Do Leftist Christians Really Care About the Poor?

In this May 31, 2016 photo, Pedro Hernandez culls through discarded tomatoes from the trash area of the Coche public market in Caracas, Venezuela.

By John Zmirak Published on July 5, 2017

Last month, I was blessed to attend Acton University, hosted by the Acton Institute. One of the biggest events at the conference was a panel discussion that included the Acton Institute’s founder, Fr. Robert Sirico. The subject was “What Does Christianity Have to Offer the Poor?” What made the panel spicy was the inclusion of Washington Post writer and Catholic Elizabeth Stoker-Bruenig. 

Though she presents as a faithful and orthodox Catholic, Bruenig is also, by her own admission, a Marxist. Bruenig routinely deletes her social media postings. But some people take screenshots. Bruenig posted the Tweet below in September 2016:  


Few in the audience knew of Bruenig’s devotion to the atheist social philosopher. But she is no lonely crank. In fact, she’s what passes for the intellectual rock star of a new and growing movement: young, more-or-less orthodox Christians who embrace radical leftist views on economics and politics. (See the Tradinista collective.)

Kidnapping Augustine to North Korea

Both economists and Patristics scholars at Acton U. shook their heads or covered their faces, embarrassed for Bruenig. They sat cringing as she hijacked the writings of Church Fathers like Ambrose and Augustine to serve her Marxist critique. (Get a taste of her style in this article, which I critiqued here at The Stream).

Bruenig cited sermons from Church Fathers, and advice bishops gave to ancient slaveowners in a no-growth economy, denouncing their abuse of wealth and stinginess toward the poor. Then she blithely applied their lessons to middle class people today.

Karl Marx’s views have led to religious persecution, mass theft, famines, tyranny, gulags, torture, want and vicious class hatred. Not in just one instance, but wherever they have been tried.

I wrote about such misuse of ancient Christian writers in The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism:

Catholics sometimes dig back in the writing of the Church Fathers and find statements that, taken out of context, seem to deny that working hard and seeking to make a profit is morally legitimate. … The problem with citing celibate monks from the fourth century on the topic of modern economics is that those good men lived and worked in an ancient pre-capitalist economy where nearly all wealth was agricultural, and mostly wrung from the sweat of foreign slaves captured in Rome’s wars of conquest. Economic and technological innovation was nearly unknown at the time. The master-slave economy in the ancient world was as close as life comes to a zero-sum game. …

Trade had been stigmatized as vulgar by nearly every classical philosopher — a prejudice most Christians breathed in with the ancient air. So in their time and place, it made some sense to see wealth as the fruit of theft. But history didn’t end there.

Marxism: Intrinsically Evil

No one called Bruenig on her attachment to Marx. That was a shame. 

Karl Marx’s views have led to religious persecution, mass theft, famines, tyranny, gulags, torture, want and vicious class hatred. Not in just one instance, the way nationalism went crazy in Hitler’s Germany. No, Marx’s ideas proved poisonous wherever they have been tried. Nothing is left of his pretense to “scientifically” analyze and predict the whole course of human history through the jaundiced lens of class struggle. All that remains of Marxism is a sneer. At human nature. At hard work and high aspirations. And at the very idea of freedom.

Does that read too much into Bruenig’s devotion to the father of Communism? No. The rest of her remarks made that clear. She attacked the “capitalist” idea that private property is in any sense “sacred.” So Pope Leo XIII taught (among many others). Property today includes our wages, of course. But Marx didn’t allow for workers to seek out the highest wage they could find. He left such questions to the experts picked by the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

All that remains of Marxism is a sneer.

Bruenig denounced as corrosively “liberal” the legal reforms in the late Middle Ages. Those reforms freed workers from serfdom and feudal duties. So they could sell their labor at will. Keep in mind that peasants used to flee their master’s estates for cities like London. So Cubans today flee to Florida.   

Forget the Poor. Let’s Bash the Rich.

Fr. Sirico reminded her of the crucial point: How to help the poorest of the poor. Then he noted the greatest single rise in living standards in human history. It came from the Industrial Revolution. From private property and the free market liberating people to find the best use of their talents. Even better, in just the past 40 years, a billion people have risen from extreme poverty. Again, the cause was the growth of markets. In our lifetimes, we can expect the end of desperate want around the world. Didn’t that prove something? So Sirico asked her, gently but firmly.

