[Alex Murphy]

That list of "Evangelical" signees reads like a who's who of the usual liberal riff-raff. Three names stand out above the rest:

* Richard Cizik, President, The New Evangelicals (Washington, DC)
* Ronald J. Sider, President, Evangelicals for Social Action (Philadelphia, PA)
* Jim Wallis, President, Sojourners (Washington, DC)

[sthguard]

Yeah, anything the Soros-funded Jim Wallis would sign is automatically suspect.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

lol. Appeasers.

[marshmallow]

That list of "Evangelical" signees reads like a who's who of the usual liberal riff-raff.

The letter is refreshingly sane and reasoned.

It's clear that the writers have evaluated the encyclical on its merits and have resisted the temptation to knee-jerk nay-saying based on its origin.

[Wallace T.]

It is worthy to note that none of the signers are affiliated with the conservative seminaries like Dallas, Westminster, or the conservative dominated Southern Baptist seminaries in Louisville, Fort Worth, and Wake Forest. The so-called evangelical Left is wandering onto the same path that the mainline churches did 50-100 years ago. The mainline churches have drifted into irrelevancy; even liberals pay no attention to them any more. The same may happen to Ron Sider, Richard Cizik, Jim Wallis, and their ilk.

[Frumanchu]

Yeah, little surprise.

While I do not endorse per se the aggressive spread of democracy as a means of foreign policy, the simple fact is that the United States of America came to be the most prosperous nation on Earth in such a very short time precisely because it was built upon the principles of limited government, free enterprise and individual liberty. The overwhelming majority of the areas where America has "failed" and "left behind" portions of its population are a direct result of the encroachment of communism, socialism, fascism and modern liberal progressivism into the system (often by claiming to be working to solve the very problems it creates and/or exacerbates).

The proposals advocated in the OP...these notions of overarching global governance...represent a failure of vision on the part of the church as a whole. The movement seems to be use the government as the means of doling out the grace of charity when the government is itself very often the greatest catalyst for its need in the first place. Government, properly implemented, shouldn't stand in the way (legally or economically) of the church meeting the needs of the poor.