Fred Clarkson has posted a blog about "Readin' & Writin' 'bout Theocracy." It is well worth reading.
When Fred's book, Eternal Hostility, came out in 1997 he was nearly alone in recognizing the growing influence of Christian Reconstructionism. By that time I had already spent seven years witnessing the takeover of the Republican Party in Harris County (Houston) Texas by Stephen Hotze and a group of Dominionist Christians. I moved to Oklahoma in 1998 and could easily spot politicians who were spouting Dominionist themes on the floor of the State Capitol. Then, when R. J. Rushdoony died in March 2001, proof of Reconstructionism's influence in the state became undeniable when the Daily Oklahoman eulogized the founder of the movement on its editorial page.
In April 2002, when I gave a speech about the movement, even among Interfaith Alliance members there was skepticism that this movement would have much influence on the country. As late as October 2004, when I mentioned Dominionism in a sermon to a congregation of progressive-minded people, there was a measure of strong disbelief that the movement had so profoundly influenced the religious right.
Since the elections last November and the ascendancy of the so-called "values voters" and a daily diet of their extremist agenda, every progressive-minded person that I have met has been aroused from their complacency about the future of democracy in America.
Too many moderates, however, are still asleep. Last Sunday I attended a discussion about church-state issues at a widely known "Moderate" Baptist church in Oklahoma City. One of the featured speakers, a layman at the church, espoused Dominionist platitudes and beliefs without the slightest realization that the source of his ideas came from 20th Century Dominionists instead of from the "Founding Fathers" of our country. Apparently, his "moderate" pastor is either unaware of this or is unconcerned about it. He said little himself to challenge his contention that the U.S. Constitution was "inspired by God," founded on "biblical law," and "presupposed" adherence to the "Christian religion." The speaker who did challenge the Dominionist's thought, another layman at the church, has already been publicly derided several times by the pastor as being part of a supposedly left-wing extremist group (Americans United).
2 comments:
thanks for this. it is very important stuff. i'm forwever thankful for an after-lecture coffee chat with my theology prof back in the 90s when he introduced me to rushdoony's work and the growing influence of reconstructionism. it seemed so abstract and fringe at the time (especially all the way in australia), but it really has snowballed and christian thnkers really need to address it.
It goes back even further. When my husband and I attended the Southern Baptist Convention in Kansas City in 1984, our pastor was distraught when we voted against a resolution calling for condemnation of women in pastoral roles. He was only slightly mollified when we explained that such a move was in violation of the Baptist Faith and Message, which leaves such decisions up to autonomous congregations.
But that's why one of the reasons we were in attendance. By that time, right-wing Baptists were already pushing for "reforms" at our seminaries (meaning kicking out professors and administrators who didn't kowtow to conservative philosophy) and political activism in our communities, which included ties to the Republican Party. We could see the beginning of the end of the traditional Southern Baptist support for the separation of church and state and church and politics in the Dominionist language of church leaders (though they were too smart to breathe the word at that point)). Our fellow churchgoers thought we were worried about nothing, but look where the denomination is today.
Long ago I read an interview with Billy Graham where he was asked what his greatest mistake had been in his ministry. His reply was that he had made the mistake of equating Christianity with Americanism and Americanism with the Republican Party, and he regretted that. My husband and I were thrilled to see that acknowledgment, but unfortunately, it's hard now to think that we didn't hallucinate it. His actions and words afterwards certainly give the lie to it.
Post a Comment