You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
Today, religion is often associated with moral and even political conservatism. But, historically, the main currents of American reform and dissent were motivated by religious belief, from the abolitionist movement to the late–19th-century Social Gospel movement, the mid–20th-century Catholic Workers Movement, the postwar ban-the-bomb, anti-nuclear movement, and, of course, the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.
Since the mid–18th century, most of this country’s leading advocates for social justice were religiously devout.
In stark contrast, prior to World War II, science was frequently misused to support ideologies like scientific racism, social Darwinism and eugenics, that sought to legitimize social and economic inequalities.
Throughout American history, there were close links between religion and dissent and protest, from Anne Hutchinson and Roger Williams to the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. I am deeply grateful to Maurice Isserman, the leading historian of the 20th-century American left, for tracing the roots of American traditions of reform, protest and dissent to the antinomian strain in Protestant culture, which in a more secularized form continues to motivate activism today.
You’ll want to read Professor Isserman’s latest book, Reds: The Tragedy of American Communism, which lays bare the deeply contradictory history of the American Communist Party, which organized powerful industrial unions, protested racism and moved the nation left even as it maintained an unwavering faith in the USSR’s claims to be a democratic workers’ state.
The antinomian strain in American Christianity manifested itself in various forms of dissent throughout the country’s history, advocating for radical interpretations of religion that prioritize personal faith and divine inspiration over institutional doctrine and practices.
The term “antinomian” (derived from the Greek for “against the law”) describes those who believe that Christians, under the covenant of grace, are not bound by traditional moral law spelled out in the Old Testament. It emphasizes the primacy of faith and the grace of God over the moral laws and the ethical norms prescribed by religious and secular authorities.
If, by chance, you’ve ever read the magisterial works on American Puritanism by Perry Miller and Edmund S. Morgan, you might recall the antinomian controversy in Massachusetts Bay Colony, when Anne Hutchinson challenged the Puritan clergy by arguing that God’s grace alone was sufficient for salvation, and that the outward observance of morality and the church’s teachings were not necessary indicators of a person’s saved state. Her beliefs and charismatic teachings led to her trial and banishment from the colony, highlighting the tension between individual religious experience and institutional authority.
Roger Williams’s call for the separation of church and state and religious freedom and his critique of the Puritans’ confiscation of Native American land on religious grounds also reflected an antinomian challenge to the prevailing social and religious order.
The 18th-century Philadelphia Quaker Anthony Benezet, who laid the groundwork for the abolition movement, emphasized the antinomian belief in the equality of all souls before God, and challenged other Christians to recognize the inherent contradiction between the principles of Christianity and the practice of slavery. John Brown’s war on slavery, which similarly stressed moral conviction over societal laws, also reflected the antinomian strain in his Christian faith.
Henry David Thoreau’s philosophy of civil disobedience, while more secular in its justification, reflects the antinomian strands in American Protestantism through its emphasis on individual conscience, moral autonomy, the critique of institutional authority and the belief in the individual’s role in enacting change. Thoreau’s approach shares with antinomianism a fundamental trust in the individual’s capacity for direct moral insight and the obligation to act upon it, even in defiance of legal dictates.
Many of the reform movements of the late 19th and 20th century arose out of a deep conviction that religious principles demanded direct action against social injustices and moral failings. The Social Gospel movement, which applied Christian ethics to social problems, asked, in essence “What Would Jesus Do?”—a question posed by Charles Sheldon in an extraordinarily influential 1896 work of fiction entitled In His Steps.
This movement played a pivotal role in motivating Progressive reformers to address the social problems brought about by industrialization and urbanization, and the intensifying economic inequality that accompanied those developments. With its emphasis on social rather than individual salvation, the Social Gospel movement was instrumental in pushing for the expansion of public education (at the kindergarten and high school levels); labor reforms, including child labor laws; safer working conditions and reasonable working hours; and social services to aid the poor, the sick, the elderly, and those hurt on the job. They saw these reforms as essential to ensuring the dignity and well-being of workers in line with Christian teachings.
Many Jewish immigrants who arrived in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries were influenced by the General Jewish Labour Bund, a secular Jewish socialist party founded in the Russian Empire in 1897. The Bund was notably active in the fight against anti-Semitism and for social justice, workers’ rights and cultural autonomy.
The ideological influence of the Bund was felt in American socialist and other leftist movements. Bundist ideals helped shape the platforms of socialist and labor parties in the U.S., and Bundists were often active in these and other progressive political organizations. During the 1930s and 1940s, individuals influenced by the Bund were prominent in the fight for civil rights, expanded social welfare programs and anti-fascist efforts.
The Catholic Workers Movement, a radical expression of Catholic social teachings, was co-founded by Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin in 1933, and was dedicated to serving the poor and advocating for social justice. This movement established a network of houses of hospitality across the United States (and eventually internationally), providing food, shelter and a sense of community to those in need, regardless of religious affiliation. It also set up farming communes as experiments in sustainable, communal living and to connect more directly with the land and the sources of food. In addition, movement members actively protested against wars, nuclear weapons and social injustices, often facing arrest and imprisonment for acts of civil disobedience.
The Catholic Worker Movement offered a radical model of Christian discipleship that emphasized personal responsibility to care for the marginalized and to challenge unjust social structures. The movement demonstrated the potential for religious faith to be integrated into active, radical engagement with the world, inspiring subsequent generations of activists inside and outside the Catholic Church. Its steadfast commitment to nonviolence and pacifism has influenced numerous peace and justice movements around the world.
Today, religion continues to fuel social criticism and reform movements, though often in ways that are less overtly religious or denominational. Modern movements for environmental stewardship, social justice and human rights frequently draw on religious principles, even if they do not explicitly foreground their religious motivations.
However, their predominant self-identification is secular and, in many instances, these movements frame their arguments in opposition to religious orthodoxies. That’s not surprising: These groups want to distance themselves from religious institutions that historically justified colonialism or slavery and opposed LGBTQ+ rights and interracial marriage.
But by adopting a strictly secular stance, these movements may inadvertently alienate potential allies within religious communities who share common goals. They may also unwittingly perpetuate societal polarization, overlooking rich traditions of religious activism, hindering dialogue and cooperation, and making it more challenging to find common ground and work together on shared concerns.
The failure to explicitly appeal to widely shared religiously inspired values is, I think, a grave mistake. If the left’s goal is to challenge societal norms, advocate for justice and inspire collective action for the common good, it’s not enough to appeal solely to rational arguments or political ideologies. Such arguments miss the deeply emotional and spiritual dimensions that motivate human behavior.
While not without challenges, an appeal to religious values can enrich and strengthen contemporary reform movements by broadening their base of support, deepening their moral resonance and sustaining their efforts over time. Ignoring religious values can alienate potential supporters who might otherwise be sympathetic to a movement’s goals.
Also, faith-based organizations and religious communities often have extensive networks that can be mobilized for social reform. Many religious traditions emphasize values such as justice, compassion and stewardship of the environment, and the dignity of all individuals—principles that often align with the goals of contemporary reform movements. In addition, religious leaders and institutions often hold significant moral authority within their communities. Gaining their endorsement or involvement can lend credibility and legitimacy to a movement, amplifying its ethical appeal.
Activism, to be successful, requires something more than demonstrations and public protests. It’s not accidental, as Professor Isserman shows, that the Communist Party of the United States was never more influential than when it portrayed 20th-century Americanism and appealed to longstanding American values. Meanwhile, the left-wing groups that are most vehement in rejecting shared religious values have never been more isolated than they are today.
Coalition building, which is the essence of democratic politics in a pluralistic society where multiple beliefs, values and interests coexist, demands finding common ground in shared ethical principles. Presenting social and political issues as ethical imperatives can galvanize support beyond mere political or ideological lines, appealing to a broader sense of right and wrong that transcends individual differences.
Reform movements are never stronger than when they mobilize faith for social change. Religious ideals can inspire and sustain social movements. Conversely, faith-averse, secular-only activism that refuses to integrate or acknowledge the power and influence of religious ideals in driving social transformation are, at least in this society, without a prayer of success.
