> I think religion in this abstract way is only attractive to those who,
because they have never worked with Christians politically, are under the
illusion that to do so you have to relate to their religion.
In other words, forget theory?
> Christians who have anti-imperialist or pro-working class politics are
perfectly willing to work with atheists -- and those who don't won't work with
other Christians who do have such politics.
However... these associations don't always last - largely because of the theological or anti-religious underpinings... and this says nothing of the tremendous divide that Christian communities have faced precisely over these issues. Catholics who have supported same sex marriages have been excommunicated, and priests who have come out of the closet fired, women who have attempted to speech out, silenced... (in churches *and* seminaries). Not to mention the splits between denominations (United Church vs. Anglican Church) or between "legitimate" authorities (biblical text, historical tradition, good reasons, casuistry, and so on). These differences can be clarified through social theory - consider the difference bewteen Segundo (the liberation of theology) and Gutierrez (liberation theology).
> Revolutionaries and progressives *must* be able and willing to work with
Xtians. But that is not difficult to do -- I've been doing it for 35 years.
Revolutoinaries and progressives have *no* reason whatever to dabble with Xtian
thought.
As long as Christians aren't too Christian, eh? (ie. don't attempt to redeem their validity claims).
ken