Opinion of the Christian left

[TJ in Oregon]

Mixed; Some elements of the Christian left do great things for a lot of people when they focus on social justice, preferably in their own personal life rather than only in politics (that goes for the "Christian right" and morality just the same). Many on the "Christian left" are considered that because of their economic views and commitment to the poor, even if their economic views are sometimes a bit misguided, and not because of any will to deny the existence of sin or deleted certain sins from our catechism (or whatever the Protestant equivalent might be). However, some on the "Christian left" (that is a horrible monicker, sort of how the "Christian right" isn't a great monicker) take the openness to the point where they espouse basic doctrinal beliefs that are somewhat removed from Christianity, eg. non-Trinitarian, universalists, churches that dispute the divinity of Christ, the Resurrection, etc. Or they consider "sin" in a relativistic context that one must simply follow his feelings rather than seeing a struggle against concupiscence.

[TJ in Oregon]

Mixed; Some elements of the Christian left do great things for a lot of people when they focus on social justice, preferably in their own personal life rather than only in politics (that goes for the "Christian right" and morality just the same). Many on the "Christian left" are considered that because of their economic views and commitment to the poor, even if their economic views are sometimes a bit misguided, and not because of any will to deny the existence of sin or deleted certain sins from our catechism (or whatever the Protestant equivalent might be). However, some on the "Christian left" (that is a horrible monicker, sort of how the "Christian right" isn't a great monicker) take the openness to the point where they espouse basic doctrinal beliefs that are somewhat removed from Christianity, eg. non-Trinitarian, universalists, churches that dispute the divinity of Christ, the Resurrection, etc. Or they consider "sin" in a relativistic context that one must simply follow his feelings rather than seeing a struggle against concupiscence.

Right; a lot of the 'Christian left' isn't really 'Christian' any more (though I would submit that it's a little easier to mount a doctrinal defense of universalism, broadly defined, than the rest of your examples; albeit still not immensely easy and certainly not as easy as Balthasar's 'dared hope' and hence not as worthwhile because daring to hope doesn't make a mockery of the matter by shrouding God's actions with absolute human statements).

The good old, "We have to believe in hell but we don't have to believe there's anyone in it" isn't necessarily heretical, but does require a good bit of naivety about humanity and what people actually do if it doesn't also contain a disbelief in sin. Anecdotal evidence of the world around me at least suggests otherwise, not to say that just seeing someone commit acts of grave matter necessarily means that person is headed for hell, but more understanding the likelihood that win many, many people do, at least one of them are almost certainly headed to hell if we think about it statistically. Of course, we should then "dare to hope" that my "statistical assessment" is flawed in some way and that everyone will be saved. Yet, just like the complete avoidance of sin altogether, it's more a "hope" than a "belief" when applied in the world. I think it is a belief that both the "Christian left" and "Christian right" share.

[TJ in Oregon]

Mixed; Some elements of the Christian left do great things for a lot of people when they focus on social justice, preferably in their own personal life rather than only in politics (that goes for the "Christian right" and morality just the same). Many on the "Christian left" are considered that because of their economic views and commitment to the poor, even if their economic views are sometimes a bit misguided, and not because of any will to deny the existence of sin or deleted certain sins from our catechism (or whatever the Protestant equivalent might be). However, some on the "Christian left" (that is a horrible monicker, sort of how the "Christian right" isn't a great monicker) take the openness to the point where they espouse basic doctrinal beliefs that are somewhat removed from Christianity, eg. non-Trinitarian, universalists, churches that dispute the divinity of Christ, the Resurrection, etc. Or they consider "sin" in a relativistic context that one must simply follow his feelings rather than seeing a struggle against concupiscence.

Right; a lot of the 'Christian left' isn't really 'Christian' any more (though I would submit that it's a little easier to mount a doctrinal defense of universalism, broadly defined, than the rest of your examples; albeit still not immensely easy and certainly not as easy as Balthasar's 'dared hope' and hence not as worthwhile because daring to hope doesn't make a mockery of the matter by shrouding God's actions with absolute human statements).

The good old, "We have to believe in hell but we don't have to believe there's anyone in it" isn't necessarily heretical, but does require a good bit of naivety about humanity and what people actually do if it doesn't also contain a disbelief in sin. Anecdotal evidence of the world around me at least suggests otherwise, not to say that just seeing someone commit acts of grave matter necessarily means that person is headed for hell, but more understanding the likelihood that win many, many people do, at least one of them are almost certainly headed to hell if we think about it statistically. Of course, we should then "dare to hope" that my "statistical assessment" is flawed in some way and that everyone will be saved. Yet, just like the complete avoidance of sin altogether, it's more a "hope" than a "belief" when applied in the world. I think it is a belief that both the "Christian left" and "Christian right" share.

Yes, it's certainly, in the form in which it is acceptable and doesn't require such naivety, much more a hope regarding God than a hope regarding the world. It's entirely more reasonable to belief that God would be good enough to redeem all men than to believe that all men are good enough to be redeemed by God, which as you said any sort of examination of the world as it is will show not to be the case to all but the most depraved sort of moral relativist (there exist non-depraved (though still wrong) moral relativists, and in my experience being at a major university they're usually anthropologists of some description).

Once you start to movie beyond hoping that God will have mercy on all the world and begin to assume he will, it starts to run afoul of Church teachings on sin, mainly the idea that obstinately remaining in a state of mortal sin will lead to that person going to hell. Hoping that God will withhold such a punishment is about as far as it can go before it conflicts with other teachings and unless one rejects those teachings the whole thing starts to become unintelligible.