On a subject so often raised by Jesus himself (the temptations of money; the warning that money corrupts; that money endangers one’s spiritual life; the Religious Right deletes these concerns from their “canon of ethics”. It simply doesn’t wash in a system allied with the interests, ultimately, of the most rich. Most of the adherents of the Religious Right aren’t among its beneficiaries. They’re told that they are; they feel that they are benefiting from putting into power those who have “promised” to make into law or to “embody” in law what they feel are their deepest concerns. But these , too, are mepty promises, because the ultimate allegiance is to MONEY.
And so the Religious Right advances a theology that stresses codification; in the place of “conversation” they install codification. It’s a package deal , they seem to imply, to the extent that rarely does anyone question who people in Church vote for. It’s “obvious” to all who have become convinced by the PR machine that the “republicans” are the obvious choice. And why is this? Because they say so. They talk the talk. And Church people are swayed by testimony, and usually blind to corporate evil (what I belive the Bible refers to as “Principalities and Powers”, which Walter Wink writes about in his Series of books on these “powers” (ie. Engaging the Powers, Unmasking the Powers, Naming the Powers, Unmasking the Powers). The dark power that is unleashed in structural evil is of the most far-reaching kind, becuase it is here where the most destructive evil can happen, and keep happening becuase of the inabbility of any one group of people or individuals to take responsibility for it. But it exists. With all my being I know it does. I see it happening and dividing the Church, and divide it does, since both sides believe that the very nature of their faith is at stake. Tony Campolo speaks of this “structural evil” in many of his books and speeches, but he did so at length in his latest, to which I referred last weekend just after I bought it: “Speaking My Mind”. I am so thankful for people like Campolo who , despite his protestations, are truly prophetic minds.
By default, the Religious Right eschews conversation in favor of adhering to codification; indeed, to affirm the conversation they must allow their assumptions to be challenged; and they won’t have this.
The swing toward “Republican” preferences in “Church –goers” is staggering; and disturbing to those whose theology recognizes the obvious abnd glaring “preferential options for the poor” throughout the Old and New Testaments. Jim Wallis has made reference many times to the “American Bible”, revealing glaring holes throughout the book where passages that express this “option” are cut out.
The “codification” over “conversation” is beneficial to the ruling elite because it “delieneates the boundaries of the debate” , and limits them to “philosophical realms”; to “assentual” agreements with certain perspectives, separating “faith” from “practice”. It is the ultimate divorce of the Outward Journey from the Inward.
The fundamentalist mentality is “heaven” for the authorities who are “building the system” and forging the “strategic alliances”
The fundamentalist system is “heaven” because there is a demonification of the :”liberal thnking” and the kind of thinking that is able to question the governing authorities. Armed with “The Romans passage” that assigns certain responsibilities directly from God to “the magistrate”, this is the passage/proof-text most often called upon by the Religious Right to write a “blank check” to the government to do “whatever it takes”. It’s the kind of thinking advanced by the character in A Few Good Men where the Nicholson character, Colonel Jessup, rants to Lt. Caffey “You WANT me on that wall, you NEED me on that wall”. The ruling elite loves a theology that serves as an “opiate” (so this will label me as a Marxist—but simply put, when a theology which , taken at face value, contains so much “insurgency” and questioning of “motive” and accusation of “the corruption of money” is “tamed” to the extent that theology gives “blanket approval” to the “operations” of leadership; then this is the “implementor’s dream”. “Render what we do “irrelevant”; or better, a part of a ‘Divine responsibility’, and we are off to the races; unhindered”