Help In These Times raise $10,000 in three weeks! Donate now!
Help this website survive! Donate to In These Times now!
PrintDiscuss
Features » September 24, 2005

Reckoning with the God Squad

Fundamentalist bullies cannot be appeased. They must be confronted.

By Bill Moyers

Pat Robertson's Operation Blessing was one of the first groups to receive taxpayer funds from the President’s Faith-based Initiative for "relief work" on the Gulf coast.

Tags   
Share   Facebook Digg del.icio.us Newsvine   StumbleUpon Reddit Furl Propeller

At the Central Baptist Church in Marshall, Texas, where I was baptized in the faith, we believed in a free church in a free state. I still do.

My spiritual forbears did not take kindly to living under theocrats who embraced religious liberty for themselves but denied it to others. “Forced worship stinks in God’s nostrils,” thundered the dissenter Roger Williams as he was banished from Massachusetts for denying Puritan authority over his conscience. Baptists there were a “pitiful negligible minority” but they were agitators for freedom and therefore denounced as “incendiaries of the commonwealth” for holding to their belief in that great democracy of faith-the priesthood of all believers.

Such revolutionary ideas made the new nation with its Constitution and Bill of Rights “a haven for the cause of conscience.” No longer would “the loathsome combination of church and state”-as Thomas Jefferson described it-be the settled order. The First Amendment neither inculcates religion nor inoculates against it. Americans could be loyal to the Constitution without being hostile to God, or they could pay no heed to God without fear of being mugged by an official God Squad. It has been a remarkable arrangement that guaranteed “soul freedom.”

It is at risk now, and the fourth observance of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 is an appropriate time to think about it.

Four years ago, the poet’s prophetic metaphor became real again and “the great dark birds of history” plunged into our lives.

They came in the name of God. They came bent on murder and martyrdom.

Yes, the Koran speaks of mercy and compassion and calls for ethical living. But such passages are no match for the ferocity of instruction found there for waging war for God’s sake: “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject faith fight in the cause of Evil.”(4:76)

So the holy warriors came-an airborne death cult, their sights on God’s enemies: regular folks, starting the day’s routine one minute and in the next, engulfed by a horrendous cataclysm.

But it is never only the number of dead by which terrorists measure their work. It is also the number of the living-the survivors-taken hostage to fear. The writer Terry Tempest Williams has said “the human heart is the first home of democracy.” Fill that heart with fear and people will give up the risks of democracy for the assurances of security; fill that heart with fear and you can shake the house to its foundations.

Having lost faith in all else, zealots have nothing left but a holy cause to please a warrior God. They win if we become holy warriors, too; if we kill the innocent as they do; strike first at those who had not struck us; allow our leaders to use the fear of terrorism to make us afraid of the truth; cease to think and reason together, allowing others to tell what’s in God’s mind. Yes, we are vulnerable to terrorists, but only a shaken faith in ourselves can do us in.

————————————

Muslims have no monopoly on holy violence. As Jack Nelson-Pallmayer points out, God’s violence in the sacred texts of both faiths reflects a deep and troubling pathology “so pervasive, vindictive, and destructive” that it contradicts and subverts the collective weight of other passages that exhort ethical behavior or testify to a loving God.

We know we can go through the Bible and construct a God more pleasing to the better angels of our nature. We also know that the “violence-of-God” tradition remains embedded deep in the DNA of monotheistic faith. Inside that logic you cannot read part of the Bible allegorically and the rest of it literally; if you believe in the virgin birth of Jesus, his crucifixion and resurrection, and the depiction of the Great Judgment at the end times you must also believe that God is sadistic, brutal, vengeful, callow, cruel and savage-that God slaughters.

Let’s go back to 9/11 four years ago. The ruins were still smoldering when the reverends Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell went on television to proclaim that the terrorist attacks were God’s punishment of a corrupted America. They said the government had adopted the agenda “of the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians” not to mention the ACLU and People for the American Way (The God of the Bible apparently holds liberals in the same low esteem as Hittites and Gergushites and Jebusites and all the other pagans of holy writ.) Critics said such comments were deranged. But millions of Christian fundamentalists and conservatives didn’t think so. They thought Robertson and Falwell were being perfectly consistent with the logic of the Bible as they read it: God withdraws favor from sinful nations-the terrorists were meant to be God’s wake-up call: better get right with God. Not many people at the time seemed to notice that Osama bin Laden had also been reading his sacred book closely and literally, and had called on Muslims to resist what he described as a “fierce Judeo-Christian campaign” against Islam, praying to Allah for guidance “to exalt the people who obey Him and humiliate those who disobey Him.”

Suddenly we were immersed in the pathology of a “holy war” as defined by fundamentalists on both sides. You could see this pathology play out in General William Boykin. As a member of the U.S. military, Boykin had taken up with a small group called the Faith Force Multiplier whose members apply military principles to evangelism with a manifesto summoning warriors “to the spiritual warfare for souls.” In uniform, Boykin attended evangelical revivals preaching that America was in a holy war as “a Christian nation” battling Satan and that America’s Muslim adversaries will be defeated “only if we come against them in the name of Jesus.” For such an hour, America surely needed a godly leader. So General Boykin explained how it was that the candidate who had lost the election in 2000 nonetheless wound up in the White House. President Bush, he said, “was not elected by a majority of the voters-he was appointed by God.” Not surprising, instead of being reprimanded for evangelizing while in uniform, General Boykin is now the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence. (Just as it isn’t surprising that despite his public call for the assassination of a foreign head of state, Pat Robertson’s Operation Blessing was one of the first groups to receive taxpayer funds from the President’s Faith-Based Initiative for “relief work” on the Gulf Coast.)

We can’t wiggle out of this. We’re talking about a powerful religious constituency that claims the right to tell us what’s on God’s mind and to decide the laws of the land according to their interpretation of biblical revelation and to enforce those laws on the nation as a whole. For the Bible is not just the foundational text of their faith; it has become the foundational text for a political movement.

————————————

The radical religious right has succeeded in taking over one of America’s great political parties-the country is not yet a theocracy but the Republican Party is-and they are driving American politics, using God as a battering ram on almost every issue: crime and punishment, foreign policy, health care, taxation, energy, regulation, social services and so on.

They have brought intensity, organization, and anger to the public square. They use the language of faith to demonize political opponents, mislead and misinform voters, censor writers and artists, ostracize dissenters, and marginalize the poor. These are the foot soldiers in a political holy war financed by wealthy economic interests and guided by savvy partisan operatives who know that couching political ambition in religious rhetoric can ignite the passion of followers.

In recent weeks a movement called the Ohio Restoration Project has been launched to identify and train thousands of “Patriot Pastors” to get out the conservative religious vote next year. According to press reports, the leader of the movement-the senior pastor of a large church in suburban Columbus -casts the 2006 elections as an apocalyptic clash between “the forces of righteousness and the hordes of hell.” The fear and loathing in his message is palpable: He denounces public schools that won’t teach creationism, require teachers to read the Bible in class or allow children to pray. He rails against the “secular jihadists” who have “hijacked” America and prevent school kids from learning that Hitler was “an avid evolutionist.” He blasts the “pagan left” for trying to redefine marriage. He declares that “homosexual rights” will bring “a flood of demonic oppression.” On his church Web site you read, “Reclaiming the teaching of our Christian heritage among America’s youth is paramount to a sense of national destiny that God has invested into this nation.”

The corporate, political and religious right have converged, led by a president who, in his own disdain for science, reason and knowledge, is the most powerful fundamentalist in American history. And radicals on the Christian right are now the dominant force in America’s governing party. They control much of the U.S. government and are on the verge of having it all. Without them the government would not be in the hands of people who don’t believe in government. They are culpable in upholding a system of class and race in which, as we saw last week, the rich escape and the poor are left behind. And they are on a crusade against government “of, by, and for the people” in favor of one based on Biblical authority. So the Grand Old Party-the GOP-has become God’s Own Party, its ranks made up of God’s Own People “marching as to war.”

————————————

It has to be said that their success has come in no small part because of our acquiescence and timidity. Our democratic values are imperiled because too many people of reason are willing to appease irrational people just because they are pious. Republican moderates tried appeasement and survive today only in gulags set aside for them by the Karl Roves, Bill Frists and Tom DeLays. Democrats are divided and paralyzed, afraid that if they take on the organized radical right they will lose what little power they have.

As I look back on the conflicts and clamor of our boisterous past, one lesson about democracy stands above all others: Bullies-political bullies, economic bullies and religious bullies-cannot be appeased; they have to be opposed with a stubbornness to match their own. This is never easy; these guys don’t fight fair; “Robert’s Rules of Order” is not one of their holy texts. But freedom on any front-and especially freedom of conscience-never comes to those who rock and wait, hoping someone else will do the heavy lifting.

Christian realism requires us to see the world as it is, without illusions, and then take it on. Christian realism also requires love. But not a sentimental, dreamy love. Reinhold Niebuhr, who taught at Union Theological Seminary and wrestled constantly with applying Christian ethics to political life, put it this way: “When we talk about love we have to become mature or we will become sentimental. Basically love means … being responsible, responsibility to our family, toward our civilization, and now by the pressures of history, toward the universe of humankind.”

Christian realists aren’t afraid to love. But just as the Irishman who came upon a brawl in the street and asked, “Is this a private fight or can anyone join in?” we have to take that love where the action is. Or the world will remain a theatre of war between fundamentalists.

Bill Moyers is a broadcast journalist and former host the PBS program NOW With Bill Moyers. He also serves as president of the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy. This article was adapted from a recent address at Union Theological Seminary in New York, where Judith and Bill Moyers received the seminary’s highest award, the Union Medal, for their contributions to faith and reason in America.

  • Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
  • Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!
Bill Moyers is the president of the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy and the host of Bill Moyers Journal on PBS.

More information about Bill Moyers
Tags   
Share   StumbleUpon Facebook Digg del.icio.us Reddit Newsvine Propeller Furl
  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Reader Comments

    I object to Moyers’ assertion…  “The radical religious right has succeeded in taking over one of America’s great political parties-the country is not yet a theocracy but the Republican Party is-and they are driving American politics, using God as a battering ram on almost every issue: crime and punishment, foreign policy, health care, taxation, energy, regulation, social services and so on.”

    This kind of generalization is on a par with the very faction Moyers is criticizing. I consider myself to be an independent – not a Republican, but just because the president is a religious fundie is no reason to tar the whole party with the same brush. This only serves to further divide and radicalize people.

    Neither do I consider myself a Christian (been there), but we should not lump Christian conservatives in with the likes of Robertson and Falwell. These two and other narrow minded pontificates are the reason more people have been killed in “God’s name” than under any other battle banner.

    Posted by whattheheck on Sep 24, 2005 at 6:07 PM

    ” What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy? ” - Mahatma Ghandi

    Posted by David in Canada on Sep 24, 2005 at 7:31 PM

    Hi Dave,

    “ What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy? “ - Mahatma Ghandi

    Probably no difference initially, but unlike Ghandi, I do believe it makes a difference to the living. There are things worth dying for and even things worth killing for.

    Better to fight (in my opinion) FOR liberty and AGAINST totalitarianism. If our ancestors had not we would not be carrying on this conversation.

    The reason Ghandi was able to protest as he did was due to 300 years of British colonial rule. I remember being in London on Fleet Street and noticing how many people of African and Indian descent were walking along in three piece suits and carrying briefcases.

    We could say the same for our citizens whose family is here because of slavery.  We didn’t get to choose, but are all products of our personal history for better or for worse.

    Ghandi’s protests would not only have had the results they did, but under a totalitarian regime we would probably not even know his name.

    Posted by whattheheck on Sep 25, 2005 at 4:09 PM

    Hi whattheheck

    You wrote :
    “There are things worth dying for and even things worth killing for.”

    My response would be, if I can quote Ghandi again :
    “Nonviolence is the first article of my creed. It is also the last article of my creed”

    The thing worth dying for (for me) is : not killing.

    When liberty is delivered and enforced by violence hasn’t liberty taken the first steps to totalitarianism?

    Bill Moyers wrote :
    ” Bullies-political bullies, economic bullies and religious bullies-cannot be appeased; they have to be opposed with a stubbornness to match their own. ”

    And he is right. Evil men who would manipulate and exploit people’s beliefs into violence and hatred against “the others” should be opposed. But that opposition should not be more violence and hatred.

    ” An eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind ” Mahatma Ghandi

    or

    ” Blessed are the peacemakers: for they will be called sons of God ” Jesus Christ (Matthew 5:9)

    Posted by David in Canada on Sep 25, 2005 at 7:28 PM

    Rabbit is going to say his opinion here and it is given in deference to no-one.

    Rabbit comes from a Mormon Family. Mum and Dad, Sister and her family, they are all totally committed to their faith. Rabbit was at one time a member and is an Elder, though ex-communicate. Rabbit lives not far from his Mormon Family.  Rabbit knows something about fundamentalist Christians.

    They are if anything as insane and irrational and bloodthirsty as the most fundamentalist Muslim or Jew. Despite being Rabbit’s mother and Sister they can see nothing past their own long term and complete blindness to all reality. They are always right, they know it and you either do to or you are a “Pitiful” poor lost soul, or an evil blood soaked satanist.

    They answer words of love and peace and tolerance with spitting venom and curses and all manner of incredible presumptions. These people are known to and Rabbit loves them. They are living farcical lives, where everything they describe about Satan and Illuminati and all manner of extreme visions is as true only as they are making it. Worst and it is this which chills Rabbit to the soul, they are the closest thing to the wicked and decieved ones who are aligned with THE GREAT WHORE OF BABYLON, as could be imagined. This is their image, their prophesy and they can’t see their place in it. Tragic.

    The horror for Rabbit who is a contented Agnostic and deeply spiritual, loving person, is that these loved ones are the very thing they are describing as “lost”.

    God help us all because these crazies believe that they are about to be carried away from the World and all it’s troubles and the quicker they set fire to the whole place the quicker they will get their Rapture.

    They are totally non-compos mentos (Sorry Latin students). They have completely substituted Beliefs for facts and have practised long and hard at believing in things which have not a shred of evidence to support them.They call this faith.

    ....For merely questioning how does a Loving God allow them to call for the blood of Muslims and support illegal unjust wars, Rabbit is said to lack faith.

    For pointing out that Jesus Christ did not carry a Machine Gun, Rabbit was assured that he should not speak Jesus Christs name, for he is a sinful Rabbit who knows nothing of “The Lord” and Rabbit should instead get down on his knees and pray for help. Hmmm.

    When Rabbit tried to point out that George Bush was not a Christian just because he said he was and that his actions had never led one to expect he might even be a decent human at all, Rabbit was subjected to insane gibbering, curses and threats. The sister almsot went into a fit, yelling about murder, baby rapists (this was about victims of Katrina) and evil hateful Muslims who all had to be killed or nobody could ever live in peace, becaue they had no God, they had a false God.

    Also Rabbit was told he knew nothing about how much tolerance and Love the sister had for Muslims in general, it was just the Fundamentalists who had turned their faith into a religion of hate.

    There was more and strange as it all was the hideous face, foaming mouth and rolling eyes were even more strange. This is Rabbit’s little Sister. Rabbit shocked, still is.

    That is some but a good sample of it.

    Now how the hell does anybody reckon with that?

    Trolls and Shills are bad, but oh boy wait till you’re up against the God Squad.

    There is one sniffing around this site by the way, having lost his usual hunting grounds at ADE, he may pop up and give us a full blown demo if we are lucky..

    Rabbit whistles,................................. will he come?

    Posted by GhostRabbit on Sep 26, 2005 at 3:33 AM
  • extended discussion >>>Continued...

    Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 758 posts.

Appeared in the October 24, 2005 Issue
Also by Bill Moyers
If you like what you're reading, why not help pay for it?
IN THESE TIMES COMMUNITY MEMBERS
We all like free stuff, but the news can't pay for itself.