Despite many problems with the essay, from factual mistakes
to the worldly wisdom on full unabashed display, it remains a compelling read.
She reveals things about the larger Dominionist sphere and
some of its popular actors that are noteworthy and invite consideration. But
it's a sad and frustrating read. She's a person who does not understand, has
lost her way and has in many respects been let down and misled by those she
trusted, those who should have been guiding her. Maybe it resonates with me
because I can think of some twenty-somethings I know who have had similar
experiences and yet haven't reflected on them to the same degree nor have they
been able to articulate them in the way Ettinger has.
I have seen firsthand the often destructive results of both
the Burkett-Ramsey approach to finances as well as Quiverfull. On the surface I
would certainly support anyone who wanted or was determined to avoid debt and
while I would certainly agree with those who express doubt with regard to the
ethics of contraception as well as the ideology which all too often is assumed
in its use, at the same time my motives and theological underpinnings are
nevertheless different if not in opposition to Dominionism and its quest for
worldly power and influence.
The college debate represents a level of schizophrenia that
is common in those circles. Raise your daughters to be anti-feminist but then
(in keeping with Middle Class expectation) send them off to university and push
them in directions that will make them want to pursue a career. To be honest I
think many Reformed and Evangelical-type fathers are actually pleased enough
for their daughters to pursue careers. It's respectable and given that so much
moral weight is placed on the status of one's finances, it's deemed a
justifiable end.
There are other issues in Ettinger's tale, the tension with
her father, the schizophrenia surrounding Quiverfull and dating culture and the
worldly wisdom of rating a person's worth by their credit score, a degenerate
concept I run into quite often. In the young man's case, he sought to do the
'middle class' thing only to have it come back and bite him. He's not alone.
Of course from there the story further degenerates. I could
say a great deal about 'illegal' rentals and the in's and out's and ethics of
building codes and housing situations. I'm afraid I don't have a great deal of
sympathy for Ettinger other than she had been taught to expect a certain kind
and level of lifestyle and was frustrated when she couldn't make it work. For
my part as a social dissident, I embrace low-level living, poverty and
dystopian style housing... but my ethics are rooted in my hostility to Middle
Class ethics and values. Ettinger clearly was confused and yet that confusion
seems rooted in a mixed message she received from her parents.
It reminds me of certain Theonomic-leaning groups that do
much to promote debt free living and in some cases promote a type of
neo-agrarianism. They believe the pre-industrial life is best and most
conducive to family life and values. I might agree with them but I would also
argue that it's not possible to turn back the clock and while some can 'play'
at farmer and a kind of faux-anachronistic living, the truth is these are all
too often wealthy people that unlike farmers of old, can afford to fail. I read
the speaker bio's for the various Dominion-Family-Agrarian-Libertarian
Economics conferences and what I usually see is someone that has made it in
other fields, investment, real estate, insurance, some kind of tech consulting
or the like, and it is the funds from these (sometimes ethically dubious) endeavours,
or their continued pursuit alongside farming that's making ends meet. And yet
they deceived their audiences into thinking they should sell-out, move to the
country, buy a plot of land and have at it. The results have at times proven to
be disastrous resulting in financial collapse and in some cases the destruction
and dismantling of the family.
While there is often a neo-Confederate taint to some of these
narratives, I'm sorry but I have never seen the kind of anti-Semitism Ettinger
points to. She's seeing something that I believe isn't there. At best there are
those who embrace theories about globalism and banking which sometimes
(seemingly or actually) take on an anti-Semitic hue simply due to the fact that
so many of the powerful bankers have been or are connected to Jewish families.
While some on the far-right and maybe some Kinist heretics weave this into a
racially driven anti-Semitic narrative, for most people I've known and
encountered (which is no paltry number) it's not something I really detect.
There might be some old Country Club anti-Semitism around as exhibited in
figures like Richard Nixon, but even that (I think) is largely a thing of the
past. While I'm well aware of the anti-Semitic
communist theme that runs strong in some Right-wing circles, sometimes
laughably combined with banking... in all honesty I've never heard it within
Evangelical and Reformed circles. Maybe Ettinger's family was plugged in with
some Theonomist-Kinist types which is the only place I can think of that you
might find it. Rushdoony who is still widely promoted in those circles
certainly had some anti-Semitic thoughts and is well known as something of a holocaust
denier or at least someone who downplays its reality. But given her later
reference to Passover Seders and Altar-Calls, I don't think so. I'm afraid
while some of her assessments of Christian Reconstruction are accurate, her statements
are riddled with error and confusion and it destroys her credibility. The
movement is certainly worthy of harsh criticism but if Ettinger hopes to reach
anyone still in the movement (apart from other disgruntled youth), she'll have
to do better.
Replacement Theology as it is sometimes called, the idea that
the Church (as the New Israel) has inherited the promises made in the Old
Covenant and thus the Jews and their typological land-kingdom are no longer
'special' or part of God's plan is not anti-Semitic. Nowhere is there a call to
turn against the Jews and in fact many old school pre-Reconstructionist
postmillennialists were very favourable to the Jews, believing that there was
at some point to be a great revival or conversion of Jews to the Christian
faith. Many are favourable toward Zionist Israel on simple Right-wing American
foreign policy grounds, often combined with a virulent anti-Islamic ideology.
Historically speaking the hostility to Jews is rooted in
Sacralist theology and the various manifestations of Constantinianism.
Christian Reconstruction is dripping with this ideology and yet even still I
have found very little of the overt anti-Semitism Ettinger refers to.
I can understand Ettinger's frustration. Her life fell apart
and even while she had fallen away from the faith and was living in sin there
was a certain moral outrage (even if poorly expressed) at the likes of Ramsey.
Truly, Ramsey is an immoral figure, a person who knows nothing about Biblical
ethics and the New Testament's teaching regarding money. It's a travesty that
he's grown filthy rich packing his worldly financial philosophy in Christian
garb and it's also a sign of severe judgment on the Church that his materials
would be purchased and used by churches to educate their congregations. A
promoter of usury, avarice, worldly thinking and moral compromise, Ramsey
stands condemned. He has ridden the frankly disgusting celebrity wave that
began to overtake Evangelical circles in the 1990's, a wave that made many of
the most popular 'teachers' fabulously wealthy. A Mammon-servant, his manner is
in keeping with the new ethos that arose out of that era. While I was never a
fan of Larry Burkett, he seems like a breath of fresh air compared to someone
like Ramsey who I find hard to even stomach listening to. But he's not alone as
the radio and podcast world has been taken over by a series of Glenn Beck
imitators and those who would emulate the crass and juvenile style of talk
radio. As a lost person back in the early 1990's I used to enjoy the antics of
Rush Limbaugh and his name-calling and parody. And yet it was meant to be taken
seriously. Later when I became a Christian I was embarrassed by this and
startled to find other Christians didn't seem to have a problem with it. Some
did, but their numbers have dwindled over the past 25 years. Today it has
become the norm, the effective style to communicate.
Ettinger is right to find him repulsive and yet sadly at the
time of her encounter she wasn't in a place to understand why.
I am not alone in noticing over the years as I listen to
Howard Dayton, Ramsey or other Christian financial advisors that they are
geared toward mostly wealthy middle class people who in many cases have simply
over-extended themselves or bought too many toys. You commonly hear stories of
people paying off $50,000 in debt in a year or so, an absolute impossibility
for the average person. There's never any discussion about the morality of
one's employment, the viability of wives working and things of that nature.
It's all geared toward the average worldly Evangelical and while they promote a
robust capitalism they have chosen to ignore the system they so love is
dependent on people being at the bottom, people being exploited so that those
on the top can live the dream.