Can the Christian Culture (everywhere not just the West) be altered to focus more on progressive ideals like equality, fairness, and a just society? How can they be more willing to pursue ideas like wealth distribution, racial integration, women's and LGBT rights and more? How plausible is it and what would be the effects?
AHC/PC/WI: More Progressive Christian Culture
- Thread starter TickTock The Witch's Dead
- Start date
In my observation, weaker and more marginalised churches and denominations tend to focus more on Jesus teachings. When churches have power they tend to focus on preserving existing power structures.
For example, I found the Catholic church in England and Wales to be far, far more progressive than the one in America. Same church, different amounts of power.
And actually, if you look today, church figures, like Pope Francis and the Archbishop of Canterbury, are talking a better game on social justice than most politicians. Extreme Conservative Christianity is not a universal phenomenon at all.
But the church will never be completely liberal because that defeats the point. Religion is supposed to be a moral guide, not an enabler. And you don't need a priest encouraging you to "do what you feel like"
But in answer to your question: weaken the church
There is actually a very strong tradition of progressive, and even extreme leftist, Christianity. Liberation Theology was frequently accused of being Marxist-leaning. And of course, churches played a key role in the Civil Rights Movement (there's a reason so many of the key leaders were members of the clergy, from King on down).
Even today, the US is a strongly majority Christian country, and yet a Democrat has won the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 elections. And Jimmy Carter made his faith an explicit selling point in his campaign (to the point that the Reagan vs. Carter debate was much less clear cut in Evangelical circles than is now remembered). So there are certainly clearly plenty of US Christians who vote Democratic. Part of the problem is that (with the partial exception of many of the African-American church groups), American liberal Christians tend to want to strongly separate religion in politics in public life, while Christianity is in strong decline in Europe as a whole.
As to how to make leftwing Christianity more prominent? A Liberation Theology wank would be fascinating. If we restrict ourselves to strictly a US context, a Humphrey win in 1968 would likely strengthen the prominence of liberal Christians (as the African-American churches would be important players in the Democratic machine, and the conservative movement would likely be significantly weaker sans Nixon). Likewise, a Carter win in 1980 might blunt the growth of the Christian Right, discrediting many of the early Religious Right leaders by associating them with a failed movement in support of Reagan (which would be seen as having blown a winnable election).
Even today, the US is a strongly majority Christian country, and yet a Democrat has won the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 elections. And Jimmy Carter made his faith an explicit selling point in his campaign (to the point that the Reagan vs. Carter debate was much less clear cut in Evangelical circles than is now remembered). So there are certainly clearly plenty of US Christians who vote Democratic. Part of the problem is that (with the partial exception of many of the African-American church groups), American liberal Christians tend to want to strongly separate religion in politics in public life, while Christianity is in strong decline in Europe as a whole.
As to how to make leftwing Christianity more prominent? A Liberation Theology wank would be fascinating. If we restrict ourselves to strictly a US context, a Humphrey win in 1968 would likely strengthen the prominence of liberal Christians (as the African-American churches would be important players in the Democratic machine, and the conservative movement would likely be significantly weaker sans Nixon). Likewise, a Carter win in 1980 might blunt the growth of the Christian Right, discrediting many of the early Religious Right leaders by associating them with a failed movement in support of Reagan (which would be seen as having blown a winnable election).
Possibly have Pope John Paul I not die. It's been theorized that he would have struck a more moderate tone, in a manner similar to Pope Francis, had he lived as opposed to more hardline traditionalist approach of John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
Driftless
Donor
The Christian church's original foundation was the poor, the wretched refuse.... "It's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God" and all that goes with it. Matthew 19:24
But any institution that gets large enough to need a bureaucracy, tends to favor the well-connected and orthodox thinking. Change is a bad career move for many of those in power under those circumstances.....
But any institution that gets large enough to need a bureaucracy, tends to favor the well-connected and orthodox thinking. Change is a bad career move for many of those in power under those circumstances.....
In my opinion I believe the Catholic Church can still exist and be more progressive. All that needs to be done is separation of church and state, strip of their right to own property beyond church-related structures, alter the theology to match Protestant values of simplicity and loving your neighbor....
