Following recent Christian discussions on historiography, it was inevitable that criticism directed at Historicism would eventually be put on the table. In this case the reference is to the argument for inevitable historical processes that govern human development and progress. Following in the footsteps of thinkers like Hegel, the philosopher studies these processes and by understanding them, a right view of history can be developed and with it a coherent political theory and strategy.
Marxism is the most famous example of this and because of the
Cold War (and more specifically the narratives surrounding its end), it is
quickly discounted – though in most cases the actual history is never interacted
with. This is not to defend Marx (who was actually critical of historicism),
but at the same time the regimes associated with it in many respects had little
to do with Marxism and represented serious deviations from Marxist thought.
Marx and Engels were of course wrong but I'm not willing to concede to the
arguments of Western Capitalists who want to take a victory lap as they impose
a false metanarrative on twentieth century history. And though the Cold War is
viewed as accomplished, the truth is that just thirty years later, the
'victory' of liberal democracy declared by the likes of Fukuyama is in question
and some form of triangulation or even Hegelian synthesis seems to be on the
table.
Marx was a lost person and as such his thought represents
foolishness. That said, his critiques of existing systems possessed and still
do possess a certain value. And everything I just said about Marx could equally
be applied to the likes of Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, or a myriad of other
political and economic thinkers.
There are other forms of historicism that are just as problematic.
Though it's gone out of style, the old Whig approach to historiography was
based on a kind of historicism that viewed man's history as form of progress.
This erroneous view was easily wed to a postmillennial ethos and the end result
was a kind of hubris-ridden if not smug approach to interpretation – that
frankly imploded in 1914.
And yet, remnants of it survive in both the secular and
religious realms of historical interpretation. Today's thinkers and leaders
still speak in historicist terms of being on the 'right side' of history – a
question begging appeal to notions of inevitable progress and the destiny of a
liberalised society.
Though it has rightly been discredited, the Fukuyama
statement in the 1990's about the 'end of history' represented a form of
historicism. He believed that in the context of ideas, liberal democracy had
triumphed and was the final expression of human political development – or
something close to it. Usually conservatives associate such Hegelian
historicism with Leftist proclivities but it's not always so as Fukuyama is a
Right-wing academic associated with Neo-Conservatism and American Imperialism.
Christian thinkers have been concerned that historicism can
provide a metanarrative that justifies all sorts of evil in the name of the
ideology and its inevitable progression. This is true, but it's not just
communists who fall into these traps. Whig historians were able to justify the
evils of empire as 'progress' and the political scientists of the Cold and
Post-Cold War epochs have used their models to justify America's attempt at
seizing unipolarity – a project that has resulted in destroyed societies and
millions of deaths over the past seventy-five years.
More could be said about the Christian-America metanarratives
that have dominated Evangelical circles for decades. The models continue to
permutate and at present have been widened to a more general and inclusive
narrative about the Christian West. In addition to being prima facie and theologically erroneous, such historiographical
approaches are often guilty of justifying crimes, whitewashing evils – and in
some cases sanctifying them.
Postmillennialism which is a form of Judaized eschatology,
that subordinates the New Testament to the Old has often been a fellow traveler
alongside some of these ideologies and as such is also guilty of their crimes.
Erroneous on multiple fronts in terms of hermeneutics and the like, the most
poignant area of departure one might say has been in the realm of ethics as
this system easily succumbs to both worldliness and to power-oriented partnerships
with bestial powers.
Given the nature of its error and viewed from a spiritual
perspective, one might say that postmillennialism is just as grievous and in
fact even more dangerous than something like Marxism. Christians aren't fooled
by Marxism but they are by postmillennialism (and the Dominionist ethos that
fuels it) and it leads them into ethical collapse – in many cases doing evil
that good may come and pursuing wickedness thinking they do God service. In
their case, the inescapable progress of the Kingdom has more than once been
used as a justification for slaughter. Once again, this specific eschatology
has long been present and (though unelaborated) has always been the functional
system at work within the context of Christendom and as such must be viewed in
the context of evils such as the Crusades and the like.
The Scriptures of course teach something very different.
While we can know that God is in control of events we have little hope of
discerning the specifics of His plan as it plays out in history. It is as many
have put it all but inscrutable. We know that history moves toward the eschaton
and though it's foolish in the eyes of the world, we proclaim the central point
of history occurred two thousand years ago. Our period is not one of progress
but of delayed wrath, an evil age – the Last Days.
The last days of what? The last days of this age, the last
epoch before the Day of the Lord and the destruction of this order. That's
hardly progress is it?
Does this result in pessimism? By no means. Our outlook is
thoroughly optimistic because it is transcendent and we are but pilgrims living
in this time of futility and groaning, and yet even in the midst of this vale
of tears the Kingdom grows and advances, but as it is heavenly its progress is
not discernible to the lost word. The gospels actually make this pretty clear.
People will not say 'lo here, or lo there', it is an invisible Kingdom within
you that is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit – and the
unregenerate are unable to see it.
This cursed world subjected to death is nearing its end and
it must die that the age of eternal life and holiness may be ushered in.
This temporality does not mean that this world is illusory as
some might suggest. It's very real but temporal – meaning that it will not
last. If real is defined in its absolute sense as that which endures the
eschaton – then no, this age is passing away. The New Heavens and New Earth
wherein is the Tree of Life will be eternal – and in one sense they already are.
Some are concerned that such views would mean there's little
impetus to pursue social progress, science, and the like. That's not true
either but certainly the expectations associated with such endeavours are
tempered. This world cannot be fixed but we pray for the peace of the city –
even if it is Babylon, and we can love our neighbours by helping them. This is
not to give a blank check to all attempts at social and scientific engineering.
