Talk:Christian left

The Christian Right is uniquely American? What about Opus Dei? Le Pen? Or the various clerical fascist parties of 20th century Europe?

Jimmy Carter is no Republican, but I question him as a "leftist". Also, I can make a strong case that William Jennings Bryan, the prosecutor in the "Scopes Monkey Trial", who while Secretary of State served no wine at state functions (hence the era of "grape juice diplomacy") was so socially conservative that free silver and a government newspaper don't make him sufficiently "left" to trump the above.

Rlquall 21:02, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Just a comment -- Wasn't early Prostentatism in America focused on a strong work ethic? To me at least, this contrasts with the socialist perspective that people are entitled to certain things ("rights") no matter what. Supreme Moolah of Iran 03:26, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Socialists often have a strong work ethic too. Also, socialist arguments focus on the immorality of capitalism, on the idea that a socialist system brings greater benefits to more people than a capitalist one, and on questions of private vs. public property. The principle that "people are entitled to certain things no matter what" comes only after those other, more important issues. -- Mihnea Tudoreanu 23:31, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I wouldn't think you would be putting Christian fascists on the same page as the religious right in America, even if more than a few figures have a tendency to make extreme comments about certain issues (particularly gays) Supreme Moolah of Iran 03:29, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've removed William Jennings Bryan and Jimmy Carter since they are essentially irrelevant to the article. In their place I have added Tony Campolo, Jim Wallis, and Ron Sider, in addition to a link that includes further resources. For now, that's all the updating I'm going to do here, hoping that someone with more knowledge of this topic will contribute. Michaelh 03:46, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Early Christian "left"

I've added a few points about the early Christian "left" (or more accurately since the term "left" did not yet exist, Christian anti-establishmentism or anti-materialism) but they need to be developed into proper paragraphs. Point is the "Christian left" didn't come out of nowhere in the 19th century, it draws on deep traditions within Christianity, traditions which date back to the time of Christ, and this should be mentioned in the article. AndyL 14:27, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Gorbachev quote

The article currently repeats the Mikhail Gorbachev quote about Jesus as the "first socialist" no fewer than four times, including in the opening paragraph. Once is enough. I don't think it needs to be in the top, since the idea is not expanded on, only repeated. Also, Gorbachev is a leftist, but is he a Christian? I'll leave the quote in the body, citing Gorbachev, but I'll remove the other three repetitions. Jonathunder 00:39, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

Actually, when I started to do this, I realized the Gorbachev quote isn't the only thing repeated. The article currently repeats sentences and even paragraphs, sometimes multiple times. What a mess. It needs plently of merciless pruning, but I don't have time right now. It's on my to do list. Jonathunder 00:53, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

At some point, most of the article was duplicated so I removed that. Also, I had removed the category "Christian fundamentalism", but it is back - can someone explain this? --Erauch 18:06, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I have removed it anyway. The same categorisation was added to 'modernist christianity' and I removed that one too. --Randolph 19:21, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Christian left?

Why is this article called 'Christian Left'? The more general category of 'Liberal Christianity' would be a better categorisation of this aspect of christianity. I was redirected here on searching for Liberal Christianity. Is anyone going to object if I start to incorporate this article into the larger category of liberal christianity? --Randolph 19:21, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

On second thoughts, it would be best to leave this article as a counterpoint to the 'Christian Right', and I will do something on Liberal Christianity instead. --Randolph 19:39, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't think Liberal Christianity is quite the same as, say, Christian Socialism or social gospel ie it's too narrow a term. AndyL 02:20, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Christian left is a counterbalance to Christian right, however, there is also mainstream Christianity, evangelical Christianity and even Christian communism which has definite historical roots. What all of these variations have in common is politics. I am thinking of creating a Christian politics (index) article to group all of these isms together to serve as a balance to Islam and politics ... right and left ... not to mention all of these other polemical "faiths". In fact I will do it right now. MPLX/MH 03:34, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Criteria for 'Notable Christian Leftists'

The criteria I used are that the person should have a strong association with both the Christian and the Left. E.g. priests who became MPs, or people who wrote on the intersection of Christianity and socialism. But people who are on the left and happen to profess a Christian denomination are not listed. I have gone through the many articles that mention Christian Socialism. I didn't add 19th century figures since I'm not yet sure that was the same phenomenon. --Erauch 04:47, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Is Karl Barth, hero to many conservatives/evangelicals, really part of the Christian left? I defer to others here, but it seems surprising to me. KHM03 00:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't know. I'm following the German article which says he was influenced by Christian Socialists, an adherent of Social Democracy, and against the Vietnam War and the arms race. --Erauch 01:59, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

I've added Hugo Chávez, as he claims a lot of inspiration from Jesus in regards to social issues. If you don't feel this is enough, then remove it.

Is he a Christian? Or is he just influenced by Jesus (a la Gandhi)? KHM03 18:38, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure he's a practicing Roman Catholic, and he's said that Judus was the capetalist for taking the coins and that Jesus was a revolutinary against the Roman Empire. I think his entry here is justified, but if you don't then so be it.

