Politics and Contemporary Christianity

[bronson]

Okay, I'm sorry, but I'm only addressing this to those who claim to be Christians - of any standing. Or are greatly interested in Christianity and the teachings of Jesus.
So if you're looking to attack religion in any way or slam Christianity just don't bother, coz I'm not interested in what you have to say.

This isn't about apologetics, doubt, refutation of the historical Jesus, or religious debate.
I'd just like to hear other Christian-ish peoples ideas on this.


Okay, so, if you are Christian, or there abouts...

1. What is your political stance

2. How do you justify this with your beliefs in Jesus and his teachings?


My problem:
Raised to fear the politically Left, which I now support. Wasn't even really aware about politics etc.
Communism was bad - because of its secular nature.

As I began to understand politics, I couldn't believe how much Christian Churches supported Conservatism.
Its like, if you're a Christian you're conservative. It freaked me out... coz I'm so anti-capitalist, anti-tradition (in alot of respects).

And it just seemed so messed up because no where in the teachings of Jesus could I find anything that supported Capitalism, or traditional institutionalised religion (which I know is just practical for Christians).

I mean, according to the 4 Biblical accounts, Jesus was all about social justice and social equality, right?
He treated women and men more equally than others did in those days.
He had empathy and compassion for any who were suffering.
He insisted multiple times on the love of others above the self.
He called religious zealots hypocrits
And whilst he taught in the institutional synagogue, he also taught outside, in towns, in peoples homes, at parties - wherever; it wasn't just a Sunday morning.



I know that religion and politics are cultural agents - affected in their own way and developed differently in different societies.


BUT HOW DOES A RELIGION BASED ON SUCH VALUES IDENTIFY WITH CONSERVATISM?!
Apart from the contemporary freedom of worship element (in my country anyway).

Of course... things are different today.
In my branch of the religion anyway... theres the liberal Leftys been introduced.

Its like:


Progressive < < < ME < < < < < < < < | > > > > > > > > > > > Conservative
liberal < < < ME < < < < < < < < < < < | > > > > > > > > > > > > traditional
Gender equality < ME < < < < < < < < | > > > > > > > > > > > Wives submit
Jesus died as an ultimate example < < | > >ME> Jesus died to redeem & save
Spiritual < Me < < < < < < < < < < < < | > > > > > > > > > > > > Religious
Community oriented < Me < < < < < < | > > > Family and Church Institution
Socially Just < Me < < < < < < < < < < |> > > > > >Tithe! ie Pay the leaders
Find ways around Biblical principals < < < Me > > > Bible literalists
Bible subjective < < < < < ME< | > > > > > > > Bible absolute truth
Morals more relative in a way < < < < < < Me | > > > > > > Traditional Morals
Unobtrusive < < < < < Me < < < < < | > > > > > > > > > > Highly evangelical
Alternative < < < < < < Me < < < < < < < | > > > > > > > > > > > Orthodox
Complex < < < < < < < < < < < < < < | > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simple


But both the Institutional Religious Right and Communal Spritual Left have elements that seem to go against things Jesus taught!


Confusion reigns.

 

[Mole]

The Social Credit Party and LaRouche, Candidate for President of the United States

I mean, according to the 4 Biblical accounts, Jesus was all about social justice and social equality, right?

I'm a baptised and confirmed christian but rather than Jesus being all about social justice He said, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's".

In Canberra christianity is all about social justice, but I look around and can find not one Court of Social Justice. We do have Courts of Justice equal to the best in the world, but not one Court of Social Justice. So I can only conclude that social justice is the kind of justice you have when you are not having any justice.

In fact the doctrine of Social Justice was invented in the 19th Century to counter the doctrine of Marxism.

And the doctrine of Social Justice was directed at poor farm workers who were moving in large numbers in the 19th Century into the industrial factories. And these poor peasant farmers already had prejudices against bankers and usurers who lent them money to plant their crops. And to whom they were perennially in debt. So they were fertile ground for the doctrine of Social Justice.

And so the christian doctrine of Social Justice was based on anti-usury. And we all know who the usurers were. They were the Jews. So the christian doctrine of Social Justice is based on age-old christian doctrine of anti-semitism.

And indeed the christian doctrine of Social Justice led to the creation of the Social Credit Party at the beginning of the 20th Century. The key platform of the Social Credit Party was to take control of the Central Bank and the issue of all Credit. And the Social Credit Party was an anti-semitic Party that found some electoral success among farmers and anti-semites in New Zealand and Canada.

