Looking inward

[andrewlittle]

Several threads and posts have prompted me to start this thread. I have no idea, as I start, where this will end up. Bear with me and we'll see.

I'll start with an old adage from I know not where: "Conservatives are easily focused - they always look inward at what they want to protect. Liberals are easily fragmented - the always look outwards at what needs changed. They all end up looking in different directions and, hence, are not easily focused." Apart from the labels "conservative" and "liberal" being outdated and less easily defined, I think this still applies.

For several years, I have posited that there has been an inherent problem with liberal/ progressive/ mainline Christianity (LPMC, for short going forward) that is allowing a distinct minority of extreme Fundamentalist Christians to snowball the effects of their fear-mongering and propaganda into a popular ideology of exclusivism, hatred and elitism. The problem, I surmise, is that not only did LPMC not counteract millenialism, dominionism, end-time theology, or whatever other name is goes under, but that it did the opposite - it slowly syncretized some aspects of this phenomenum into its own beliefs and practices.

A number of threads and posts here are are dealing with different aspects of the same problem. They are each highlighting individual problems, but they are really part and parcel of a bigger problem. These are just some of the threads dealing with some aspect of "dominion theology" or "prosperity theology" - they are interesting reads:
NathanATX's "The Christian Embassy" http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1749
Emproph's "Theocratic Treachery" http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1677
Joe Brummer's "Gay Activists Need Non-Violence" http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1753
LadyinRed's "rticle on Talk to action about people being programmed into violence." http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1742

These cover a number of different scenarios that are unmistakably related.

A current popular evangelical theology is blindly accepted by a lot of Christians who may not know the source or the underlying precepts of prosperity theology, which is the basis for millenialism, etc.

In 2004, I wrote (I will try to reduce the size of this quote, or highlight significant areas):

Entitlement is a word applied, more often than not disparagingly, to U.S. programs aimed at alleviating conditions for the poor. Interestingly, a better word cannot be found to describe the attitude of dominant U.S. culture towards wealth, consumption and accumulation. There is a distinct attitude among most in the U.S. that individuals are entitled to keep the rewards of their efforts, no matter the cost to anyone else. There is also an innate jealousy towards anyone else who appears materially ‘successful’ - almost as if ‘they have what we should have.’ Since entitle means, “to give an enforceable right to claim something” , it would seem most appropriate to apply the epithet to those [in dominant culture] who would seek to limit benefits to those most in need and, perhaps, deserving.

While Prosperity Theology, as a particular religious expression, has been widely lambasted by mainline theologians as abhorrent, it seems entirely plausible that the U.S. Christian community is firmly entrenched in a more generic theology of prosperity, perhaps one more correctly described as a theology of entitlement. The high points of the Prosperity Theology were: non-Christian humans have the nature of Satan; by "conversion" they acquire the nature of God like true Christians; true Christians have the right to progress and prosper in all areas of life - non-Christians do not; blockages to prosperity come from the Devil and the demons who are the real reason for diseases, poverty and stagnation; Jesus has delegated all his power to Christians who are obliged to use this authority to destroy all things that seem evil to real Christians; God is bound by spiritual regulations which it is up to Christians to understand and exploit; revealed knowledge is a message from God's Spirit directly into our spirit, and outsiders (those who not think like we do) do not have revealed knowledge. In short, adherents of this theology are entitled to prosperity, authority and hegemony. Others, simply, are not only not entitled, but are, in fact, the enemy.

[Some] U.S. Pentecostalism, TV evangelism and the Religious Right, who claim to have the ear of the majority of U.S. citizens, speak a language that is eerily similar to Prosperity Theology, albeit without the criticism that has accompanied the formal movements in other nations. The popular U.S. theology of the aforementioned groups is as contextual as any liberation theology. It suits the acquisitive nature of U.S. culture to a ‘tee’, and its appeal is not just limited to the Religious Right.

In the extreme, it is not unusual to hear messages about the evil empire (Islam), capitalism being the Christian way, calamities and catastrophes being caused by unrighteous behaviors of GLBT persons and those condoning abortions, God-given authority to promote U.S. style democracy and capitalism, and a war against an infidel enemy to protect our economic interests being a just war. “If you’re not a supporter of the war, globalization, {insert other ideology}, you’re unpatriotic,” is not an unusual rallying cry in the U.S. today. However they are described - Fundamental, Conservative, Religious Right, Full Gospel - the [leaders of the] churches that reflect the dominant U.S. theology are lined up to promote U.S. global dominance economically, politically and theologically, [as well as to benefit from it].

When you move to the left, however, the theology of entitlement does not disappear. Certain strains of this theology still resonate: mission is often condescending as if given to someone inferior; secular gifts and wealth are often criteria for serving as elders or church council members; ministers are paid on a sliding scale that somehow reflects their abilities; money, when given to churches, many times remains under the control of the giver through designation; the wealthy are generally more deserving of respect, and their words heard more readily, than the poor; and leadership is given the deference that seems to indicate a special relationship with God. Whether Republican or Democrat, left or right - the candidate who spends the most money in a U.S. election campaign wins the election 94% of the time. Admittedly, the depth of the worship of money, power and the elite may be mitigated somewhat as you move from the right, but the idol is an idol just the same.

Okay, so much for editorial comments.

Do the tenets of Prosperity Theology ring a bell when we consider what is happening in so much of our country? If so, who is immune? It hinges on the addiction to power, position, prestige and profit (for the leaders), or the fear of loss of any or all these things (for the adherents).

Certain attitudes from this theological outlook have seeped into virtually every LPMC church, and have set up a stage upon which "dominionism" can preach it's popular, but hateful, rhetoric. How many LPMC churches have copies of the "Left Behind" series of books on their shelves? How many in one way or the other glorify the wealthy, powerful or prestigious members?

GLBTQ and immigrants are not alone in being demonized - it's just that many groups have yet to realize that is what is happening. In much more subtle ways, racism is alive and well in the efforts to dismantle the gains that have been made. To the Prosperity Theology crowd there are far fewer in the "Christian like us camp" than outside it. That camp excludes the poor (even though these make up a lot of unwitting supporters), people of color, GLBTQ folks, socially moderate to liberal on the spectrum, non-Pentecostal and non-Fundamental conservatives (they don't have the "right" Christian characteristics) and, of course, every non-Christian on the face of the planet.

Not only is the upcoming Left Behind game, being promoted by many conservative church hierarchies, about a right-believing Christian commando force slaughtering unbelievers (those who believe differently), but we are already at war, or in serious antagonistic diatribe, with non-Christian nations over protection of resources. We are also, despite our verbal insistance on human rights, standing by as millions of people are slaughtered. Why? Because they are not economically important. They are simply collateral damage in a game that is about acquiring more and more advantage - with the key players being those who are specially anointed by God.

So who's included in the elite camp: powerful (God-given, remember), wealthy (ditto), MALE (unless you are married to one of these males, and even then ...), European descent (and then only some), heterosexual (a must) - well, we could go on narrowing the field down. And they will do just that because the fewer players, the greater the return for each of the elite.

Who needs to be on-board for this to work? Government, big business, military and social leaders. Oddly enough, who are the subjects of many of the threads talking about these radical conservative movements - it's the same people.

How does a war like this start? When one - only one - "side" declares a war. That war has been declared, and most people of the world, including the majority of those in our country, are expendable. How do you get people to sign onto a war like this? By convincing them there are Godless enemies that are out to take away what you have - not just out there in the world, but inside our culture. That includes, obviously, Muslims, GLBT, abortionists and women who have had abortions, and all manner of other people. Fear is the driving force behind the success of the leaders.

Call it what you want - end times theology, as is popular today - is all about the end of times as we know it. We are in this with a whole bunch of other people - so what do we do? We cannot keep thinking that we have to deal with just our own particular symptoms - e.g. lack of rights for GLBT. This is a much larger phenomenum and to combat it, non-violently or not, will take a large network of allies.

Okay, this portion of the tirade is over. WhatTell me what you think. Did the revision make it any clearer? By the way, it is okay to tell me I'm just a conspiracy wingnut.