political ideology. Our faith is to God, and our ideology is how we deal with the state, and we find no contradiction in principles and values between our Faith and political ideology.
I agree that both are compatible and agree with the statement made above. The bible will always answer it self and context ( to who is the particular verse directed to , the church, the believer, the Jew, the gentile the unbeliever , new covenant, old covenant etc, also taking into account that the original text were never written in chapter and verse) in reading scripture is vital to contextualize otherwise we tent to misread scripture and proof-text.
Hebrews 8:8 Here is the main point: We have a High Priest who sat down in the place of honor beside the throne of the majestic God in heaven. 2 There he ministers in the heavenly Tabernacle,[a] the true place of worship that was built by the Lord and not by human hands. 3 And since every high priest is required to offer gifts and sacrifices, our High Priest must make an offering, too. 4 If he were here on earth, he would not even be a priest, since there already are priests who offer the gifts required by the law. 5 They serve in a system of worship that is only a copy, a shadow of the real one in heaven. For when Moses was getting ready to build the Tabernacle, God gave him this warning: “Be sure that you make everything according to the pattern I have shown you here on the mountain.”[b] 6 But now Jesus, our High Priest, has been given a ministry that is far superior to the old priesthood, for he is the one who mediates for us a far better covenant with God, based on better promises. 7 If the first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need for a second covenant to replace it. 8 But when God found fault with the people, he said: “The day is coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. 9 This covenant will not be like the one I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand and led them out of the land of Egypt. They did not remain faithful to my covenant, so I turned my back on them, says the Lord. 10 But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day,[c] says the Lord: I will put my laws in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 11 And they will not need to teach their neighbors, nor will they need to teach their relatives,[d] saying, ‘You should know the Lord.’ For everyone, from the least to the greatest will know me already.
12 And I will forgive their wickedness, and I will never again remember their sins.”[e] 13 When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear.
Having a clear understanding that we are under a new dispensation called Grace or as some call it the church age (who are us the believers not some religious system based on performance or works) but a justification by faith. Romans 5 (AMP) Therefore, since we are justified ([a]acquitted, declared righteous, and given a right standing with God) through faith, let us [grasp the fact that we] have [the peace of reconciliation to hold and to [b]enjoy] peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed One). 2 Through Him also we have [our] access (entrance, introduction) by faith into this grace (state of God’s favor) in which we [firmly and safely] stand. And let us rejoice and exult in our hope of experiencing and enjoying the glory of God. 3 Moreover [let us also be full of joy now!
Most of the new testament writings are regarding the new covenant and the contrast between them.
The word "sovereign" is not used in the King James Version of the Bible. It is used 303 times in the Old Testament of the New International Version, but it is always used in association with the word "LORD" and is the equivalent of the King James Version's "LORD God." Not a single one of those times is the word "sovereign" used in the manner that it has come to be used in religion in our day and time. Religion has resulted in the invention of a new meaning for the word "sovereign," which basically means God controls everything. Nothing can happen but what He wills or allows. However, there is nothing in the actual definition that states that. The dictionary defines "sovereign" as, "1. Paramount; supreme. 2. Having supreme rank or power. 3. Independent: a sovereign state. 4. Excellent." None of these definitions means that God controls everything. It is assumed that since God is paramount or supreme that nothing can happen without His approval. That is not what the Scriptures teach. In 2 Peter 3:9, Peter said, "The Lord is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." This clearly states that it is not the Lord's will for anyone to perish, but people are perishing. Jesus said, "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat" (Matt. 7:13). Relatively few people are saved compared to the number that are lost. God's will for people concerning salvation is not being accomplished. This is because the Lord gave us the freedom to choose. He doesn't will anyone into hell. He paid for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2; 1 Tim. 4:10), but we must choose to put our faith in Christ and receive His salvation. People are the ones choosing hell by not choosing Jesus as their Savior. It is the free will of man that damns them, not God. People virtually have to climb over the roadblocks that God puts in their way to continue on their course to hell. The cross of Christ and the drawing power of the Holy Spirit are obstacles that every sinner encounters. No one will ever stand before God and be able to fault Him for withholding the opportunity to be saved. The Lord woos every person to Him, but we have to cooperate. Ultimately, the Lord simply enforces the consequences of people's own choices.
God has a perfect plan for every person's life (Jer. 29:11), but He doesn't make us walk that path. We are free moral agents with the ability to choose. He has told us what the right choices are (Deut. 30:19), but He doesn't make those choices for us. God gave us the power to control our destinies.
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse." (Rom. 1:18-20)
Ever since the fall of Adam, man has been trying to find a way back to God. There is a longing within every person to be back in the image that God created them in. There is a knowledge that there must be something more. The religions of the world are a testimony to this scripture, from the first chapter of Romans, that God has revealed Himself to His creation. But man has devised nearly as many different ways to approach back unto God as there have been people.
The difference between religion and Christianity is, basically, that religion is man's attempt to reach God, and Jesus is God reaching out to man. All the religions of the world fall short of obtaining salvation because they put the burden of salvation on man. They teach that through our adhering to a rigid standard of dos and don'ts, we make ourselves acceptable unto God. But God revealed in James 2:10 that if you keep the whole Law and yet offend in one point, you are guilty of all. This is where the religions of the world have missed it. They have all sinned and come short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). Man cannot save himself; he has to have a savior.
