"Christian
Zionism" and the Myth of America: Oppression dogma
By Rev. John Hubers
America, in part, owes its national identity to the prevalence
of powerful myths which arose out of its early history. Many are
attached to founding "fathers", others to the experience of
nation building.
Perhaps the most powerful myth is that which developed out of
the frontier experience of an emerging nation. Manifest destiny
is how historians label it, the belief that the settlement and
taming of this vast largely uninhabited land by European
colonialists was a divinely destined event. Here's how the story
goes: a brave pioneering people, escaping from religious and
political oppression in Europe meet great obstacles in realizing
their dreams of a free land for free people in an untamed
wilderness. Among these obstacles are "savage" natives who use
terrorist tactics to attempt to thwart their designs. With God's
help the brave settlers defeat the "savages" and force them off
the land, at least the best land, thus making way for those who
are better able to exploit the God given resources that it
yields.
Recent scholarship has debunked this myth, highlighting the
brutality and negative consequences of this early form of ethnic
cleansing, but the basic mythic elements of story-heroic
pioneers escaping persecution to give birth to a free
land-continue to shape American self identity as evidenced in
the ease with which politicians, most recently President George
Bush, are able to rally support for foreign policy ventures
drawing on key elements of this myth ("any attack on America is
an attack on freedom!").
I put this before you primarily as a way of explaining what is
otherwise inexplicable-how the eschatology of an obscure 19th
century British Christian sect managed to capture the
imagination of appreciable numbers of what is the largest and
most politically powerful non-Catholic grouping of Christians in
America-those who identify themselves as Evangelicals. The sect
in question is the Plymouth Brethren whose inspiration was a man
named John Nelson Darby. What he taught is an approach to
biblical interpretation known as "dispensationalism." A key
aspect of "dispensationalism" is the distinction it makes
between Israel and the Church in God's plan of salvation. It was
Darby's belief that Old Testament prophesies related to the
restoration of Diaspora Jews to the pre exilic land of Israel
were to be literally fulfilled. This was in opposition to the
more widely held teaching of the western Church of the time
which read the ancient Hebrew prophesies through the lens of
Augustine's "displacement" eschatology. Augustine identified the
Church as the heir of the promises-a "New Israel" looking
forward to an eternal "New Jerusalem", thus eliminating the
promise of land from the equation.
Darby's teaching became popularized (and, some would say
"sanitized") in America at the turn of the century through the
preaching of the popular evangelist DL Moody as well as the
publication of the widely read "Scofield Study Bible" which used
color coded charts to identify which prophesies applied to which
particular group of believers. Later Dallas Theological Seminary
would pick up the dispensationalist torch, the most notable of
its graduates being the author of the widely read
dispensationalist book, "The Late Great Planet Earth", Hal
Lindsay.
In the eyes of dispensationalists the pivotal event of the 20th
century was the founding of the State of Israel in 1947 which
was "proof positive" that Darby got it right. This was given
more credence by the Zionist state's swift and decisive victory
in the 1967 six day war. "Clearly God's hand was in this",
trumpeted the dispensationalists. The ancient promises God made
to Israel were coming true in front of their eyes - a literal
fulfillment of Old Testament prophesy.
This was the position of the dispensationalists. But they were
not necessarily the dominant voice of the mainstream evangelical
church at this point. That didn't happen until the two myths
began to merge-the dispensationalist myth and the American myth.
I use the word "myth" with some hesitancy as there may be those
who take this to mean that I believe the biblical message to be
on a par with children's fairy tales. Such is not the case. Myth
in the sense I am using it here refers more to the power of a
story to shape a consciousness which defines truth in a way that
transcends the story itself. The myth of manifest destiny
functions this way as it draws on historical events to define
something larger than the events themselves. The
dispensationalist myth does the same with the story of the
founding of the state of Israel. Here, too, the historical
events are less important than the interpretation given to those
events, the way the story is framed giving rise to a larger
Truth.
This is the way the story goes, at least in its condensed
version: A persecuted people longing for a land where they can
practice their faith in freedom overcome great odds and a
determined opposition under God's direction and empowerment to
create a state of their own. The opposition comes from "savages"
who use terrorist tactics to keep these brave settlers from
establishing their state, savages whose poor stewardship of the
land justifies their removal.
Here, I believe, is at least one explanation for the tenacious
hold of the dispensationalist myth on the American consciousness
(even beyond evangelical circles)-it echoes themes of the
American frontier myth. We hear our own story in Israel's story.