And today the doctrines of Social Credit have found their home with Lyndon Hermyle LaRouche, Jr. who perennially stands for President of the United States. Why, just yesterday I was taking to The Citizens Electoral Council of Australia (CEC), part of the LaRouche Movement. And they told me to, "Fuck off". A similar response I get when I critique MBTI or astrology here.

And interestingly the Church of England did not adopt the doctrine of Social Justice but the Roman Catholic Church did invent and adopt the doctrine of Social Justice. And as a result the Church of England lost the loyalty of the industrial poor while the Roman Catholic Church kept the loyalty of the industrial poor. So much so the Church of England was described as the Tory Party at prayer.

And it not only the christians who use the doctrine of Social Justice for propaganda purposes, Hamas the terrorist organisation also uses the doctrine of Social Justice to good effect.

In short the doctrine of Social Justice is based on anti-semitism. And is the kind of justice you have when you are not having any justice. And naturally today it appeals to the bien-pensant, quite like astrology or MBTI.

 

[Take Five]

I'm a baptised and confirmed christian but rather than Jesus being all about social justice He said, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's".

In Canberra christianity is all about social justice, but I look around and can find not one Court of Social Justice. We do have Courts of Justice equal to the best in the world, but not one Court of Social Justice. So I can only conclude that social justice is the kind of justice you have when you are not having any justice.

In fact the doctrine of Social Justice was invented in the 19th Century to counter the doctrine of Marxism.

And the doctrine of Social Justice was directed at poor farm workers who were moving in large numbers in the 19th Century into the industrial factories. And these poor peasant farmers already had prejudices against bankers and usurers who lent them money to plant their crops. And to whom they were perennially in debt. So they were fertile ground for the doctrine of Social Justice.

And so the christian doctrine of Social Justice was based on anti-usury. And we all know who the usurers were. They were the Jews. So the christian doctrine of Social Justice is based on age-old christian doctrine of anti-semitism.

And indeed the christian doctrine of Social Justice led to the creation of the Social Credit Party at the beginning of the 20th Century. The key platform of the Social Credit Party was to take control of the Central Bank and the issue of all Credit. And the Social Credit Party was an anti-semitic Party that found some electoral success among farmers and anti-semites in New Zealand and Canada.

And today the doctrines of Social Credit have found their home with Lyndon Hermyle LaRouche, Jr. who perennially stands for President of the United States. Why, just yesterday I was taking to The Citizens Electoral Council of Australia (CEC), part of the LaRouche Movement. And they told me to, "Fuck off". A similar response I get when I critique MBTI or astrology here.

And interestingly the Church of England did not adopt the doctrine of Social Justice but the Roman Catholic Church did invent and adopt the doctrine of Social Justice. And as a result the Church of England lost the loyalty of the industrial poor while the Roman Catholic Church kept the loyalty of the industrial poor. So much so the Church of England was described as the Tory Party at prayer.

And it not only the christians who use the doctrine of Social Justice for propaganda purposes, Hamas the terrorist organisation also uses the doctrine of Social Justice to good effect.

In short the doctrine of Social Justice is based on anti-semitism. And is the kind of justice you have when you are not having any justice. And naturally today it appeals to the bien-pensant.

Yet again, this is incorrect. Christian social justice was not conceived as a Jew-hating idea to subvert support from the Marxists. If you'd take the time to check out Catholic Social Teaching, you will find that there are condemnations against discrimination and persecution of Jews and others. It's not just about "poor farmers" as Social Teaching also includes stances against capital punishment, abortion, stances for environmental concern...the list goes on and on with issues discrediting your assumption.

While there are certainly sects of Christianity that are blatantly strong conservatives, this is not universal for all Christian groups. One thing to realize is that even those conservative groups are not subverting Jeus' message about social justice. More accurately, they don't trust the government in handling that role. For example, they prefer to depend on charity over taxes for welfare programs, because they think charity is more efficient. Also their stances on gay marriage and abortion clearly line up with conservatives platforms. So while in terms of government function, they prefer the government not to be the primary agent of social justice, that is not to say that they have no concern for social justice at all.

1. I'm conservative politically, raised Catholic

2. I don't sense any contradictions of being able to live my understanding of Jesus, while being a conservative.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm a baptised and confirmed christian but rather than Jesus being all about social justice He said, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's".

Note that, in context, he said this in context of paying taxes -- the Jewish leaders were trying to get him marked as a political dissident in the eyes of the Romans and had hoped that they could get him to encourage people to not pay taxes, but he wisely decided to not go there. It didn't fit his intended purpose, according to scripture.

Not sure how that impacts the rest of your post.
I won't debate it more here, but we can talk about it in a different thread if there's an issue.

(Meanwhile, I'm going to sit this one out for awhile and read some other responses as they come in...)

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

In class now, but when I get the time, I'm gonna contribute.

 

[Mole]

Christian social justice was not conceived as a Jew-hating idea to subvert support from the Marxists.

Quite recently the Pope has admitted the Roman Catholic Church was, and I quote, "anti-Judaic", for two thousand years. And this Pope publicly apologised for the Church's anti-Judaicism.

Of course, "anti-Judaism", is a weasel word for anti-semitism.

And the Pope couldn't bring himself to use the word, anti-semitism. For, two thousand years of anti-semitism prepared the ground for the holocaust of the Jews.

And although the Church is prepared to admit to anti-Judaicism, it is not prepared to take any responsibility for the holocaust.

Germany, for instance, has been prepared to take responsibility for the holocaust and has been paying monetary reparation to the Jewish victims ever since.

It's bad enough that the Church has been forced to pay vast monetary reparations to its victims of child rape. Paying compensation to the Jews would be too much. You can understand their position.

 

[Mole]

Note that, in context, he said this in context of paying taxes -- the Jewish leaders were trying to get him marked as a political dissident in the eyes of the Romans and had hoped that they could get him to encourage people to not pay taxes, but he wisely decided to not go there. It didn't fit his intended purpose, according to scripture.

Jesus thought the world was coming to an end in his own lifetime or that of his followers, so He had no interest in social justice. He was interested in salvation.

Social justice was an invention of the 19th Century in order to keep peasants, who were moving off the farm into the industrial factories, from being lost to Marxism and to keep them loyal to the Church. And it worked in Europe but not in England. For the Church of England abandoned the industrial poor and put them in the Workhouse.

And this was evident in Australia where the Church of England served the Ascendant rich while the Roman Catholic Church served the poor, particularly by providing education and hospitals. And to this day the Roman Catholic Church runs a vast school and University system in Australia, at government expense, as well as hospitals and hospices.

 

[Totenkindly]

Jesus thought the world was coming to an end in his own lifetime or that of his followers, so He had no interest in social justice. He was interested in salvation.

Tied in with his invitation to become part of the "kingdom of God," yes.
Which sort of offered a new way to live, a kingdom run by new rules -- salvation meant leaving one world and entering another, so to speak. This isn't social justice per se but some people might mistake it as such.

So how do modern Christians view the implementation of social justice vs this new "kingdom"? Is there a difference between what they are doing/perceiving and what Jesus seemed to suggest?

 

[Mole]

Tied in with his invitation to become part of the "kingdom of God," yes.
Which sort of offered a new way to live, a kingdom run by new rules -- salvation meant leaving one world and entering another, so to speak. This isn't social justice per se but some people might mistake it as such.

So how do modern Christians view the implementation of social justice vs this new "kingdom"? Is there a difference between what they are doing/perceiving and what Jesus seemed to suggest?

Social justice is as bogus as astrology or MBTI.

Justice here is delivered by a properly constituted Court. And there is not one, not one, Social Justice Court in all of Australia. So not one Australian Subject can get social justice in Court. And there is no, absolutely no, social justice legislation in Australia to which a Subject can appeal.

So a reasonable person would conclude that social justice is the kind of justice you are having when you are not having any justice.

So social justice is a tool of propaganda and is bogus.

And the proof of the pudding is in the eating as I get the same response when I critique social justice to the American LaRouche Party or when I critique the American MBTI.

And both the LaRouche Party and MBTI found their origins in the first part of the 20th Century. And both are tarred with the same brush.

But look, you can vote for LaRouche to be your President, but we don't want him here.

 

[Totenkindly]

Social justice is as bogus as astrology or MBTI.

Justice here is delivered by a properly constituted Court. And there is not one, not one, Social Justice Court in all of Australia. So not one Australian Subject can get social justice in Court. And there is no, absolutely no, social justice legislation in Australia to which a Subject can appeal.

So a reasonable person would conclude that social justice is the kind of justice you are having when you are not having any justice.

So social justice is a tool of propaganda and is bogus.

And the proof of the pudding is in the eating as I get the same response when I critique social justice or when I critique astrology or MBTI to the LaRouche Party or Typology Central.

