The True American Holy Christian Church: Do we want this sort of New Christianity?

Arthur's Journal on God & Politics
What Does It Mean to be Christian in America?
A God of War
Apocalypse & End Times
Biblical Literalism
Christ Path
Conformity & Orthodoxy
Fear, Shame & Guilt
God & Politics
Goodness, Morality & Sin
Heresy & Heretics
History, Mystery & Doubt
Kindergarten Religion
Mental Spiritual Constructs
Mystical Christianity
Mythical Proportions
Passion of The Christ ...
Someone Else's Magic

“The True American Holy Christian Church”: Do we want this sort of New Christianity?

A few days ago, after hearing the President’s advocacy of a marriage amendment to the Constitution, I looked on Google’s “Search News” engine for recent articles about Christian involvement in our political process. In doing so I found an article that was published on the Internet on February 11, 2004. The URL will be posted at the end of this writing. My writing today will included pasted excerpts along with my own comments.

The article is striking, lengthy and annotated and I am in no position at this time to judge one way or another as to its accuracy. Some may see it as another example of our societal inclination to see conspiracy all around us. Others, as I have done, may find it disturbing in that the information contained seems to offer a plausible explanation and framework around what has become the more open involvement in our political system of the Christian Right.

One of the article’s themes that seems to stand out is also something I have repeatedly attempted to address in articles on this site: Biblical literalism particularly as it relates to prophecy and the end times.

I offer it for your own consideration. The article, if copied to a Word document, will total more than 40 pages. I have included excerpts from only the first twelve pages. If by then you are not willing to read it in its entirety and feel you can reject it out of hand as irrelevant nonsense, I thank you for reading this report and wish you well.

However, what is found below is not going to go away and it is possible that you are about to read something very fundamental to what is happening in the United States this very moment - something we will be called upon in this election year to endorse or reject.

Below you’ll read the biographical information on the author:

Katherine Yurica was educated at East Los Angeles College, U.S.C. and the USC School of law. She worked as a consultant for Los Angeles County and as a news correspondent for Christianity Today plus as a freelance investigative reporter. She is the author of three books. She is also the publisher of the Yurica Report.

Katherine Yurica recorded and transcribed 1,300 pages of Pat Robertson’s television show, The 700 Club, covering several years in the mid 1980’s. In 1987 she conducted a study in response to informal inquiries from the staff of the Subcommittee on Oversight of the House Ways and Means Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, which was investigating whether television and radio ministries were violating their tax-exempt status by conducting grass roots political appeals, endorsing candidates, and making political expenditures as defined under Section 527 of the IRS code. The Subcommittee on Oversight published Katherine's study in Federal Tax Rules Applicable to Tax-Exempt Organizations Involving Television Ministries on October 6, 1987, Serial 100-43. (Published in 1988.)

The Despoiling of America:

How George W. Bush became the head of the new American Dominionist Church/State

By Katherine Yurica

With Editorial and Research Assistant Laurie Hall

February 11, 2004


“It happened quietly, with barely a mention in the media. Only the Washington Post dutifully reported it.[1] And only Kevin Phillips saw its significance in his new book, American Dynasty.[2] On December 24, 2001, Pat Robertson resigned his position as President of the Christian Coalition. Behind the scenes religious conservatives were abuzz with excitement. They believed Robertson had stepped down to allow the ascendance of the President of the United States of America to take his rightful place as the head of the true American Holy Christian Church. Robertson’s act was symbolic, but it carried a secret and solemn revelation to the faithful. It was the signal that the Bush administration was a government under God that was led by an anointed President who would be the first regent in a dynasty of regents awaiting the return of Jesus to earth. The President would now be the minister through whom God would execute His will in the nation. George W. Bush accepted his scepter and his sword with humility, grace and a sense of exultation.”

This article is the documented story of how a political religious movement called Dominionism gained control of the Republican Party, then took over Congress, then took over the White House, and now is sealing the conversion of America to a theocracy by taking over the American Judiciary. It’s the story of why and how “the wrath of God Almighty” will be unleashed against the middle class, against the poor, and against the elderly and sick of this nation by George W. Bush and his army of Republican Dominionist “rulers.”

[My comment]

I’ll quote the following from an email I received a month ago from a close relative who belongs to a fundamentalist church and who, although he is not entirely active in his church, still has strong feelings akin to what Yurica wrote as part of her introduction.

