fragments of an attempted writing.
Put simply, Dominionism means that Christians have a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions. Originating among some of America’s most radical theocrats, it’s long had an influence on religious-right education and political organizing. But because it seems so outré, getting ordinary people to take it seriously can be difficult. Most writers, myself included, who explore it have been called paranoid. In a contemptuous 2006 First Things review of several books, including Kevin Phillips’ American Theocracy, and my own Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, conservative columnist Ross Douthat wrote, “the fear of theocracy has become a defining panic of the Bush era.”


Now, however, we have the most theocratic Republican field in American history, and suddenly, the concept of Dominionism is reaching mainstream audiences. Writing about Bachmann in The New Yorker this month, Ryan Lizza spent several paragraphs explaining how the premise fit into the Minnesota congresswoman’s intellectual and theological development. And a recent Texas Observer cover story on Rick Perry examined his relationship with the New Apostolic Reformation, a Dominionist variant of Pentecostalism that coalesced about a decade ago. “[W]hat makes the New Apostolic Reformation movement so potent is its growing fascination with infiltrating politics and government,” wrote Forrest Wilder. Its members “believe Christians—certain Christians—are destined to not just take ‘dominion’ over government, but stealthily climb to the commanding heights of what they term the ‘Seven Mountains’ of society, including the media and the arts and entertainment world.”


- from here.


Poor First Things.  So many of the horses they've bet on have pulled up.  

16 comments:

  1. Deep ties to dominionism?

    I bet Gary North doesn't even return their calls.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When I was involved in the fringey side of the pro-life movement ages ago, where Christian Reconstructionists were in control of the Prot side of things (Operation Rescue, etc.), it was pretty clear that there were very substantial differences between the Pentecostals and the Presbyterians -- among other things Pentecostal Dominionists tend to be a bit more big tent in their version of Dominionism than the Presbs/Reformed Reconstructionists do. Perry has ties to the Pentecostal side of things. Bachmann (I used to live in Stillwater, MN and had the misfortune of meeting the woman when she was running for the School Board there and then later when she was elected to the state leg. and I heard the scuttlebutt around those parts when she went into politics) is WELS but has ties to a local Christian group that is a charismaticish cultlike weird group which is dominionist following the Pentecostal model. Bachmann came to the bookstore I worked at, as my boss was on the board of the local Crisis Pregnancy Center and Bachmann had her hand in every local social conservative endeavor (or wanted to appear to, rather), and she could not, when speaking about any of those sorts of issues, avoid dominionist language - so much so it freaked out my pro-life Catholic boss. I think Bachmann has real ties to the Pentecostal side of Dominionism, even if she is a member of WELS, and Perry has ties to TX Pentecostal Dominionists, and will take advantage of those folks as an activist side of his base even if the man's politics will morph as needed for him to win elections. Perry definitely sings to dominionists as an annointed son.

    Bachmann and North seem to have spoken at the same event together last year ( http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/rep-bachmann-signs-fringe-fest ).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Owen,

    The Bachmanns officially left the WELS and joined Eagle Brook church in June, six days before Michelle announced her candidacy. Eagle Brook just so happens to be a large source of referrals for Marcus's counselling clinic. This article has the deets: http://iowaindependent.com/59587/new-bachmann-church-tied-to-familys-christian-counseling-clinics/#disqus_thread

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really have a hard time getting worked up about Rick Perry being a "Dominionist" (something that I've never heard of in Pentecostal circles), considering that he in all likelihood killed an innocent man for no good reason other than maybe appearing tough. Then there's Michelle Bachmann's absurd stances on mass transit/cutting any government services to the non-wealthy, which are also far more concerning to me than any social conservatism with Christian inspiration of one sort or another.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Maybe I'm too cynical, but it always seemed to me that people would play the Moral Majority card when it gets them elected, and only really then. Not to say that there aren't people who want to start a theocracy nor am I saying that Rick Perry, Rick Santourum, and Bachman don't give me the heeby-jeebies. I just wonder if Theocracy is to the Left what Sharia Law is to the right: a helpful scare tactic.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Pentecostal Dominionists? Who knew? I always thought the Dominion Schtick was strictly Calvinist.

    Diane

    ReplyDelete
  7. The scariest people in the "radical" pro-life circles were a combination of the two - the Calvinist charismatics. It is quite something to meet folks who 1) believe in TULIP, 2) are white supremacists (they still "loved" black babies, but they also believed that northern european caucasians and their descendants have a unique role in God's plan of salvation and need to have their interests protected, they also believed the colored races were especially prone to paganisms), and 3) speaks in tongues.

