Romanian Evangelical leader and aspiring political player Adrian Petrice claims he isn't looking for a theocracy or seeking political control but he's using all the language and concepts found in Dominion Theology. It's obvious that he has picked up these concepts from Western Evangelical influence.
He speaks of:
There is a real need for more Christians to pursue a political career as a calling, not as to a job.
I strongly believe that every legitimate human activity can be redeemed by the power of the gospel, and that we should have enough faith to include politics, in spite of being deemed as of the most corrupt area(sic) in our society.
Were these attitudes and concepts derived from the study of Scripture? Not at all. These impulses have been planted. These seeds arrived with the Lausanne Movement and are now bearing serious fruit. Dormant for a generation the current social and political climate is giving these ideas a new context and thus a new lease on life.
Romania is currently in a state of turmoil due to a corruption scandal. The people have taken to the streets and in numbers not seen since the 1989 uprising that led to the downfall of Nicolae Ceaușescu.
Petrice believes it is the obligation of Evangelicals to take to the streets and challenge the legitimacy of the political order.
What we see these days is that the civic conscience of professing Christians, and particularly evangelicals is stirred up by these outrageous measures and many are taking the streets to join the massive protests. This is a step forward, that goes beyond just praying on Sundays in churches for those in authority, according to 1 Timothy 2:1,2. Hopefully more Christians will understand that under a democratic regime, citizen rights come citizen duties, and that "when injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty', to use the quote by Thomas Jefferson, that was widely used these days in Romania.
To be quite honest these statements anger me. Petrice has not discovered these notions through the study of Scripture. In fact repeatedly throughout the interview he quotes Scripture and then indicates the idea, the posture of Christian vis-à-vis the state as presented in the New Testament is not only insufficient, but deficient.
Once again, Dominion theology clearly demonstrates a rejection of Scripture's Sufficiency or to put it in the common parlance... The Gospel is not enough. At least that's how Charles Colson put it. While it does not diminish the magnitude of the error, his candor is to be appreciated.
Scripture does not advocate democracy nor ratify it. If it is the form of regime in power then so be it, but nowhere are we told to support the state, participate in its rituals or agenda and we're certainly not called to politically resist it, and especially not in the name of the Church. Petrice like all Dominionists has turned Romans 13 on its head. He has corrupted the words of Christ with regard to Caesar and read obligations into the statement of Christ that were not part of his message.
And further this is buttressed by the sinful and erroneous statements of the apostate and enemy of Christ, one Thomas Jefferson. How heartening to know that American Evangelicalism with its fusion of Enlightenment Liberalism and Christianity has now exported this filth to believers abroad. Scripture is denigrated as now the task of the Christian is to transform culture and whether Petrice is being honest (even with himself) or not... to gain control and make the Kingdom of God manifest through cultural and political expression. Once again it's the Tower of Babel with a cross on top. Such is the vision of Billy Graham and Lausanne.
Thank-you for exporting this heresy to Europe and infecting a new generation with it.
These ideas have been growing and developing for a generation. Previously they couldn't gain a lot of traction, but with the end of the Cold War a generation that has grown up with Islamic terrorism, political and economic crises and now resurgent nationalism in the form of populism... everything is on the table.
The corruption in the Romanian political system is disappointing to be sure, but hardly anything new. Study the history and context of Romania and you will better understand why its culture is the way it is. To expect Romanians to embrace Western Liberalism within a generation of 1989 is to misunderstand their reality. Of course this also assumes that Western Liberalism is a good thing and appropriate in every situation and setting. I do not for a moment subscribe to such views.
And in no way shape or form will I agree the values associated with Western Liberalism represent what Scripture teaches. Petrice's own quotations condemn his views as sub-Scriptural at best and demonstrate once more the deep flaws and Biblically subversive attitudes present within Evangelicalism.