He wrote:

“I support Bush for his stand on ALL the moral issues that are important to me. And that comes not from my membership in any church, but from the simple sense of decency and knowledge of what is right instilled in me by my parents. I will never support a democrat (or republican) who does not share those same views on moral issues....

It is obvious to me that the political arena is becoming more and more the battle ground between good and evil, and this election is no exception. The black and white issues that ARE good or evil are increasingly separating along party lines. I have no doubt that many who are on the side of evil honestly believe they are doing, saying, and feeling what is right. But that doesn’t make them right. We are indeed in the days where evil will be called good and good will be called evil.”


“The years 1982-1986 marked the period Pat Robertson and radio and televangelists urgently broadcast appeals that rallied Christian followers to accept a new political religion that would turn millions of Christians into an army of political operatives. It was the period when the militant church raised itself from centuries of sleep and once again eyed power.”


... “Dominionism is a natural if unintended extension of Social Darwinism and is frequently called 'Christian Reconstructionism.' Its doctrines are shocking to ordinary Christian believers and to most Americans. Journalist Frederick Clarkson, who has written extensively on the subject, warned in 1994 that Dominionism 'seeks to replace democracy with a theocratic elite that would govern by imposing their interpretation of ‘Biblical Law.’ He described the ulterior motive of Dominionism is to eliminate '…labor unions, civil rights laws, and public schools.' Clarkson then describes the creation of new classes of citizens: ‘Women would be generally relegated to hearth and home. Insufficiently Christian men would be denied citizenship, perhaps executed. So severe is this theocracy that it would extend capital punishment [to] blasphemy, heresy, adultery, and homosexuality.’[10] Today, Dominionists hide their agenda and have resorted to stealth; one investigator who has engaged in internet exchanges with people who identify themselves as religious conservatives said, 'They cut and run if I mention the word (Dominionism).’[11]

Joan Bokaer, the Director of Theocracy Watch, a project of the Center for Religion, Ethics and Social Policy at Cornell University wrote, 'In March 1986, I was on a speaking tour in Iowa and received a copy of the following memo [Pat] Robertson had distributed to the Iowa Republican County Caucus titled, 'How to Participate in a Political Party.' It read:

Rule the world for God. Give the impression that you are there to work for the party, not push an ideology. Hide your strength. Don’t flaunt your Christianity. Christians need to take leadership positions. Party officers control political parties and so it is very important that mature Christians have a majority of leadership positions whenever possible, God willing.’[12]”

... “It is estimated that thirty-five million Americans who call themselves Christian adhere to Dominionism in the United States, but most of these people appear to be ignorant of the heretical nature of their beliefs and the seditious nature of their political goals. So successfully have the televangelists and churches inculcated the idea of the existence of an outside 'enemy,' which is attacking Christianity, that millions of people have perceived themselves rightfully overthrowing an imaginary evil anti-Christian conspiratorial secular society.”

[My Comment]

This is an election year and we find ourselves bombarded by the rhetoric of politics and religion at a time when the connection between the two is more obvious because of the issues around same sex marriage and abortion. Do we as Christians react to discussions about public morality and religious values by tuning them out - thinking that because the Constitution forbids the co-mingling of Church and State these arguments are merely campaign rhetoric and not to be taken seriously?


“Dominionism started with the Gospels and turned the concept of the invisible and spiritual 'Kingdom of God' into a literal political empire that could be taken by force, starting with the United States of America.

Discarding the original message of Jesus and forgetting that Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world,' the framers of Dominionism boldly presented a Gospel whose purpose was to inspire Christians to enter politics and execute world domination so that Jesus could return to an earth prepared for his earthly rule by his faithful 'regents.’ ”

[My comment]

Last week I watched a report on Bill Moyer’s NOW about Christians who are so invested in the literal fulfillment of End Times prophecy, particularly the Book of Revelation, that they actively lobby against any transfer of Israeli territory to the Palestinians. Their reasoning seems to be that Israel must be restored to the boundaries that existed at the time of Jesus before the Second Coming can occur.


“In the fifties and sixties, right-wing Christians worried about communists and communism taking over the world. Along with communism, another enemy to Christianity was identified by ministers.

In 1982, Francis Schaeffer, who was then the leading evangelical theologian, called Secular Humanism the greatest threat to Christianity the world had ever seen. Soon American fundamentalists and Pentecostals were seeing humanists everywhere.