That's honestly what I got. What about your opinions?
tenthring
Banned
There are plenty of progressive christian denominations out there. The issue is they hemorrhage members fast and cease existing. If all you are is progressivism with Jesus on top then why bother with the Jesus part. Just become a secular progressive.
People go to church to learn the truth and live the way. Not to sing a few songs, be told how everything they want to do already is awesome, and then have coffee. Or to be part of some glorified NGO. At least the churches that last more then a single generation aren't like that.
Part of the problem is you don't know why the church believes what it beliefs. My guess is the best explanation you can come up with is that people are ignorant or cynical or hypocrites or whatever. If that's all you've got to explain 2,000 years of faith you aren't trying hard enough.
There are plenty of progressive christian denominations out there. The issue is they hemorrhage members fast and cease existing. If all you are is progressivism with Jesus on top then why bother with the Jesus part. Just become a secular progressive.
People go to church to learn the truth and live the way. Not to sing a few songs, be told how everything they want to do already is awesome, and then have coffee. Or to be part of some glorified NGO. At least the churches that last more then a single generation aren't like that.
Part of the problem is you don't know why the church believes what it beliefs. My guess is the best explanation you can come up with is that people are ignorant or cynical or hypocrites or whatever. If that's all you've got to explain 2,000 years of faith you aren't trying hard enough.
It's not that. It's just that the contemporary people I don't see enough progressive Christians getting enough attention and not having enough influence over people. I mean with the bigots and blatant hypocrites they do make Christisnity look bad.
I think you have a dramatic misunderstanding of the Catholic church's beliefs and principles. Growing up in America as a Protestant I had them myself for a long, long time. But such...misunderstandings are woven into the fabric of the Anglosphere, which has been slandering the church since Henry VIII had his little mid-life crisis, er...founded the church of England.
The fact is the Church has been talking about and emphasising the role of social justice since the very beginning. For most of European history, in fact, it was the only group talking about concern for the poor and peace. Catholic priests were the first to speak out against slavery and the exploitation of the natives in the New World. And the list goes on. The problem was, when it became powerful, the Church also became political because it started looking out for its own interests.
This is the way all religions go. Prophets are reformers, religions are political beasts. The bigger and more successful they are, the more conservative the religions become, in the main.
As for Protestant theology valuing simplicity and loving your neighbour -
Firstly, it doesn't. The five solas are the foundation of Protestant theology. And one, Sola fide, means that you needn't even bother with good works. Now most Protestants will say that you should do them anyway (and most decent ones will), but there's a psychological difference between must and should. The Catholic church teaches that works are a sign of faith. If you're not doing good works then your faith is lacking. Works aren't a definitive sign of faith but lack of works definitely reflects a lack of faith. And it is in fact (a minority of) Protestant denominations that teach something called the Prosperity Gospel, which says that riches on earth are a sign of favour in heaven and is, quite literally, the most unchristian thing I've heard in my life.
The fact is, you find the same dynamic in Protestant churches as in the Catholic. Small churches will be more about Jesus teachings, but larger ones? Not so much. I mean, how many Protestant leaders spoke out against the Iraq war the way JPII and Benedict did?
From creationism and the rest of anti-science, to homophobia, to anti-immigrant xenophobia I think you'll find it's large evangelical denominations which are the foundation of almost all the Conservative Christian energy of the day. And I wouldn't want to see the Catholic church in any way conform to this.
Disestablishment is a great idea though, fully in favour of that. Not sure about stripping the church of the right to own property outside of church buildings. The Catholic church is the largest non governmental provider of health care in the world, so it does need revenue for its works and its already in a lot of debt - has been for a while now.
Booster wrote:
I mean, how many Protestant leaders spoke out against the Iraq war the way JPII and Benedict did?
I wonder, though, to what extent the Popes' opposition to the Iraq War was rooted in concern about the fate of the Iraqi Christian communities in the event of a Baathist ouster?
As a comparison, was the RCC as vocal in its opposition to things like funding the contras in Nicaragua and backing various right-wing dictatorships in that region, when those groups and regimes were fighting the Church's Communist enemy?
I mean, how many Protestant leaders spoke out against the Iraq war the way JPII and Benedict did?
