The Gospel of General Boykin

Preaching in his military uniform before a religious congregation in Oregon this June, General Boykin proclaimed, "we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christian. Did I say Judeo-Christian? Yes. Judeo-Christian."

He continued, "The enemy that has come against our nation is a spiritual enemy. His name is Satan. And if you do not believe that Satan is real, you are ignoring the same Bible that tells you about God."

To that same congregation, still in military uniform, General Boykin said of George W. Bush that, "He was appointed by God" to be leader of the United States.

To another religious group in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, General Boykin declared that the true enemy in George W. Bush's wars "is the principalities of darkness. It is a demonic presence in that city that God revealed to me as the enemy."

In a religious flyer, General Boykin is quoted as saying, "Bin Laden is not the enemy. No mortal is the enemy. It's the enemy you can't see. It's a war against the forces of darkness."

Comparing himself to a follower of Islam, General Boykin offers the taunt that "my God is bigger than his."

According to a Charisma News Service report of June 4, 2002, Boykin told to the Community Prayer Breakfast in Fort Myers that in executing the wars of George W. Bush, "It is a spiritual enemy we have to contend with. Now is the time to fight."

Boykin and Bush: Conspiring for Christ?

Confronted with these comments, the Bush Administration is supporting General Boykin. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld refuses to criticize General William Boykin's ideas about an American holy Crusade against Islam, or even to say that his remarks are diplomatically unfortunate.

it is particularly disturbing that the problems with General William Boykin are not restricted to mere talk. Boykin has a long history of using his official position in concrete ways in an attempt to transform the American military into a Christian organization of religious conversion and holy war. The Bush Administration, for example, has long been aware that Boykin used his position as leader of a military base within the United States to provide unique and unprecedented access to civilian Southern Baptist missionaries so that they would have the opportunity to convert Green Beret soldiers to their particular fundamentalist version of Christianity.

An attempt to convert an entire segment of the American military into a force devoted to one particular church instead of to the United States government is not just against military regulations. It's treason.

Knowing of General Boykin's history of illegal use of military training facilities for religious purposes, and aware of Boykin's radical views about using America's military to fight a Christian Crusade against other religions, George W. Bush promoted Boykin to the position of Deputy Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. In this position, Boykin is in frequent communication with senior White House officials, and even the President of the United States himself.

What else are we to think but that George W. Bush and his assistants in the White House are using the American military in order to wage a religious war on behalf of Christianity against Islam?

Was this agenda, represented by both Boykin and Bush, part of the motivation behind the rush to war in Iraq?

None of our soldiers signed up for that.

An Independent Investigation

When it comes to Boykin, the central question is: does this General, believing what he does about the wars he fights for Bush, continue to purposefully use American troops to undermine Islam itself? This question can only be answered by an official investigation that is independent of the Bush White House and of General Boykin's sphere of command.

This independent investigation must also target the Bush Administration, to determine whether Bush has communicated with Boykin or other military officers about executing a military strategy designed to injure Islam for the sake of Christianity.

The role of radical fundamentalist Christian theology in the Bush Administration's foreign policy is crucial to understand, yet shrouded in secrecy. Is the Bush Administration cooperating with fundamentalist Christians in the Pentagon to attempt to bring about Armageddon?

Boykin seems to suggest as much. Describing his sense of destiny about Christian America, he says, "We in the Army of God, in the House of God, the Kingdom of God have been raised for such a time as this." It seems that General Boykin believes that he is fighting in the first battles of the prophesied End Times, in which the forces of righteousness combat Satan on Earth.

The problem with having an active military general who believes that he is fighting in a final holy war against Satan is that fundamentalist Christians regard the global destruction that this holy war would bring as a good thing. For believers like General Boykin, such destruction is a welcome first step to establishment of the Kingdom of God on Earth. That's what Boykin is referring to when says that now is the time of the "Kingdom of God".

Is such a fanatic, fatalistic man psychologically equipped to direct American soldiers into battle? Can such a man, when he believes that he is fighting against evil spirits, develop realistic military strategies, or will he just follow his theological inclinations, hoping for the best?

So far, the Bush Administration is refusing even to ask these important questions. If Bush will not ask these questions, it is the duty of the U.S. Congress to seek answers through its own investigation.

Irrational Evangelical Exuberance

The emotional relationship of Bush's wars to evangelical End Times prophecies is disturbing precisely because it is so irrational. An example of this irrationality comes from General Boykin, who continues one of his sermons with the following thoughts:

"...our roots are Judeo-Christian. Did I say Judeo-Christian? Yes. Judeo-Christian. That means we've got a commitment to Israel. That means it's a commitment we're never going to abandon.

Ladies and gentlemen, we will never abandon Israel, we will never walk away from our commitment to Israel because our roots are there. Our religion came from Judaism, and therefore these radicals will hate us forever."

The leaps of logic shown in these brief religious pronouncements are staggering. First, there's the unspoken premise that the "roots" of the United States of America must necessarily dictate present day foreign policy toward Israel and the entire Middle East. Putting aside the fact that the government of the United States of America is certainly not a "Judeo-Christian" entity, let us consider the broader validity of the "roots" argument that General Boykin makes.

The historical roots of the United States of America are in British colonization. Does that mean that it was wrong for the Americas to abandon its commitment to those roots by breaking away? Does it further mean that the United States should perpetuate its roots in colonialism by obtaining new colonies of its own?

Then there's slavery. If the United States is rooted in anything, it's slavery. So, would General Boykin argue that we ought to be loyal to our roots in enslaving other human beings as a basis for our economy?

How about the horse-riding roots of America? What about our roots in doing surgery without anaesthetic? Should those roots determine our foreign policy as well?

General Boykin and his fundamentalist allies might do well to consider that as great as roots are, they don't make the whole plant. The plant may grow out from its roots, but that doesn't mean that the plant should stick its leaves back under the ground and live in darkness. To do so would be suicide.

America has grown since its beginnings, in size and in its knowledge. The last thing that America needs now is to be thrown back into the lifestyles of the late 1700s, as Boykin would have it.

There's a second, even more irrational element to Boykin's statements about the relationship between America's old "roots" and our current foreign policy. General Boykin says that America must be an ally to Israel against what he characterizes as Islamic idolatry because the United States is a Christian nation, and Christianity is derived from Judaism. Then he suggests that Muslims hate the United States because, as a Christian nation, the United States is historically rooted in Israel and Judaism.

Well, what General Boykin may not be aware of is that Islam is itself derived from Judaism! So, if, as Boykin extravagantly claims, Muslims hate the Christians because Christianity is derived from Judaism, then Muslims must hate themselves too. Hmm. Is that his explanation for radical Islamic suicide bombings?