Appearing on Pat Robertson’s 700 Club show, Schaeffer claimed that humanism was being forced on Christians; it taught that man was the 'center of all things.' Like communism, secular humanism was based on atheism, which was sufficient enough for Schaeffer to conclude that humanism was an enemy to the Kingdom of God.[15] 'The enemy is this other view of reality,' Schaeffer spoke emotionally. Citing the Declaration of Independence as his authorizing document, he said:

‘Today we live in a humanist society. They control the schools. They control public television. They control the media in general. And what we have to say is we live in a humanist society….[Because] the courts are not subject to the will of the people through elections or re-election… all the great changes in the last forty years have come through the courts. And what we must get in our mind is the government as a whole, but especially the courts, has become the vehicle to force this view on the total population, even if the total population doesn’t hold the view.’[16]

Schaeffer claimed that the major ‘titanic changes’ to America occurred since 1942: ‘If you don’t revolt against tyranny and this is what I call the bottom line, is that not only do you have the privilege but [you have] the duty to revolt.

When people force upon you and society that which is absolutely contrary to the Word of God, and which really is tyranny…we have a right to stand against it as a matter of principle. And this was the basis upon which the founding fathers built this country.’

The appeal to evangelicals went further. On April 29, 1985, Billy Graham, the respected and world famous evangelist, told Pat Robertson’s audience on the 700 Club show that:

‘[T]he time has come when evangelicals are going to have to think about getting organized corporately….I’m for evangelicals running for public office and winning if possible and getting control of the Congress, getting control of the bureaucracy, getting control of the executive branch of government.

I think if we leave it to the other side we’re going to be lost. I would like to see every true believer involved in politics in some way shape or form.’

According to Schaeffer, Robertson, and Billy Graham, then arguably the three most famous and influential leaders in the American protestant church world, ‘God’s people’ had a moral duty to change the government of the United States.”[17]

[My comment]

For years I’ve heard this sort of thing and have personally responded more or less in agreement since it seemed to confirm my own internal lament as to where our constantly declining public morality was leading us. I took it seriously on that particular level but never considered on a more external level that taking over the government is a Christian option as something viable or consistent with the teachings of Jesus and Paul.


“How Can Evil Deeds Be Reconciled With Christian Beliefs?

It’s important to understand that the founders of Dominionism are sitting on the horns of a moral dilemma: How can a leader be both good and evil at the same time?

For if biblical moral proscriptions are applicable to him, he will certainly suffer some form of censure. And if proscriptions are applicable, the leader could not lie to the citizenry with impunity or do evil so that ‘good’ could be achieved.

The answer to the dilemma of how a Dominionist leader could both do evil and still maintain his place of honor in the Christian community lies in the acceptance and adoption of the Calvinistic doctrine that James Hogg wrote about in The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner. (W.W. Norton, N.Y. 1970.)

This novel, published in 1824, is concerned with psychological aberration and as such, anticipates the literature of the twentieth century. The protagonist is a young man named Robert, who drenched in the religious bigotry of Calvinism, concluded that he was predestined before the beginning of the world to enter heaven, therefore no sin he committed would be held to his account. This freed Robert to become an assassin in the cause of Christ and His Church.

Fifty years ago a variation on the concept was expressed disapprovingly as, ‘Once saved—always saved.’ In this view, salvation had nothing to do with ‘good works or a holy life.’ A drunk who had a born again experience would be among God’s chosen elect whether he stopped drinking or not.

But the logical extension of the reasoning is the idea that Christianity could have within itself not ex-sinners but active sinners: as Christian murderers, Christian pedophiles, Christian rapists, Christian thieves, Christian arsonists, and every other kind of socio-pathological behavior possible.

As we have sadly witnessed of late the concept is broadly accepted within the American churches. But the Dominionists needed the aberrant extension of Calvinism; they believe as did Calvin and John Knox that before the creation of the universe, all men were indeed predestined to be either among God’s elect or were unregenerate outcasts.

And it is at this point Dominionists introduced a perversion to Calvinism—the same one James Hogg utilizes in his The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner—its technical name is ‘supralapsarianism.’ It means essentially that the man called from before the foundation of the world to be one of the elect of God’s people, can do no wrong.

No wonder then observers noted a definite religious swing in George W. Bush from Wesleyan theology to Calvinism early in his administration.[25]

How comforting the Calvinistic idea of a justified sinner is when one is utilizing Machiavellian techniques to gain political control of a state. It’s more than comforting; it is a required doctrine for “Christians” who believe they must use evil to bring about good. It justifies lying, murder, fraud and all other criminal acts without the fuss of having to deal with guilt feelings or to feel remorse for the lives lost through executions, military actions, or assassinations.

