Chalcedon Report No. 5..........................................................

introductory statement, note how
resoundingly the wrong definition of
theocracy was hammered into the heads
of attendees at the conference:
Few things are more commonly misunderstood
than the nature and meaning
of theocracy. It is commonly assumed
to be a dictatorial rule by self-appointed
men who claim to rule for God. In
reality, theocracy in Biblical law is the
closest thing to a radical libertarianism
that can be had. (Roots of Reconstruction,
p. 63)
Demonizing Others
Can Trigger a Backlash
The increasing popularity of the
quasi-media (e.g., fake news), fed by
a profound dissatisfaction with mainstream
journalism, has launched a
new breed of protagonist who openly
disdains the drawing of the battle lines
in such an extremist form. Jon Stewart,
adopting a “pox on both your houses”
perspective, savages not only the kind of
thinking later expressed at the conference,
but also its partisan counterpart
across the aisle:
So much of what is out there is polemics.
Once you write your diatribe about
how liberal America is ruining the
country, or how conservative America
is turning us into a theocracy, where do
you go from there? The next book has
to be that Joe McCarthy was a decent
guy or that George Bush is a Saudi operative.
(Entertainment Weekly No. 784,
September 17, 2004, p. 11)
Comedians like Jon Stewart revel in
deflating targets like today’s exaggerated
rhetoric. Had Mr. Stewart attended the
conference, he’d have learned the answer
to “where do you go from there?” (He’d
realize that he got the big picture right
— theocracy was looming large on the
horizon — but the finer details were
slightly off: Bush is seen more as an instigator
of a future American Taliban than
a Saudi operative.) Allusions to the Taliban,
and Iran under the mullahs, dotted
18 Faith for All of Life September/October 2005
Faith for All of Life
Conference attendees pick up literature on dominionism
the rhetorical landscape over the two-day
span of this conference — and that was
when the speakers were being nice.
Let us examine each conference
presentation in more detail.
Joan Bokaer
on the Rise of Dominionism
in the U.S. Government
Joan Bokaer, associated with Theocracy
Watch (theocracywatch.org) and
Cornell University’s Center For Religion,
Ethics and Social Policy, was the
first speaker following the introductory
formalities. Bokaer’s misapplied definition
of theocracy (“a form of government
ruled by religion”) grounded
her antipathy toward Christians being
effective in the public sphere. Bokaer
delighted in quoting Maureen Dowd’s
outcry, “Oh my God. We’re living in
a theocracy!” thereby setting up her
punch-line: in a theocracy, Dowd’s first
three words would have violated the
Third Commandment, bringing judgment
down on her head.
Bokaer’s tracing of history starts
with Paul Weyrich in the Goldwater era,
marking milestones like the Heritage
Foundation (1973), the term “moral majority”
(1979) and the Council for National
Policy (1981), whose meetings are
“highly secretive.” Not just “secretive,”
mind you. I’m guessing the primary offense
is that, unlike modern presidential
administrations, this group doesn’t leak
information to the press. Such private
discussions must be inherently heinous
in nature, gauging from the loud hiss
rising from the audience when Bokaer
showed Tim LaHaye’s picture on the
screen. Ralph Reed and James Dobson
were the next pariahs paraded through
the Powerpoint perp walk.
Back of all this is Bokaer’s assertion
of what this was all initially about: “manipulation
of people of a certain faith.”
She re-invoked the “secrecy motif”
(Pat Robertson counseled stealth, while
Ralph Reed mirrored this sentiment,
etc.). Rev. Tommy Ice was quoted
favorably by Bokaer by virtue of his
explicitly anti-dominionist stance. (Bokaer,
in effect, turned supposed compatriots
LaHaye and Ice into estranged
bedfellows. Gentlemen?)
Astonishingly, she held that “conservative”
is synonymous with pro-statist.
Not astonishingly, she dramatically
brandished the spectre of the Taliban.
Quote that her audience took to
heart: “We cannot let them succeed!”
Quote that Chalcedon supporters
should take to heart: “Education is critically
important.”
Quote receiving enthusiastic applause
that Bokaer seemed to think will
cause God to stand down: “We’re quite
powerful, and we’re the majority!”
Chip Berlet
on Millennialist and Apocalyptic
Influences on Dominionism
Chip Berlet is Senior Analyst of Political
Research Associates (www.publiceye.org).
To be honest, this poor guy had his
work cut out for him. Pastors have a
hard time getting a flock to sit through
“tedious” theological distinctions. How
do you pull off this stunt in less than an
hour with a lay audience? Mr. Berlet did
what most pastors do to keep the flock’s
attention: ratchet up the rhetoric.
Now, I’ve taught through the book
of Revelation, and I don’t ever remember
beginning my classes with Berlet’s