The stated purpose of this book is to demonstrate that the moral failures of American history (e.g. slavery, patriarchalism, mistreatment of Native Americans and others) were due not to Christianity, but to rebellion against it. This demonstation is necessary, in the author's view, since these moral failures are increasingly being cited by those who would like to question God's existence or at least marginalize Christianity.
While the author succeeds in making this point, he also mistakenly identifies capitalism (he applies modifiers; male, individualist, consumerist) as the primary enemy of Christianity. In demonizing capitalism in this way, he misses (or at least de-emphasizes) the following facts:
In short, Keillor allowed his anti-capitalist bias to cloud his otherwise insightful analysis. He lost sight of the fact that capitalism, like freedom generally, may be used for good or evil purposes, depending on the motives of those who possess it. Paraphrasing the NRA slogan; freedom doesn't cause evil, people cause evil.
In addition to his anti-capitalism, Keillor also displays a Luddite or anti-technology, anti-progress streak when he criticizes the desire of modern people to use technology (especially information technology) for "being in more places, knowing more facts and doing more things than any humans before," as prideful and even an attempt to be godlike. This attitude is reminiscent of the Amish contention that freezing technological development at a particular level of attainment is somehow conducive to staying close to God. I wonder if Keillor really believes we'd be better off without these modern enhancements of human abilities. If so, I don't think I'd care to live in his kind of society.
Keillor makes the standard leftist claim that capitalism erodes the values on which it relies (e.g. honesty, fairness, public morality). But lets look more closely at this claim. Any erosion of this type must come ultimately from the choices of individual participants in free markets, and may not fairly be blamed on "the system." In fact, in a truly free market, unfair dealing will quickly be punished by loss of customers to the competition. The only alternative to leaving people free to make their own (sometimes bad or wrong) decisions about their lives is for some other power (government, church, "community") to intervene to make them for them. Thus is the root of collectivism, and if it is backed by force, becomes oppression.
On the opening page, Keillor quotes scripture to illustrate his overall point, that God will work his will regardless of any human rebellion:
In the Preface, the author admits that this book represents a revisionist version of American history and asks only that it be judged for its explanatory power. He doesn't claim it as the only possible Christian interpretation. Noting the trend in recent times of evangelicals' retreat from the public world of 'facts' into the private world of 'values,' the author boldly claims that the statement 'Jesus Christ is Lord' belongs to the former and believes that taking a critical look at American culture and history will promote this goal. While secular scholars view evangelicalism as a provincial, local (but mistaken for universal, divinely revealed) viewpoint and expect it to wither in the face of a more cosmopolitan, global outlook, Keillor says a better way to see it is as a rival cosmopolitanism competing with secularism. He grants that many postmodern scholars have made good critiques of Western culture, but rejects their notion that Truth doesn't exist, only the will to power. The title derives from repeated references in Ezekiel to Israel as 'a rebellious house.' The author emphasizes that God will accomplish His plans regardless of what we Americans (or any humans) do (Ps. 33:10-11 is quoted on page 1), so pointing out our weaknesses doesn't dim God's victory at all. He even claims that 'human rebellion is a much stronger causative engine driving American history than is human repentance' (13).
Part I : America under European colonial rule
Chapter 1: 1492: The Seven Deadly Sins Tumble out of Europe
The Revisionists' Critique of Columbus, Europe and Christianity (15)
In recent times, Columbus has been recast from hero to villain. The most serious contention of this new criticism is that 'indigenous cultures were somehow superior to European culture in ways that discredit the exclusive truth claims of Christianity' (16). Christendom is seen as deficient 'in light of 1990s concerns about the environment, the status of women, human equality, peace and social justice' (16). Rather than 'snipe' (attack at their weakest points, e.g. their habit of romanticizing natives), Keillor prefers to directly confront their strongest arguments, claiming this will paradoxically show the truth of Christian claims. For example, let's admit that 'indigenous peoples were generally less violent, more generous, more egalitarian, less aggressive and more in tune with nature than Christian Europeans' (17). The point is that they were deluding themselves and not confronting the Truth (and naturally rebelling against it) as Europeans were. Assuming religion is merely a cultural artifact, secularists blame European culture (and its associated religion) for its members' moral failures. The truth is that European history (like OT Jewish history) represents an argument between God and his often rebellious people. They wanted the benefits of faith but often rebelled against its demands. 'Tragedies (e.g. conquest, slavery, war, exploitation, misery) caused by rebellion against Christianity and its God cannot logically be blamed on that faith or that God' (18). Keillor gives as examples of secular critics of Christianity Kirkpatrick Sale, David E. Stannard and James Kirby Martin.
