← Back to Library

Recognizing Christianity’s universal leftism for what it undisputedly is

This piece from Wayfare makes a provocative claim that cuts against modern political tribalism: the core message of Christianity is inherently leftist, not because of partisan alignment, but because its theological foundation demands universal equality and the dismantling of systems that create scarcity. In an era where faith is often weaponized to defend the status quo, this argument reframes the debate by suggesting that true adherence to the Sermon on the Mount logically requires moving beyond capitalism and borders.

The Spiritual Roots of Economic Justice

The article centers on Phil Christman's book Why Christians Should be Leftists, treating it not as a dry policy paper but as a spiritual testimony. Wayfare reports that Christman's political evolution began when he read the Sermon on the Mount and realized "the whole economy of losers and winners, with its implied scarcity of worthiness, had disappeared." This moment of clarity is presented as the catalyst for understanding that Christian grace is incompatible with systems built on exclusion.

Recognizing Christianity’s universal leftism for what it undisputedly is

The piece argues that this spiritual insight translates directly into political action. It paraphrases Christman's conclusion that "the structure of capitalism depends upon the private or corporate accumulation of profit and property—and thus functionally excludes others from possession of such wealth." Consequently, the article asserts that for a believer, staying within capitalism is a theological contradiction. This framing is powerful because it bypasses standard economic debates to attack the moral premise of inequality itself.

"Part of the point of being a Christian is that you're supposed to unlearn the human instinct to circle the wagons, identify the outsiders, prioritize the in-group."

However, the article acknowledges a significant historical friction: the Marxist tradition's hostility toward religion. Wayfare notes that Marx dismissed Christian socialism as "the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat." The editors counter this by pointing to historical figures like Leo Tolstoy and Eugene V. Debs, noting that these thinkers were deeply religious yet central to the labor movement. This context is crucial; it reminds readers that the left has never been a monolith of atheism, but rather a coalition where faith often fueled the fight for workers' rights.

Beyond Borders and Belonging

The commentary extends the argument beyond economics to the concept of national sovereignty. The piece argues that just as capitalism creates artificial scarcity, borders create artificial divisions between neighbors. It highlights Christman's view that "the universalizing... of the resources of the world and the people who live within it is the socialism that Christman comes to believe the plain teachings of Jesus require." This is a bold move, linking the theological concept of 'neighbor' directly to immigration policy and global resource distribution.

Wayfare draws on the early Christian community described in the Book of Acts, where believers "sell their goods, distribute them equally, and have all things in common," to show that this isn't a modern invention but an ancient imperative. The article suggests that Marx was actually a latecomer to this tradition, rather than its originator. This historical reorientation challenges the reader to see socialism not as a foreign import, but as a recovery of early Christian practice.

Critics might note that equating religious testimony with political strategy can be dangerous; spiritual conviction does not always translate into viable policy. The article admits this, quoting Christman's admission that "I don't think it pays to get too dug in at this point on any of those systems." Yet, the editors maintain that the direction of the movement is what matters most.

Jesus's call was one of abundance; it is 'to go and be generous,' and to trust in God to enable us to transcend 'the urge to fear our own capacity for generosity.'

The Obstacle of Moral Purity

The piece identifies a major barrier preventing many Christians from accepting this leftist conclusion: the association of the political left with sexual freedom. Wayfare observes that right-leaning reviewers often acknowledge the Christian critique of wealth and borders but "demur from recognizing that such condemnations put them, however partially, on the socialist left" because they fear compromising on issues of personal sin.

The article pushes back hard here, arguing that Jesus focused far more on economic justice than sexual morality. It cites Martin Luther King Jr., a confessed democratic socialist, who described the goal of Christianity as "the beloved community." The editors suggest that this shared vision of community is stronger than the disagreements over lifestyle. This is where the argument risks oversimplification; it glosses over how deeply held views on personal morality can fracture political coalitions, even when economic goals align.

Bottom Line

Wayfare's strongest move is reframing socialism as a theological necessity rather than a partisan preference, effectively using Christman's testimony to bridge the gap between faith and social justice. Its biggest vulnerability lies in assuming that spiritual conviction alone can overcome the complex structural barriers of modern governance. The reader should watch for how this "universal leftism" translates into concrete policy proposals beyond the moral imperative.

Deep Dives

Explore these related deep dives:

  • Why Christians Should be Leftists Amazon · Better World Books by Phil Christman

  • Christianity and Social Order Amazon · Better World Books by William Temple

  • Leo Tolstoy

    Though not explicitly named in the excerpt, Tolstoy's Christian anarchism and rejection of state violence provide the historical theological bridge between the Sermon on the Mount and modern leftist politics that Christman likely draws upon.

  • Eugene V. Debs

    Debs represents the specific archetype of a socialist leader whose political platform was explicitly rooted in Christian ethics, serving as a concrete historical precedent for the 'Christian leftism' the article defends.

  • Keir Hardie

    As the founder of the UK Labour Party who openly integrated Methodist theology into his socialist organizing, Hardie illustrates the practical political movement that emerged when Christians applied Jesus's teachings to economic justice.

Sources

Recognizing Christianity’s universal leftism for what it undisputedly is

by Various · Wayfare · Read full article

Phil Christman, a writer and lecturer at the University of Michigan, is a committed Protestant Christian. He grew up attending a fundamentalist church which embraced a strict Calvinist theology, and although he shared that perspective, he struggled with and eventually rejected it. His rejection of the Calvinist approach to Christianity didn’t lead him to renounce his faith; instead, his faith evolved, and with that spiritual evolution came a political one as well. In the excellent Why Christians Should be Leftists, he explores and affirms that evolution and calls other Christians to join him. Most probably won’t, but that takes nothing away, I think, from his powerful testimony. Here, as a literal card-carrying leftist (assuming my monthly dues to the Democratic Socialists of America are up to date), as well as a believing LDS Christian, I want to explain why.

The fact that Christman’s book is best understood as a testimony is something that Steven Smith observed in his review of the book in Wayfare last December. Smith acknowledged that he doesn’t share Christman’s political convictions (at least not all of them), and also that he isn’t a fan of testifying when it comes to complex political topics, which he characterized as providing “soft or simplistic reasons... in defense of a prior inspiration.” But he also admitted that “it would be a mistake just to dismiss such testimonies.” Sharing convictions that come to us through spiritual inspiration rather than argument is, Smith thought, a major part of what allows us to realize attachments across all sorts of boundaries; by respecting the idea that God’s grace may work in ways unknown or disagreeable to us, we are better able to apprehend “the imago dei that makes you and me and everyone else intrinsically worthy of love and respect.”

I’m sure that Smith must have chosen that formulation intentionally, because it parallels exactly the spiritual conviction which grounds Christman’s account of his own political evolution. In his account, Christman was a college student attending a Calvinist university, feeling lonely, confused, and frustrated—he was, in his own words, an “ungirlfriended loser” (8). One day he was reading from the Bible outdoors with a group of similar losers—at least compared, in his mind at the time, to the other groups of students playing guitar, smoking, or flirting all around him—and as they worked through Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount from the Book of Matthew, he ...