Is There a Religious Left?
Monday December 1, 2008
Not yet, according to Jeff Sharlet. Sharlet was recently asked to contribute to a book on the supposed Religious Left, and he has posted the draft of his chapter at The Revealer (to which you all should subscribe).This is a...
Filed Under: conservatism, conservative, jeff sharlet, john dewey, killing the buddha, liberal, liberalism, morning joe, pat buchanan, ralph waldo emerson, the family, the revealer, william james
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
About The New Christians
Tony Jones is the author of many books, including The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier and The Sacred Way: Spiritual Practices for Everyday Life. He is a leader in the emergent church movement and a renowned expert on postmodern theology and the American church landscape.
Find out more about Tony, his books, and his speaking schedule at his website.
Subscribe
Tag Cloud
barack obama, bible, blogalogue, blogging, christian, christianity, christianity21, church, comment of the day, doctrine, emergent church, emerging church, gay issues, glbt, god, homosexuality, jesus, new testament, news, original sin, paul, politics, prayer, rod dreher, same sex marriage, scot mcknight, spirituality, theology, tony jones, transforming theology
It is very difficult to know what "left" and "right" mean in religious terms. Have you ever heard of the tmatt trio? It's a formula that is supposed to tell you where you stand on a left-right spectrum -- the only thing the author of this shibboleth doesn't tell you which answers indicate which direction.
But when it comes to people, it is easier.
The religious right (in the USA) is typified by Bob Jones.
The religious left by Dorothy Day.
And I know which one I prefer.
I vote for Dorothy Day.
Duh-sciple
Thanks for the kind words, Tony. Wondering if you come to your views on pragmatism by way of Cornel West -- that Emerson-Dewey "progressive pragmatism" tradition sounds like his "American Evasion of Philosophy." If that's the case, I'm not sure Obama is in that tradition. I agree with Buchanan about the cabinet picks, as it happens -- Buchanan's a sharp observer, if a bellicose and bigoted one. But I agree with you, too, that "left" and "right" are terms of very limited use.
The TJ Money quote: "I tend to think that the bipolarities of "liberal v. conservative" are a holdover from Enlightenment epistemology and, as such, are less and less helpful."
As sharp as Buchanan might be, the right-left rhetoric is far from helpful now. We can only hope that in the years to come both politics and theology become less bipolar.
Sorry, Steve. Even this:
"The religious right (in the USA) is typified by Bob Jones.
The religious left by Dorothy Day."
Let's move on.
TJ - It will be fascinating to hear about the foundationalists on *the other side* of the street from the Buchanan foundationalists. Looking forward to reading Sharlet.
You don't have to call yourselves Christians. Because homosexual is not a Christian belief. You should find a new name to call yourself.. Chist did not condone homosexuality. The bible does not either. If you truly studied what the foundation of real Christianity is you will find out that it is not a gray area. It is a no on homosexuality.
So go back to basics-read your bible!
As "Your name" demonstrates, the answer to Tony's question is "Yes".
Back in November 2004, Jeff Sharlet confessed it quite clearly, talking about questions he and Peter Manseau were asked while discussing Killing the Buddha
http://www.therevealer.org/archives/timely_001143.php
"What’s the common denominator of American faith? What is it that most of us share?
We lied every time. We offered up sincere but misleading tributes to freedom of speech as the American devotion. We avoided the answer that had made itself as plain as the two-lane roads we drove on: The greatest common denominator of American belief is anti-homosexuality."
I will extend that to say that opposition to women's free choice of abortion is a cross-denominational metric of the "religious right".
What these two tenets -- anti-homosexuality and anti-choice -- have in common is opposition to anything other than traditional sex roles. So:
The "religious right" is anyone who believes that the most important function of religion is to support traditional sex roles.
The "religious left" is anyone who believes that the most important function of religion is *anything else*.
Anything. If opposition to abortion and/or gay marriage is not your first-tier, make-or-break religious issue, you're on the religious left. That's all it takes. So in a way, yeah, you could say there's no "religious left", because they have no unifying principle except not thinking the patriarchy is all that. The only way the religious left could be unified is by coming out (pun intended) as anti-patriarchal.
I find the Right/Left distinction in politics moderately helpful; in religion, I think it's rarely useful.
With that caveat, I will say that I see Gianni Vattimo as the quintessential Christian leftist. (Perhaps John Caputo to a lesser degree.) I see very little overlap between Vattimo and you, Tony. But who knows, I guess for others Brian McLaren is the epitome of the left-leaning Christian.
As a fellow Volvo driver (well, only when I am in the car with the family), I must agree with the sentiments expressed... and tell you that you will love The Family. It may be my favorite (not nec best) book I read all year (of course, I read most of it on a plane flying to DC, which gave it added weight).
It is THAT good. I wish all scholarly journalism was as compelling.
rick bennett
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.