    I sat in jail one night with a Presbyterian Rushdoonyite - he was a real treat. The Pentecostal and charismatic dominionists in the pro-life movement tend to have a much more activist sort of temperament and really want to present their "message" in a way that has something in the way of broad appeal. But this Rushdoonyite was more the cold calculating brooding type. It was somewhat surreal, because a month or so before this I had been in jail with a Trot, and both the Trot and the Rushdoonyite, in a very similar manner, liked to talk about who was going to be liquidated first once the new order was in control. And with both there was an eerie lack of emotion about it - it was all matter of fact, "scientific."

    Look kids, in order to be a dominionist one need not believe, like Rushdoony, that kids who talk back to their parents need to be stoned to death. One only need to believe that God intends for Christians to rule in the temporal order; that the temporal order should have all of its laws conformed to God's laws, and thus that unbelievers must be subject to God's laws; and that there is a relationship between Christians coming to temporal power and the coming of Christ. With regard to the last point, even rapture believers can be dominionists (and their eschatology is obviously worlds away from Rushdoony's) because they believe that Christians in political power will play a decisive role in the events which lead up to the rapture which will facilitate Christ's ultimate return.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Could someone explain to me how dominionism, which has about as much chance of taking over America as Gaddafi does, would be worse than the current managerial state? thanks in advance.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Benito,

    Are you believer? Yes, then no problem. No, ( and I think you are one from your question), then you will have problems.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Uhm. Where the hell do you people come from? Lot's of people are "believers" but do not support dominionism. In the Rushdoony version of dominionism, homosexuals, women who have sex before marriage (not men), women who get an abortion, and people who espouse heretical beliefs get executed. In the Pentecostal version of dominionism, the U.S. gets to not only continue but heavily escalate its waging war against God's enemies (particularly Islam) in the world and it's support for the expansion of the state of Israel. I know plenty of "conservative" Christians who would be horrified by either the Rushdoony or Pentecostal variations on the theme of dominionism. That said, social conservatism in America has certainly been influenced by dominionism, and it's hard to avoid dominionist influences when politicking on social conservative issues. James Dobson is no Rushdoony, but he has been influenced by people who were disciples of Rushdoony. George Weigel no doubt finds many of Rushdoony's views horrific, but when he drafts Declarations a majority of the signers have been influenced either by Rushdoony or a Rushdoony derivative.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Owen,

    I wasn't aware of any use of "dominionism" that was outside the Calvinist Rushdoony, North et al sort of crowd. Maybe this is because of the particular places I've spent my time (Gary North initiated a correspondence with me when I was in high school because of some pieces I wrote for Lew Rockwell… I also got emails from folks asking me to go to Liberty, assuming I was Christian—I wasn't yet at that time). So these people are inspired by Pentecostals wanting to take the country back for God? Does this have any real program other than moral majority Republicanism as we've known it and a bunch of hot air?

    ReplyDelete
  12. OK Owen we get you're a commie, please fix the eyebleeding RED font. My eyes are not your class enemy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. C. Peter Wagner is scarier than Rushdoony...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Jeff Sharlet's The Family is a great book to read on this topic.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Andrew,

    Agreed on Wagner.

    Ari,

    "Real program" -- one could chuckle at that phrase being applied to Rushdoonyites (though I certainly grant your point - they have defined their program assiduously) , let alone earnest politico Pentecostals. To answer your question, it varies quite a bit - the Pentecostals and charismatics involved in Operation Rescue definitely had a real program with regard to social issues - it was essentially a softened, gentler version of Rushdoony - instead of killing homosexuals you send them to re-education camps, that sort of thing. If there is one policy point that all of these Pent/charis dominion oriented groups agree on it is unequivocal support for the state of Israel. I would say that these people have an agenda that is more clear and more of a precise target than moral majority types (especially of the Ralph Reed variety), but less precise and thorough than Rushdoony. Of course a Rushdoonyite will reject this notion, because the eschatology is radically different, but I don't look to Rushdoonyites for anything, and certainly not for clarification on terminology.

    ReplyDelete
  16. By "believer", I did not mean a "generic" Christian, i.e; a member of the "regular" mainstream variety denominations including quite a few evangelicals etc; but a member of a specific group that espouses dominationism whether "soft" or "hard".

    You know, the "true believer" versus the soft, squishy middle-of-the-road, wishy-washy believer.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.