[Piccolo]

I found this article from 2011 by Andrew Miller discussing what he believes to be the compatibility of Christianity and Marxism. I thought it was a pretty interesting piece, and wanted to see what others here thought about it.

http://politicalaffairs.net/the-compati ... d-marxism/

[Andrea_Chenier]

This question became of great interest for me in recent times. I consider the difficult relationship between Christianity and Marxism to be highly tragic. If I think about Italy e.g. the antagonism between the two dominated society for decades. You had to be either a catholic or a communist, either Don Camillo or Peppone, end of story. While the conflict reached its ugliest heights in form of the battle between left wing terrorism and the repressive christ-democrat state in the 70s, some rays of hope for reconciliation emerged, too. Most notably coming from one man, Pier Paolo Pasolini. Pasolini was a marxist homosexual but called himself catholic at the same time. Thus, he broke through the dogmatic, petty-bourgeois mindset of both societal camps. His film adaptation of The Gospel According to Matthew was criticized by some reactionaries for supposedly portraying Jesus as a Che Guevara-like communist instead of the christian Messiah. Unfortunately for them, even the Catholic Church itself approved of the film because - being based on no other script than the actual Gospel - it was the most authentic Jesus Christ movie ever made, the most gripping and powerfully honest in its message.

The problem that many marxists have with accepting Christianity as potential ally, of course, is the unpleasent fact that institutional Christianity traditionally served as an ally of oppressive ruling classes. Be it the french crown, the Czar, fascist dictators such as Franco, Mussolini and Pinochet or the US-american style capitalist bourgeoisie which defines itself through supposedly christian values. Also the reactionary position of the Church regarding gay rights, women's rights, abortion etc. those values which by now managed to overshadow Christ's overall emancipatory message. This is the Church's biggest failure, its incompetence in the matter of transfigurating Christ's eternal messages of salvation into modern times but choosing to view everything through the eyes of a socially conservative Israeli 30 A.D. instead.

When it comes down to fundamental Christianity and Marxism's founding fathers, there is not that much hostility left.

The history of early Christianity has notable points of resemblance with the modern working-class movement. Like the latter, Christianity was originally a movement of oppressed people: it first appeared as the religion of slaves and emancipated slaves, of poor people deprived of all rights, of peoples subjugated or dispersed by Rome. Both Christianity and the workers' socialism preach forthcoming salvation from bondage and misery; Christianity places this salvation in a life beyond, after death, in heaven; socialism places it in this world, in a transformation of society. Both are persecuted and baited, their adherents are despised and made the objects of exclusive laws, the former as enemies of the human race, the latter as enemies of the state, enemies of religion, the family, social order. And in spite of all persecution, nay, even spurred on by it, they forge victoriously, irresistibly ahead. Three hundred years after its appearance Christianity was the recognized state religion in the Roman World Empire, and in barely sixty years socialism has won itself a position which makes its victory absolutely certain.

If, therefore, Prof. Anton Menger wonders in his Right to the Full Product of Labour why, with the enormous concentration of landownership under the Roman emperors and the boundless sufferings of the working class of the time, which was composed almost exclusively of slaves, "socialism did not follow the overthrow of the Roman Empire in the West," it is because he cannot see that this "socialism" did in fact, as far as it was possible at the time, exist and even became dominant — in Christianity.

Thank you, Potemkin, for having provided above Engels quote in that other thread!

[Leninist]

Wonderful response sir. And the question itself is particularly interesting considering the new pope. No Marxist, but certainly a step up from the reactionary bigots before him. As you seem well acquainted with the subject, do you think the new pope could represent a change in the historically conflictual Catholicism \communism relationship?

[fuser]

No, not at all.

Christianity is an idealist system, Marxist is materialist, end of it. If Christianity is compatible then most of other religions (idealist philosophical systems) are compatible with Marxism (a big thanks to conformity bias).

Not only that its not compatible, there can be no alliance with it (or any other religion either except for pragmatic reasons). I mean why would I declare Christianity to be compatible with Marxist in places like Nigeria to the dismay of Muslim working class. It downright stands at the opposing end of the concept of Internationalism of Proletarians (who belong to various plethora of Religion and not just Christianity).

