by Peter Davison
Q: What do people mean when they use terms like "conservative," "liberal," "orthodox" or "progressive?"
A: In "Through the Looking Glass," Lewis Carroll has Humpty Dumpty say to Alice, "When I use a word, it means exactly what I intend it to mean, nothing more and nothing less." Humpty says this contemptuously, which is how many people these days use labels, either to justify themselves or to condemn others. In other words, we often assume we know what these words mean, and use them to prevent real conversation, which usually brings out various understandings and shades of meaning. So let's take a look at these four words, which are often bandied about in religious and political circles alike.
The word "Conservative" is used to describe the current governing party in Canada, though it is really a coalition of former "Progressive Conservatives" and "Reform-Alliance" factions. Some former PCs have difficulty with this new incarnation of their party, dominated by "neo-conservatives" seen as socially regressive and economically somewhat libertarian, leaving little room for "Red Tories" who favour a more centrist position. Minority government, however, coupled with topsy-turvy positions taken by American "neo-conservatives" on government intervention and rescue packages for corporations, has led people to question what some parties really stand for. Similarly, provincial Liberals in Quebec are led by a former federal Conservative who increasingly plays the nationalist card; while British Columbia Liberals are mostly former Social Crediters whose policies are more aligned with federal Conservatives. In the United States, the term "liberal" is largely pejorative, used to convince "ordinary folk" like "Joe the plumber" (who, it turns out, isn’t Joe or really a plumber), not to let "tax-and-spend liberals" take away their earnings. Yet it's the so-called "conservatives" in the USA who have driven the nation, and the world, into unparalleled debt, and now propose corporate "rescue packages" funded by those same "ordinary folk," while increasing tax cuts for the super-rich!
For Anglicans these days, the words "conservative" and "orthodox" are used to describe those who claim "traditional Anglicanism" over against "liberals" accused of eroding the faith. Yet these same "conservative" or "orthodox" people often take a very narrow view of Christian Tradition. Some limit it to sixteenth century Reformation documents, objecting to "liberal" liturgies based on much earlier sources for the renewal of our worship. They see "orthodoxy" as narrow dogmatism, and "liberalism" as outright unbelief. On the other side, "liberalism" at its best combines deep faith with openness to dialogue, realising that any significant conversation can occur only when all parties speak out of conviction, but with mutual respect. This is quite different from a false liberalism that says, in the end, "nothing matters, anything goes." Liberalism is not indifference!
This leaves us with the adjective, "progressive." Some misuse it in the same way they misuse "liberal." However, a growing network of people recognizes a need to work at mutual understanding and co-operation. For them, respect for differences can also lead to the discovery of much common ground. For them faith should not be confused with ideology, which represents a closed system, while faith has always known truth is greater than our ability to grasp it. The mystery of faith leads us to worship a God who cannot be domesticated, and into seeing that persons cannot be labelled and dismissed at whim. Anglican tradition has always combined seemingly irreconcilable positions within a "big tent." This often makes life more difficult; but fomenting schism to create the illusion that we are all the same has always left everyone as losers. Labelling is a dangerous game for all who practise it. We all need to use words with care, especially when we think we understand them!