Human-Centered Belief Systems Versus God-Centered Christianity (18)
As background for Europe and Columbus, Keillor summarizes here the diverse peoples and cultures of the pre-Columbian Americas. While these indigenous cultures had many differences, they all used religion to locate 'human life at the center of reality' (18). 'These indigenous belief systems were constructed by humans to achieve human goals' (19), therefore rebellion was rare. To say this is not to denigrate these cultures, just as Europe cannot take any credit for Christianity, since the latter is not a human construct, but God's divine revelation to humanity (can't be proven, but let's see if it has explanatory power). Since Christianity doesn't place humans at the 'center of reality,' rebellion against it is the normal human response (unlike for man-made, indigenous religious constructs).
Europe Rebelling Against Christianity (20)
While Europe-bashers often exaggerate, it is true that 'Europe was unstable and dynamic to the point of being destructive, aggressive, unbalanced and contentious' (20). Keillor sees as key that Europe's 'religion did not integrate fully its economy, politics and society as did Native American religions' (21). He sees two conflicting cultural roots; Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian, which yielded both flexibility and instability. Rebellion against God (or at least medieval Christianity) was a primary driver of the Renaissance. Scripture ordains both private property and divine sanction for rulers, but these are only reconcilable in a God-obeying, not a God-rebelling, society. Individual self-seeking (economic avarice, political ambition) ran rampant. He is heading for the conclusion that rebellion against God was (is) 'a driving force in history that helps to produce capitalism, democracy, imperialism' (21).
The role of relgion: 'Instead of seeking the salvation of souls and the worship of God as ends, the 15C Catholic Church often used people's hunger for salvation and for God for its own profit' (21-2). For their part, the laypeople preferred a human-centered, religion of externals. 'They grumbled about the church's appetite for funds and the clergy's privileges, not about shrines, rites, pilgrimages, saints, relics, indulgences and festivals' (23).
The role of government: Like the church, the state wasn't content to merely fulful its God-given role of maintaining order and dispensing justice. 'Most rulers needed other motives' (23), and thus was born feudalism, whereby the King farmed out benefits to regional warlords in return for fealty. At first, the RCC didn't like this, but soon learned it could be profitable for them too.
The role of merchants: 'In exploiting their functions for profit, rulers and church officials were ably assisted by merchant bankers' (25). 'Easy profits from lending to church and government pulled the economy from its proper functions' (25). He believes the purpose of the economy is to 'enable people to acquire necessities at reasonable prices' and that profits 'should not be exhorbitant or so high as regards luxury goods that production of necessities is neglected' (25). But who defines 'necessities' and 'exhorbitant'?! He laments that 'self interest [not Christianity] was the great integrating motive' of society (25).
The role of the Renaissance: Prior to this, there was a lack of integration, especially in Italy. There were separate sets of rules for politics, trade, church and art. The Renaissance Italians used self-interest (from the Greco-Roman [and Islamic?] heritage) to integrate society (and free it from medieval Christian 'chains'). 'The Renaissance meant that humanity siezed power in a radical liberation from all traditions and authority' (26). But isn't liberation from corrupt power good and right? The point is to limit the power available to corruption. The author claims elite families and individuals gained too much power and laments that acquiring power/wealth without limits became justifiable. 'Individualistic, innovative, respecting no limits, humans were in control' (26). But human rights limits were observed and at least some of the humans 'in control' were guided by God-honoring intentions.