I have no problem with individual religious comrades but any such project trying to make religion (or any idealist system) compatible with Marxism shall be opposed as worthless and outright counterproductive.

institutional Christianity traditionally served as an ally of oppressive ruling classes. Be it the french crown, the Czar, fascist dictators such as Franco, Mussolini and Pinochet or the US-american style capitalist bourgeoisie which defines itself through supposedly christian values

Yes, religion should be proletarianized by taking it from the hands of capital but that's a completely different matter than trying to make it compatible with any religion.

[Andrea_Chenier]

No Marxist, but certainly a step up from the reactionary bigots before him.

Indeed. Best thing about Francis is how he got american reactionaries all butthurt, Limbaugh calling him "marxist" etc.

do you think the new pope could represent a change in the historically conflictual Catholicism \communism relationship?

I do like Pope Francis but don't fully trust him to achieve anything significant in that direction, yet. Let's start with the positive first. When I visited poorer, more rural areas in Apulia during my latest trip to Bari there were pictures of Francis all over the place, much unlike his predecessor whom the people would never have put side by side with images of popular Saints like Francis of Assisi, Padre Pio and down-to-earth Pope John XXIII. I really appreciate the new Pope's ambition to revitalize this branch of Christianity, i.e. the one that puts la misericordia (mercy, forgiveness, generosity, love for the next human being) at first place instead of pro-lifeism, homophobia and so on. The way Francis acts in this sense - also his appearence, his many gestures of modesty with the people etc. - will have a positive influence on christian minds all over the globe, at least it should. Hopefully enabling them to open up to more radical thoughts of social justice i.e. Communism.

But at this point we have a problem, too. The Pope may act as a true, genuine christian on a personal level but not that much in his potentially powerful political position as the Pope. This becomes evident when you compare him with John XXIII, whose acts of charity where not just that - random charity - but sent clear political messages as well. A notable example was his visit to a prison. As first Pope in history he went to see people perceived as criminal scum by bourgeois society and comforted them, like Christ would have done. Or during the Cuba Crisis John didn't just say "Oh, I pray God fills the russian and american hearts with love and mercy and makes them put down their atomic bombs" - like Francis does all the time in his weak speeches against the war in Syria - he said more somehting like "Hey, Russians and Americans! Knock that shit of, the Pope commands you to!". He used his big influence and contributed to prevent global tragedy.

While it is nice of Francis to assure us marxists that we will go to heaven if we are good people, it is still not enough on a level of political power. Unfortunately, a popular Pope who is near the people is not always a guarantee for communist-friendly Church politics. John Paul II being the most notable example, a rigid anticommunist who even used his political influence to destroy socialism in Poland and the whole eastern bloc, thus expropriating the people of collective ownership, social security and justice. Not what Jesus would have done

[The Immortal Goon]

I have trouble reconciling materialism and idealism.

However, I think that there's something to be said for not using Christianity as a beating bag or propaganda tool as it doesn't work to do so. There is nothing to really gain from doing so, should someone of faith choose to recognize Marxism, let him or her. Should someone reject Marxism because of faith:

If a clergyman anywhere attacks Socialism the tendency is to hit back, not at his economic absurdities, but at his theology, with which-we have nothing to do. In other words, we occupy a strongly entrenched position based upon demonstrable facts. When a clergyman attacks this position our wisest course is to remain in our entrenchments and to allow him to waste his energy and demonstrate his ignorance by futile attacks upon our position. Instead of which, our comrades descend from their entrenchments and engage the enemy in combat over a question of the next world – a question that were we to argue for another century could not be proven or disproved on one side or the other. That is to say, we attack the enemy where he is strongest, and instead of relying upon appeals to the class interests of the workers we tangle their minds up in questions which even the trained intellect of scientists cannot solve. All of which must be very satisfactory to our enemies.

[Donna]

It isn't really a question of compatibility (only a small minded person must be satisfied that one is superior to the other), but a question of discovering the clockwork of the mysterious forces that twist and turn the human experience according to both material and spiritual laws.

"Plato illuminates while Marx sweeps away." -the Unknown Friend, anonymous author of Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey into Christian Hermeticism.

[Dagoth Ur]

Okay when you get that the whole point of religion is being a bunch if good stories that if applied to your life gets good results (at least this is why some last millennia) the question becomes "what isn't compatible with x-religion". Communism is a material system, of course, but religion has become more and more about materialism for the past few centuries because (oddly enough) religion doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Personally I'm opposed to anyone who isn't the revolutionary proletariat having access to any social controls or tools.