I'd question this, hasn't he expelled some missionaries and jailed dissident priests? Most Venezuelans claim a Roman-Catholic heritage and referencing Jesus for political purposes does not exactly support any religious devotion on Chavez part...jme66.72.215.225

Australia - Peter Garrett

I can find no evidence of Peter Garretts christianity. Alan Liefting 02:46, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See IV PG in Sydney Anglicans, also Report on Aust Chn politicians in "The Australian" generally known but documentation does seem scarce. Paul foord 07:41, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

UK- William Wilberforce

I added him. In a modern context, his persistent and faith inspired 50 year campaign against slavery surely make him a leftist Christian, though he lived at a time before these labels were appliable. Mindstar 7th December 2005

"in a modern context?", how exactly does opposing slavery make one a "leftist". Wilberforce is often cited by "Christian Right" folks like Chuck Colson and James Dobson, I think using him and for that matter John Wesley is a bit of a stretch, the left-right dichotomies of the USA and west Europe did not exist in their times and it's difficult to classify either man along those lines.

Liberation Theology

I think the section of the liberation theology should be given more prominence on this page as they are perhaps the most important exponents of the christian left today...2 lines is not enough —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burgas00 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

William Jennings Bryan

The way you discredit Wm. Jennings Bryan, you would also have to discredit Dorothy Day. 129.171.49.127 20:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article mustn't fall into the trap of thinking that everybody can be placed on some fictitious line that runs from left to right. We need to cover in the intro the specific beliefs that might be considered 'left wing', but which other left wing views might not be. I think it's also worth explaining what is driving the 'Christian left' - i.e. social justice and care for the disadvantaged. DJ Clayworth 17:06, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that we shouldn't fall into that trap. I also agree that social justice is the defining characteristic of the Christian left. I did a little correcting to grammar and sentence structure. Let me know if my additions were out of line. Kimathi 23:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Rogers and John Kerry

Can we give any conclusive evidence that Fred Rogers did, in fact, donate to John Kerry's 2004 Presidential campaign? And if he did, is that evidence enough to qualify him as a leftist? I'd like to think that Mister Rogers was a leftist, but with the lack of sourcing I can't be certain. Anyway, comment on this if you'd like.

Mister Mister 12:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that donating money to John Kerry's presidential campaign does not make one a leftist. The fact that Fred Rogers died almost two years before the election makes the claim particularly suspicious. Angr (talk • contribs) 12:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While Mr. Rogers did donated to Kerry's campaign I've decided I don't want him on this list since trying to classfy him politicaly demeans his memory. 132.241.246.111 16:18, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Jones as a member of the Christian Left?

Although the list of notable Christian leftists is somewhat subjective, I find nothing to indicate that Jim Jones is a representative of the Christian Left. Most would debate whether he is even simply Christian. To Angr: Why did you remove the edit? RelHistBuff 11:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see in the history that Angr has been insistent in putting Jones as a notable Christian leftist. Although there have been several edits removing this, Angr has placed it back. I believe this needs to be discussed. Looking at the sources, there is no support, one article mention that Jones believed in salvific power of socialism, but this is not an accepted doctrine among Christian leftists. Note that the source website also says that it is an "alternative" consideration of the Jonestown incident. One cannot simply state as there is a "source", a statement should be supported in a Wikipedia article. RelHistBuff 11:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been insistent on putting it back in because it seemed to me the sources do support the contention that early on his career at least, he was a Christian leftist. (By the time of the Jonestown incident he was indeed probably no longer Christian or leftist, though.) And it seemed to me people were removing him more from a feeling of "Ew, he was a lunatic cult leader, we don't want him on this page" than from sticking to the facts. When I get a chance, I'll re-read the sources. In the meantime, I don't want to get in a revert war over this. Angr (talk • contribs) 11:30, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no doubt that he supported socialism, which is an indication of being "leftist", but I think most socialists would disown him as a nut. His followers were under the delusion that they could escape to Russia, but there was no support from the Soviet government. As for whether he was Christian, that is also a subject of debate. There are many good examples of Christian leftists in the current list as it is. Why have such a debatable inclusion as Jim Jones?

RelHistBuff 11:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if the sources support it, why not? It seems entirely in the spirit of NPOV to show that the Christian Right doesn't have an absolute monopoly on megalomaniacal lunatics. Angr (talk • contribs) 12:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely support NPOV. I have been amazed at the neutrality of Wikipedia articles covering very controversial topics. But it doesn't really make sense that we have to search for "lunatics" in order to be balanced with another article. Besides, the list is subjective and it has a fine range of examples. I am sure that some would say that Al Sharpton is already in the fringe category. But adding Jones would really lower the quality of this article to the point that it would look like it has been vandalised.

RelHistBuff 13:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's the reason why those sources were added, precisely because he stands out as an unlikely Christian leftist. If the sources weren't there, it certainly would look like someone is having a little joke. But with the sources it's clear a case can be made that he was a Christian leftist, especially in his early days. Angr (talk • contribs) 14:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a case can be made that Jones was a Christian leftist at one time. But I will use an analogy. Martin Luther was an Augustinian monk during a significant portion of his life. But no one would place him in a list of "Notable Roman Catholics". Had he remained a monk, he might have made it into a footnote in some Roman Catholic article somewhere. Similarly, had Jones remained within the theology of the Disciples of Christ while practicing Christian socialism in Indianapolis, LA, or San Francisco, he might have made into the footnote of this article. But like Luther, Jones completely changed into something else that defined him in history. I still claim that adding him would lower the encyclopaedic value of this article. RelHistBuff 15:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]