Dominionism: This is what is at the heart of any discussion of "the Family" and Michael Coe

[nadinbrzezinski]

At the apex of hard Dominionism is the religious dogma of Dominion Theology, with two major branches: Christian Reconstructionism and Kingdom Now theology. It is the latter's influence on the theopolitical movement called the New Apostolic Reformation that has been linked in published reports to potential Republican presidential nominees Perry, Bachmann or Palin. All three of these right-wing political debutantes have flirted with Christian Right Dominionism, but how far they have danced toward the influence of hard-right Dominion Theology is in dispute. It would be nice if some "mainstream" journalists actually researched the question.

"While differing from Reconstructionism in many ways, Kingdom Now shares the belief that Christians have a mandate to take dominion over every area of life," explains religion scholar Bruce Barron. And it is just this tendency that has spread through evangelical Protestantism, resulting in the emergence of "various brands of `dominionist' thinkers in contemporary American evangelicalism," according to Barron.

The most militant Dominion Theologists would silence dissenters and execute adulterers, homosexuals and recalcitrant children. No...seriously. OK, they would only be executed for repeated offenses, explain some defenders of Christian Reconstructionism. Even most Christian Right activists view the more militant Dominion Theologists as having really creepy ideas.

http://www.publiceye.org/christian_right/dominionism.htm


And this is why when the story exploded all over the National Media that Hillary Clinton joined the prayer group in Congress, it is a major deal, Here from the Atlantic.

Today, on Capitol Hill, as the old avenues of bipartisanship have gradually been blocked off by hardening ideology, the prayer groups have become cherished sanctuaries for their members—providing respite, however brief, from the cacophony of political Washington. Speaking about a group is strongly discouraged, and what transpires at meetings is strictly off the record. As a result, the groups provide an intimate setting in which members can share their faith without fear of being judged. “Once you take off the cloak of politics and look into a person’s soul, you find that you can establish a relationship that is enduring and deep and doesn’t let politics get in the way,” one longtime participant explained to me. “If you’re going to be consistent with the teachings of Jesus, it’s about forgiveness, reconciliation, and peace.” Many who come, he said, are surprised to wind up forming close friendships with colleagues who in any other setting would be considered political enemies.

You’re not supposed to think about lofty spiritual affairs in terms so temporal as their political importance. But among the prayer groups, one holds special status: a tight-knit gathering of about a dozen senators which still meets every Wednesday morning for prayer and discussion, led by Douglas Coe himself. Each week, someone starts the meeting by giving personal testimony, secure in the support of the audience. Once, Senator Dan Coats stood before the group and sang “Jesus Loves Me, This I Know.”

The roster of regular participants has included such notable conservative names as Brownback, Santorum, Nickles, Enzi, and Inhofe. Then, in 2001, just after the new class of senators was sworn in, another name was added to the list: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/11/take-two-hillarys-choice/305292/

Mrs Clinton also had glowing words about Mr. Coe in her own autobiography. This is not an attack. This is a fact. One that exploded in 2008. And if she should decide to run for office, that is a fact that people need to take into account. Dominionism is about power, not necessarily religion.

[Jackpine Radical]

1. How many threads will it take before this sinks in around here?

Rhetorical question. Maybe even stupid question.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Well right now it is because we have a few people here talking

on how none of 2008 actually happened. It is as if it was a fog or something.

[ret5hd]

3. When she denounces it...completely, unequivically.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

26. Feb. 31, 2015. Trust me. That's the date.

[Katashi_itto]

4. K&R

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Thanks sis

[Katashi_itto]

8. Sis?

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Hey we can see some of us as a sisterhood of sorts

by the way, this primary season, a lot of people did opt for waffles

[Katashi_itto]

12. True!

[VanillaRhapsody]

5. I do not believe that HRC is "7 Mountains" and you don't either....this is just to the point of

sickening now...borderline CT territory. Good luck with this meme....

[sufrommich]

6. Same smear as it was here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3755215

[Hekate]

24. "Barack Obama = Stealth Christian Dominionist?" All that and a secret Muslim too. What a busy boy...

...he has been.

