The words "challenge" and "extending" refer to their willingness to overthrow regimes that violate American "principles" and "values," or regimes that threaten American "interests" and "prosperity."(3) From a religious point of view, the neocon vision is pagan, understanding the world in terms of power politics.

President Bush appointed a number of neocons to his administration, most notably Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, both of whom signed the 1997 Statement of Principles. Once 9/11 occurred, the neocons saw their opportunity. They took the emotional jolt of 9/11 and used it to implement their pre-planned attack on Iraq.

This invasion had to be sold to the American public. Given the obvious threat, the fact of 9/11, and hostile nations and groups, it might seem that the invasion could be sold on the pagan grounds of national security alone. By my reading of the gospels, Jesus' prophetic message was not primarily directed against the power politics of pagan Rome. As such, I see little reason to fault the neocons for their pagan agenda. An invasion of Iraq can make sense for those who believe in nothing but raw power. It might even make some sense to those who believe in some form of Luther's two Kingdom idea. But that was not how it was sold to the American public.

Jesus did, however, address the idolatry of those who linked the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to a pagan program.(4) What was true then, is true now. The invasion of Iraq was sold to the American public through presidential rhetoric that linked the neocon program to the Christian faith, especially the faith of the Religious Right.

Let us consider one of the most influential members of the Christian right, Pat Robertson. In his book, The New World Order,(5) he sets forth his program for America and the world.

He begins by painting a picture of a world soon to fall under the power of Satan. According to Robertson, conspiratorial forces, such as the Illuminati, the Masons, the national and international bankers, the United Nations, the liberals, and The Supreme Court are conspiring to create a world order against God. The only hope for the world is for Christians to take control of the U.S. government and impose the Ten Commandments. Unless that happens, there will "never be world peace until God's house and God's people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world.(6)

Once the Christian right gains control of the U.S. government, their next step is to "save" the world from the godless one-world government that is waiting in the wings. Here is Robertson,

Such a world government [the Satanic one] can come together only after the Christian United States is out of the way. ... With America still free and at large, Satan's schemes will at best be only partially successful. ... An independent America could point out Satan's lies. If America is free, people everywhere can hope for freedom. And if American goes down, all hope is lost to the rest of the world.(7)

This is the idolatry described by Sidney Mead and presented in an earlier essay.(8) It places Christians on the top, rather than on the bottom as those who serve as Christ served. It makes the un-biblical claim that a Christian United States of America is the divinely anointed, holy nation by which God defeats Satan and saves the world.

By the norms of orthodoxy, Robertson is a heretic. By Old Testament standards, he is a false prophet, telling the powerful what they want to hear. By the standards of America's founders, his agenda is un-American. It violates the founders' belief that America should not be governed by those who impose their sectarian religious practices upon others.

After 9/11, the president made a series of speeches linking the pagan agenda of the neo-conservatives with a heretical version of the Christian faith, especially the faith of the Christian right. To describe how that happened, I need to say a few words about how political speeches affect the heart and mind.(9)

All persons carry within them powerful emotional and cognitive networks of feelings, thoughts, memories, and experiences which can be activated by language, especially political and religious language. In verbal form, these deep networks are the myths, stories, and narratives that make sense of the world. Effective political speeches tap into these networks and use them for political purposes.

These networks are far more emotional than cognitive. Once activated, they will even deny facts, leaving emotion to take precedence over reality. For example, studies have shown that subjects, given rock-solid information that directly contradicts the emotional commitments, will find a way to ignore the facts. It is feelings, not logic or facts that drive the electorate to act, or vote, or support a particular candidate or program.

Furthermore, political speeches that galvanize the public will link a number of networks together for even greater effect. For example, consider the phrase, "axis of evil," used by President Bush in his 2002 State of the Union address to refer to Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. The speech was written by President Bush's speech writer, Michael Gerson, an evangelical graduate of Wheaton with a degree in theology.

The phrase had links to the WWII Axis powers, but even better, Gerson thought it was "sinister, even wicked. It was almost as if Saddam was an agent of the devil. The connection between his regime with weapons of mass destruction and international terrorism could put the world on the road to Armageddon."(10) At the level of feeling, and in the context of presidential speeches, the phrase identified Saddam Hussein with the devil. As such, it resonated in the souls of evangelical Christians. President Bush liked the phrase. In his words, "It just kind of resonates."(11)

Between September 11, 2001 and May 1, 2003, the commencement of hostilities with Iraq, the President of the United States made 17 major presidential speeches, an unprecedented pace among modern presidents.(12) These have been exhaustively analyzed, their dominant themes and references catalogued and counted.(13) Two binary opposites were dominant and linked together, good/evil and security/peril.(14)

The first polarity activated the idolatrous perspective described by Mead and championed by the Christian Right. The second polarity activated the neocon world view. The link between the two profaned the Name of God. Consider the following quotations taken from presidential speeches.

