Robert Bellah's The Broken Covenant is a scathing critique of modern American priorities. Bellah claims that our ideals, while good, have been misapplied: Diligence, initiative, and the desire to model virtue have yielded to material gain, individualism, and imperialism. In Bellah's mind, we have divorced our ideals from the bonds of social justice. Salvation requires not simply restoring the old covenant, but shaping a new one around a unifying civil religion.
Bellah, echoing his own disillusioned era, examines the flawed myths upon which Americans base our identity and actions. These include the myths of origin and chosenness, which generate arrogance; prosperity, which demands material success to prove "moral virtue and religious salvation" and produces "emotional and imaginative constriction...in a world of common sense and plain fact" (76); and pluralism, which--when coupled with chosenness--degenerates into a limited "welcome" on condition of conformity. With such skewed traditions, says Bellah, our failure is no surprise. Through racism, materialism, and other ethical crimes, the nation's original covenant, its promise of social justice, "was broken almost as soon as it was made" (139).
Bellah offers an honest look at many American flaws, and I found his critique of our nativism and disregard of community especially compelling. He takes care to show how Lockian and Calvinist ideals have come to contradict original Christian values such as humility and love of neighbor, an argument very interesting to a Christian like me. I don't think we need to reject those ideals altogether, but Bellah's argument was an effective call to consider how I apply them.
Bellah then seeks to redeem our myths, but "any reappropriation of tradition must be made in the full consciousness of [past failure]" (144). He wants a new covenant, for "unless the free act of liberation [such as 1960s rebellion] moves rapidly toward an act of institution...even the liberation itself turns into...new despotism" (34). According to Bellah, this new "act of institution" should incorporate classical and Biblical traditions but reject the selfish model of Locke, "the utilitarian morality of self-interest" (xx). And Bellah longs for an internalized covenant, which "can never be completely captured by institutions" (142). He desires personal conviction over external conformity, and such passionate conviction is better inculcated by community and churches than government.
To fulfill a covenant, however, one needs a religion. I know the objective of Bellah's covenant (social justice), but his book fails to delineate a sufficient set of "principles" for practitioners of the civil religion to follow. Bellah seems to reject established creeds and embrace a relativistic attitude, and his vague longings for "unity with nature" (155) and "immediacy of experience" (157) cannot recreate the solid "imaginative, religious, moral, and social context" of the spiritual forerunners he admires. I agree with many of Bellah's premises, but in the end, I think that he falls prey to his own fear: By shying away from absolute truth, he fails to crystallize his (very Christian) ideals within a covenant.