[hopemountain]

37. don't forget jay-z and beyonce

and the illuminati

[joshcryer]

10. It was a non issue in 2008.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Informed voters will use the info

non informed voters, which is most of the voters. won't

[joshcryer]

13. I'm just saying it barely hit the news.

Shartlet's book is fairly obscure, we don't know really anything beyond that Clinton attended prayer breakfasts.

I can see it making the rounds on blogs but it'll never go mainstream.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. So I go back to the well informed voter, don't I?

They are as rare as a good diamond in the rough.

Here we have more than a few.

And for that I also blame my counterparts in the media, they dropped the issue and the story telling after a week.

Hey, they don't even do budgets these days, and it is for the same reason, these are not sexy stories. Now give me a forever home story for "blondie" or "Ike" or whatever the name of the furry critter is... and I guarantee it will will almost crash websites.

Since we happen to do policy, I am sure a reread of a lot of this is in my future if Clinton declares. If she does not, well, there are other things to read. And to be honest, I hope she does not run...

[Unknown Beatle]

22. I'm with you on this,

but, I'll almost guarantee that Hilary will declare that she will run for POTUS.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. I am hoping that her newborn grand-baby

changes that. She is waiting for that, and becoming a grand parent can change people.

And I hope the baby is healthy and all that too.

But if she declares, well, I got a lot of re-reading to do.

[Hekate]

25. There certainly have been a lot of grandfathers in the Oval Office....

I've always found this particular argument pretty baffling.

[7wo7rees]

15. Just a.heartbreak. That is all.NT

[rickyhall]

16. I think she's smart enough to tell reality from fantasy

What worries me most is the Senator's close relationship with Wall Street and the rich bastards, the people who are making the rest of us poor.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. This is about power

Oh and let me add, this is part of the nexus of wealth and power, that includes WS

[Phlem]

20. As if her being 3rd way wasn't bad enough.

I can already see what kind of presidency it will be.

[glinda]

18. Please let a real candidate show up....

environmentalist, real, smart, strong.....

[Phlem]

19. I confess, I was sucked into the religion drama but

my argument in that her beliefs would influence her actions are still the same. Actions that we've been watching for a while. She does not walk the walk but talks the talk and likes money a whole heck of a lot! That's the difference between the two.

This is excellent work Nadin! As I've come to respect.

Thank you for bringing this to light. I just don't have the time to do this home work and I appreciate it greatly!





-p

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. You welcome. part of it, like when covering my local fires, is knowing

where to look (Aka what boolean search string to use so these things pop fast, and today that was becoming a problem)

[DeSwiss]

27. K&R

These Dominionist creeps are f@(king nuts. And anyone who kowtows to them, placates them, sucks up to them, encourages them or gives them legitimacy has no business in politics.

- I'm looking at you Hillary.

K&R

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. And I am looking at a whole list of them, not just Hillary

this has to be made so embarrassing that like the Koch brothers, they have to run away. (And in the case of the Kochs, well ALEC is no longer the hip place to be)

[DeSwiss]

31. I get that point, and agree....

... but it seems as if Hils is being ''pre-ordained'' for another WH jaunt. And after the prior SCOTUS Coup, we should realize that anything's possible now. And she can do a hellava lot more damage from that vantage point.

I'm still inclined toward total systemic collapse as the best solution. Will it be painful,? yes you bet. That's the price we must pay for our indifference all this time. It's either us now or our kids and grandkids for sure, later. It's must be paid sometime.

- The worst of it is, you can't tell where the good parts and the corrupt parts end and begin anymore. It's time.....


[center]
[font size=1]Dare to click[/font]
[/center]

[DesertDiamond]

29. I don't know if Clinton is a Dominionist, but I do know Dominionism is real and they do want to

take us over. My dad was very concerned about this seven years ago and made some copies of a video about it before he died, a video made by Theology faculty at Columbia University. He wanted me to share them with people. No one took it seriously. Actually, I'm not worried because I know it will come to a point where all of that negativity is neutralized and it will be a nonisssue. But what battles we'll be faced with before then, that I don't know.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. We all must take these yahoos seriously

they are completely fucked up. As to her being one or not, to people like Coe she is just one more cog in his quest for ultimate power, and not just in the US.