I can move this to another thread if you'd like to start a new topic, otherwise stick with the OP please (as I'll try to do). Thnx.

 

[Mole]

I can move this to another thread if you'd like to start a new topic, otherwise stick with the OP please (as I'll try to do). Thnx.

Contemporary christianity led directly to the Social Credit Party and to the LaRouche Political Movement.

This is directly on the topic.

To move my posts would be partisan.

 

[Take Five]

Quite recently the Pope has admitted the Roman Catholic Church was, and I quote, "anti-Judaic", for two thousand years. And this Pope publicly apologised for the Church's anti-Judaicism.

Of course, "anti-Judaism", is a weasel word for anti-semitism.

And the Pope couldn't bring himself to use the word, anti-semitism. For, two thousand years of anti-semitism prepared the ground for the holocaust of the Jews.

And although the Church is prepared to admit to anti-Judaicism, it is not prepared to take any responsibility for the holocaust.

Germany, for instance, has been prepared to take responsibility for the holocaust and has been paying monetary reparation to the Jewish victims ever since.

It's bad enough that the Church has been forced to pay vast monetary reparations to its victims of child rape. Paying compensation to the Jews would be too much. You can understand their position.

Wrong again.

1. Anti-Judaism does not necessarily mean anti-semitism. The Church may have wanted Jews to convert to Christianity, but this was not necessarily based on racist ideology.

2. Actually, since you are inclined to use Pope speeches as evidence, perhaps you should peruse the one given by John Paul II in which he apologized for Church inaction during the holocaust. Indeed, the Church has reaffirmed the everlasting legitimacy of the Jewish covenant with God, and made religious freedom a top foreign policy priority. You may also wish to tell others how priests were murdered along with the Jews during the holocaust, and how after WWII, the Soviets relentlessly made efforts to repress the Church. During Nazi occupation of Poland, the future Pope John Paul II studied clandestinely in a secret seminary, due to Nazi repression of Polish intelligentsia.

3. I can't stress enough how bogus it is to assume that Catholic Social Justice was not aimed at taking away support from Marxism. If it had any purely political reasons behind it, it was to preserve the legitimacy of the papacy. You'll find that the papacy's emphasis on spiritual and social concerns increased after the Papal States were dissolved. While certain Pope's were strongly opposed to Marxism and Leninism, there is too much within Catholic Social Justice too limit it to any particular political philosophy. It's more than politics. Anyone with a basic knowledge and understanding of the teaching knows this.

4. It is of course ridiculous to say that social justice equates to no justice. What is true, is that people disagree on what social justice is. Certainly from a viewpoint of Christianity, social justice is not limited to governmental laws and policies. Though just war, fair wages, and environmental concern may and should be addressed by the government, it is not the sole responsibility of any government to take care of these things. Government is not the only arbiter of justice--justice not covered by courts and laws is the responsibility of individuals, so long as those actions are within the boundaries of just laws. Social Justice is justice, but not everything it encompasses is the responsibility of government alone. And aside from that, who ever said that governments were always just?

 

[Ruthie]

I'm a Christian, and I'm very solidly on the political Left. I agree with most of what you say: it baffles me that so many Christians can draw a conservative message from the teachings of Christ. You're definitely right about the social justice component of Christ's message, as well as His teachings on peace.

Unlike you though, I'm not anti-tradition - I actually like tradition very much, and while I'm pretty far to the Left on most issues, I do have some issues with the cultural Left. I don't really have a political stance on abortion, because I really can see both sides. I am sincerely concerned by divorce rates and particularly with children being raised by single parents. But even those can be addressed in part with liberal solutions - zeroing in on anti-poverty programs, access to marriage counseling, etc... I do support same-sex marriage, and believe that marriage itself is a social stabilizer and should be encouraged in society.

I don't know that I'm a good example of the Christian Left, mainly because I haven't attended church regularly in more than 20 years. I was raised Baptist, but my family left the church when I was 8. I tried a few of the liberal churches (United Church of Christ, specifically) but it didn't really fit. The social justice message was there, but at times it felt a little more like a community service group than a church. I've recently considered converting to Catholicism; the mix of social justice and traditionalism has an appeal there, even though I wouldn't agree with some of the stricter teachings.

