Since 1988 I've been keeping an eye on a faction of the Religious Right known as Christian Reconstructionists.

Reconstructionists are so extreme they make TV preacher Pat Robertson look like a moderate. They call themselves Reconstructionists because they plan to "reconstruct" American society along "biblical" lines - well, it's really more their interpretation of what the Bible mandates. In their case, that means a country that is a fundamentalist Christian theocracy operating under Old Testament law.

Islamic Totalitarians, Apocalypse, and Terrorism
Walk a mile in the shoes of those who claim to honor God and yet cheer the bombing of the Boston Marathon. They represent only a tiny fraction of the Muslims on our planet, yet they see themselves as carrying out the will of God. Fanatics such as these can be found in many of the World’s religions. They shoot abortion providers in the United States; blast apart buses in Israel; and murder Muslims and Hindus in India.

These religious fanatics often combine a totalitarian political mindset with a belief in sacred prophecy that they are mandated by God to rule the world, and they must act now against their enemies because time is running out. In fact they believe that we are approaching the end of time itself, the literal end of the world as we know it. This worldview is call apocalypticism. Sketchy details are emerging that suggests one of the motives for the alleged suspects in the Boston bombing may have been a belief in an obscure and contested Muslim prophecy about the apocalyptic End Times. We may never know the full details of what motivated the Tsarnaev brothers, but if we want to understand the genesis of much Islamic terrorism by a small handful of Muslims around the world, a speculative tour of their apocalyptic worldview may help us design a more effective response.

The repression in Chechnya by invading Russian troops was brutal and deadly. In 2002 Human Rights Watch issued a report stating that "Russian forces in Chechnya arbitrarily detain, torture, and kill civilians in a climate of lawlessness."

Some Chechen Muslims suggest that Russia and the United States reached an understanding whereby the US would not pay attention to human rights abuses in Chechnya as long as Russian forces were fighting radical Muslims.

Richard H. Schultz, Jr. and Andrea J. Dew in Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat, note "the growing significance of Sufi Islam in the social, political, cultural, and economic life of Chechnya."

The Sufi form of Islam around the world is a pacifist religious movement, and Sufis generally stay out of politics, and sometimes are persecuted by the more orthodox Muslims.

According to Schultz & Dew, in Chechnya an aberrant form of Sufism developed.

Schultz & Dew suggest that after the Russian invasion of the North Caucuses, the "idea of ghazzavat or holy war made it easier for Chechens to take on" the Russian invaders.

"By labeling the Russians 'infidels,' the ghazzavat doctrine" infused the Muslim fighter with a "feeling of worthiness and moral supremacy." In addition, it "provided fighters with safe passage to the afterlife" by "eliminating fear of death and the unknown."

For some Muslims in Chechnya, terrorism was the only viable form of resistance. According to Shultz & Dew, "radical Islamists from various Arab and Muslim countries" joined the Chechen resistance, and saw the fight as "part of the international holy war."

What began as a resistance by Chechen nationalists seeking independence from Russia eventually morphed into a religious campaign dominated by Muslims. According to Shultz & Dew, "radical Islamists from various Arab and Muslim countries" joined the Chechen resistance, and saw the fight as "part of the international holy war." In 2003, the authors note, "the U.S. State Department designated three Chechen groups as terrorist organizations and charged they had links to al-Qaeda." This has been disputed by some experts. Clearly, not all Chechen resistance fighters were Muslim; some were simply nationalists opposed to the vicious Russian campaign against Chechnya. And not all resistance fighters turned to terrorism.

Nonetheless, the question remains, did repression in Chechnya breed the Boston Bombing?

Recently I had occasion to talk with Ellery Schempp, the plaintiff in the landmark 1963 school prayer and Bible reading case Abington Township School District v. Schempp. The 50th anniversary of that ruling is in June, and we'll have a story about the case in the forthcoming May issue of Church & State.

It's not too much of a spoiler to share one story Ellery told me: After he filed a lawsuit against mandatory religious exercises at his suburban Philadelphia public high school, the principal was furious. The man actually called Tufts University, where Ellery had been accepted, and urged officials there to rescind their decision to admit him. Ellery, you see, was a "troublemaker." (Tufts officials ignored the principal's demands.)

If you have nothing better to do on Wednesday, May 8, at 6:30 p.m., you could go to Statuary Hall in the U.S. Capitol and listen to a bunch of Religious Right activists tell lies about George Washington.

U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) and other members of Congress are sponsoring an event to celebrate the 224th anniversary of the inauguration of Washington. The event is called "Washington: A Man of Prayer."

More mourning and prayers.

Lots of praise for all the first responders.

Less speculation and gossip.

Keep in mind that not all acts of violence are terrorism.

Realize that terrorism can be carried out by individuals, groups, and governments.

Talk to friends and family for support.

Don't spread rumors or more anxiety in any way.

Confront the attention-seeking conspiracists for spreading lies. Their swill is toxic to democracy.

The FBI has not stopped numerous acts of terrorism, they have entrapped numerous hapless people and then busted them for headlines.

Whoever is responsible, do not blame entire groups of people based on their political leanings, religion, or race.

The American Christian Right has a problem that I think has not been adequately addressed by most interested journalists, scholars and activists. The problem is that the conservative Catholic Bishops and the conservative leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) have such a bad record when it comes to child sex abuse, that it should be counting against their moral and official standing far more than it has.

One year ago today, on April 10, 2012, a new book hit the shelves -- David Barton's The Jefferson Lies: Exposing the Myths You've Always Believed About Thomas Jefferson.

Although Barton has been writing "history" books for well over two decades, he was relatively unknown outside of evangelical Christian circles and those of us who fight historical revisionism until a few years ago, when Glenn Beck, by making him his resident "historian" and new BFF, propelled him to Christian nationalist rock star status.

Christian Post and other media sources have announced the April 6 launch of the Ron Paul Curriculum for home schoolers.  Fox News described the program as "libertarian-edged" but Paul's curriculum is being produced by Gary North, a leading Christian Reconstructionist, and  Thomas Woods, Jr., a self-described founder of The League of the South. This launch demonstrates Ron Paul's ongoing commitment to a worldview that is dramatically different from that of the libertarian label Paul usually receives, a worldview that has been described by Talk2action contributors as theocratic libertarianism. Those embracing this ideology prefer to call themselves "Constitutional conservatives."

There is some sad news to report today: On Friday, David Kuo died. He was only 44 and had been battling an aggressive brain tumor.

You might remember Kuo from the George W. Bush presidency. He came to Washington in 2001 as an idealistic conservative foot soldier hoping to help the poor through the "faith-based" initiative. Two years later, he left disillusioned, convinced that the initiative was little more than a partisan political stunt.

I'll admit it: I enjoy reading scathing reviews of books and films. Critics are called that for a reason. When it's time to be critical, some of them really know how to put it out there.

Consider Roger Ebert. The long-time movie reviewer for the Chicago Sun-Times didn't hold back when he was forced to sit through a bad film.

I was reminded today of this post from June 23, 2011. It seems as relevant today as it did then. -- FC

A few years ago, Talk to Action contributor Rev. Steven D. Martin, a Methodist minister, produced a documentary film called Elizabeth of Berlin, about a remarkable woman who called on her church to speak out against the Nazis on behalf of the Jews. I wrote an article about the film for Religion Dispatches at the time.

I was recently reminded about that article, the film, and what Steve said when I interviewed him.  Elizabeth of Berlin was his third film about the Church in the Nazi era, and so I asked him why he was so interested in this subject.  His answer has haunted me ever since, and helps to inform my thinking about many things, including the themes of this site.