I wonder, though, to what extent the Popes' opposition to the Iraq War was rooted in concern about the fate of the Iraqi Christian communities in the event of a Baathist ouster?
As a comparison, was the RCC as vocal in its opposition to things like funding the contras in Nicaragua and backing various right-wing dictatorships in that region, when those groups and regimes were fighting the Church's Communist enemy?
There are three big reasons why American evangelical Christianity is right wing:
- The South is typically more conservative than the North, at least among the white community, and evangelical Christianity has the strongest following in the South
- The shameful silence or opposition of Evangelical Christianity on the 1950s-60s Civil Rights Movement
- One factor divided into three subfactors
- Roe v. Wade
- Francis Schaeffer's book A Christian Manifesto, which helped create the Christian Right
- The diverging platforms of the Democratic and Republican Parties with respect to abortion. If the Democratic party had not been monolithic on abortion issues, at least for presidential candidates and congressional leaders, you would have likely not seen the Catholic move to the GOP.
I think we're ignoring another aspect- many parts of the Left are extremely hostile to organized religion. Much of the Left ignored religious persecution in Russia/the USSR between 1917 and 1941. And even today, double standards like the AP refusing to show the Charlie Hebdo cartoons while still showing the Piss Christ pictures are usually criticized by the Right, not by the Left.
tenthring
Banned
There are plenty of progressive Christians. They have publications and media coverage and are very famous. Generally speaking most of the very powerful protestant Christian denominations to which most American presidents and American elites belonged all went progressive, some of them extremely progressive (Episcopal for instance).
The issue with all of them is that within a generation of becoming progressive everyone realizes that it makes a lot more sense to be a secular progressive then a progressive Christian. Progressive Christianity doesn't make any sense, it's a contradiction. Once people get over their lingering Christian sentiments which are at odds with their new ideology they just quietly stop going. Their faith ends not with a bang, but with a whimper. As people just slowly stop showing up on Sunday more and more until they don't even bother attending at all.
This is another big factor. While Ayn Rand certainly fills the same role on the Right, if Communism hadn't been anti-religion (even liberation theology is but a husk of Christianity), then you'd likely see greater diversity.
I can't lie and therefore should admit the fact that I do have a naive understanding about the organization. And what do you mean by disestablishment?
Catholics in the US are actually a pretty apolitical group, I looked up the numbers once (don't have them on hand) and they've voted pretty consistently down the middle in (almost, they turned out in force for JFK and Obama) major election. Indeed, prior to the election of Francis there was a big effort by figures like Cardinal Dolan to push American Catholics fully into the Republican camp, and it failed completely.
Actually the church opposed military aid to the Contras too. The Catholic church tends to be on the anti-war side. Though that tendency is rarely as strong as it should be.
http://articles.latimes.com/1987-08-01/local/me-164_1_u-s-catholic-bishops
Not to worry man, it's just one of those things common to the Anglosphere, individualism, anti-governmentalism, and anti-Catholicism are part of who we are
You'll have to forgive the info dump up there, it just bugs me all the myths about the church that are common wisdom in our society.Disestablishment is the separation of church and state.
Separating church and state would make the church more progressive and less likely to prop up existing power structures, but this will mean progressive in the broad sense - concern for the poor and anti-war. It's never going to be liberal on social issues because that requires a level of transience that is a big turn-off to most churchgoers. Religion, to most people, myself included, gives a sense of permanence in a changing world.
To elaborate on my earlier example, my church in England, even when preaching about "traditional marriage" went out of its way to state that homosexuals must not be discriminated against and are as loved by God as anyone else. By contrast, my church in America tends to (by which I mean always) leaves the second bit out. The Catholic church in England is a minority of a minority. The one in America, the largest subgroup of a majority. And even here, its more liberal than the biggest Evangelical denominations (accepting the scientific consensus on evolution and global warming for example) and is also historically weaker.
Or to put it in soundbite form - the church is at its best when it is at its weakest.
And though it pains me to say it, a broader spread of atheism might just be the best thing for left wing Christianity of all flavours.
GeographyDude
Gone Fishin'
I'm not sure His Holiness was really all that thrilled to receive the above gift.
I'm not sure His Holiness was really all that thrilled to receive the above gift.
As I understand it. he was rather....annoyed.