[cantbeserious]

32. Thank You For Sharing

eom

[peoli]

33. Its hard for me to imagine the mind that is both Liberal and a Dominionist.

It's so right wing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Think of a VENN diagram, the nexus is power.

[peoli]

38. Maybe she will usher in the second coming of Christ...

with Mitt Romney in Missouri.... and peace will have no end.


No but really, thank you for posting. Dominionism terrifies me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. As it should terrify any right thinking person

no pun.

[joshcryer]

39. I can see that Venn Diagram.

But IMO that doesn't mean that there is ideological overlap. You'd have two ideologies outside of a central sphere of influence. The question then becomes whether the sphere of influence is for the actions of The Fellowship or for the actions of ones ideology.

Think about it this way, when Occupiers helped hurricane Sandy victims they worked with the St. Jacobi Lutheran Church who allowed them to use their grounds as a staging area. Does that mean that they want to help the homophobic pastor Timothy J. Spaude? Not at all, their association with the church was to help Occupiers help hurricane Sandy victims.

So I think it's unfair to say Clinton is "just one more cog in (Coe's) quest for ultimate power." It would be just as damning to say that Occupiers wanted to help Spaude gain influence in the community to spread his anti-gay message.

I think Clinton was more associating with that group for the connections it brought rather than because it influenced her ideologically and I don't think she gave it much power by her association since she basically disagrees with their tenants across the board.

Note: I understand the Lutheran Church is more open to homosexuality than many others, but it's a church by church thing and Spaude is definitely anti-gay.

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. Wrong analogy

given that Occupy Sandy, last time I checked, was not part of a very exclusive cell ... er prayer group, in the US Senate...

And yes, for Coe it is about ultimate power to control the destiny of the US and make it into his vision of a Christian nation. Whether that is through a Democrat, or a Republican, it is immaterial. I am sure you have read, among others, Sharlet's book. If you have not, time to do so. And that is just a primer on Dominionism.

It has been spoken and warned about in Academia for literally decades. I got my intro to them in a College undergraduate course in the 1980s. The ideology is actually older than The Family. but the Family is quite toxic. And outside of Academia most people treat it as if it could never happen here. Well, I am sure you have heard of this... "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."

Suffice it to say, Sinclair Lewis was dealing with an older form of the same virus.

As to who else is part of this crap at the highest levels? You surely have heard of Ted Cruz right?

[joshcryer]

43. That wouldn't matter to the Venn Diagram, imo.

Assuming the diagram is about supporting a given system. It would be two cells, one exclusive, one non-exclusive. Both systems are exclusive from the point of view of Spaude and Coe as they have their own non-inclusive agendas at the top. They both happen to be anti-gay, for example.

I read his book after two days of researching, and I bet that a lot of people haven't.

Here's what he says about Clinton:

Hillary may well be God's beautiful child, but she's not a member of Coe's Family. Rather, I'd been told at Ivanwald, she's a "friend," less elect then a member, but more chosen than the rest of us. A fellow traveler but not a sister. Her goals are not their goals; but when on occasion they coincide, Hillary and the Family can work together.

I want to start an OP about this because the chapter on Clinton is actually very telling, he expresses a liberal at heart and one who tried to crack The Fellowship.

But so many are blinded.

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. Yes, and she is also part of the top cell

to shepherd policy.

And she refers to Coe as not her preacher, but a man of god in not one, but two of her books. I have not read the last one.

Fellow travelers are useful idiots for Coe.

The problem we are having is this. Like the Koch brothers, most of this is not receiving any real exposure. It should. These are the dark forces that are changing the country. They are not changing politics to a more inclusive democratic system, but essentially the first phase is over. We no longer have a functioning democracy. What we have is an Oligarchy. That is the first phase.

Mind you, this is a phase we have been through before. The 1880s come to mind. The next step, if you are part of the Family, or any of the even more shadowy groups that want to take control of the country and make it a Christian nation, their version by the way, is now well underway. How can I tell? People like Ted Cruz speak of this openly. There is no fear anymore.

