Kudos to Bob Allen at Ethics Daily for his story on Reconstructionism.
It is hard to know when you can take what North and SBC leaders say at face value. They often obfuscate whenever it helps them accomplish their goals.
My rule of thumb is to watch what they do and see if it matches with what they say.
It is entirely possible that the idea for "conservative" Christians to takeover the institutions of civil government began with North and was then taken up by other hands. It is also possible that the idea did not begin with North and that he was merely the first to report what he had heard religious right leaders like Pressler talking about behind closed doors at meetings like that of the Council for National Policy. That would explain why North appeared surprised by Pressler's reluctance to openly talk about connections between the SBC takeover and the religious "New Right."
There's no doubt in my mind that, behind the scenes, the Republican party is now engaged in a bitter struggle between neo-conservatives and the religious right. At the moment, the mechanisms of power are all in the hands of neo-conservatives. They throw a bone to the religious right now and then. Their biggest bones are the appointments of Roberts and Alito. In the end, those bones will have the most lasting influence on domestic politics.
The neo-conservatives most lasting influence is on foreign policy. The mess they have made in Iraq and the tensions they are fueling in North Korea, Syria and Iran are setting a trajectory that is shaping the world's future for the foreseeable future. That future does not look bright. It looks more like the pre-millenialist vision of Armageddon than the millenial reign that post-millenialists like North had envisioned.
No comments:
Post a Comment