Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Living in tension as a libertarian Christian
Living in tension as a libertarian Christian
Feb 21, 2026 4:08 PM

A “libertarian Christian” might seem like an oxymoron to some Christians.

For Albert Mohler, the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, you cannot be both a faithful Christian and a libertarian. For him, libertarianism is defined only by exaltation of the ego, freedom from all moral restraints, and secular humanism—ideals that are hardly in line with a God-centric faith. The left-leaning Christian political activist Jim Wallis would agree. For Wallis, libertarian political philosophy does not line up with what the Bible says about government authority, and the libertarian’s strong emphasis on individual rights can violate mon good, leaving the poor to fend for themselves.

When I told my conservative Christian parents my political perspective was inching ever closer to libertarianism, they looked at me like they expected me to start defending drug use and prostitution. (I didn’t.)

Finding my way from neo-conservativism to libertarianism e without many intellectual tensions along the way. Not realizing its niche status, Ayn Rand’s famous atheism and moral philosophy of Objectivism was nearly enough to scare me away from libertarian thought entirely. But the more I explored, the more I found consistency between political liberty and my faith. I also met many other libertarian Christians who were wrestling with the same ideas.

Locating the Tension

One of them, Jacqueline Isaacs, spoke at Acton on Tap last month about Called to Freedom: Why You Can Be Christian and Libertarian, the book we co-authored together with four of our peers,Isaacs explained why she believes it’s possible to reconcile Christianity and libertarianism, but zeroed in on why life as a libertarian Christian is not possible without experiencing tension in its many forms—an fortable reality she and I have both learned to accept.

Adhering to the non-aggression principle, which condemns the initiation of force against other persons or property, is what separates most libertarians from free-market conservatives. Libertarian political thought brings into question the traditional conservative tendency to regulate moral issues, such as outlawing casinos or regulating alcohol consumption through strict licensing laws and high taxes.

Unsurprisingly, one protest we often hear from conservative Christians goes something like this: “But I don’t want my children to grow up in a society where X is acceptable.” Fill in the blank with gambling, smoking marijuana, gay marriage, or any choice that might be considered immoral or controversial in the context of Christian teaching. What the conservative Christian tends not to realize is that the libertarian Christian doesn’t want this kind of world either — a world where virtue and vice are blurred. Enter: the tension.

How can the libertarian Christian want to live in a virtuous society, but also a free society that allows others to choose good or to choose evil, so long as they are not harming someone else? The libertarian Christian takes this question and considers which institutional sphere of influence is best suited for the job of “morality influencer”: the government, the free market, or the church.

Libertine Libertarianism vs. Christian Libertarianism

While a libertine libertarian, or someone who is not necessarily concerned with objective morality, might say, “leave it to the market to decide,” the libertarian Christian isn’t satisfied with that answer.

Her libertarian side would argue that the government is not an effective enforcer of morality—and when it tries to be, the cost is great. History shows that Prohibition never stopped speakeasies or bootleggers. America kept on drinking, even as organized crime spiked. Even the Congressmen and Senators who voted to pass the amendment purchased booze from their own personal bootlegger, George Cassidy. Similarly, the war on drugs has yielded the world’s highest incarceration rate with a price tag of about $1 trillion to date. Yet drug addiction rates remain unchanged.

While God is at work everywhere—in our office buildings, in our homes, and even in the white marble halls of Capitol Hill—the libertarian Christian does not believe we can look to the government as the chief administrator of morality. It’s simply not cut out for the job.

On the other hand, in influencing society’s moral code, the libertarian Christian’s faith would tell her she’s not off the hook. The life-changing power of the Gospel is surely the only true way to transform individual lives and orient full cultures towards Christian virtue. God gave us his church as an earthly means to spread the message of Christ and redeem a broken world through grace. The libertarian Christian knows that the church as a whole, including herself as a part of the body of Christ, carries a great responsibility in transforming culture—an area in which the government will always fall short.

To the libertarian Christian, the answer to the question of which institutional sphere is the best influencer of morality is not the government or the free market, but the church.

Humility in Doing Good

Recognizing the limitations of the government takes great humility. It es with an inherent tension core to our nature. We are a people who want to be led. In 1 Samuel 8, the Israelites begged for a King to lead them despite Samuel’s warnings that the ruler would oppress them and plunder their property. We expect our leaders to fix problems and achieve progress—or at least just try to do something. In Congress, “getting things done” is nearly regarded as a cardinal virtue, even if es at the expense of our liberty. We are fortable existing in our fallen world and all the tension es with it, so we grab at anything to try to fix it. There’s something about just “doing something” about a problem that feels good, even if the solution turns out to be severely flawed.

But some things just can’t be fixed—by the government at least. Sometimes, we mustn’t always do something, and that might feel unnatural to many. The libertarian Christian accepts this fortable tension. She knows that political action isn’t always the answer because she knows governments can’t save the world from sin. She knows that, ultimately, only Christ is the fixer of her nation’s problems. She knows when to “do less.” She knows when to be still and pray.

