Liberal Vs Traditional Christianity

Once upon a time there was a certain blogger who created controversy with a post on male preferences in women. Apparently, it was harsh and "unloving" to even suggest that not all women are perfect and that men can (and should) have some standards when it comes to choosing a marriage partner. Even though the blogger in question didn't call anyone by name but wrote an abstract statement, the post was still considered "judgemental" by many and the flame wars around it continued for ages.

Now I'm not planning to comment on the post itself or speculate whether stirring internet controversies is the ideal way to present your message.  I just find it interesting that a lot of Christians appear to be less upset by the sin itself  than by someone calling it out. Yet, Christianity didn't always use to be so milquetoast.

Consider this quote from St. Augustine, for instance:  For watchmen or overseers of the people are appointed in churches, that they may unsparingly rebuke sin. 

He actually goes further than that and claims that it's a duty of everyone to do the same and that God punishes us for refraining to do so:


For often we wickedly blind ourselves to the occasions of teaching and admonishing them (the evildoers) , sometimes even of reprimanding and chiding them, either because we shrink from the labor or are ashamed to offend them, or because we fear to lose good friendships, lest this should stand in the way of our advancement, or injure us in some worldly matter, which either our covetous disposition desires to obtain, or our weakness shrinks from losing. So that, although the conduct of wicked men is distasteful to the good, and therefore they do not fall with them into that damnation which in the next life awaits such persons, yet, because they spare their damnable sins through fear, therefore, even though their own sins be slight and venial, they are justly scourged with the wicked in this world, though in eternity they quite escape punishment. Justly, when God afflicts them in common with the wicked, do they find this life bitter, through love of whose sweetness they declined to be bitter to these sinners.

Many churches even go so far as to state that "we are all equally bad." There is truth to this statement as we are all born sinners. But, as you have noticed from the quote above, St. Augustine had no trouble making a distinction between "wicked" men  and "good" men (those who repented and gave their life to Christ. ) The modern liberal idea that a church-going Granny is just as wicked as an unrepentant child-murderer because she sometimes engages in gossip is preposterous and ( dare I say? ) offensive to anyone with a functioning brain.

Of course, one should choose his opportunity to speak wisely. Sometimes it's better to hold your peace or wait until a suitable moment before speaking your mind or it will do more harm than good. Augustine agrees:

If any one forbears to reprove and find fault with those who are doing wrong, because he seeks a more seasonable opportunity, or because he fears they may be made worse by his rebuke, or that other weak persons may be disheartened from endeavoring to lead a good and pious life, and may be driven from the faith; this man's omission seems to be occasioned not by covetousness, but by a charitable consideration. 

However,  he then  goes to point out that it's not really charity but fear which often  makes Christians close their eyes to the evil around them:

But what is blame-worthy is, that they who themselves revolt from the conduct of the wicked, and live in quite another fashion, yet spare those faults in other men which they ought to reprehend and wean them from; and spare them because they fear to give offense, lest they should injure their interests in those things which good men may innocently and legitimately use...

They abstain from interference, because they fear that, if it fail of good effect, their own safety or reputation may be damaged or destroyed; not because they see that their preservation and good name are needful, that they may be able to influence those who need their instruction, but rather because they weakly relish the flattery and respect of men, and fear the judgments of the people, and the pain or death of the body; that is to say, their non-intervention is the result of selfishness, and not of love.

The situation presently is little different from what he describes. People fear doxxing and internet mobs coming after them. The consequences for heresy against the dominant religion of liberalism are very real and while they don't include death yet they may very well include the damage of reputation and good name. We aren't all born to be heroes and most of us have families to consider so I perfectly understand the reluctance of many to speak up.

There is one thing though: you don't have to attack those who do in order to virtue signal! The person who never uses his judgement isn't a better or more spiritual Christian, he's just really really unwise. And it's not sinful to have standards. In fact, it's probably sinful not to.