God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peacemonger
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi peacemonger,

Nice to see you back! Boy, are you in trouble with this one! 😉

Blessings,
Shoshana
 
I heard Jim Wallis debate the inestimable Fr. Robert Sirico on the Laura Ingraham show a couple of months ago. For a while Fr. Sirico had the MP3 file on his website: www.acton.org, but it’s no longer there, perhaps someone could find it archived somewhere.

Anyway, the debate was fascinating because it demonstrated that Jim Wallis really just wants to enact “social justice” by forceful redistribution of wealth. Wallis also makes the faulty assumption that conservatives don’t perform (or barely perform) any acts of mercy or charity–it’s maddening to see this again and again.

Wallis did another thing thing that I found really curious: he repeatedly referred to Martin Luther King, Jr. as Martin King. He did this again when I saw him on O’Reilly’s show a few weeks back. Whenever he did that, my brain had to do a little double-take to recall who he was naming. This is the first person I’ve ever heard not use Martin Luther King’s middle name. I’ve wondered why–Wallis is a protestant, so Luther should not be a dirty word to him.

I also want to note that Wallis is serving in some kind of capacity for the Democratic Party–advising them on religion and politics or something.
 
40.png
StJeanneDArc:
I found the link to the Fr. Sirico-Jim Wallis debate:
acton.org/press/radio_archives.php

It’s called “The Religion Debate: Father Sirico vs. Jim Wallis”.

I highly recommend listening to it.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link. I will definitely listen to it.
 
Wallis is a little confused:
  1. He wants us to take the lead from Martin Luther King in how to combine religion and politics but he fails to understand that Martin Luther King used religion(Christianity/Scripture) to effect political change (elimination of segregation and other discriminatory laws) to benefit a marginalized population (Blacks).
If he saw this, he would see that voters in the last election used religion (mainly evangelical leaders, also some orthodox Catholics) to effect politcal change (pro-life legislation, protection of marriage) to benefit a marginalized population (unborn and born children).
  1. Budgets are moral documents? No. People are moral or immoral and moral or immoral people make budgets. This is the same error that Reid made last night (intentionally no-doubt) when he said changing social security would create an “immoral” debt. Immorality and morality have to do with sin and offenses against God by individuals, not perceived ineffective policies or states. Wallis apparently is getting his religous advice from non-Biblical sources.
  2. God doesn’t have any politics. This is Wallis putting his political beliefs overtop of God to the point that God has politics - this flies in the face of Jesus’ life and his words.
  3. The people of our politics do not neglect the poor. Nobody in the United States starves or lacks shelter if they seek support from the government.
  4. Wallis doesn’t understand econmics. Tax breaks allow businesses to do better and therefore hire more workers so that the poor become more rich. You don’t do justice to the poor by keeping the poor through handouts with no incentive for them to become indepedent. You do violence to their human nature (made in the image and likeness of God) when you keep them pinned and dependent upon rich politicians.
  5. The religous right is not losing influence. It is gaining influence.
  6. George Bush is the commander in chief, he does have a mission to combat terrorism and he does have a faith - earth to Wallis?
 
40.png
StJeanneDArc:
I heard Jim Wallis debate the inestimable Fr. Robert Sirico on the Laura Ingraham show a couple of months ago. For a while Fr. Sirico had the MP3 file on his website: www.acton.org, but it’s no longer there, perhaps someone could find it archived somewhere.
Click to expand...
I posted a thread on his radio interview and a link here

I was dissapointed no one picked the thread up because I was very impressed with what he had to say!
 
I’ve heard Wallis a few times and unfortunately was bamboozled into subscribing to his magazine. Whoever posted that his main objective is a perverted “Robin Hood” agenda is absolutely correct. He lives in Washington DC and thinks that we should all support the non-productive behavior of various deadbeats, malingerers and the terminally lazy. There isn’t the slightest thought that a) these people are often in this situation due to their own bad judgement and b) they don’t think THEY have any responsibility to grab a shovel and try to fill in the hole they’ve dug for themselves.

I’ve read some of his past books and he didn’t sound quite so radical hefty lefty in the past. I don’t know if he’s simply less strident in print or if he has changed. I am curious if the new book is simply a polemic or if there is anything valuable within it.

I don’t think he has evil intent but I think he is very very very misguided. He also hates President Bush with an unmitigated passion.