We identify with the Zionists because their experience matches
ours (or at least appears to match ours as we are dealing less
with actual history here than interpretive history).
I don't want to overstate the case here, as clearly those who
accept the dispensationalist take on eschatology have done so
for the most part because they are convinced that this is the
best way to read the Bible. But the hold that it has on the
imagination of American evangelicals and even those who would
not identify themselves as such, can only be explained, I
believe, by the apparent links between the Zionist story and the
American story.
The damage that this does to ecumenical relations, particularly
relations between the more conservative wing of the American
evangelical community and the community of believers in the
Middle East is hard to overstate. At issue is the way these
Christians identify with Zionist ideology over against those who
are oppressed by it, including Middle Eastern Christians. Its
"us" versus "them", but in this case the "us" excludes fellow
Christians (although truth told many American Christian Zionists
are unaware that Palestinian Christians exist. To them it's
Christians/Jews against Muslims. Or to put it more crudely,
civilized citizens of free societies versus savage terrorists.)
So what is to be done? How, given the tenacious grip of this
myth on the collective imagination of conservative (and
politically powerful) evangelicals can the tide be turned
towards helping these Christians move towards a more balanced
view of the situation.
We begin, I believe, by engaging this community in conversation,
which is the first mistake that is often made by the ecumenical
community-not starting the conversation in the first place. It
is easy to demonize those who hold this position, particularly
given what is at stake-the suffering of the Palestinian people.
But I know no other way to counter the perceptions which give
rise to the myth.
I have noted in this regard that Palestinian Christians who
visit America to engage the Christian community in conversation
about the occupation often limit their visits to churches which
represent the mainline ecumenical community, in essence,
"preaching to the choir." Granted it is difficult to find ways
to open up a dialogue with Christian Zionists on this issue, but
the effort must be made as this is a necessary first step
towards breaking the iron grip of the imaginative power of the
myth. They've only heard one story. It's important that they
hear another.
A recent visit of Dr. Jarjour (Rev.Dr.Riad Jarjour is General
Secretary of the Middle East Council of Churches) to my own
denominations' General Synod underlines this point. The Reformed
Church in America, while not falling into the Christian Zionist
camp, is a generally conservative evangelical body whose
membership is susceptible to the lure of Christian Zionism (the
"Left Behind" series is popular among our people).
Dr. Jarjour addressed our Synod on several different occasions
in various formats, including two major addresses at our plenary
sessions. In connection with these addresses were two
resolutions, one which was openly critical of the Israeli
occupation calling for a return to pre '67 borders, the other
calling for an end to sanctions against Iraq and warning about
the build up to war. The Reformed Church is normally cautious
about passing such openly political pronouncements, yet both
resolutions passed primarily on the weight of Dr. Jarjour's
articulate plea for solidarity with our Middle Eastern brothers
and sisters. Long time observers of the RCA were astonished that
these resolutions passed as easily as they did. Clearly Dr.
Jarjour's presence and the way he was able to provoke empathy
for fellow Christians is what turned the tide.
This, I believe, underlies the importance of countering the
Zionist myth with the real life story of Palestinians who suffer
under the occupation. It is telling that nearly every American
Christian who has visited Palestine and had a chance to meet
Palestinians in the occupied territory, listening to their
stories and enjoying their hospitality, has returned to America
with a new found empathy and sometimes militant support for the
Palestinian cause. The key is hearing and experiencing the story
told in a different way-allowing the voice of those who lost
their homes and suffer under the humiliating weight of the
occupation to be heard, primarily the story of Christians whose
natural bonds to fellow believers makes it difficult to continue
to hold onto the demonizing aspects of the Zionist myth.
Christian Zionism is a powerful movement in America primarily on
the weight of its compelling story line which echoes our own
story line. The key in countering it, I believe, is to tell
another story-the true life story of people who have lost their
homes and livelihoods, their dignity and in some cases their
lives at least partly because of unqualified American support
for the Zionist cause. Hard core Christian Zionists will
continue to hang onto their perceptions in the face of whatever
evidence may be produced to counter the myth. But there are many
who are open, I believe, to hearing another story, who could be
brought into the camp of those who are working as I trust we are
all working to respond to the situation in Palestine with the
sense of justice and compassion God calls us to bring into all
of our affairs, political or otherwise. Putting a human and
humane face on the struggle is what is needed if for no other
reason than to prove that Palestinians are not the "savages"
which the myth has made them out to be. Whatever can be done to
make this happen will be a step in the right direction.
Rev. Hubers is the Reformed Church in America's Mission
Coordinator for the Middle East and South Asia
