Dominion

In preparing for this Sunday’s sermon, I’ve been reading up on dominion theology. In a new book, Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, Michelle Goldberg traces the theological roots of Christian nationalism back to dominion theology, and from thence back to Christian Reconstructionism.

Christian Reconstructionism, according to Goldberg, is a “theocratic sect… which advocates replacing American civil law with Old Testament biblical law.” This theocratic sect is based on a theological position that is, in essence, the darkest hue of American Calvinism:

Most Christian Reconstructionist theology — a very strict Calvinism that mandates the death penalty for a long list of moral crimes, including homosexuality and apostasy — has little appeal to outsiders and is controversial even among Christian conservatives. But dominionism, its political theory, has been hugely influential in the broader evangelical movement…. [p. 13]

In other words, dominionism grew out of Christian Reconstructionism. Goldberg later calls dominionism a theology, rather than a political theory, but she’s not contradicting herself: dominionism is a theology with definite political implications. Goldberg cites a book by Francis Schaeffer called A Christian Manifesto:

A Christian Manifesto, published in 1981, described modern history as a contest between the Christian worldview and the materialist one, saying, “These two world views stand in complete antithesis to each other in content and also in their natural results — including sociological and government results, and specifically including law.” [p. 38]

What does “dominion” mean? It’s a familiar Biblical word from the story of Genesis, where God tells Adam and Eve that they have “dominion” over everything else. But dominionist theology means something more than that, and Goldberg quotes from a book titled The Changing of the Guard: Biblical Principles for Political Action by Christian nationalist George Grant:

It is dominion we are after. World conquest. That’s what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel…. Thus Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land — of men [sic], families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ. [quoted in Goldberg, p. 41]

Two interesting points from my own religious liberal perspective:

First, theology can have political implications, and it’s foolish to pretend otherwise. Within religious liberalism, feminist theology certainly has had dramatic political implications; and my own religious community of Unitarian Universalism has an explicit commitment to democratic principles. Curiously, many Unitarian Universalists would say that their religion is merely a private matter. It’s time for us to get over that misconception.

Second, with its Calvinist overtones, dominionist theology represents a kind of theology that my religious tradition, Unitarian Universalism, knows how to tackle. After all, historically both Unitarianism and Universalism grew out of serious and effective theological critiques of American Calvinism. We thought the battle against that kind of Calvinism had been won; I think it’s time for us to face up to the fact that we’re going to have to fight that battle all over again.

This Sunday, I’ll be exchanging pulpits with Ellen Spero of the Chelmsford, Mass., Unitarian Universalist church. If you’re in New Bedford this weekend, come hear Ellen preach — she’s one of my favorite Unitarian Universalist preachers.

3 thoughts on “Dominion

  1. kim

    The contradiction is in that wanting dominion over all IS a materialist philosophy — there’s nothing spiritual about killing someone for “moral infractions”.
    Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Why do people keep seeking power and then claiming to be spiritual?

  2. Administrator

    Kim — I agree with part of what you say — spirituality and religion have often been corrupted by power. But I can’t agree with your statement that power and spirituality are necessarily imcompatible. Indeed, I’m trying to find ways that we religious liberals can claim our political power while remaining accountable to humanity and the highest ideals. One inspiration for me: Starhawk has written persuasively on how to claim your power as a spiritual/religious person, and she has sound suggestions about how to build accountability into religious communities, so that power is regulated by the community. I also find Confucius, Mencius, and Lao-Tze have interesting insights into the relationship between power and spirituality.

  3. Bill Baar

    Good forbid power and spirituality incompatible. That would really leave us to the dogs.

    One very serious short comming with today’s UU’s, good preacher Harper, is this notion is not all that exceptional among UUs.

    I’m far more worried about Liberal theologians like Rockfords Rev. Stanley Campbell who will be speaking to UU’s in Rockford about his trip to Iran (happening right now). Campbell made a point of apoligizing for the American Gov to Iranians and it was broadcast by the BBC.

    It was a horribly demoralizing comment to make with so many Iranian dissidents at work there and a fellow like Ramin Jahanbegloo sits in Evin prison. No conservative Evangelical would have been trapped like this.

    I remember as a kid going to third Unitarian in Chicago. They had a large somewhat secret Communist Party cell there. Those of us on the New Left ridiculed them because they were so ancient. During detante with Russia they would talk youth groups on visits to East Germany and the Soviet Union. I remember once they got into this huge justicfication for Soviet Soda Machines which despensed into a common shared glass. Someone in the audience thought that gross. and I remember the secret comrade making excuses for this, while the young Maoists etc in the crowd snickered about what a dope the old Communist was…. all of us sitting comfortabley at Thrid Church Chicago while soviet Dissidents sat in Psych words.

    If only one of us had gone on the trip and spoke out about the fates of Sharansky or Sakarhov.

    I don’t think it would have changed their lives much but it would have been good for our own spiritual health.

    That Conservative Christians not taken in by tyranny then (or now) should give us pause to think.

Comments are closed.