Last year, journalist Marci McDonald published her book, The Armageddon Factor. She has recently made presentations promoting the book’s controversial portrayal of conservative evangelicals. The following are two contrasting views of the author’s thesis.
Be afraid… be very afraid… of evangelical Christians!
By Steve Wetherbe
Canada is in dire danger of following the United States down the path toward a demagoguery led by right wing Christians. At least, that’s what journalist and author Marci McDonald told a receptive audience at the University of Victoria last month.
McDonald’s talk, sponsored by the university’s Centre for the Study of Religion and Society, was a précis of her controversial book, The Armageddon Factor. Subtitled ‘the Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada,’ it’s an expose of the growing influence of conservative Christian groups over the Conservative government of Stephen Harper.
She told a group of around 80 grey-haired academics that, though she herself is a Christian, she is not the “right kind” of Christian to the many evangelical Christian leaders she interviewed for the book.
“I was baptized Anglican — horrors! — and raised United Church — double horrors.” And she was, moreover, on the wrong side of such issues as same-sex marriage, abortion and embryonic stem cell research.
And while she presented herself as the very model of tolerance, she claimed that the conservative Christians she describes in her book are anything but. Once her book came out, she was constantly accused of being “an anti-Christian bigot” — to the extent she wants to pass on the torch of crusading journalist (at least on this story) to others.
McDonald also presented herself as a Cassandra-like figure who had warned her fellow Ottawa journalists of a Christian-right takeover, only to be laughed at by those who said “It can’t happen here.”
As proof of this takeover, McDonald breathlessly listed many new conservative Christian organizations that have set up offices in Ottawa since the Conservatives took office (alongside, she didn’t mention, dozens of other lobby groups of every hue and description, with the same goal: to influence public policy).
But it gets worse, she contended. The Conservative government has given these conservative Christian groups, which threw their support behind Harper in the last two elections, unprecedented access to federal politicians and cabinet ministers.
Students from Trinity Western University, she revealed, are given internships with MPs, training them to bring their presumably right-wing values to the political arena as MPs and political activists when they graduate. She didn’t mention that internships with MPs of all stripes are common as dirt.
Other evangelical Christians have paying jobs with the federal government (triple horrors!) — and some are actually in the Conservative cabinet.
McDonald didn’t rest her case there. She tapped into that reliable font of Canadian outrage: anti-Americanism. As she described it, Canadians are taking their marching orders from the American ‘Christian nationalists’ exemplified by the George W. Bush White House — who have taken over the Republican Party, and brought the world close to war with their pro-Israel policies.
Christian nationalists, McDonald told her audience, want Canada and the U.S. to be placed under Christian rulers and Christian law — turning the continent into a kind of Iraq, with Jesus in charge. But she admitted that “only a tiny fraction” of the groups and organizations she listed belonged to this extreme group.
In the meantime, the only evidence she could find that they were making headway in Canada was the Conservative government’s strong pro- Israel stand, and its refusal to include abortion services in its maternal and child health foreign aid plan.
To make her scenario more alarming, she had to look across the border to the Tea Party movement, which just helped send many more Republicans to Congress in the recent U.S. midterm elections.
There, she warned, “public debate has taken a toxic turn. The threat of demagoguery lurks just beneath the surface.”
In fact, few neutral U.S. observers see much religious content in the Tea Party movement at all — and leaders of the Christian right see it as a rival for influence in the Republican party.
Steve Weatherbe is a freelance journalist based in Victoria.
Armageddon Factor was misunderstood and caricatured
By Ron Dart
The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada has had many a booster and knocker. CC.com’s report on the furor, ‘Much ado about Armageddon in the news,’ tended to doff the cap to the knockers and marginalize the boosters.
Many evangelicals have suggested that author Marci McDonald was rather thin in her understanding of the more complex and nuanced Canadian evangelical tradition in her tome. This is a fair criticism, if McDonald was doing an analysis of the Canadian evangelical way. But was this the purpose of The Armageddon Factor?
I arranged for McDonald to give a public lecture on the book at University of the Fraser Valley in Abbotsford November 1, and I asked John Redekop (well known within the Canadian evangelical family) to respond to McDonald.
The lecture hall was packed to hear the author. Needless to say, a lecture of 40 minutes was but a stone skimming the surface of the water of the 420 page book. Redekop did enthusiastically urge one and all, though, to purchase the book and read it in a thoughtful, informed and critical manner.
Sadly, there has been much misunderstanding and caricaturing of The Armageddon Factor by those who both differ with McDonald’s conclusions and the way she reached such conclusions. There is much room for legitimate and healthy dialogue about these issues, but there can be no doubt that McDonald has canvassed significant aspects of the more political wing of the Canadian evangelical tradition and connected many important dots.
It is essential to be clear what McDonald is doing, and not doing, in The Armageddon Factor. She is not, and this must be stated in the very clearest terms, writing a book on the distinctive Canadian evangelical tribe. She is, and this must be carefully noted, describing a form of the right-of-centre evangelical clan in Canada — and she does make distinctions within the centre and right of centre. Let me quote from her guiding thesis:
“In the book, I have chosen to focus on those political activists whose goal is to attain the same political power that their counterparts have enjoyed in the United States. But while chronicling the forces shaping Canada’s religious right, I have highlighted one faction I refer to as ‘Christian nationalists’ — a militant charismatic fringe with ties to Harper’s Conservatives, that has gained influence out of all proportion to its numerical heft.”
So, let it be clear that McDonald is tracking and tracing, for the most part, a right of centre ‘faction’ of Christian nationalism; she touches on others in the book that are right of centre, but only to make broader connections. Many an organization, lobby group and publication (and the networks that bind them) are brought together in describing this ‘faction’ and ‘fringe’ — and, more importantly for a political journalist, their influence on Harper’s Conservatives.
The title of the book is appropriate for the simple reason that many within the conservative evangelical heritage (not all, of course) have both apocalyptic end times leanings and Zionist tendencies.
The more worrisome aspect of this is that there are MPs within Harper’s Conservative Party who share this worldview. The implications for the Palestinians (many of whom are Christian) are obvious and tragic. The Armageddon Factor delves into this dilemma.
I still recommend The Armageddon Factor as an A++ keeper, if the reader understands McDonald’s thesis properly. She should not be blamed for what she is not doing; but she should be applauded for what she has done, and done well. Those who think the author has erred seriously in her thesis should write a finer book, and then see how their own published ship sails across the waters of criticism.
Ron Dart is a professor at the University of the Fraser Valley in Abbotsford.
Having just finished Marci´s book, I am relieved and grateful that she gave such a thorough who´s who of the Christian right in Canada. The currents she described have been building for years; it is simply that many are finally being exposed to the public now that evangelicals have their own PM and many MPs. For example, Christian Zionism, creationism/intelligent design, Christian schools and homeschooling, etc. Some questions: With all that power, what are evangelicals going to do with it? How are they going to treat people of other faiths and persuasions? Are they aiming at a system that favours Christians or a level playing field for everyone? How many Afghanis, Palestinians, First Nations, Canadian cheap labour and Canadian poor have suffered and even died due to policies from this government and its ruling party of the Conservatives (really the Reformed party who recently bought the rights to the old Tory label) ? What ever happened to loving your neighbour? Are we only loving our rich and powerful neighbours, and throwing table scraps to everyone else? I could go on. Recent news articles cite studies that show Canada may be among the top richest countries of the world in the next 20 years. Our influence is sure to grow. Do we want to be known as a cheap imitation of the US and its Christian Right, or do be famous as a compassionate nation unafraid to be just toward all, within and without the country?
I read the book and agree with some of Darts assessment. She does track a very small wedge but paints the brush much too large. She conflates regular evangelicals with the right wing fringe, and when she runs out of evidence jumps over into the American scene and then assumes guilt by association.
She seems completely unable to step out of her liberal Toronto mindset and even try to see things through the eyes of those she criticizes. She seems to assume that a true pluralism=liberal Canadian mindset with all its prejudices.
I felt like although she tried, she went looking for dirt that fed her primal fears of George Bush and Stephen Harper and guess what? She found it!
Although she did say a lot of things that were correct, I have to conclude I would place it with other conspiracy works I have read, except this one contains more truth than most I have seen. The real problem is not her research but herself, she let her fears and prejudices shape her conclusions and so fits in with all the other verificationists out there.
One doesn’t have to jump over to the American scene for answers to the agenda of the religious right. Here in Canada they deny any influence or financial help from our American cousins. (I’ve lived in the US (San Diego), & am well aware that beliefs do not recognize borders.) Also, people have invoked the freedom of information Act in the US, & they get plenty of cash from down south.
An example of the veracity of the book in question, based on personal experience: First of all, the rights to, as defined so well in the US Declaration of Independence ; life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness, are not liberal ideals, but human ideals to which all people aspire. More importantly, as a man of science & no doubt a lot older than most in my situation; medically; I can testify to the disdain of the religious right for the 3 above named …rights.Don’t take my word for it, – it’s thoroughly documented. I was still living stateside during the early years of the AIDS epidemic. I returned to Canada (Vancouver), in 1984. The religious right, largely under the umbrella of the badly named ‘Moral Majority’; successfully delayed the use of any public funds for HIV research. After all, one should never interfere with god’s punishment, right? Effective treatment options came too late for thousands. I buried 58 close friends. They may have succumbed in any event, but they were assured of death by the faith based. Prejudices do not enter the picture. Read the rhetoric of the religious right online. I’ve printed binders full of comments & articles authored by those “she criticizes”. Everything from the House of Commons, to our judiciary; especially the Supreme Court, & anyone daring to show respect for entire segments of humanity with whom they have issues; are targeted. Thus far, only verbally, but that could change in a heartbeat.Religion gone astray lead to 9/11, & the Oklahoma City bombing. So, what am I saying? Abolish religion? Of course not. But be aware of the undue influence of religious extremists with smiles; in that far away land called Ottawa.
I’ve read the book & there’s no doubt that she’s right on. Having lived in the US, I’m an expert in nothing, but saw first hand how vitriolic & extensive the religious right is, in every area of the country. It is more prevalent south of the Mason-Dixon line, but educational standards are such that in Oklahoma last year, only 35% of high school students could name the nation’s first elected president.Believe me, no one is immune from attack.If you’re off by one verse in your beliefs, you’ve been tricked by the anti-Christ, & can never be a “TRUE” Christian, yadda, yadda.They have infiltrated education, politics, & society with inane concerns. But I think that worst of all, they pushed for & now have; theological representatives on Boards at the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, to monitor & re-word, data sent out to the medical community.(On the up side, maybe that was part of the incentive to establish our own center to study dangerous microorganisms in Winnipeg.)
I’ve read the book for myself, and I find it amusing that a lot of old-timer Christians have responded to it with rather knee-jerk reactions. Steve Weatherbe’s comment seems to fall into that category. I’m sorry but I’m not convinced you’ve actually read the whole thing. I’m also tempted to say that if some people are STILL talking about this book – get over it already. You make Christians out to be a bunch of wining, complaining, spoiled sports.
Steve Weatherbe, you make a broad, unsubstantiated claim that “few neutral U.S. observers see much religious content in the Tea Party movement at all” without letting us know who the ‘few’ are. I doubt these people – whoever they are and if they indeed exist – are ‘neutral’ but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. But I will remind you that the prominent tea partiers – Palin, Beck for example – are wildly theocratic in their approach. It would be helpful to your statements to back themselves up with substance as the victim of your attack piece has done in her book.