Pondering providence …

I AM GRATEFUL that in his review article "On a mission" (April 5), Lloyd Steffen was not even harder on my book, American Providence, since I wrote it to challenge the assumptions of the theological left. Steffen thinks that God does not play favorites, because this offends the liberal imagination. I think God acts through (and thus can be said to favor) particular peoples on behalf of all people. Steffen also raises the problem of evil to argue that we should not interpret "providence in light of historical specifics." But if we give up the skill of reading specific historical events providentially, it is hard to imagine what is left of this doctrine.

Moreover, as Steffen himself demonstrates, theological leftists do read American history providentially--they just think that God is choosing America for special judgment, rather than for a special mission to the world.

Steffen's comments in the end confirm one of the basic arguments of my book: when providence is eclipsed, paranoia often takes its place. Thus, the theological left sees menace lurking behind every American motive.

Even the critics of American foreign policy cannot escape the logic of a providential view of history. The question is whether America is truly so far outside the boundary of God's plan.

Stephen H. Webb

Crawfordsville, Ind.

Lloyd Steffen replies:

Having commended Stephen Webb's book, I can only think that his reaction to my review arises from my having asked the reader to think seriously and critically about the book's argument.

Of course, people can argue providence to fit their own political agendas--Webb's comment about leftist interpretations makes my point rather than refutes it. My own view is that if we cannot know God as God knows God's own self, then wisdom dictates that we shy away from imputing motives to God and worry, rather, about our own.

Webb notes that on my reading of providence "it is hard to imagine what is left of the doctrine.'" Right. He got my point. Detach self-interested nationalism and old-fashioned egocentrism from providence and there is not much left worthy of attention. What might be left worth considering is an idea of providence that says God cares for all people as much as God cares for each one, which universalizes divine favoritism so that it is thereby eliminated. That is a move I find worthy of a transcendent and mysterious divinity.

The theological leftist referred to in Webb's letter is Martin Luther King, who was an important providentialist. I never said I agreed with King. I just noted that Webb ignored King's view that the arc of history moves ultimately toward justice when including it would have made Webb's argument fair and balanced. Webb's claim that providence is at work in the Bush policy of Iraqi democratization fails with anyone who thinks that that war is not really about democracy. American troops are in Iraq to establish a base of American influence, and any who have been paying attention to what the neoconservatives influencing policy have been saying for years know that to be the case.

Mixing a Fox News summary of the world with theology can yield only a Fox News theology. Gary Dorrien's book is again to be commended for rehearsing the neoconservative public record so thoroughly and thoughtfully. I hope this exchange about Stephen Webb's book does not obscure my criticisms of Jean Elshtain's particular way of using "just war," since I find that widely and uncritically accepted approach much more insidious and thus worthy of more serious attention.

COPYRIGHT 2005 The Christian Century Foundation
COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning