Christian Reconstructionism is “arguably the driving ideology of the Christian Right today.”
Thats what I wrote in my 1997 book Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy. Its not that I thought then — or now — that everyone on the Christian Right is a Reconstructionist. Far from it. Rather, I think that the explicitly theocratic Christian Reconstructionist movement has played a catalytic role in moving large sectors evangelical Christianity from apolitical stances, to active political participation, brought distinctively theocratic ideas into mainstream discourse. And this has happened in just one generation.
“For much of Reconstructionism’s short history.” I wrote in Eternal Hostility, “it has been and ideology in search of a constituency. But in recent years, its influence has grown far beyond the founders’ expectations. As Reconstructionist writer Gary North observes. ‘We once were shepherds without sheep. No longer.'”
I was surprised when Terry Gross asked me about Christian Reconstructionism in our interview on Fresh Air recently. I have been surprised every time it has come up for the past year or so, because for so long the idea that there are active modern theocratic thinkers whose views inform the contemporary Christian Right, has been difficult for a lot of people to take in.
For those unfamiliar with the term here is how I defined it in my 1994 study of Reconstructionism in The Public Eye, the scholarly publication of the Somerville, MA-based Political Research Associates.
“Reconstructionism is a theology that arose out of conservative Presbyterianism (Reformed and Orthodox), which proposes that contemporary application of the laws of Old Testament Israel, or “Biblical Law,” is the basis for reconstructing society toward the Kingdom of God on earth.”
“Reconstructionism argues that the Bible is to be the governing text for all areas of life–such as government, education, law, and the arts, not merely “social” or “moral” issues like pornography, homosexuality, and abortion. Reconstructionists have formulated a “Biblical world view” and “Biblical principles” by which to examine contemporary matters. Reconstructionist theologian David Chilton succinctly describes this view: ‘The Christian goal for the world is the universal development of Biblical theocratic republics, in which every area of life is redeemed and placed under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and the rule of God’s law.'”
That was pretty arcane stuff in 1994, and 1997, but no more. The name of the Christian Reconstructionist movement’s seminal thinker R.J. Rushdoony, is even starting to become more widely known. It was also not long ago that the word “theocracy” was not uttered in mainstream political discourse in relation to the Christian Right. Now even mainstream newspapers and mainstream polititians of both major parties are using the term — not as a term of disparagement, but as a fair descriptor of the political views and actions of some Christian Right leaders.
Of course there is still a lot of adjusting going on. There are those of all political stripes who would rather we not use the term “theocracy” at all. Some, quite understandably, are afraid the term will tar their movement. Others think it is not an effective term for tarring the movement — as if that were the only legitimate use of the word. Some object to misapplications of the term. Others just have thier heads in the sand and don’t want to see that there is, in fact, an active Christian theocratic movement in the United States.
Whatever people may think of the word theocracy, the fact remains that this movement is not new. It is not going away. And it is gaining power. Because this is so, many of us are going to continue to not only use the term, but growing numbers of people will be thinking and writing about it.
There is currently a well done series of articles published on the progressive news and opinion site Truthout that is making the rounds of the blogosphere. The series includes helpful discussions of Christian nationalism and Christian Reconstructionism. Check it out.
[Crossposted from FrederickClarkson.com and Talk to Action]
Its going to take some time for people to get used to the idea that there are theocrats among us. They are different than conservatives. And how we deal with them will be different perhaps, than we may think.
In my opinion, because the US population is so diverse, I would be inclined to think a secular government would be preferable.
However, one aim of the coming US theocracy will be to make some adjustments to that diversity, in concert with some domestic policy changes that will impact certain demographics, with the result that the principal utility of theocracy, social control, will not be impacted by heterogeneity of population.
As a side note, a secular constitutional monarchy government in combination with a state religion seems to work OK in some European countries, precisely because it does provide a focus for strong national-religious sentiments without affecting too much the well being of the people. Not really relevant to the US situation, I know.
Probably the single greatest factor in the successful imposition of theocracy in the US is that so many of the theocrat’s values mesh with US mainstream opinion, even though the mainstream may view those values through a secular lens.
Having said all that, I stand by my previous contention that while US internal hostilities will have a religious element, the major conflict will be economic, with ethnicity a strong second, and then religion. And there will be some strange bedfellows and unexpected overlap, as poor old Joe Bageant will learn to his surprise that Pooty is shooting at him.
it will be an interesting swing of the pendulam, but as always, it will swing way out, before returning to center ; )
The pendulum is a myth. I don’t believe in it.
This is about organization, ideology, resources and the will to fight.
The big question for our time is whether the non-theocratic forces will get their shit together it time.
Great post and comments, but I’m wondering about your belief that the pendulum is a myth. I’d agree it’s not some mystical or automatic thing, but isn’t the organizing, etc. that you mention, a reaction to this swing to the right?
The further the right pushes, won’t the reaction have to be equal or stronger and won’t that create a, uh, swing of sorts? even if it takes a long time?
It seems to me it’s been that way historically. In fact, I’m sort of counting on it so I’ll be crushed if you tell me it’s all made up. Anticipation of the backlash to all this is what’s keeping me going.
sorry. the pendulum, and “swings” thereof, IMHO, is wishful thinking.
I find such concepts irrelevant to the urgent political situations we face. If the theocrats win — and they are winning — the consequences will be dire.
If they win, and lo and behold the pendulum turns out not to be mythological, well I find no comfort in that.
What if victory by the theocrats is preventable?
This is a defining struggle of our time. I think we need to act like it. I for one, am not waiting for the pendulum.
Interesting, as to whether the reaction to circumstances is myth or not, in relation to a pendulum effect, never the less, I agree it is time for strong action, but the sad part is, I’m not seeing enough of it.
It really seems that the strongest reaction to the dire times is in the blogosphere, and not nearly enough momentum in the general public.
Agreed that people are coming somewhat more aware of what is happening, but it is far from the strength of momentum it desperately needs.
Is it blind faith, that America will always be free, and justice for it’s people, such has been our history, at least what is taught to us all during our lives. Is this what’s keeping the people from screaming in the streets to stop this madness?
We are being robbed daily, in every aspect you can think of, and yet people are just passing it on because it’s the times?
In my mind, it is GREED, pure and simple, not only in our governments, (world wide) but in the lives of the majority of the people.
Yes, it may be wishful, and mythical thinking, but I’m going to keep the faith that mankind will make the “swing” back to reality, fairness, to a time when there were at least some moral concept of life.
I am not one to set for long, and be passive, for in my life I have experienced brute force, in it’s worst form. I have received it, and given it, and it’s not something I ever wish to be a part of again, so for now, I will keep the one thing that keeps the candle burning, “Hope”, until heaven forbid, the other alternative.
Mr. Clarkson, I have long respected your work, and beleifs, and I have Hope, your work will be fruitful in the change we so badly need.
Izzy, thank you for your comments, and I have Hope, that between all the beleifs of people realizing, needing, and working for change, these things will come to pass, without the need for Force.