You're not alone though: there's an active and growing community of Left-leaning Christians.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

It's my understanding that the Right actively constructed their position to include the demographic of Christians by including moral positions in their political platform that corresponds to the morals held by the majority of Christianity. In this way the Right is an interesting mix of military hawks, Wall Street Capitalists, and the Religious Right. Those are three groups that don't necessarily share the same position or philosophy, but in order to gain a majority the political Right takes positions that accommodates each group, since their interests are not seen as directly overlapping. The OP points out certain ways that the underlying philosophies of these different groups actually do overlap and conflict. It is a compartmentalized, rather than a homogeneous political platform that currently forms the Right.

Edit: Contemporary Christianity has also responded to underlying philosophical conflict in the Right by adapting its own philosophies in the form of the Prosperity Gospel which is a religious component to the ideals of Capitalism.

 

[Take Five]

I'm a Christian, and I'm very solidly on the political Left. I agree with most of what you say: it baffles me that so many Christians can draw a conservative message from the teachings of Christ. You're definitely right about the social justice component of Christ's message, as well as His teachings on peace.

Unlike you though, I'm not anti-tradition - I actually like tradition very much, and while I'm pretty far to the Left on most issues, I do have some issues with the cultural Left. I don't really have a political stance on abortion, because I really can see both sides. I am sincerely concerned by divorce rates and particularly with children being raised by single parents. But even those can be addressed in part with liberal solutions - zeroing in on anti-poverty programs, access to marriage counseling, etc... I do support same-sex marriage, and believe that marriage itself is a social stabilizer and should be encouraged in society.

I don't know that I'm a good example of the Christian Left, mainly because I haven't attended church regularly in more than 20 years. I was raised Baptist, but my family left the church when I was 8. I tried a few of the liberal churches (United Church of Christ, specifically) but it didn't really fit. The social justice message was there, but at times it felt a little more like a community service group than a church. I've recently considered converting to Catholicism; the mix of social justice and traditionalism has an appeal there, even though I wouldn't agree with some of the stricter teachings.

You're not alone though: there's an active and growing community of Left-leaning Christians.

I can definitely see where Ruthie is coming from, not that I'm on the political left. I get the sense that there are some churches blatantly conservative, and others blatantly liberal, each with their strengths and weaknesses.

Here is one issue with which I am proud of my Catholic Church. Our policy on voting is that each person must prayerfully discern which political candidate will best carry out justice. It serves no party inherently, and Catholics are fairly evenly split between Democrat and Republican in the US. You can easily see the tension within the US Conference of Bishops, that are ardently anti-abortion, pro-social welfare, and anti-death penalty.

 

[Mole]

Our policy on voting is that each person must prayerfully discern which political candidate will best carry out justice.

Here we vote for politicians to legislate and judges are appointed to deliver justice.

For a politician to deliver justice or a judge to legislate, would be to violate the Separation of Powers.

It would be simply unconstitutional.

 

[Litvyak]

1. Anti-Judaism does not necessarily mean anti-semitism. The Church may have wanted Jews to convert to Christianity, but this was not necessarily based on racist ideology.

Pff

 

[Take Five]

Here we vote for politicians to legislate and judges are appointed to deliver justice.

For a politician to deliver justice or a judge to legislate, would be to violate the Separation of Powers.

It would be simply unconstitutional.

In America legislation is supposed to be just in the first place. We like to hold all of our politicians responsible, and disagree that just actions are not only the responsibility of the courts. After all, the Supreme Court Justices are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and just legislators are probably more likely to confirm just judges. I, as an American, prefer to see justice being served in all levels of government, though I am disappointed at times.

 

[Mole]

I'm a Christian, and I'm very solidly on the political Left.

C'mon, next you will be telling me that Jesus is on the Political Left.

And I guess your Political Right will tell me He is on the Right.

None of our politicians would dare to claim that Jesus is on their side, 'cause we would laugh them out of Parliament.

 

[Mole]

In America legislation is supposed to be just in the first place. We like to hold all of our politicians responsible, and disagree that just actions are not only the responsibility of the courts. After all, the Supreme Court Justices are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and just legislators are probably more likely to confirm just judges. I, as an American, prefer to see justice being served in all levels of government, though I am disappointed at times.

Politics is the art of the possible. It is about competing goods. It is about compromise. And it is about compromise that is determined by the vote.

Whereas justice is determined by the rule of law. And only the Courts are qualified to determine the rule of law. Only the Courts can deliver justice. To look for justice in politics has the smell of totalitarianism.

I am sure you know that the first thing the totalitarians do is to take justice our of the hands of the Courts into their own hands.