Union Seminary vs. American “Empire”

on January 6, 2015

It is fashionable for left-leaning theologians and their followers to rail against America as “empire.” Their precise meaning is rarely clear. By “empire,” do they mean all government, which by definition relies on some level of lethal coercion? Or do they only target governments with great power status, like ancient Rome or modern America? Either way, they pit the “empire” and its jaded devotees against the Kingdom of God and the true disciples.

This recent polemic against America as “empire” is from New York Union Seminary’s David Carr, who recalls Rome’s “powers of extreme violence,” which left “millennia-long trauma” echoing from its persecution of the ancient Jews and Christians.

“As the sole superpower today, the United States echoes Rome in its use of air power, drones and torture to intimidate and overwhelm its opponents,” Carr explains. “With violence closer to home, the United States echoes Babylon in its imprisonment of millions of its own citizens, with an average of 1 in 3 black males imprisoned at one point in their lifetime.”

Carr elaborates:

These measures are justified as fights against “terrorists” abroad or anti-crime/anti-drug campaigns at home. Both create a well of enduring trauma among neighborhoods and families who have lost loved ones to attacks, kidnapping or imprisonment. The US has long seen itself as a beacon of democracy and economic opportunity. Its reliance on violence to address problems now makes the US ever more an emblem of terror and death.

Citing “wars abroad and at home (the ‘war on drugs’),” he asks: “…does the United States want to be remembered like Babylon or the Roman ‘whore Babylon’ whose destruction is predicted in the biblical book of Revelation?” Taking a break from the Rome analogy, he admits the “American system of democracy offers an opportunity to shift course in these matters, and the American people can be guided by the best ideals of religions shaped by past traumas.”

What does Carr want the American people to do to escape the stigma of “empire?” Empty the prisons of drug felons? Stop fighting al Qaeda, ISIS and the Taliban abroad? All governments everywhere at all times imprison criminals and kill foreign enemies that threaten their people. Otherwise, there is anarchy, and national collapse, followed by subjugation to some new organizing coercive force.

What would Carr and theologically kindred spirits like to replace the American “empire?” Or is the game simply to fire rhetorical darts that sound spiritual without owning responsibility for real life situations needing justice and governance? Absent criminal justice systems and militaries, would dangerous forces of domestic and international disorder be expected to yield to the wisdom of theologians and philosophers?

How would someplace like Union Seminary fare in Manhattan absent the New York Police Department and the U.S. military? In a state of domestic, urban anarchy and lawlessness, would the seminary create its own highly armed security force, sort of its own “empire?” Would the seminary be comfortable being completely exposed to another 9-11 attack or possibly living under an Islamist caliphate that’s not so friendly to liberal Protestant experimentation?

If not, why not? Shouldn’t the consequences of shedding the American empire of “terror and death” be embraced as the cost of faithful discipleship?

Serious Christian thinkers since Augustine have addressed how Providence works through statecraft to achieve approximate order and justice in a fallen world. Such serious efforts among sheltered theologians of today, who prefer ideological ideals to the earthly reality, are all too rare. Who will fill the void?

  1. Comment by Jason P Taggart on January 6, 2015 at 11:08 am

    I don’t recall any lefty theologian criticizing the Soviet Union, which would definitely fit the definition of “empire,” ditto for China, so you have to marvel at so-called “Christians” who refrain from criticizing empires ruled by avowed atheists.

  2. Comment by Mike Ward on January 7, 2015 at 7:57 pm

    But they will criticize Israel.

  3. Comment by Mike Ward on January 7, 2015 at 7:54 pm

    I’m glad I’m not the only one who finds the Progressive usage of “empire” vague and unclear. The meanings of a lot of Progressive Christian buzzwords are unclear to me. They use the adjective “American” a lot in ways that don’t make sense to me. I think the American experience has shaped the churches in America in particular ways, but I often hear the term used to describe attributes of churches which are not distinctly American. “Redemptive violence” is a phrase that gets thrown around a lot, but I’ve never heard a coherent definition for it.

  4. Comment by Jeremy Smith on January 7, 2015 at 9:23 pm

    Does America rule an empire? Well, unlike Rome and Britain, we don’t directly rule any other state. On the other hand, we have 700 military bases all across the globe. What other state has anywhere near that reach? Clearly, as a result of our victory in WWII, and then in the Cold War, the United states has achieved a position of power in the world unlike any other state. In many ways, our power exceeds the wildest dreams of Babylon, Rome, Spain, Russia, China, or Britain. For we have nuclear weapons. Modern technology has vastly expanded what we even mean by power. So it does not seem at all a stretch to say America rules an empire. The real question is, power for good or for ill? And even if for ill, what would any alternative be like? These questions need to be raised. I think we Americans need to face up to just how powerful we are, and take seriously the awesome responsibility that implies. The fact that people shrink from acknowledging that we rule an empire, or something very like an empire, suggests that we fail to acknowledge the seriousness of the situation we are in.

  5. Comment by Mike Ward on January 8, 2015 at 11:53 am

    I don’t think you understood what was being said in the article. Tooley doesn’t say America isn’t extremely powerful. In the first paragrah he uses modern American along with ancient Rome as examples of “governments with great power status.”

    I think Tooley puts empire in quotes throught the article because he is talking about the way many left-leaning theologians use the term, and as he states, their meaning is not always clear. Sometimes they do seem to be singling out only very powerful nations, but at other times polemics against “empire” seem to apply to all goverments.

    This really isn’t an article about whether or not America is an empire.

  6. Comment by Jeremy Smith on January 8, 2015 at 12:13 pm

    Tooley rightly calls for a clarification by those who claim America has an empire. I’m proposing a way to be more specific. This is a big discussion. Tooley asks of those who criticize American “empire,” what would you put in its place? And he points out that all states exercise coercive power. He is right that these are exactly the points which self-righteous liberals overlook. However, a response to what he says would be: the power that any state needs to have to exist is not the same as the power of an empire. In general, ideologues of the left demonize our power, and, again in general, ideologues of the right are either unwilling to admit its extent, or unwilling to question its meaning or purpose. A careful reading, for example, especially of Augustine (esp. the City of God) and of much of the Old Testament will discover a very serious consideration of exactly these questions in the context of faith in the sovereignty of God. Both struggle, I think, to understand how evil can play a role in God’s plan. Both understand how the lust for power we inherit with our sinful nature is stoked by the achievement of power. The consequence for us Americans should be, I think, to very seriously acknowledge the vast extent of the military and economic power America wields, and of the real danger to our own souls which that power presents. Our sinful nature is capable of enjoying power for power’s sake. We need to ask ourselves every day: do we regard our power as a responsibility or do we glory in our power and bask in its security?

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.