Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Sins of the American Empire and Pastoral Responses

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Pastoral Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article describes attributes of the American Empire and addresses characteristic sins—pride, sloth, greed, and idolatry—that are necessary for maintaining the domestic and foreign policies aimed toward expanding the economic and military power of the United States. In particular, I claim that theo-political narratives and rituals extant in U.S. culture are internalized, structuring our collective psyches and shaping both our wills and actions. Pride, sloth, greed, and idolatry signify the distortion of will, giving rise to actions that result in harm and alienation. To address this reality, several pastoral strategies are depicted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. It is not possible to address the interesting and important discussions about the sin of pride vis-à-vis feminist critiques of patriarchy. However, the basic elements (grandiosity, superiority, devaluation of the other) of the sin of pride are manifested in the thinking that attends patriarchy and the American Empire.

  2. The beliefs and values associated with the U.S.’s special role in history are not simply linked to narratives or speeches. Civil rituals (e.g., press conferences, inaugurals, congressional sessions, 4th of July), cultural rites (e.g., sports events), and social entertainment (e.g., movies) are other examples of how values and beliefs associated with American expansionism are internalized and maintained.

  3. This speech is readily available on numerous web sites.

  4. I wish to stress that the sin of sloth does not mean that there are no good results or that a ``slothful'' person is completely or even characterologically indifferent. Sin is nearly always ambiguous.

  5. Being prophetic is understood here as confronting people with their sins and reminding them of the covenant and their relation to God.

References

  • Aquinas, St. Thomas (1964). Summa theological. New York: Blackfriars, McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Augustine, A. (1984). The city of God. New York: Penguin Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacevich, A. (2002). American empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacevich, A. (2005). The new American militarism. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, E. (1973). Denial of death. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, E. (1975). Escape from evil. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capps, D. (1987). Deadly sins and saving virtues. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassian, J. (1997). Conferences. (B. Ramsey, Trans.). Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (2004). Hegemony or survival. New York: Owl Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Countryman, W. (1988). Dirt, greed, and sex: Sexual ethics in the New Testament and their implications for today. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evagrius (2000). The works of Evagrius of Pontus. (R. Sinkewicz, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairlie, H. (1978). The seven deadly sins today. Washington, DC: New Republic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farley, E. (1990). Good and evil: Interpreting a human condition. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S. (1930). Civilization and its discontents. Standard Edition (Vol. 21, pp. 64–148). London: Hogarth Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horney, K. (1950). Neurosis and human growth. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. (2000). Blowback. New York: Owl Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. (2004). Sorrows of empire. New York: Owl Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. (2002). The anarchy of empire in the making of U.S. culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keizer, G. (2003, 14 June). Political sloth. Christian Century, p. 8.

  • Kohut, H. (1978). In P. Ornstein (Ed.), The search for the self (Vol. 1). New York: International Universities Press.

  • Lasch, C. (1979). The culture of narcissism. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundestad, G. (1990). The American “empire.” Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, K. (1986). The seven deadly sins: Sloth. Expository Times, 92(12), 371–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFayden, A. (2000). Bound to sin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menninger, K. (1973). Whatever became of sin? New York: Hawthorne Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathanson, D. (1992). Shame and pride: Affect, sex, and the birth of the self. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nepo, M. (2005). Dream-Walking toward America: The deepening of the American dream project. In M. Nepo (Ed.), Deepening the American Dream (pp. 1–22). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niebuhr, H. R. (1941). The meaning of revelation. New York: Collier Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogilivy, J. (1999). Greed. In R. Solomon (Ed.), Wicked pleasures: Meditations on the seven deadly sins. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagels, E. (2005). Created equal: Exclusion and inclusion in the American dream. In M. Nepo (Ed.), Deepening the American Dream (pp. 1–22). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plato (1961). The collected dialogues. In E. Hamilton & H. Cairns (Eds.), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raines, J. (1969). Sin as pride and sloth. Christianity and Crisis, 29(3), 4–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, E. (2005). Onward liberal soldiers? The crusading logic of Bush’s grand strategy and what is wrong with it. In L. Gardner & M. Young (Eds.), The new American empire (pp. 227–252). New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rorty, O. A. (1990). Pride produces the idea of Self: Hume on moral agency. Australian Journal of Philosophy, 68(3), 255–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryn, C. (2003). America the virtuous. London: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schimmel, S. (1997). The seven deadly sins. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tillich, P. (1957). Dynamics of faith. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, G. (1997). The capital sins: Seven obstacles to life and love. Cincinnati, OH: St. Anthony Messenger Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, S. (1960). The sin of sloth. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.

  • West, C. (2004). Democracy matters. New York: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. (2005). Imperial language. In L. Gardner & M. Young. (Eds.), The new American empire (pp. 32–49). New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryan LaMothe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

LaMothe, R. Sins of the American Empire and Pastoral Responses. Pastoral Psychol 55, 459–472 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-006-0048-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-006-0048-8

Keywords

Navigation