Bruenig wasn’t impressed. She admitted, grudgingly, that capitalism had indeed lifted billions of people from desperate poverty. From one baby in three dying. From rickets and cholera. And from lifetimes of back-breaking farm labor on the brink of hunger. She conceded that capitalism is still doing that today.

But suddenly Bruenig seemed to lose interest in the fate of the very poor. Instead she wanted to complain about the rich. The real problem, it seemed, was growing “inequality,” not poverty.

Is Faith a Side-Effect of Squalor?

And anyway, she deflected: Didn’t the Industrial Revolution coincide with the growth of secularism? Instead of remaining pious, malnourished peasants many well-fed workers began to drift away from the churches.

Scholars like Rodney Stark actually dispute this point: They note that the Industrial Revolution was also marked by massive religious upsurges: The Great Awakening. The Methodist movement. The explosion of Catholic religious orders that served the poor.

But let’s grant for the sake of argument: In many societies, over the long term, populations that become materially more comfortable often become more secular. Does that mean we should work to keep people poor? 

Marxism is a great way to accomplish that, no question. Of course, it also does things like drive people to abort their children. At one point, the average Soviet woman had gone through six abortions. China still coerces women to abort every child after the second. So maybe Marxist Catholicism needs some serious rethinking.

Christian heretics over the centuries had the same dream: That they could build the New Jerusalem here on earth by herding the poor together. By wiping out the wealthy. They were wrong, of course. But at least they had an excuse. They hadn’t seen what 70 years of Communist tyranny really looked like.

Perhaps we exaggerate, through the mists of history, how pious people really were in the past. Superstition at this distance might look like devotion. Methodists in the 18th century reported encountering rural Englishmen who still practiced paganism.

No doubt God makes allowances for the new spiritual challenges: the kind of challenges people face when we’re not scrabbling to get the next potato to come up out of the ground. He sends new graces, new movements, new inspirations. Doesn’t He? After all, He has “numbered every hair” upon our heads.

Is the Christian faith just a side-effect of squalor? Surely not. But Ms. Bruenig seems to think so.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Paul

    Politically liberal Christians I know ultimately suffer from the false premise that their generosity is expressed by what is done with other peoples money.

  • Barbara

    I wonder if this clinging to Marxist theories is not the greatest denial of reality ever seen. Ask these poor deluded folks this question: where can we find a successful Marxist regime? End of discussion.

  • Kevin Carr

    Part of the problem is Marxist think free market economies are a zero-sum game, if one person does well, another has lost something. That is why they demonize then rich, but they ignore the failings and destruction of Marxism. Marxism always leads to a ruling, elitist class, and the serfs that are there to feed the beast. That is why you have Marxist like Hillary, Obama, Sanders and many others that see nothing wrong with the wealth they have amassed, but will demonize other rich people or corporations.

  • VisPacem

    Marx and his followers are typically hypocrites pretending to care about an abstract ‘humanity’, but not real human beings.

    They are all too willing to deny the structure of reality and encourage the destruction of whatever and whomever in order to fulfill and impose their shallow ideological abstractions upon reality and others.

  • texasknight

    Pray for the heretic. Pray for her conversion.

    • John Nolan

      Are you really that naive that you think Marxists support the Democratic Party? And as for “party of death,” it was you and other conservative Republicans that murdered a million civilians in Iraq because you hate Arabs and love wars.

      • texasknight

        You are blind to the world around you. Democrats are indeed socialists. They always strive for a bigger, more controlling centralized government and property redistribution. The party of death is responsible for the continued slaughter of more than 58 million humans ripped apart and or chemically fried unto death while hidden in their mother’s womb. They are also responsible for fashioning laws that led to the destruction of the family. BTW, our Army did not murder millions of civilians. The muslims murdered the millions of non-combative citizens of Iraq. What does all of this mean? You are either a socialist or a useful idiot of the socialists. Stop sipping the socialist Kool-Aid.

  • Faith is not a side effect of squalor- but squalor is often a side effect of faith.

    If you believe your entire reason for being is to do good for God, to die for your fellow man, a savings account makes very little sense.

  • crisdi

    Can’t serve two masters, as Jesus said, you love one and hate the other!

Does God Govern in the Affairs of Men?
Dudley Hall
More from The Stream
Connect with Us