Lisa N
 
40.png
Brad:
Wallis is a little confused:
  1. He wants us to take the lead from Martin Luther King in how to combine religion and politics but he fails to understand that Martin Luther King used religion(Christianity/Scripture) to effect political change (elimination of segregation and other discriminatory laws) to benefit a marginalized population (Blacks).
If he saw this, he would see that voters in the last election used religion (mainly evangelical leaders, also some orthodox Catholics) to effect politcal change (pro-life legislation, protection of marriage) to benefit a marginalized population (unborn and born children).
  1. Budgets are moral documents? No. People are moral or immoral and moral or immoral people make budgets. This is the same error that Reid made last night (intentionally no-doubt) when he said changing social security would create an “immoral” debt. Immorality and morality have to do with sin and offenses against God by individuals, not perceived ineffective policies or states. Wallis apparently is getting his religous advice from non-Biblical sources.
  2. God doesn’t have any politics. This is Wallis putting his political beliefs overtop of God to the point that God has politics - this flies in the face of Jesus’ life and his words.
  3. The people of our politics do not neglect the poor. Nobody in the United States starves or lacks shelter if they seek support from the government.
  4. Wallis doesn’t understand econmics. Tax breaks allow businesses to do better and therefore hire more workers so that the poor become more rich. You don’t do justice to the poor by keeping the poor through handouts with no incentive for them to become indepedent. You do violence to their human nature (made in the image and likeness of God) when you keep them pinned and dependent upon rich politicians.
  5. The religous right is not losing influence. It is gaining influence.
  6. George Bush is the commander in chief, he does have a mission to combat terrorism and he does have a faith - earth to Wallis?
Click to expand...
Very well said!
 
40.png
Brad:
Wallis is a little confused:
  1. He wants us to take the lead from Martin Luther King in how to combine religion and politics but he fails to understand that Martin Luther King used religion(Christianity/Scripture) to effect political change (elimination of segregation and other discriminatory laws) to benefit a marginalized population (Blacks).
If he saw this, he would see that voters in the last election used religion (mainly evangelical leaders, also some orthodox Catholics) to effect politcal change (pro-life legislation, protection of marriage) to benefit a marginalized population (unborn and born children).
Click to expand...
Jim Wallis is pro-life and I have heard him concur with the above analysis regarding abortion. The issue of course is that on some other issues, the marginalized were not helped.
  1. Budgets are moral documents? No. People are moral or immoral and moral or immoral people make budgets. This is the same error that Reid made last night (intentionally no-doubt) when he said changing social security would create an “immoral” debt. Immorality and morality have to do with sin and offenses against God by individuals, not perceived ineffective policies or states. Wallis apparently is getting his religous advice from non-Biblical sources.
Click to expand...
Budgets are acts of state just like pro-life legislation is. Both can be evaluated as to the moral implications.
  1. God doesn’t have any politics. This is Wallis putting his political beliefs overtop of God to the point that God has politics - this flies in the face of Jesus’ life and his words.
Click to expand...
He’s been asked to join a discussion that has included folks like Karl Keating, Deal Hudson, etc.
  1. The people of our politics do not neglect the poor. Nobody in the United States starves or lacks shelter if they seek support from the government.
Click to expand...
I think you are right that great good is being done by our social welfare initiatives. But speaking for myself and what I know Rev. Wallis to beleive in, we are not satisfied with ample soup kitchens and homeless shelters. We want the root causes of poverty weeded out – living wages, worker training, collective bargaining rights, an end to discrimination in the workplace, opportunity and education, safe workplaces, health care for all, etc.

Secondly, I can’t endorse a self-satisfied response that the dirt poor – people who are illiterate, mentally disabled, have addiction problems, etc. are to ignored because in their desparate circumstances they can’t nagivate the social services system.
  1. Wallis doesn’t understand econmics
Click to expand...
His views are in line with the consistent and historic message of the Catholic Church. That doesn’t make him right, it does make him more than standing alone.
 
40.png
Brad:
  1. The people of our politics do not neglect the poor. Nobody in the United States starves or lacks shelter if they seek support from the government.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with you on your points except for number 4.

Government programs in poor areas are inadequate to say the least. My family and I volunteered in southern West Virginia (coal country) last summer, and we had a real eye-opening experience with poverty. There is a cycle to poverty, and the local environment in these areas are conducive to predator businesses that keep the poor people, poor.
Your argument assumes that anyone who is poor will sign up for these assistance programs, but the reality is not many do sign up. The reasons are numerous: they may not qualify, the programs don’t provide much, they can’t even get to where they need to go in order to sign up, etc…
The Passionists have a presence down there; some of the volunteers tend to be on the ‘liberal’, cafeteria Catholic side, but they do excellent work. I highly suggest anyone volunteering with them. The big reason we chose them was because we could make it a family affair.
 
40.png
katherine2:
I think you are right that great good is being done by our social welfare initiatives. But speaking for myself and what I know Rev. Wallis to beleive in, we are not satisfied with ample soup kitchens and homeless shelters. We want the root causes of poverty weeded out – living wages, worker training, collective bargaining rights, an end to discrimination in the workplace, opportunity and education, safe workplaces, health care for all, etc.
Click to expand...
Conservatives want the root causes of poverty weeded out as well–a culture of death, fatherless households, dismal elementary education, unaffordable higher education, unemployment. All of these problems have been created and exacerbated by the feel-good, “compassionate” social-engineering programs created by the leftists of the last 60 years.
40.png
katherine2:
Secondly, I can’t endorse a self-satisfied response that the dirt poor – people who are illiterate, mentally disabled, have addiction problems, etc. are to ignored because in their desparate circumstances they can’t nagivate the social services system.
Click to expand...
I agree, government programs are impersonal, bureaucratic responses to spiritual and moral problems that are best handled by extended families and faith communities. The government has for years usurped the role of families and communities and now we see the results.
40.png
katherine2:
His views are in line with the consistent and historic message of the Catholic Church. That doesn’t make him right, it does make him more than standing alone.
Click to expand...
His views are in line with the consistent and historic message of Karl Marx. He just gives it a Christian veneer.
 