Time is short, and I don't care whether somebody is a useful idiot, or a full participant. Come the June election of 2016, I guarantee you I will not vote for Hillary Clinton if she chooses to run. If she should, by some miracle, win the nomination, I have no idea what I will do. I live in a deep blue state though, so I might take offers of strategic voting. But I might as well start looking for a way out of the insane asylum, because at that point, at least in my mind, not voting and eating waffles is just as effective as a choice. As a Jew, I have reasons, valid ones, to fear a Christian theocracy. Lets just say my well honed instinct tells me it might be time to leave stage left.

And I mean that.

[joshcryer]

46. The biggest takeaway from Sharlet's book is Clinton is for social justice.

As opposed to economic justice. So she could associate with The Fellowship whenever they agreed with her on social policy, such as sex-trafficking, while sharing the same views on the far left (Sharlet calls her a Cold Warrior advocate). Sharlet paints a rightward leaning Clinton in that vein, but he falls short when he claims she's (was) distancing herself from feminism, perhaps that was true in 2008, but just recently she said she wants to be called a feminist. I think we need a new analysis.

In that I do believe highly in social justice and that I have done a lot of research on Soviet Russia and how it really screwed up, I am not terribly worried by these views. Unfortunately, I don't think a non-corporate candidate can be elected currently.

Though I will fight for one if they come along in time. I'm guessing I'll vote for Robert Reich if Sanders chooses not to run (and if Reich keeps his promise).

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. I have been involved in Social Justice

and poverty issues since I was 18 years old.

And I will keep my promise. I will not vote for her. She scares me, and I will vote my values.

But the peek we got into the Family (and you have more and more of these types percolating up through government) lead me to think we are well on our way (I will argue we might already be there anyway) to fascism.

Don't get me wrong, she has done good things. She was one of the people involved in investigating Watergate and the right has hated her ever since. The avatar of the GOP is not just a pretty picture, they have long memories. And they do not forgive... or forget.

She has broken many ceilings and has been ahead of her time in some things. But the last 15 years give me a lot of pause, and that includes her voting record in the US Senate. I am not jumping into a decision without lack of information. I will do the same careful research with every other candidate that runs for the Dems. And if I find that I can support none, well I guess I will vote for the least horrible of them, just to keep in practice.

Oh and I will stay away from political hagiography by the way.

But where we are moving as a nation is damn scary. And this is precisely the kind of discussion we used to have on DU, and we no longer do. I respect those who wish to vote for her, and will work for her nomination, but I will fight them, when they start with the usual, but she is inevitable talk. That actually is the reason why I do not think she will be the nominee, and we'd better start looking at Stage Left to see who is entering the fray. One of the reasons she did not in 2008 the elections came, people were damned tired of Hillary and the pundits. And she is doing it again, learning she did not.

[joshcryer]

48. I think I have a much more optimistic view than that.

I think the biggest challenge we as a country and as the world faces is climate change. And it ain't going to be pretty regardless who is in the White House.

Demographically, culturally, I think we're moving in the correct direction, but it's going to be harmed greatly in the coming years. Arctic sea ice, methane clathrates. And of course global capitalist hegemony will just see it as an opportunity to exploit arctic oil and gas more.

I hope you're right about the nominee. I don't see a way out yet though. I'll fight for a candidate if I think it's a fighting cause. I can't go through the Draft Gore movement again though. It was heart-wrenching. I'll stick it out and just vote for the nominee. Probably defend Clinton if it comes to it (the smears will be loud and voracious), but beyond that, nope.

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. Climate change is one of the reasons we are moving where we are moving

it is a species wide and planet wide threat. I believe those in power know it. And they also know they need to prevent an uprising.

And you are correct, I am not that cheerful. These days I also cover politics, and watching sausage making close up will make you even more cynical, guaranteed. The process is far more complex than the magical thinking many here (and Free Republic) think it is.

[Raksha]

53. I understand where you're coming from, and I'm very glad you said that.

"Time is short, and I don't care whether somebody is a useful idiot, or a full participant. Come the June election of 2016, I guarantee you I will not vote for Hillary Clinton if she chooses to run. If she should, by some miracle, win the nomination, I have no idea what I will do. I live in a deep blue state though, so I might take offers of strategic voting. But I might as well start looking for a way out of the insane asylum, because at that point, at least in my mind, not voting and eating waffles is just as effective as a choice. As a Jew, I have reasons, valid ones, to fear a Christian theocracy. Lets just say my well honed instinct tells me it might be time to leave stage left.

