- The State of the Debate by Jacqueline Otto
- An Unequal Treaty by Jeremy Kolassa
- The Death of Fusionism by Clark Ruper
- Avoiding Confusionism: Liberty and Civil Society by Jordan Ballor
What these differing conceptions of liberty amount to, in my view, is this: one views liberty, particularly political liberty, as an important and yet limited good, while the other views liberty as an end in itself, in fact the highest end of human life itself. The former view of political liberty is primarily that it is an instrumental good that is a necessary condition for the realization of even greater goods in other spheres, like the family, the church, voluntary associations, markets, and so on. The latter view holds liberty in the political realm to be, in some significant sense, the highest expression of human good and a codification of the freedom of choice as a good as such. To put it bluntly, one views liberty as the freedom to do what we ought, while the other views liberty as the freedom to do what we want.I would add that limitation of the state is an important component of government in a fallen world. It limits the evil of evil men. The Kingdom of God ruled over by Jesus could be quite expansive without the destructive effects that man's imitation of this kingdom causes. That said, love constrains us in the Kingdom of God which suggests that servants of the Lord are given much liberty, liberty to love as they ought.