Indeed every technological advancement seems to create a new set of problems.
Every good invention seems to create new conditions that often directly or
indirectly lead to new evils.
Just by way of example, I stick out because I have a sizable
yard that I mow with a push mower. People at times will stop their cars and
feel compelled to say something stupid to me such as 'Boy, you should get a
riding mower'. And yet since I don't have a riding mower I often reflect on
those who do. The riding mower is a great piece of technology that took a
difficult labour and sought to make it easier. And yet what has been the
result? Because the machine does all the work (as opposed to some of it) there
is the temptation to cut more and more – rather than leave some areas wild as I
do, which I rather enjoy them being that way. Consumerism has also led to even
more fussing and the purchasing of supplementary trailers, drum rollers,
spreaders, and the like. This isn't necessarily the fault of the technology,
but even the tech must interact with human nature and its cultural context.
It's also interesting to note how many people are simply too fat to push a lawn
mower. Yes, I work up an impressive sweat at times and it can be a workout but
I actually enjoy that aspect of it. The technology of a riding mower has made
the task easier – but is it for the overall good? I realize there are some
situations in which the size of the area is beyond what is reasonable for a
push mower but I see many people with yards much smaller than mine that have
riding mowers. I see some that are so small it becomes silly and because they
can't maneuver they have to make multiple passes and it actually takes them
longer than if they had simply walked behind a push mower. And of course they
also use more fuel. And finally, as I cannot afford such a mower I would be
forced to finance it and a lawn mower payment would be highly detrimental to my
already stretched and traumatised household budget.
This is just a silly example regarding mowers but we could
have similar and more wide ranging discussions about technological
'advancements' far more impactful and profound that society has sought to
develop. Not every 'advancement' is in fact an advancement.
Job teaches us that God's plan cannot be known and attempts
at interpreting causality in the realm of history are doomed to fail. God has a
plan and we must trust Him. It's an act of faith.
We know that judgment is due as both Job's life and the Tower
of Siloam episode demonstrates. And whether that judgment comes in the form of
natural disaster, accident, tragedy, injury or even political violence (Pilate
mingling blood, or Assyrian conquest) – such suffering and judgment are in fact
deserved as we all stand under a sentence of death. These are precursors of the
Day of the Lord and the fact that such judgment is delayed and that the sun
shines on us, we are bodily healthy, and there is rain for our crops and the
like is a testimony to God's grace – and yet that common grace (as it were)
only heaps up judgment on the stiff-necked unbelievers who continue to reject
Christ.
The fact that the Tower of Siloam hasn't fallen on us today
or that we haven't been slaughtered by Caesar and his agents is a testimony to
God's grace. Be thankful as he may decide to withhold it tomorrow. That's not a
lack of justice on his part but simply the suspension of his grace and it's
entirely His prerogative.
Post-Resurrection history isn't a tale of good guys and bad
guys but the largely unwritten and indiscernible tale of the Church militant
(an eschatological embassy or colony of Zion) surviving in a world of Beasts
and Counterfeit Christianity. It's a remnant tale of suffering that will not be
fully known until it is told or revealed in glory. The political actors are all
bad guys as they are all 'the world' – given over to the lust of the flesh, the
lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. And apart from Christ, these cultures,
nations, and their rulers are given over to idolatry and one of the primary
idols which 'makes the world go round' as they say is mammon. And history is largely
a tale of those who serve it. It is no accident or coincidence that Christ
directly contrasted service to God and service to mammon. We as Christians
stand in a place of permanent antithesis to this age.
In heaven the real history will be revealed about those who
didn't succumb to the world and those who refused to listen to Satan's offers
(made to Christ in the wilderness). The False Church (our primary antagonist)
took this offer and this too must be understood if one hopes to grasp the warp
and woof of the historical tale. There is a metanarrative to be sure, though we
can only see it in the broad strokes. There is a kind of historicism – a series
of inevitable processes and yet these are the result of sin and the fall,
hardly a cause for hope or a system upon which to build. The justification of
these cycles or their codification is not wisdom but foolishness. Our
understanding of history must be both cynical and transcendent – the two
realities in a dynamic interaction. Cynicism drives us toward transcendent
hopes and expectations and it is this transcendence that causes us to view the
course of this age through a rather cynical and dubious eye. But this does not
mean that our lives and dispositions are characterized by cynicism as we have
an eternal hope – but not one placed in this age.
We can reflect on these events and raise ideological and
ethical considerations, but this will always put us at odds with established
schools of thought. If anything we as Christians have the ability to
contextualise history in ways the lost world does not and yet all too often the
Christian attempts at interpreting history have fallen prey to the errors represented
by the likes of David Barton, Bill Federer, and Peter Marshall or are instead
flat and unreflective and thus absent the wisdom that can be gleaned.
Historical interpretation is complicated and a surprising
number of people fail to understand this even if they pay the notion some lip
service. History fascinates and the more one knows, the more one can feel
comfortable discussing the subject or area at hand but at the same time one
senses his inadequacies and just how complicated it all is – and therefore how
little one person is really able to grasp. Factor in the vast unknowns within
the spiritual realm which are also at work, the transcendent nature of God's
vantage point and plan and we're left with a limited ability to predicate. The
absolutist nature of some metanarratives rightly evoke laughter and dismissal
but have a care, these are the narrative packages that all too often resonate
with the public and can quickly sweep them away and pull them into social and
political action – sometimes dangerous and evil. Needless to say, we are
witnessing this right now. Both political camps in the American context are
caught up in historicist narratives but the Right is proving to be far more
dangerous and since many of its narratives are tied up with Christianity – we
had best take notice and reflect on these questions.