The European Conquest of Another World: The Columbian Encounter (26)
'Starting in 1492, many ... tumbled out of Europe and set loose of generous, communal, stable and nonaggressive societies' in the new world (26). They brought superior weapons and (unintentionally) disease. He doesn't mention that they also brought superior civilizational skills and principles! They would later 'kidnap, steal, rape, torture and murder' to subdue the natives and find their (imagined) gold. 'Europe had few constraints on self-interest, but the Englishment or Spaniard away from home was freed even from these' (27) and used his military superiority to acquire 'wealth, booty, women and lordship previously available only to the European elite' (27). They mixed evangelizing (sometimes by force) with self-serving commerce and conquest. The Spanish (with their Inquisition force against Muslims and Jews) tended to use heavy coercion. The French (mostly Jesuits) adapted Christianity to receptive elements in each indiginous culture. The English (Puritans), fearing (re)contamination, were more intolerant and insular, demanding total cultural conversion (and convinced surprisingly many native converts to become 'praying Indians' 30).
New World Mirror and Old World Bible (30)
European Capitalism: Amoral, Abstracting, Accumulating, Limitless (32)
Chapter 2: Africa Comes to the Americas, Christ Comes to the Slaves
Plantation Slavery a Product of Capitalism, Not Christianity
The Causes of Plantation Slavery
Profit Motives Create the Slave Trade
West African History
The Atlantic Slave Trade as a Capital-Accumulating Business
Plantation Slavery Distorts Family, Church and Government
The First Great Awakening Challenges Plantation Slavery
Rejection of Revival but the Start of an Antislavery Movement
African-American Culture and Contributions to American Life
Chapter 3: Born from Above: Puritans, Conversions, the Great Awakening
The Myth of Puritan Exceptionalism: The "City upon a Hill"
Primitivism: An Attempt to Return to the First-Century Church
The Puritan Integration of Church and State
Economic Exceptions to Puritans' Religious Integration
The Rhode Island "City-State" Uncouples Church, State, Economy
Coupling Church and State Distorts Christian Faith
Uncoupling of Church and State at the Colony Level
Uncoupling Town, Family and Church: Stoddard's Solution
The (First) Great Awakening
Part II: An American Republic of Rebellious Male Individualism
Chapter 4: Gentlemen Think Up a Revolution, a Republic and a Constitution
The Influence of Colonial Gentry on American History
The Rise of Radical Whig Republicanism in America
The Crisis of Republicanism Leads to the Federal Constitution
The American Enlightenment began in opposition to the First Great Awakening and was ended by opposition from the Second. Not republican virtue but evangelical piety became the great glue holding American society together.... As democratic, religious, frontier America sailed past its outdated Constitution, many Founders felt disillusioned. Benjamin Rush tossed "all the notes and documents for his once-planned memoir of the Revolution into the fire." Washington lamented the rise of democracy. "John Adams spent much of his old age bewailing the results of the Revolution, including democracy, religious revivals, and Bible societies." Jefferson complained of a Richmond revival: "[The women] have their night meetings and praying parties, where, attended by their priests, and sometimes by a hen-pecked husband, they pour forth the effusions of their love to Jesus."
The Framers' descendants felt the opposite. They came to venerate the Constitution as they grew less able to comprehend its Enlightened authors or its spirit. Misunderstanding both, they thought its failure was success. Disillusioned Founders seemed political prophets wisely legislating for all future generations. The glory and crown of America seemed to lie in Americans' political skills and in their ability to form republican governments. Both were greatly exaggerated. Abundant land, new immigrants, no nobility or established church, evangelical moral values - these caused the United States' prosperity and progress more than an outdated Constitution. They were gifts from ... Providence, who had his own purposes to fulfill.
Interesting that no other culture with some or all of these advantages developed freedom! Modern liberty rests upon a Christian foundation.
Chapter 5: Rebel, Young Patriarch, and Go West with the Country
Chapter 6: The Great Duel: North and South Drop Debate and Take Up Arms
Part III: Social, economic and international developments largely outside American control
Chapter 7: Exodus: Slaves Freed, Capitalism Enters Its Promised Land
Chapter 8: Women Aim for Reform and Equality but End Up with Consumerism
Chapter 9: History's Accelerator: America Abroad, for Pious and Impious Ends
Part IV: How the US chose 'realism,' then rejected it and splintered
Chapter 10: Getting Real: The U.S. Adjusts to Reality to Fight Totalitarianism
Chapter 11: 'At Sixes and Sevens': A Revolt Against Realism Splinters America
Chapter 12: Splinter-New: Media-Driven, Networked, Niched, New Age America