A. The advance of human freedom, the great achievement of our time and the great hope of every time, now depends on us ... Fellow citizens, we'll meet violence with patient justice -- assured of the rightness of our cause, and confident of victories to come. (9/20/01 address to congress and the nation)

B. America is a strong nation and honorable in the use of our strength. ... If this [Saddam Hussein] is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (2003 State of the Union Address)

C. The course of this conflict is not known, its outcome is certain. Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them. (9/20/01 address to congress and the nation)

D. Americans are a free people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. ... We Americans have faith in ourselves, but not in ourselves alone. We do not know -- we do not claim to know all the ways of providence, yet we can trust in them, placing our confidence in the loving God behind all of life and all of history. May He guide us now. (2003 State of the Union Address.)

E. Every name, every life, is a loss to our military, to our nation, and to the loved ones who grieve. There's no homecoming for these families. Yet we pray, in God's time, their reunion will come. (5/1/03, announcing end of major combat operations in Iraq).

F. All of you -- all in this generation of our military have taken up the highest calling of history. You're defending your country and protecting the innocent from harm. And wherever you go, you carry a message of hope, a message that is ancient and ever new. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, "To the captives, 'come out,' and to those in darkness, 'be free.'" (5/1/03, announcing end of major combat operations in Iraq).(15)

The polarities of good/evil (America the Holy/Saddam the unholy), and security/peril (US military might/terrorist attacks) can be seen in these quotations. These two polarities were linked so that the feelings of holiness and righteousness from the first displaced, concealed, or merged with the feelings of fear and aggression required by the second. Quotations A and B define America as the holy nation, honorable, patient, and just, and her opponents as the personification of evil.

Similarly, quotation C identified the United States with freedom and justice, Saddam Hussein with cruelty and fear, and linked this contrast to God thereby linking religious feelings of God's justice with America's military solution. In the context of an impending war, the line from quotation D, "May He guide us now," evokes the Christian notion of guidance and grants spiritual legitimacy to President Bush's war plans. Quotation F activated the Christian network through biblical terms such as hope, calling, and darkness, together with a passage from the prophet Isaiah, Isaiah 49:9. This passage is fulfilled in Jesus Christ who, obedient to God, chose to be killed rather than kill. Here, however, Isaiah 49:9 is fulfilled by the "shock and awe" of war. Quotation E linked the sacrifices of those killed while killing others with the Christian network of an eternal homecoming in heaven, a homecoming attained by Jesus' sacrificial death. Quotation E is not that far from the Muslim idea that those who die in the wars of Allah will inherit paradise.

Those who die for others should be honored for their sacrifice. But far more than that is being said here. What is happening here is that feelings and beliefs that belong only to the Holy Name of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace, are being used to legitimate, honor, and sanctify a brutal act of aggression. It doesn't matter whether that aggression was justified or not, whether it was right or wrong, whether it had to be done to protect or promote democracy, freedom, or ourselves. Whatever it was, it was and is not the way of Christ.

To state my case again: Even if the invasions were right by any known norm or set of facts,(16) it is blasphemy when millions resonate to language connecting the Prince of Peace to the killing of others. A terrible idolatry, a disfiguring of the bride of Christ, a deep profaning of the Name of God, a violation of the first commandment, a taking of the Lord's Name in vain, has taken place in the American soul.

Jesus' words to pagan Israel still hold: "Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:4).

Endnotes

1. This essay is a short version of a more detailed account which can be found in the social and economic section of my web site, www.rsanders.org.
2. See the Iraq section, 1997-2000, of their web page, Project for a New American Century, http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqmiddleeast2000 1997.htm
3. All these quotations are taken from the June 3, 1997, Statement of Principles, found on the web site of the Project for a New American Century, http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
4. See especially chapters 7 and 8 of N. T. Wright's, Jesus and the Victory of God, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996).
5. Robertson, Pat. The New World Order. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1991.
6. Robertson, p. 227.
7. Robertson, p. 256.
8. See the social and economic section of my web page, www.rsanders.org.
9. The ideas from this section come from Drew Westen's book, The Political Brain (New York: Public Affairs, 2007).
10. Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack (New York; Simon and Schuster, 2004), p. 87.
11. Woodward, p. 95.
12. David Domke, God Willing? Political Fundamentalism in the White House, the "War on Terror," and the Echoing Press (Ann Arbor: Pluto Press, 2004), p. 19.
13. The ideas for this section come from the book by David Domke.
14. Domke, p. 39.
15. Domke, pp. 16, 47, 109, 1, 110, 110.
16. The great "fact" leading to the War in Iraq was the claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Whether he did or did not is irrelevant to the argument of this essay.

---The Rev. Robert J. Sanders, Ph.D. is a former Episcopal Church priest now with the Anglican Mission in America. He is an orthodox, Evangelical Anglican theologian. www.rsanders.org