Tag Archives: to change the world

Essay 2, Chapter 5: The Neo-Anabaptists

These days I’m summarizing James Davison Hunter’s To Change The World. The book is made up of three separate essays; we’re up to the fifth chapter of the second essay. This chapter is entitled “The Neo-Anabaptists.” Here’s the abstract from Hunter’s website:

The mythic ideal that animates the neo-Anabaptist position is the ideal of true and authentic New Testament Christianity and the primitive church of the apostolic age. Constantinianism is a multifaceted heresy that surfaced and resurfaced throughout history. The archetype of neo-Constantinianism is the founding of the American republic, which has a strong view of the church and a separatist impulse. While the neo-Anabaptists attempt to reject it, they are also defined and depend upon it.

http://jamesdavisonhunter.com/to-change-the-world/chapter-abstracts/

The Christian Left and the Neo-Anabaptists share several characteristics: they tend to reject undiluted capitalism, they tend to be from the upper classes socio-economically, and they reject the discourse of the Christian Right. There aren’t a lot of Neo-Anabaptists in the United States, but the movement has a growing appeal among the younger generations.

Neo-Anabaptists seek a return to the pure Christianity of the New Testament church. (Could that be why so many within my movement are drawn to this viewpoint?—Tim) Part of the restoration spirit of the original Anabaptists was a rejection of infant baptism, insisting on adult baptism (hence the name of the movement). Anabaptist teaching continues in small groups like the Quakers, the Mennonites, etc. Neo-Anabaptists have adopted many of the teachings, but come from a broad range of Christian groups.

The Edict of Constantine is seen as one of the historical low points, the moment when the church fully sold herself to the State. The church embraced the powers of this world, with their violence and war. An ethic of coercion and power became common within Christianity. Thus the Neo-Anabaptists consider that the greatest harm to the church was done by the church itself. Their ressentiment focuses on this blending of church and State.

According to Hunter, the goal of the Neo-Anabaptists is “to lead theology and the church to a genuinely postsecular self-understanding.” (p. 160, emphasis Hunter’s) They emphasize the sharp contrast between the church and the world. They see worship as the central calling of Christianity.

Hunter points out that the Neo-Anabaptists, despite claiming to reject the systems of this world, have adopted the language of politics, speaking time and again of “the politics of Jesus.” Like the other two groups mentioned, Neo-Anabaptists make no distinction between the public and the political.

Hunter’s principal accusation against the Neo-Anabaptists is that they define themselves in terms of the very system they reject. More than standing for something, they stand against something. By using political terms, they themselves become political.

Essay 2, Chapter 4: The Christian Left

In our walk-through of James Davison Hunter’s To Change The World, we’re up to the fourth chapter of the second essay. This essay is entitled “The Christian Left.” Here’s the abstract from Hunter’s website:

Progressives have always been animated by the myth of equality and community and therefore see history as an ongoing struggle to realize these ideals. The key word in the progressive lexicon is justice. The biblical tradition that Christian progressives appeal to is the prophetic tradition in its condemnation of the wealthy for their abuse of the poor, the weak, and the marginalized. However, in its commitment to social change through politics and politically oriented social movements, in its conflation of the public with the political, in its own selective use of Scripture to justify political interests, and in its confusion of theology with national interests and identity, the Christian Left imitates the Christian Right.

http://jamesdavisonhunter.com/to-change-the-world/chapter-abstracts/

Within the U.S., the Christian Left has not been particularly strong, at least compared with its overseas success in movements like liberation theology. Inside the U.S., politically progressive Christians were principally found within the mainline denominations, although there is now a growing number of evangelicals that align themselves with the political left.

Whereas conservatives are angry over the harm done to their nation, progressives focus on the harm done to the weak and disadvantaged. They show great hostility toward the leaders of the Christian Right, feeling that these men have hijacked the Christian faith. Not only that, but those of the Christian Left feel that the Christian Right has severely damaged their country through their actions. The ressentiment of the Left is not directed toward non-Christians but toward the Christian Right.

The Christian Left also has its own quest for power, first for “reclaiming the Christian faith,” then spreading into the political arena. Though the Christian Left often claims to be non-partisan, their opposition to the Right typically leads them to support the agenda of the Democratic party, and many progressives, in fact, are active within that party.

The grand irony is that, in opposing the Christian Right, the Christian Left ends up using the same methods of their opponents. As Hunter says at the end of this chapter: “The political goals are different, but the realpolitik is, in essence, identical to the long-standing instrumentalization of the Christian conservative constituency by the Republican party—control over the power of the State.” (p. 149)

Essay 2, Chapter 3: The Christian Right

We’re taking a chapter by chapter stroll through James Davison Hunter’s To Change The World. It’s a book with a relevant message for today. It’s also far from an easy read. That’s why we’re taking it slow.

Here’s the abstract of the second essay chapter 3 “The Christian Right” from Hunter’s website:

Politically conservative Christians are animate by a mythic ideal concerned with the “right-ordering” of society. They want the world in which they live to reflect their own likeness. A legacy of a Christian origin is understood as providing a sense of ownership over America and “radical secularists” have taken this away. The effect is harming to America, and people of faith, marginalizing them in public life. Their response has been one of political engagement, often conflating Christian faith and national identity in the political imagination.

There are changes occurring among the Religious Right. However, though the tactics have expanded to include worldview and culture, the logic at work—that America has been taken over by secularists, that it is time to “take back the culture” for Christ—is identical to the longstanding approach of the Christian Right. This is because the underlying myth that defines their goals and strategy of action has not changed.

http://jamesdavisonhunter.com/to-change-the-world/chapter-abstracts/

This chapter is full of an amazing number of quotes (130 footnotes in this chapter alone!), quotes from Focus on the Family, American Values, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Family Research Council, Christian Coalition, etc. As Hunter says, “the tone is as important as the content” (p. 112), so the large number of quotes is important.

In the quotes we can clearly see the two elements mentioned in the last chapter, the quest for power and the sense of ressentiment. He outlines the Christian Right’s interpretation of history, their fear and anger at “what they’ve done to us,” and how these feelings motivate them to action. There is a two-pronged call: prayer and action, and action invariably refers to political activity.

The Conservative Right places a great amount of hope in politics, expressing a clear desire for dominance, a controlling influence over the government. The logic is simple: America has been taken over by secularists and the main duty of Christians is to acquire and use political power to revert the situation.

Essay 2, Chapter 2: Power and Politics in American Culture

We’re going through James Davison Hunter’s To Change The World chapter by chapter over the next few weeks. Here’s the abstract of the second essay chapter 2 “Power and Politics in American Culture” from Hunter’s website:

Power now does the work that culture used to do. This is seen in the tendency toward the politicization of nearly everything. Politicization is most visibly manifested in the role ideology has come to play in public life, the well-established predisposition to interpret all of public life through the filter of partisan beliefs, values, ideals, and attachments. As a consequence, we find it difficult to think in ways to address public problems or issues in any way that is not political.

Politicization means that the final arbiter within most of social life is the coercive power of the state. Our times amply demonstrate that it is far easier to force one’s will upon others through legal and political means than it is to persuade them or negotiate compromise with them. What adds pathos to this situation is the presence of ressentiment, defined by a combination of anger, envy, hate, rage, and revenge.

http://jamesdavisonhunter.com/to-change-the-world/chapter-abstracts/

This chapter describes what Hunter calls “the politicization of everything.” The state has become the principal framework through which we understand everything. The language of politics shapes our understanding of our lives, our purposes and even ourselves. People are known publicly as pro-lifers or pro-choicers, liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican, traditionalist or progressive. We even apply many of these political terms to our religious views, defining religion in terms of politics instead of vice versa.

We also have come to view political solutions as the only viable ones for public problems. That’s why holding power seems to be so important to us, since we see this power as the only way to have a voice regarding social life.

Adding depth to this situation is what Nietzsche called ressentiment. It is a combination of anger, envy and revenge as a political motivation. It is grounded in a sense of entitlement and a belief that one has been wronged. Hunter doesn’t claim that everyone is power-hungry and resentment-filled; he does say that these are the dominant forces driving our political culture today.

Faith has become just as politicized as everything else. Outsiders view Christians as being very political, and Christians describe themselves in political terms. Hunter will discuss the three dominant political positions in American Christianity: Conservative, Progressive and Neo-Anabaptist. That will take place over the next few chapters.

Essay 2, Chapter 1: The Problem of Power

We’re going through James Davison Hunter’s To Change The World chapter by chapter over the next few weeks. The second essay is entitled “Rethinking Power.” Here’s the abstract of the second essay chapter 1 “The Problem of Power” from Hunter’s website:

When faith and its culture flourish, it does so, in part, because it operates with an implicit view of power in its proper place. When faith and its culture deteriorate, it does so, in part, because it operates with a view of power that is corrupt.

http://jamesdavisonhunter.com/to-change-the-world/chapter-abstracts/

The second essay will look at how power is understood and practiced in today’s America. Hunter will especially focus on the church’s relationship to this power. The blunt truth is that the church has allowed the world to define power and to dictate how it is gained and used.

What we need is a new understanding of power, which is what Hunter will seek to present in this essay.