But the libertarian Christian also knows when to act. She knows that with es great responsibility. In What’s Wrong with the World, G.K. Chesterton says, “Most modern freedom is at root fear. It is not so much that we are too bold to endure rules; it is rather that we are too timid to endure responsibilities.” The libertarian Christian knows timidity is not an option. She knows if she wants liberty, she must take up the burdens e along with it. She follows God’s call to do good in the world and she strives to exemplify Christ’s love as best she can, even though she knows she will fall short. She is intentional in building relationships with her family, her church, munity, and those on the margins of society. The libertarian Christian knows what Lord Acton taught—that freedom is for doing what we ought, not what we like—and she lives accordingly.

Making Peace with the Tension

In her Acton on Tap lecture, Isaacs says that instead of trying to make peace between libertarianism and her Christian faith, she’s more focused on “making peace with the inherent tension.” The tension between freedom and virtue. The tension in remaining still when we want to act. The tension in acting faithfully when our efforts feel miniscule. The tension of existing in an imperfect, finite world while what we truly desire is a perfect, eternal heaven.

Christians, she says, are well acquainted with tension. Christian author John Stott illustrates this when he says we are living in the “already” and the “not yet,” meaning Christians are already redeemed by the blood of Christ, but not yet fully restored as e in final consummation. “When we examine our political philosophy and our faith and find tension, we ought not to be surprised,” says Isaacs.

The tension won’t resolve until Christ returns to restore heaven and earth. That’s when freedom and virtue will be reunited. Until then, we’ll have to live with the tension—and that’s something that, as libertarian Christians, Jacqueline and I have both accepted.

Image:NYC – St Patrick Cathedral – Facade and Atlas,Jean-Christophe BENOIST(CC BY 3.0)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Acton Commentary: Race Alarmists Hijack Black History Month
Ignore those racial disparity studies that point to the “resegregation” of America’s educational system. They advance the lie that minorities cannot survive without whites. “What is best for e black and Latino students is what is best for all students: stable and supportive families, parental options, and high achieving schools with stellar teachers,” Bradley writes. Read mentary at the Acton website, and then discuss it here. ...
Kaarlgard Declares ‘Failure of Morality, Not Capitalism’
In a Forbes blog post titled “Failure of Morality, Not Capitalism,” Rich Kaarlgard counters the critics of supply-side capitalism by pointing to an absence of morality. Kaarlgard declares: Many people do blame capitalism for bringing us to this low moment in the economy. Do they have a point? They do if capitalism, as they define it, is devoid of any underlying morality. True enough, it is hard to see any underlying morality when one surveys the present carnage caused by...
Debunking the New Deal
It’s long been my contention that the mythology surrounding the New Deal in large swaths of the popular imagination plays an ongoing, important, and harmful role in politics and policy debate. For that reason, I e periodic attempts to debunk the myth. Jonah Goldberg offers a perceptive and enlightening perspective on New Deal historiography and its current uses and abuses. Unlike Daniel Gross (cited by Goldberg), I don’t care whether the analyst is an historian, economist, policy wonk, or journalist,...
PBR: On Faith
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” Perhaps taking a cue from this week’s PBR question (or perhaps not), the On Faith roster of bloggers have been asked to weigh in on the following question this week: “Should the Obama Administration let faith-based programs that receive government grants discriminate against those they hire or serve?” Notable responses include those from Chuck Colson, Al Mohler, and Susan Brooks Thistlewaite, the latter of whom has these...
PBR: A Genuine Challenge to Religious Liberty
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” Jordan Ballor kindly asked me to offer a few words in response to this question, as I made it an area of expertise during the previous Administration. I’ve been working up to writing something more formal, but I’ll begin by thinking aloud here, as well as at my my home blog. Without further ado, here’s what I posted over there: By now, you’ve probably heard about the...
Acton Commentary: Choosing a Prosperous Future
“Focusing on education is not a distraction from the pressing business of economic recovery,” Kevin Schmiesing writes. “It is vital to ensuring it.” This focus should advance school choice and a reduction of administrative red tape. Read mentary at the Acton website, and share ments below. ...
Roepke was right
In my Winter 2007 article on economic globalization for AGAIN Magazine, I quoted economist Wilhelm Roepke. (AGAIN is published by Conciliar Media Ministries, a department of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Church of North America). Roepke: Economically ignorant moralism is as objectionable as morally callous economism. Ethics and economics are two equally difficult subjects, and while the former needs discerning and expert reason, the latter cannot do without humane values. In light of all that has happened with the U.S. economic...
PBR: Public Good and the Faith-Based Initiative
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” I have little confidence in the future of the faith-based initiative because conservatives who gain office are unwilling to take any fire at all in order to advance the cause beyond concept. At the same time, liberals will be unable to make productive use of the idea because of giant fissures regarding public religion in their movement. In theory, President Obama would make an ideal person to...
America’s Secular Challenge
I’ve been reading America’s Secular Challenge by NYU professor and president of the Hudson Institute Herb London. The book is essentially an extended essay about how elite, left-wing secularism undercuts America’s traditional strengths of patriotism and religious faith during a time when the nation can ill afford it. The assault on public religion and love of es in a period when America faces enemies who have no such crisis of identity and lack the degree of doubt that leaves us...
The Buckleyization of America
William F. Buckley, 1956: [I’d] sooner be governed by the first two thousand people in the Boston telephone directory than by the two thousand members of the faculty of Harvard University. Rassmussen poll results, 2009: Forty-four percent (44%) voters also think a group of people selected at random from the phone book would do a better job addressing the nation’s problems than the current Congress, but 37% disagree. Twenty percent (20%) are undecided. ...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved