War
For Souls And Empire
In Christ's Name
By Yoginder Sikand
10 October, 2006
Countercurrents.org
Although
rarely commented on in the press, Christian fundamentalism has emerged
as a powerful factor in shaping American foreign policies, particularly
in the 'Muslim world'. With a born-again Christian fundamentalist as
President of America this is hardly surprising. And that this can only
further worsen already embittered relations between the 'West' and the
'Muslim world' is too obvious to need any explanation.
Right-wing evangelical American
Christian groups in America are among the most vociferous supporters
of Bush's global 'war on terror'. As they see it, all religions other
than (their version of) Christianity are nothing less than inventions
of the Devil. Their followers, they insist, are doomed to eternal perdition
in hell. For them, America's current 'war on terror' is nothing less
than a divine mandate to America to break down the walls of heathendom,
paving the way for them to pursue what they call their global commission
to spread the 'good news' of Christianity.
The Southern Baptist Convention
(SBC) is one of the several American evangelical groups strongly backing
Bush's imperialist offensives in Iraq and elsewhere in the 'Muslim world'.
Established in 1845, the SBC is the largest and most powerful ultra-conservative
Protestant Christian organisation in the country. It has a membership
of some 16 million in America, with some 42,000 churches. In a statement
of its beliefs it insists that salvation is possible only through belief
in Jesus Christ and his death on the Cross, and is predicated on baptism
in the Christian church. Non-Christians, no matter if they have led
morally upright lives, 'become transgressors' and 'are under condemnation,
that is, they are lost'. It insists that those 'without a personal commitment
to Jesus Christ will be consigned to a literal hell, the place of everlasting
separation from God'. The SBC, like other evangelicals, sees as its
primary task the conversion of the entire world to Christianity. 'The
Great Commission mandate of our Lord Jesus', it declares, 'compels us
to disciple the nations' (SBC Resolution on the Priority of Global Evangelism
and Missions, 1999). In 2003 its overseas church membership stood at
more than 7 million, with 1523 international missionaries working in
the field.
Bush, for his part, has made
no bones about his sympathies for the SBC. In 2002 he delivered an address
to the SBC's annual convention through satellite (accessible on http://www.sbcannualmeeting.net/sbc02/presidentbush.asp),
where he explicitly acknowledged the role of preachers of the SBC in
'nurturing' his 'faith'. He indicated in no uncertain terms his support
to the SBC and its agenda by declaring, 'You and I share common commitments',
including 'protecting human dignity' and 'human rights'. He ended his
speech by thanking the SBC for what he called its 'good works'. 'You're
believers, and you're patriots, faithful followers of God and good citizens
of America', he said in closing, beseeching God to bless them and America.
As an ultra-right wing church, the SBC's political stance has consistently
been pro-establishment, and one of its principal functions has been
to provide suitable theological sanction to American imperialism. In
the heydays of the Soviet Union, the SBC was regarded as a bulwark against
what was seen as the menacing threat of communism. It lent full support
to the American state's war on communism, which it equated, in its own
words, with 'cancer'. The 'Christian faith', it declared, 'is incompatible
with communism'. It expressed its gratitude to 'all agencies, organizations
and persons who guard our homes, our churches and our nation against
communist subversion'. 'We speak our No to communism when we say Yes
to Jesus Christ', it announced in a resolution passed at its annual
meeting in 1962 at the height of the Cold War. It insisted that the
'proper and only adequate response to the challenge of communism is
to be thoroughly Christian, and to seek to establish and support New
Testament churches at home and abroad'. This, of course, tied in comfortably
with the American policy of sponsoring right-wing Christian groups in
the so-called 'Third World' to counter 'red menace'.
Following the collapse of
the Soviet Union, American Christian evangelicals have been among the
most forceful champions of the Huntingtonian thesis of a 'clash of civilisations'
pitting the 'Christian' West against Islam. Leading evangelicals have
issued statements that clearly indicate that they see America as engaged
in nothing less than a crusade against the Muslim world. No sooner had
Bush announced America's latest imperialist offensive in Iraq (which
he termed as a 'crusade') than the SBC rallied behind him to provide
his declaration with religious sanction. At its annual meeting in 2002
the SBC passed a lengthy resolution on the 'war on terrorism', exhorting
Christians to rally behind Bush. It enthusiastically blessed American
imperialist aggression against Iraq by arguing that the Christian scriptures
explicitly 'command civil authorities to restrain evil and to punish
evildoers through the power of the sword'. It fervently appealed to
Christians to 'pray for those in authority', and applauded what it called
the 'moral clarity' of Bush in his denunciation of 'terrorist' groups
as 'evildoers'. It resolved to 'wholeheartedly support the United States
government, its intelligence agencies and its military' in what it called
the 'just war' against the 'terrorist networks'. But, as it saw it,
the war, while necessary, was not the final solution to the problem
of 'terrorism', which could only come about through the global spread
of Christianity. Hence, it concluded its resolution by insisting that
the 'conversion of the people of all nations to salvation through belief
in the Lord Jesus Christ' was 'the only ultimate answer to all forms
of terrorism'.
The 2002 meeting of the SBC
also passed an important resolution on the situation in West Asia. Like
most other American evangelicals, and following faithfully the official
American line, it expressed unstinted support for Israel. It insisted
that the Old and the New Testaments 'affirm God's special purposes and
providential care for the Jewish people', and argued that 'The Jewish
people have an historic connection to the land of Israel, a connection
that is rooted in the promises of God Himself'. It declared, in no uncertain
terms, that Israel properly belonged to the Jews, claiming that the
'international community' had 'restored' land to the Jewish people in
1947 in order to 'provide a homeland for them and to re-establish the
nation of Israel'. No mention, of course, was made of the forcible occupation
of the land by the Zionists and the consequent killings and forced migrations
of thousands of Palestinians, both Muslims and Christians. In a thinly
veiled reference to Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation it
expressed its 'abhorrence of all forms of terrorism as inexcusable,
barbaric and cowardly'. It provided 'Christian' sanction for denying
the Palestinians the right to oppose the Israelis ('We denounce revenge
in any form as a response to past offences', the resolution read), but
at the same time asserted that Israel had the alleged God-given right
to oppose the Palestinian resistance ( '[We] support the right of sovereign
nations to use force to defend themselves against aggressors'). In sort,
it parroted what seems to be the standard American and Israeli line
on the Palestinian issue.
The SBC is just one of a
vast number of well-heeled American fundamentalist Christian organsations
that are today major players in American domestic politics and exercise
a powerfully influence in shaping American foreign policies. The silence
of the Western media, by and large, on their pernicious theology and
their backing for Western imperialism is hardly surprising, given that
the entire onus for the deteriorating relations between the 'West' and
the 'Muslim world' is consciously sought to be placed solely on the
onus of the Muslims themselves. Clearly, if at all the 'clash of civilisations'
thesis is to be prevented from coming true and leading the world to
the brink of Armageddon, Christian fundamentalist imperialism cannot
be left unchallenged.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights