Theocracy in Today's World: Some Considerations Regarding Marxism, Islam, and Zionism JOH N W. BEAR DSLEE III The origin of the word "theocracy" is to be sought, it is sa id , in the effort to explain Hebrew life to the Roma ns. If the wo rd is ta ken in a strict se nse, mea ning a structure in which a ll li fe a nd re lati onships within the community are governed by the will of God as d irectl y revealed , this o ri gin of the term is most a pp ro priate, for the regulation a nd inte­ grati on of the communi ty in such fas hi on, so that not only is there no d istincti on between sacred a nd secula r but the source of law a nd custom is a god known as full y sovereign a nd distinct from nature, is a distincti ve product of the Hebrew experience. Ma ny cultures, indeed most cultures until quite recently, are characteri zed by, from our point of view, the a bse nce of distinct se paration of the sacred a nd the secula r. " Reli­ gion" a nd "technology" are not disting ui shed- the hunting ceremony is as much a part of practical life as the hunting skill- a nd the socia l ord er is supported by sa ncti ons, includ­ ing "ta boos" based on relationships to the "spiritual" or "spirit" world (as we ca ll it). But "theocracy" implies a concept or experi ence of the spirit world in which the divine is reall y capa ble of ruling, or of dema nding a utho ri ty. The Hebrew experience included such a god; that of other Mediterranean nati ons did not. "Theocracy," moreover, becomes relevant eve n to the fo ll ower of a sovereign God, in proportion to the num ber of choices actua ll y open to a person. If, fo r example, onl y one fi ber is availa ble for weaving, the weaver has no pro blem in choosing hi s raw materi a l. If several are ava ila ble, he faces choices of a "practical" a nd "technological" nature which may be "religious" as well. " You sha ll not wear a mingled stuff; wool and linen together" (De uteronomy 22: 11) indicates the possibility of a conflict between "tec hnology" and "religion" where, of several technological possibilities, each having its own adva ntages, "reli gion" permits onl y one. For the community to adhere to the re ligious choice- to let the divine voice decid e directly a mong feasible technologica l alternati ves, a nd re quire this choice fro m its members- is to fo ll ow the way of theocracy. In history, tensions have emerged in the socia l a nd political spheres as we ll as in the technological. Israel perfo rce submitted to fore ign rule, a nd thus to a se parati on of "civi l" a nd "religio us" a uthority. But J esus gave the reli gious critique of theocracy perma nent sta nding with his much-discussed saying " Rend er to Caesar the things that are Caesar's" (Matthew 22:2 1). However the words are interpreted , however Caesar's right to determine hi s privileges may be seen as limited , the Lord's words, a nd the subsequent behavior of hi s foll owers, imply a break from the unq ua lified theocracy of the Hebrew scriptures, in the form of a relative independence of a secondary a uthority. From two or more relati ve ly independ ent interpre ters of a uthority to two or mo re kinds of a uthority is a step perhaps not necessary in logic, but common en·ough in history. The way was prepa red , long before 89 the advent of Christianity, by the separation of sacred function among the successors of Moses- prophets, priests, judges, and kings. Tensions between prophets and the Lord's anointed prefigure the coming of secularism, which, as conservatives noted in post­ Reformation Christendom, develops along with re ligious plu ralism. The contrast between a real pluralistic society, and an ancient tribe in which life is unified and pervaded by religion, let alone a genuinely theocratic society, is obvious enough, and the tensions that result from fragmentation have often been discussed. Since, in modern times, "science" and "philosophy" have often been used to question and to deny all theistic claims, and since many of the most violent struggles have had a religious basis, it has seemed, both in terms of truth and of expediency, that the elimination of religion might be the great step to the overcoming of the divisions themselves. Such a mood, although weakened by the results of the French, Russian, and Chinese revolutions, with their demonstration that the rejection of religion does not result in unity and justice, remains a powerful factor in Western society, and the contribution of religion to conflict and injustice is a theme well known among writers from Voltaire to some contemporary composers of letters to the editor. It is a mood which helps understand the attraction of Marxism, which may be understood as a "secularized theocracy." It has often enough been compared to a religion; it is significant that among the known forms of religion it most closely resembles the true theocracy. Political and social analysts will continue to point out that no "socialist" or "commu­ nist" state has yet established a true Marxist society. This is no more relevant to the present discussion than the fact that no social embodiment of true Christianity has ever appeared in history. We have Marxist theory, elaborated and modified by a succession of thinkers as Christian theology has been elaborated and modified in its history, and we have socia l-politica l structures that have been motivated and shaped in varying degrees by that theory. Taken together they comprise Marxism as an historical and social pheno­ menon, an unmistakable product of Western European "Christian" society, not the only possible lin e of development for that society, but an impressive one. The appeal of Marx­ ism to Christians, both as a theory that has been adopted by liberation theologians, free­ dom fighters, and respected contemporary teachers in American theological seminaries, and as a practice that has been admired by Christian visitors to Cuba, China, and other "socialist" lands, is one striking part of the wider appeal that Marxism enjoys in the contemporary world. Weaknesses in the Marxist structure and in Marxist claims are easily found by those who seek them, but there is every reason to suppose that its attractiveness, including its attractiveness to Christians, will continue to be a major factor in o ur lives. Three factors, in particular, seem worthy of examination as partial explanations of the fact- the alleged scientific nature of Marxism, its offer of justice on earth, and its hopeful vision of the future. The prominence and prestige of science are matters that need not be argued. Modern science and its offshoots in technology had their birth at the hands of Christians, and remade the Christian world in ways that were the fulfillment of many dreams and that made the Western-Christian world the envy of Asia and Africa. Scientific education, and 90 modern medicine and modernized agriculture were enthusiasti ca lly exported as part of the Christia n mission, and were enthusia stica ll y received by those to whom the mission was addressed. The "scientific" became the "good." The scientific accompaniments of Christ ian mi ssion proved more acceptable than its reli gious motivation, and the great nations of Asia soon learned that they could absorb the much-wanted Western science apart from Western religion. At the same time, efforts in the West to develop a scientific defense of Christianity demonstrate where the real faith of the West has come to lie . The culture that called for a scientifically verified faith could be expected to look for a scientifically verified social order. The "scientific" quality of Marxism is of course in part a play on words, and the kind of thinking on which the scientific study of society rested in Marx's day has become obsolete, but the popular attraction of the claim "scientific" and the absence of a ny appeal to the supernatural claims of which our age has become tired, combined with the logical coherence of much of the system, its obvious root in "reality," and the understanding of today's problems that yields a practical basis for action- all of these combine to assure Marxism of a continued hearing. It is easier to rail against it than to provide an alterna­ tive coherent analysis of social conflict. With regard to justice, no one doubts that the modern world has begun to cry aloud for it, and that the Marxist social passion corresponds to the deep aspirations of suffering people who intend to suffer no longer. What Edwin Markham once called "the long, long patience of the plundered poor" has run out. The plundered poor are no longer patient. This sign of the times accompanies, and indeed has stimulated, what seems to be a more sensitized conscience on the part of privileged Christians. Certainly Christianity, even when embedded in the oppressive structures, has done much to awaken a demand for justice. Post-Christian secularism, from Voltaire on, has been a powerful carrier of Chris­ tian va lues, and a world that has been turning away from Christ's church clings, some­ times ever more tightly, to social-ethical demands that often originated within the church.