With Apologies To Chris Hedges

A while back, Hedges wrote a book called Christian Fascism. I read the book and heard what he had to say and dismissed it for the most part.  From talking to my religiously conservative Christian friends, I knew that many of my fellow Christians did want some more control over things than what existed, but not to the extent that Hedges saw.

But after reading William Barr's address to the Law School at Notre Dame (click here for the speech), I'm afraid that I was more wrong than  Hedges was concerning the desired future of many a religiously conservative Christian in America.

William Barr is, of course the current Attorney General in the US because of the Trump Administration. It appears that he is an old-school, conservative Catholic. And with that comes a good helping of authoritarianism.  Basically, Barr's address says that our nation was designed to be run and populated by Christians like himself and that all other participants pose a threat to the nation--that is especially true if those participants are secular and progressive. His basic theme is that our Founding Fathers proposed a system of limited government that depended on the self-control of its people. And nothing says self-control like Barr's kind of conservative Catholicism. Of course he doesn't seem to have a problem with conservative Protestants either.

To prove that this nation was designed for the religious likes of him, in general that is, he quotes Madison from his Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, a work that opposed a proposed piece of legislation where taxpayer money would be used to support the churches in the name of promoting 'public morality' (click here). But that doesn't stop Barr from quoting from that work to suggest the opposite. For Barr states the following (click here for the source) :

religious liberty as a "rights toward men" but "a duty towards the Creator" and a "duty...precedent both in order and time and degree of obligation to the claims of Civil Society."

 Now Barr later claims that our nation was built on the Judeo-Christian moral standards because our Founders were Christians.

Here we should note that I don't believe the source of the Judeo part of those moral standards were well received in the nation at that time. First, there was just a handful of Jews in 17th century America and when we get to the 18th century, some states had passed laws that prohibited Jews from voting. There was other evidence of anti-Semitism back then.

Back at the ranch, according to Barr these moral standards enabled Americans with the necessary self-control that would facilitate a working limited government. Thus, the Judeo-Christian foundation of our nation is a necessary part of what keeps America free though Barr states that under the general label of religion.

Barr goes on to say that the presence of our social is ills is due not just to the weakening of those standards in society, but to a 'comprehensive effort to drive it from the public square.'

Barr continues to emphasize the importance of passing down our religious heritage to our children but that there are 3 'fronts' in which 'secularists' are trying to infringe on the transference of our traditional religious morals. Those fronts consist of:

1. changing what is taught to our children in school
2. plans to keep public funds from supporting our religious schools
3. forcing religious schools to follow a 'secular orthodoxy'

 To support his first point, he cited New Jersey's law requiring public schools to use a 'LGBT curriculum' that oppose religious teaching. He noted that similar laws were passed elsewhere.

To support his second point he cited a Montana tax credit system that supported non-religious private schools that was later cancelled when some parents wanted to use that system to send their kids to nondenominational Christian school.

To support his third point, Barr cited a lawsuit against the Archbishop of Indianapolis because he barred teachers who were in same-sex marriages from teaching in his Catholic schools.

All of that and some other things paints a 'disturbing picture' for Barr because he sees the Judeo-Christian tradition, especially the Church part of that tradition, as America's Obi-wan Kenobi for restoring traditional morals back to America. Thus Barr said the following:

I think we should all we can to promote and support authentic Catholic education at all levels.

and

We must be vigilant to resist the forces of secularization to drive religious viewpoints from the public square and to impinge upon the free exercise of our faith.

Thus we can cite Barr as both being ignorant of the views about religion in the public square as advanced by James Madison, the person he fondly quoted as well as the traditional problem of how the religious liberty of some has, for centuries, been used to infringe on the civil liberties of others.

Again, we should note that Madison wrote what Barr quoted from to oppose using of taxpayer money to support the churches. In the same work that Barr quoted from, Madison said the following:

Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?

Thus Madison saw no difference between exclusively promoting a general religion from promoting a given denomination. So how would Madison then react to Barr's speech that seeks to exclusively promote Judeo-Christian moral traditions and Christianity in general? Madison's quote more explicitly applies to Barr's implied support for state money being used to support Christian education.

As for the other fronts that Barr pointed out, we should note that America has a long history of religiously based intolerance being exercised against different groups. Again, Jews were discriminated against in voting rights in certain states during America's infancy as a nation. Often, American Christians used their faith and the Scriptures to defend segregation and white supremacy. Recent resolutions in both the SBC and PCA denominations document that claim. And of course we need to include the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans in the land which was blessed by Christian beliefs. Also, for centuries, homosexuals were considered to be criminals by many and some were incarcerated and relief from that did not come until a few decades ago. That was due to church  influence on our moral standards.

When it comes to the Christian religion being used to prosecute those who were different, Barr is either ignorant or he sees it as acceptable. If the latter is true, then Barr forgets liberty or freedom mathematics that says: 

Liberty - Equality = Privilege.

In the meantime, what self restraints were being exercised by the wealthy in our nation? After all, our nation's laws, according to Barr, assumed that all were to use their religious values to control themselves so that there would be no need for our nation to increase the size of its government. But doesn't our nation have a rich heritage of those with wealth exploiting labor from slavery to the use of foreign workers to the use of prison labor to the use of violence against workers seeking justice in terms of pay and working conditions?

Thus Barr's speech seems to lack adequate awareness of both the sentiments of Madison, whom he quoted, as well as the history of  how what he calls 'religious liberty' being used to oppress those who were different. And yet, it is those good old days that Barr seeks to reestablish in America.

Yes, America could use a moral infusion to help it recover from what ails it. But Barr's perspective of what is needed there lacks awareness of the past and depth for our needs in both the present and future.

But something else should be said. To the extent that a large enough number of religiously conservative Christians share Barr's views, then we could say that Hedges was right considering the intent of some and the possibility that we could see a Christian fascism established in America. In fact we might even say that the conservative Christian support for Trump is at least partially based on that hope when he appoints people like William Barr to such a high government position.