[Andrea_Chenier]

I have trouble reconciling materialism and idealism.

Yeah, it shouldn't be that much of a reconciliation but a peaceful co-existance for the mutual benefit. As Stalin said, the question of religious beliefs must be kept well in mind, must be handled with great care, because the religious feelings of the people must not be offended. These feelings have been cultivated in the people for many centuries, and great patience is called for on this question, because the stand towards it is important for the compactness and unity of the people.

Religion should be used with strategic intelligence by marxist revolutionaries, not treated as an enemy a priori. Attacking religion can lead to alienation of the masses. Once socialist progress is achieved in society, religion will probably fade away on its own anyway.

When religion actively turn against the people, it needs to be punished by revolutionary justice:

"Were there Catholic priests in Albania who betrayed the people?" Comrade Stalin asked me then.

"Yes" I told him. "Indeed the heads of the Catholic Church made common cause with the nazi-fascist foreign invaders right from the start, placed themselves completely in their service and did everything within their power to disrupt our National Liberation War and perpetuate the foreign domination."

"What did you do with them?"

"After the victory," I told him, "we arrested them and put them on trial and they received the punishment they deserved."

"You have done well," he said.

[Vera Politica]

On the issue of materialism and idealism: these categories are from the 19th century and Marx's materialism was, in particular, a criticism of historical idealism. I am not sure why or when this happened (someone help me), but Marxism took, more often than not, a view of metaphysical materialism. I think it is best to understand Marxist materialism within the confined of social science: it is a methodological assumption, not a grand philosophical picture, about how it is that we should understand social history. It is the kind of methodological assumption that one needs to have social science. I am not sure why we should be making any more of this.

That said, I am not sure this helps at all with the original question. Maybe I am suggesting this: Christianity is as compatible with Marxism as it is with the natural sciences. That is, they have nothing at all to do with each other. Marxists offer a social scientific analysis of religion, which is something that social scientists do in general anyway. Where religion becomes incompatible with Marxism, and with science generally, is when it encroaches on the methodology of the sciences, i.e. when it offers a different methodological framework from which to study and analyze material reality. THIS is inconsistent with Marxism as it is inconsistent with science in general.

[Deutschmania]

This question gets raised so many times. And if you appeal to the authority of key figures in the history of Marxist-Leninism, you will get conflicting opinions. I think that most people are aware of the anti-theistic sentiments of a number of prominent, and prevalent Communists, including both Marx, and Lenin themselves. However there is a rich tradition of Judaeo-Christian Communism, that predates, and transcends Marx's self described scientific socialism. In fact the Communist League was derived from just such a group, called the "League of the Just". https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1885hist.htm And now of days, in most most western countries at least, Christians, and other persons of faith are permitted to hold membership. In fact, in Italy, the leader of the Communist Refoundation Party, Paolo Ferrero, is himself an evangelical Christian. As to my own view, I do not feel that I have to agree with everything that Karl Marx thought about all things, especially matters unrelated to social theory, in order to consider myself a Marxist. And, for what it's worth, I invoke Rosa Luxemburg, in support of my position on this subject. https://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1905/misc/socialism-churches.htm

[Social_Critic]

It depends on whether one takes Marxism as a purely theoretical concept which lacks a basis in real Hunan nature. And whether one separates Christianity from its political roots, which led to a religion meant to keep the poor happy being poor and the rich enjoy their wealth with church blessing.

In other words neither of them ends up where it's supposed to end. Marxism is a really dumb idea when put in practice, the concepts are very 19th century and not worth much. Thus it always leads to dictatorship and human rights abuses, and the emergence of a ruling clique which eventually turns fascist.

[nucklepunche]

I guess a lot of people tend to refer to "Marxism" as shorthand for socialism. I don't think Christianity is incompatible with socialism or even communism on its own, but Marxism is an entire worldview, communism and socialism only being one very important aspect of it. Part of the Marxist worldview is materialism which is more or less incompatible with Christianity. A major part of Marx's religious attitudes were driven by his view that religions like Christianity promise a paradise in another world, whereas Marxism promised to bring about a totally equal society on earth. Marx viewed such beliefs as a roadblock to his system.

In answer to this question, it depends on your interpretation of both Marxism and Christianity, but Marx himself would have certainly said you could not be both a Christian and a Marxist, or at least it would be very hard to be both.