40.png
StJeanneDArc:
Conservatives want the root causes of poverty weeded out as well–
Click to expand...
Sure they want it, just just have no effective plan to address it otu of fear soem rich man would have a pay an extra nickel.
The government has for years usurped the role of families and communities and now we see the results.
Click to expand...
There was more poverty before the Neal Deal than today.
His views are in line with the consistent and historic message of Karl Marx. He just gives it a Christian veneer.
Click to expand...
I’m sory you have that view of the Catholic Church
 
40.png
katherine2:
Sure they want it, just just have no effective plan to address it otu of fear soem rich man would have a pay an extra nickel.
Click to expand...
Not! Being conservative does not make you rich. Confiscatory tax policy to redistribute the wealth is really easy. Let mother government handle it sweetie, everything will be OK.

The Cathechism teaches -

**2427 **Human work proceeds directly from persons created in the image of God and called to prolong the work of creation by subduing the earth, both with and for one another. Hence work is a duty: “If any one will not work, let him not eat.” Work honors the Creator’s gifts and the talents received from him. It can also be redemptive. By enduring the hardship of work in union with Jesus, the carpenter of Nazareth and the one crucified on Calvary, man collaborates in a certain fashion with the Son of God in his redemptive work. He shows himself to be a disciple of Christ by carrying the cross, daily, in the work he is called to accomplish. Work can be a means of sanctification and a way of animating earthly realities with the Spirit of Christ.

**2428 **In work, the person exercises and fulfills in part the potential inscribed in his nature. The primordial value of labor stems from man himself, its author and its beneficiary. Work is for man, not man for work. Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community.
 
40.png
buffalo:
Being conservative does not make you rich.
Click to expand...
But being rich can make you conservative!!!😃
The Cathechism teaches -

**2428 **In work, the person exercises and fulfills in part the potential inscribed in his nature. The primordial value of labor stems from man himself, its author and its beneficiary. Work is for man, not man for work. Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community.
Click to expand...
Hence, the Church’s teaching on a living wage, to be guaranteed by the social order either by collective bargaining or government action.
 
40.png
katherine2:
Hence, the Church’s teaching on a living wage, to be guaranteed by the social order either by collective bargaining or government action.
Click to expand...
Correct - However one should be cautious that the short term wage increases do not turn into long term job losses having the net effect of lowering the wage as well as the standard of living.

We now can see clearly the effect of high paying manufacturing jobs moving offshore. The higher the disparity between our wages and other countries will mean a faster rate of job losses to these countries. So if you are for distribution of wealth global economics is right up your alley. I hope your charity now extends to the world.
 
40.png
buffalo:
Correct - However one should be cautious that the short term wage increases do not turn into long term job losses having the net effect of lowering the wage as well as the standard of living.

We now can see clearly the effect of high paying manufacturing jobs moving offshore. The higher the disparity between our wages and other countries will mean a faster rate of job losses to these countries. So if you are for distribution of wealth global economics is right up your alley. I hope your charity now extends to the world.
Click to expand...
Thus the contradiction of US liberal Democrats…
 
40.png
katherine2:
Jim Wallis is pro-life and I have heard him concur with the above analysis regarding abortion. The issue of course is that on some other issues, the marginalized were not helped.

Budgets are acts of state just like pro-life legislation is. Both can be evaluated as to the moral implications.

He’s been asked to join a discussion that has included folks like Karl Keating, Deal Hudson, etc.

I think you are right that great good is being done by our social welfare initiatives. But speaking for myself and what I know Rev. Wallis to beleive in, we are not satisfied with ample soup kitchens and homeless shelters. We want the root causes of poverty weeded out – living wages, worker training, collective bargaining rights, an end to discrimination in the workplace, opportunity and education, safe workplaces, health care for all, etc.

Secondly, I can’t endorse a self-satisfied response that the dirt poor – people who are illiterate, mentally disabled, have addiction problems, etc. are to ignored because in their desparate circumstances they can’t nagivate the social services system.

His views are in line with the consistent and historic message of the Catholic Church. That doesn’t make him right, it does make him more than standing alone.
Click to expand...
I agree with Stjeannedarc’s response(thank you!) so I will take some well-deserved time off from responding to this post.

I mean, I do get a 15 minute break every 2 hours or so, don’t I?

Just so you don’t go away completely empty handed, I will add that you are somewhat obstinant in your belief that the Catholic Church holds socialistic views when both you and I know, in looking at encyclicals and other documents dating back to the 1800s, the Church has consistently condemned socialism outright and vigorously promoted private property ownership and private charitable institutions to solve much of these social problems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top