Maybe we’re all liberal, then? One of the more interesting aspects of this rather fluid definition of liberalism is that “cultural outlook” needn’t be a specific cultural outlook. Which is why when @ZacharyGarris and his sort of patriarchalist speak in this way, it’s important to be reminded that those who believe they’re immune from cultural bias are often the ones most susceptible to exactly that. For example, Garris’s perspective that women working outside the home is “feminism” has nothing to do with scripture or even the vast majority of church history. Instead, it’s largely derived from overly-romanticized Victorian sensibilities brought about by 19th century industrialization. So, according to this definition of liberalism, I can’t help but see that at least some aspects of his patriarchalism must be considered New Liberalism. Of course, all of this is why we should try not to define truth OR error by looking to culture. This is a good reminder if you’re looking at 2026 California or 1850 Georgia. This is a good reminder if your tendency is to adopt the culture of today or the remembered culture of a favored time period (mythologized or not). Similarly, it’s a good reminder if your tendency is to just counter-signal whatever is going on today, as if the measuring stick is simply a contrarian and grumpy attitude toward the society we live in now.