And I mean that."

Pretty much the same conclusions I've come to myself, or close enough that it makes very little difference. I'm still going to have to re-read that 2006 Atlantic article and read the Sharlet book, though.

[ancianita]

34. I looked into this two years ago. What we're seeing is the tip of a huge underwater iceberg.

The 7 Mountains Mandate, of which Ted Cruz is a part, seems to be a recent subset of the dominionist movement, but it's getting to be part of the decades' long attempt to christianize our government.

There's a lot more to this, but at the very least, this subset of dominionism ( I hate capitalizing names I disrespect deeply) in politics bears watching because these politicians are trying to legally define "freedom" across family, business, government, media, and entertainment as biblically based; they believe that other kinds of "freedom" are corrupt and should be abolished.

Dominionism doesn't mind rearing its public head as political drama. The Paul Weyrich style of dominionist war is on, and Ted Cruz is one of its "anointed kings." There is no gainsaying their world. They might make mistakes over shutdowns or visible policy hypocrisies -- e.g., the Greg Colletts, Michelle Bachmans, Louis Gohmerts or the 'suicide caucus' -- but they won't go away because we or the media mock or ignore them.

For Hillary to "kiss their ring" is to get their endorsement. This whole thing creeps me out. I am not excited with the prospect of her nomination. Here I am, stuck in the middle of lesser evils. I can only hope that Hillary keeps dominionist numbers contained.

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. Exactly, but we even have people here who were members in 2008

pretending 2008 and all these revelations never happened.

It is weird, as if our team is less damaging from the seven mountains POV than theirs, and it is not a game.

[flvegan]

42. ...and also eating meat.

(dominionism, that is)

[LuvNewcastle]

45. We have one of them running for the Senate here in Mississippi.

His name is Chris McDaniel. He's trying to unseat long-serving Republican Thad Cochran in the GOP primary, and he's very close. We're having a runoff next week. McDaniel has had Santorum and Palin down here campaigning for him. He hasn't publicly spoken about RW Christianity, but I hear he's been making the rounds in the RW churches, which are most of them down here.

I voted in the GOP primary this year just so I could vote against him. I think a lot of liberals did. I'm fearful about the runoff; those RW Christians are loyal voters. If McDaniel wins, you'll be hearing about him soon enough. He's already mentioned Ted Cruz as someone he would ally himself with. I'm as fearful of these Dominionists as I am of any fascists, and if Hillary would be allied with them in any way, that says all I need to know about her.

[Raksha]

50. Thank you for posting this - I had completely forgotten that Atlantic article,

and Hillary Clinton's association with "The Family." Now I'm going to have to re-read the article in the light of everything that has happened in the eight years since it was written.

Re "Mrs Clinton also had glowing words about Mr. Coe in her own autobiography. This is not an attack. This is a fact. One that exploded in 2008. And if she should decide to run for office, that is a fact that people need to take into account. Dominionism is about power, not necessarily religion."

I have already decided I will not vote for Hillary Clinton even if she's the Democratic candidate, because of her Wall Street ties and her vote for the IWR among other things--basically because she epitomizes the Third Way. These Dominionist associations make her that much more toxic as far as I'm concerned.

It seems I've got a little re-reading and catch-up reading to do myself.

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. You welcome, and some here are still saying that this is not the case

[LuvNewcastle]

52. I've decided the same thing. There's only so far I'll go.

She's totally unacceptable to me. I'm not the average voter; I'm a hell of a lot more informed, but I do talk to others, and I would tell people that Hillary Clinton is a bad choice. I hope Democrats pick someone else in the primaries. I will vote for anyone else in the primaries.

[grasswire]

54. Sarah Palin is in league with dominionists.

And regarding Doug Coe: He was mentor to Chuck Colson, too. Got Colson out of prison after only

[Enthusiast]

55. This religious dogma is incompatible with democracy.