Work duties kept me from joining the book club discussion until this last day, but I did want to add a few thoughts on the question of whether Bush is turning the U.S. into a theocracy before letting Martin Marty make my case far better than I could.

John Blackton has kindly referenced some of my earlier writings related to this topic (although in the interest of correcting the record, I am neither a Southerner nor a Methodist, but am instead a recovering-Baptist-from-Michigan-turned-D.C.-Episcopalian.)

As far as the theocracy charge goes, there is no doubt (and Kevin Phillips proves quite clearly) that some fundamentalists are Christian reconstructionists who want the U.S. to become a theocracy. There is also no doubt that this group strongly supports George W. Bush, and that the Bush administration has appealed to their beliefs when selling some of its policies (such as invading Iraq). But it does not follow that Bush is trying to turn (or has already turned) the U.S. into a theocracy.

Put another way, there is a significant difference between Sam Brownback, who advocates and endorses the revisionist history of David Barton, and Bush, who stands next to Barton at photo ops. Bush's willingness to accept support from, and pander to, these groups should be strongly denounced. That question in Cleveland this week was an excellent first step at forcing him to choose--do you agree with those guys or not?

Distinguishing between Brownback and Bush is important, because once we've cried wolf at Bush, we'll have a harder time getting people to believe us when we go after a seriously scary theocrat like Brownback.

I've always thought that the more damaging line of attack against Bush--rather than calling him a theocrat, which rings false with a lot of religious voters--is that he has perverted religion by exploiting it for political purposes.

Our "preacher-in-chief" Bush rarely attends church, and when he does, he goes to a fairly liberal D.C. Episcopal church where members of his base would be decidedly uncomfortable. He treats the faith-based initiative as simply a campaign tool, and isn't seriously about funding it or using it to solve social problems (see here and here). And he has chosen business interests over religious interests so many times that moderate evangelicals are starting to get seriously ticked off at him.

In the end, though, the University of Chicago's wonderful Martin Marty captures my thoughts on this far better than I ever could, so I'll leave you with these passages from his weekly Sightings column:

For whatever light it sheds on the subject, let me say that I tend, or try, to dampen hyperbole on subjects of this sort.  In the sixties and seventies, when it was the fashion among radicals to call America "Amerika," implying that European-style fascism was developing, my kind and I stepped back, contending that one can make a case about repression and its styles without invoking the extreme, even an often demonic aura of "the other."  The same goes for "theocracy."  Why give people a name they might savor and favor, or apply the term to near-miss phenomena?....

Advice to myself, after reading Phillips's counsel:

1) Don't assign to people a label and a position they don't exactly hold;

2) Don't lump all people called "conservative" or "born again" into the mix of the theocracy-minded;

3) Don't label anyone "theocrat" who does not bear most of the marks of the theocrat;

4) Thus remember that, for people of faith on left or right, to try to influence foreign or domestic policy is not by itself a mark of theocracy -- not by any means;

5) Do urge fellow citizens to be Madisonian (Federalist Papers X and LI), to work for the republic, against favor or privilege or establishment for particular religions (e.g., "Christianity" or "the biblical worldview");

6) If you must blame, blame fairly, including the Republicans-not-on-the-right or Democrats-wherever-they-are for leaving a moral vacuum that exploiters can invade and exploit;

7) Make the point that theocracies have always corrupted communities of faith that favor them, noting that such polities are bad for religion;

8) Read and profit from Rudin and especially Phillips as they make their cases; 

9) Be ready to link up with others, to see if at this late date the republic can be invigorated and survive;

10) Arrange with people you can trust to help you live with new strategies and old hopes, as you try to find a means of sleeping peacefully after you've read this unsettling script--and then awaken, for thought and action.