The Making of Liberal Theology

Kevin deYoung has a new book review The Making of American Liberal Theology.
This helps explain why Liberal Theology appears so attractive.

The Making of American Liberal Theology Imagining Progressive Religion 1805-1900 (WJK 2001) is the first volume of Gary Dorrien’s magisterial three volume series on the history of American liberalism. I don’t know much about Dorrien except that when he began the series he was at Kalamazoo College and now he is at Union Theological Seminary. From what I’ve read (and I did not read every page), he is sympathetic to liberalism (hence the position at Union), but also fair and clear. I doubt that many evangelicals need to read these volumes, but some pastors and students may want to have them as reference material on their shelves.


The last point will serve to illustrate the issues.

7. The true religion is the way of Christ, not any particular doctrines about Christ.


The Word of Christ is not a doctrine or the end of an argument, but a self-authenticating life; it is morally regenerative spiritual power claimed in Christ’s spirit…Moving beyond their mentor, the Bushnellians accented the humanity of Christ; Munger and Gladden lifted Jesus’ teaching above any claims about his person. In both cases, however, a self-authenticating moral image conceived as the power of true religion was in control. The true religion is the way of Christ. (399-400)

Dorrien observes that this kind of religion was a departure from historic orthodoxy.

Traditional Protestant orthodoxies place the substitutionary atonement of Christ at the center of Christianity, conceiving Christ’s death as a propitiatory sacrifice that vicariously satisfied the retributive demands of divine justice. (400)

The new progressive religion of liberalism understood Christianity quite differently.

By the end of Beecher’s life, it was almost prosaic for Munger and Gladden to assert that Christianity is essentially a life, not a doctrine. (405)

Liberalism is not a swear word to be thrown around. It is a diverse, but identifiable approach to Christianity, one that differs significantly from historic orthodoxy, not to mention evangelicalism and fundamentalism. Liberals believe they are making Christianity relevant, credible, beneficial, and humane. Evangelicals in the line J. Gresham Machen believe they are making something other than Christianity.

As Shakespeare put it, “Ay, there’s the rub.”

PS if you don't know Bushnell he is a source:

Moral Influence Theory


Abelard (a.d. 1079-1142) first advocated this theory that has since been taught by modern liberals such as Horace Bushnell and others of a more "moderate" liberal stance. The moral influence view was originally a reaction to the commercial theory of Anselm. This view taught that the death of Christ was not necessary as an expiation for sin, rather, through the death of Christ, God demonstrated His love for humanity in such a way that sinners’ hearts would be softened and brought to repentance.

The weaknesses of the moral influence view are obvious. The basis for the death of Christ is His love rather than His holiness; this view also teaches that somehow the moving of people’s emotions will lead them to repentance. Scripture affirms that the death of Christ was substitutionary (Matt. 20:28), and thereby the sinner is justified before a holy God, not merely influenced by a demonstration of love.