So God sent His Son Jesus in the likeness of sinful flesh to condemn sin in the flesh that we might come into right standing with God (Rom. 8:3-4). We are made acceptable to God through who Jesus is and what He did (Eph. 1:6). Jesus said of Himself that He was the only way unto the Father (John 14:6). Peter said in Acts 4:12, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." God is the only One who could provide salvation for man, through Jesus; and any other attempts to approach unto God, regardless of how sincere they may be, will end in total failure with the result of eternal death.
Most church-going people all over the world can accept all of this regarding other religions easily. But what many have failed to see is that much of what is called Christianity today is nothing but religion. By that, I mean that many people are going through the motions of Christianity thinking that their observance of Christian virtues will help them obtain salvation. But it is possible to be caught up in the trap of trying to be justified by your church attendance and financial receipts, or keeping of the 10 commandements just as much as the man who burns incense to idols to appease the gods.
Hebrews 5:9 says that Jesus is the author of eternal salvation, therefore His judgement is the only one that counts. Many people trust the fact that their names are on a church roll or that they have "IN GOD WE TRUST" written on their coins, but that's not the standard that Jesus used to administer salvation.
Let's look at an account of Jesus ministering salvation. In Mark 10:17-22, we see an example of a man who really desired to have eternal life. He was actively pursuing it, which is evidenced by the fact that he ran to Jesus and knelt down at His feet. If desire or good intentions could obtain salvation, he would have gotten it. But Jesus, the author of eternal life, didn't accept his conditions. Many people today don't believe that it is really important what you believe. It's just your intentions that count. But this example proves that to be wrong.
This man was seeking the right thing, and he even came to the right Person, but he did a number of things wrong. First, he only acknowledged Jesus as being a good master (verse 17). Jesus answered by saying, "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God." This rich young ruler was willing to acknowledge that Jesus was good, but he wouldn't go so far as to say He was God. Yet, one of the must crucial elements to salvation is believing that God was manifest in the flesh (1 Tim. 3:16).
Every great leader of the different religions of the world has had to recognize the greatness of Jesus, but yet they have rejected His own claims to divinity. When Jesus was questioned by the chief priests, He admitted He was the Christ (Matt. 26:63-64). The chief priests and elders said that He had spoken blasphemy or ascribed divinity to Himself. Jesus had to be more than a good man to be a sacrifice for the whole human race. One man's life is only worth one man's life. But since Jesus was God, His life was worth more than all the people who had lived or ever will live on this earth. This young ruler made the mistake of recognizing Jesus as good, but not as God.
Second, he wanted to know what he could do to inherit eternal life. He was trying to reach God through his efforts, but he couldn't do enough good. He had sinned and come short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). Many so-called Christians today are doing the same thing. They think that their church attendance or Bible reading, etc., will atone for their sin, but only the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ can cleanse us of our sin. All our efforts fall short. You may live better than someone else, but who wants to be the best sinner who ever went to hell? You need a savior.
Jesus knew this man was incapable of saving himself. He didn't tell him to keep the Old Testament Law so that he could earn salvation. The Law wasn't given so we could keep it but rather to let us see that we have all sinned and need a savior (Rom. 3:19-20). Jesus ministered the Law to this man so that he would see his need and call out to Jesus for help.
The rich young ruler said he had observed all those commandments all his life. According to Romans 3:23, which we already quoted, that wasn't true. Jesus knew that, so He told him to go and sell all that he had, give the money to the poor, and then come and follow Him. This was to show that he had broken the very first commandment, which was, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Ex. 20:3). His money was his god, and he proved it because he chose to keep his money rather than obey the Lord.
The third thing he did wrong was that he didn't make Jesus his Lord (ruler and master). He was not willing to make a complete commitment of his life to the control of Jesus. Verse 20 says that Jesus loved him, but Jesus didn't change His standard. Unless a man is willing to make Jesus Lord of all, He can't be Lord at all (in that man's life).
God still hasn't changed His standard. Some churches today tell people just to do their best or join their church, etc., and they'll go to heaven, but that's not so. You have to recognize your complete dependence on Jesus only and make a surrender of your life to Him as Lord. As it says in Romans 10:9, "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
One can be a Christian and a Libertarian but not a Christian Libertarian. They are diametrically opposed to one another. Sure, CL's love small government but only if they can replace it with large theocracy. To be a Christian Libertarian is to not be a Libertarian at all. They don't count. They're just social conservatives trying to hijack another political movement that doesn't want them in it.
Barry Goldwater once warned that once you let the religious right in the Republican Party, you'll never get them out and it would be the party's demise. Yet socio-cons can't stand on their own as a movement. If they ran as the Christian Party, they flat out know that everyone would rightfully run for the hills; hell, we'd blaze off in a flaming trail of skid marks. The Tea Party started out as a genuine small goverment movement. But once they let the socio-cons in, they started up the Be-jesusing, gay bashing and offering up their medieval rape musings, and the party was done for.
I'm all for Christians, Muslims, Jews and Hare Krishna's jumping on the Libertarian Bandwagon as long as the keep their religion to themselves.
The person who said that "One can be a Christian and a Libertarian but not a Christian Libertarian. They are diametrically opposed to one another. " is not the gatekeeper for Libertarian thought. His saying "I'm all for Christians, Muslims, Jews and Hare Krishna's jumping on the Libertarian Bandwagon as long as the keep their religion to themselves." is just the type of narrow political exclusivity that will keep Liberty limited if it is left unchallenged and unopposed. I am a Christian Libertarian and am grateful for the unparalleled Liberty that I have found and am happy to share with others.
Join the Discussion