(Ir)religiosity

theology | philosophy | culture

Is Sojourners part of the religious left?

View Comments

For a long time now Jim Wallis has denied that he or his organization comprises or wants anything to do with the so-called Religious Left.  In fact, in one of his more popular books he spends a great deal of time arguing that the should be neither a Religious Right nor a Religious Left.  Much of his rhetoric has suggested that faith communities and religious non-profits should strive to transcend the political polarities that always seem to dominated public discourse.

I agree.  I think that is exactly the route that should be taken.  And I think that Wallis and Sojourners have done a pretty good job of modeling that ethos.

But then yesterday a statement was released from the Sojourners press office with a noticeable change in language and tone.

I wanted to gauge your interest in the first big mobilization of the Religious Left in the Obama era — a signal of the shift in power dynamics. Sojourners is mobilizing over a thousand Christian activists and 70 religious and anti-poverty groups at a conference next week in DC to prepare a new poverty coalition for legislative battle this year. This is the Religious Left filling the hole created by the decline of the Religious Right but now we have the political power and ear of the White House — definitely a new trend and a “first” within this new political era. (ht)

Yikes.  I don’t like the sound of that at all. I’m all for a mass mobilization to fight poverty but I don’t see the need to brand it has the rise of new Religious Left.  We’ve seen what happened with the Religious Right.  Polarizing and divisive language should be expected of our politicians.  But I think it’s time for our faith communities to model a different way that transcends the false dichotomies of modernity.

What’s interesting is that this press release is the only statement (that I know of) that uses the new verbiage.  So it makes one wonder if Sojourners really is shifting or a deputy press secretary is just off message.  The official website for the conference makes no such mention of “mobilization of the Religious Left.”  But either way, it makes me very curious about insider talk.

What do you make us this?  Is it a careless mistake or indicative of a wider shift?

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

Written by Blake Huggins

April 23rd, 2009 at 9:30 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with , , , ,

«
»
  • Ah, thanks for pointing that out. I somehow missed it on the old reader.
  • I don't think this is anything new for Sojourners.

    During the last election they had a dialog on faith and politics with the candidates. It ended up that only democratic candidates participated. I later found out that republican candidates were invited but they all turned down the offer. This was a great idea, but if you're really striving to be in the center, and the right turns you down, it says something.

    I think sojourners need to find out how to stay in the center better.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/04/us/politics/04t...
  • I would agree that the widespread public perception of Sojourners is that they are "progressive or are on the "left." That's unfortunate. But it's not the result of Sojourners branding themselves as such. Wallis has always fought against that. The perception, I think, stems a deep seated assumption that if you care about poverty or peace and justice issues, you are "liberal." Fortunately, we're beginning to see that view wane. But I think this is an example of its continued influence.

    I'm not sure that is indicative of the Republican candidate's failing to participate in the dialog. I don't blame that on Sojourners. I blame that on simple myopia on the part of the GOP (Dems can be equally myopic, to be sure). They're still suffering from a power hangover vis-a-vis the "Moral Majority" and apprehensive of any religious associations that aren't far right.

    But I do agree. Sojourners has a perceived image problem. I just don't think it is their fault per se.
  • I agree with Adelle, I'm nearly certain that Wallis would never approve of left/right language. I'm going to assume that whoever wrote the press release either didn't clear it with the next level up, or that there was just a complete failure in editing. If sojourners does indeed continue with left/right language, or more specifically support thereof, then I'll probably have to send some letter of discontent, and stir up some questions.

    Good job on picking up on this, I normally only read through the front page stories, not the press releases, so I would have missed it.
  • I can't take full credit for picking it up. I noticed it on the Christianity Today politics blog. I usually only get to the front page stories, like you.

    I would like to see a follow-up to this on the part of Sojourners, though. If anything, just to clear things up.
  • Not sure, but i have always seen Wallis as part of the religious left and many people i know, both conservative and liberal, feel the same way. Wallis may have never intended that but it is how he is seen in many circles. It's just until recently, the left/progressives have been the only side advocating to fight poverty.

    i do agree with this, 'Much of his rhetoric has suggested that faith communities and religious non-profits should strive to transcend the political polarities that always seem to dominated public discourse.' Yet, it is often the right that mixes religion and politics and enables the polarities to be perpetuated, imho.

    i hope this press release is a one time mistake. If not, it's very disheartening!
  • Yeah, I've always seen Wallis et al. to be on the more progressive side of thing too. But that's different from branding the whole organization as catalyst for "the Religious Left." Once you do that you've created a decisive barrier that is antithetical of the need to transcend the polarities.

    I agree though, the Right has done a lot of that lately, I just don't want to see a repeat on the Left. We need to rise above that.
blog comments powered by Disqus