If this doctrine seems too wayward to believe—as it might have done had I not heard a recent interview with a Pentecostal minister—rest assured the twisted doctrine is horribly alive and thriving in America today.

The interview conducted by Brian Copeland a news talk show host for KGO, San Francisco on September 5, 2003, was with the Reverend Donald Spitz of Pensacola, Florida who is involved with a Pro Life group in Virginia and with the Army of God.

The occasion was the execution of Paul Hill, another Pentecostal minister who murdered a doctor and his body guard outside an abortion clinic. Hill was caught and convicted of the crimes.

Spitz admitted that he was Paul Hill’s spiritual counselor. He said Hill died with the conviction he had done the Lord’s work. Spitz who approved of the murder said, ‘someone else is going to handle the publishing of Paul Hill’s book On How to Assassinate.’

Spitz believed that Hill was completely justified in murdering the physician because, according to him, ‘twenty-six babies’ lives were saved by the killing.’ When Copeland pointed out that the scheduled abortions for the morning of the murders would have simply been postponed to another day and that the lives of the fetuses were only extended for a day or so, Spitz refused to accept the argument.

Not surprisingly, Spitz opposed the use of birth control methods. Copeland asked, ‘If a woman is raped should she be forced to carry the fetus to term?’ Spitz said, ‘Yes.’ ‘What if the pregnancy will kill the mother?’ Spitz replied that under no circumstances could ‘the baby be killed.’

When Spitz was asked, ‘Why haven’t you gone out and killed an abortionist?’ he replied calmly, ‘God hasn’t told me to do the killing.’”

[My comments]

Honest people realize the implications of their own convictions. The logic of one’s convictions ought to be carefully considered because in the real world, the logical conclusions of those convictions, when pursued, may lead to a point of tragic absurdity and inconsistency with the original sources of those convictions.

Murder (killing an abortion doctor) as a consequence of convictions based on the teachings of the Son of God as expressed in the Bible then stands out as an extremely powerful justification for repudiating questionable convictions.

If one’s literal belief in an inerrant Bible leads to convictions that allow one to commit murder which is contrary to “Judge not that thou be not judged,” a logical absurdity is established:

At the Second Coming, are we to assume that the Son of God, who refused to stone the woman caught in adultery, would vindicate a man who murdered an abortion doctor? "Well done thou good and faithful servant?"

As I indicated earlier, I have only included excerpts from the first twelve pages of Yurica's writing.

Before closing, I’ll list the subtitles from which Yurica writes in the rest of her article:

The Neo-Conservative Connection with Dominionists and Machiavelli

Leo Strauss the Father of Neo-Conservatism

Strauss’s Student, Harry Jaffa on the 700 Club with Pat Robertson

How Dominionism Stealthily Swept Over America

The Dominionist Plan: Today Control the USA, Tomorrow the World

What “Dominion” Means

Who Rules? And Who Are to Be the Ruled?

Who Lives and Who Dies?

How Justice Scalia Would Expand the Death Penalty

Dominionism’s Theocratic Views

The Immorality of the Medicare and Medicaid Programs

How to Destroy the Social Security Program

Wealth is a Sign of God’s Favor, Poverty is a Sign of God’s Disfavor

Who Is on the Side of Freedom? Let Him Speak Now!

Notes to The Despoiling of America

[My comments: The notes are thorough, highly authoritative, will total around ten pages in a Word document and contain more than just source citations. They are not limited to unknown or extremist sources.

Mel Gibson, in one of his televised interviews concerning his new film, talked about his portrayal of graphic violence, the reality of Jesus' suffering and the involvment of the Jews in Jesus' death as things that are now out in the open and on the table - things that should be discussed openly.

Katherine Yurica has attempted the same thing with religious issues and activities in the here and now and much closer to home. Her URL:

Related Links:

Frederick Clarkson-Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence

Justice Antonin Scalia-God's Justice and Ours

The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party - a public information project from

"There will be Satanic forces... We are not... up just against human beings, to beat them in elections. We're going to be coming up against spiritual warfare." - Pat Robertson, Road to Victory, 1991 War on Secular Society


Moses' Law for Modern Government: The Intellectual and Sociological Origins of the Christian Reconstructionist Movement

The American Christian is a journal based in Bay Center, Washington. 
Copyright 2005-2009 The SwanDeer Project
Send all e-mail to aruger at gmail dot com