Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

INVITATION TO A STONING [Rushdoony ties to D. James Kennedy - should Moore be in this list?]
Reason Online ^ | November, 1998 | Walter Olson

Posted on 11/14/2003 6:47:13 PM PST by Chancellor Palpatine

For connoisseurs of surrealism on the American right, it's hard to beat an exchange that appeared about a decade ago in the Heritage Foundation magazine Policy Review. It started when two associates of the Rev. Jerry Falwell wrote an article which criticized Christian Reconstructionism, the influential movement led by theologian Rousas John (R.J.) Rushdoony, for advocating positions that even they as committed fundamentalists found "scary." Among Reconstructionism's highlights, the article cited support for laws "mandating the death penalty for homosexuals and drunkards." The Rev. Rushdoony fired off a letter to the editor complaining that the article had got his followers' views all wrong: They didn't intend to put drunkards to death.

Ah, yes, accuracy does count. In a world run by Rushdoony followers, sots would escape capital punishment--which would make them happy exceptions indeed. Those who would face execution include not only gays but a very long list of others: blasphemers, heretics, apostate Christians, people who cursed or struck their parents, females guilty of "unchastity before marriage," "incorrigible" juvenile delinquents, adulterers, and (probably) telephone psychics. And that's to say nothing of murderers and those guilty of raping married women or "betrothed virgins." Adulterers, among others, might meet their doom by being publicly stoned--a rather abrupt way for the Clinton presidency to end.

Mainstream outlets like the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post are finally starting to take note of the influence Rushdoony and his followers have exerted for years in American conservative circles. But a second part of the story, of particular interest to readers of this magazine, is the degree to which Reconstructionists have gained prominence in libertarian causes, ranging from hard-money economics to the defense of home schooling. "Christian economist" Gary North, Rushdoony's son-in-law and star polemicist of the Reconstructionist movement, is widely cited as a spokesman for free markets, if not exactly free minds; he even served for a brief time on the House staff of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), the Libertarian Party presidential nominee in 1988, when Paul was a member of Congress in the '70s. For his part, Rushdoony has blandly described himself to the press as a critic of "statism" and even as a "Christian libertarian." Say what?

An outgrowth of Calvinism, modern
Reconstructionism can be traced to Rushdoony's 1973 magnum opus, Institutes of Biblical Law. (Many leading Reconstructionists emerged from conservative Presbyterianism, but as with so much of today's religious ferment, the movement cuts across denominational lines.) Not one to pursue a high public profile, Rushdoony has set up his Chalcedon Institute in off-the-beaten-path Vallecito, California, while North runs his Institute for Christian Economics out of Tyler, Texas.

As a "post-millennialist" school of thought, Reconstructionism holds that believers should work toward achieving God's kingdom on earth in the here and now, rather than expect its advent only after a second coming of Christ. Some are in a bit of a hurry about it, too. "World conquest," proclaims George Grant, in what by Reconstructionist standards is not an especially breathless formulation. "It is dominion we are after. Not just a voice... not just influence...not just equal time. It is dominion we are after."

Well, OK, it's easy to laugh. Yet grandiosity does sometimes get results, especially when combined with an all-out conviction that one is historically predestined to win (the Communist Party in the '30s comes to mind). Reconstructionism has a record of turning out hugely prolific writers, tireless organizers who stay at meetings until the last chair is folded up, and driven activists willing to undergo arrest (Reconstructionist Randall Terry founded Operation Rescue, the lawbreaking anti-abortion campaign) to make their point.

Politically, Reconstructionists have been active both in the GOP and in the splinter U.S. Taxpayers Party; but their greater influence, as they themselves would doubtless agree, has been felt in the sphere of ideas, in helping change the terms of discourse on the traditionalist right. One of their effects has been to allow everyone else to feel moderate. To wit: Almost any anti-abortion stance seems nuanced when compared with Gary North's advocacy of public execution not just for women who undergo abortions but for those who advised them to do so. And with the Rushdoony faction proposing the actual judicial murder of gays, fewer blink at the position of a Gary Bauer or a Janet Folger, who support laws exposing them to mere imprisonment.

Among other ideas Reconstructionists have helped popularize is that state neutrality on the subject of religion is meaningless. Any legal order is bound to "establish" one religious order or another, the argument runs, and the only question is whose. Put the question that way, and watch your polemical troubles disappear. If we're getting a religious establishment anyway, why not mine?

"The Christian goal for the world," Recon theologian David Chilton has explained, is "the universal development of Biblical theocratic republics." Scripturally based law would be enforced by the state with a stern rod in these republics. And not just any scriptural law, either, but a hardline-originalist version of Old Testament law--the point at which even most fundamentalists agree things start to get "scary." American evangelicals have tended to hold that the bloodthirsty pre-Talmudic Mosaic code, with its quick resort to capital punishment, its flogging and stoning and countenancing of slavery, was mostly if not entirely superseded by the milder precepts of the New Testament (the "dispensationalist" view, as it's called). Not so, say the Reconstructionists. They reckon only a relative few dietary and ritualistic observances were overthrown.

So when Exodus 21:15-17 prescribes that cursing or striking a parent is to be punished by execution, that's fine with Gary North. "When people curse their parents, it unquestionably is a capital crime," he writes. "The integrity of the family must be maintained by the threat of death." Likewise with blasphemy, dealt with summarily in Leviticus 24:16: "And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him."

Reconstructionists provide the most enthusiastic constituency for stoning since the Taliban seized Kabul. "Why stoning?" asks North. "There are many reasons. First, the implements of execution are available to everyone at virtually no cost." Thrift and ubiquity aside, "executions are community projects--not with spectators who watch a professional executioner do `his' duty, but rather with actual participants." You might even say that like square dances or quilting bees, they represent the kind of hands-on neighborliness so often missed in this impersonal era. "That modern Christians never consider the possibility of the reintroduction of stoning for capital crimes," North continues, "indicates how thoroughly humanistic concepts of punishment have influenced the thinking of Christians." And he may be right about that last point, you know.

The Recons are keenly aware of the P.R. difficulties such views pose as they become more widely known. Brian Abshire writes in the January Chalcedon Report, the official magazine of Rushdoony's institute, that the "judicial sanctions" are "at the root" of the antipathy most evangelicals still show towards Reconstruction. Indeed, as the press spotlight has intensified, prominent religious conservatives have edged away. For a while the Coalition on Revival (COR), an umbrella group set up to "bring America back to its biblical foundations" by identifying common ground among Christian right activists of differing theological backgrounds, allowed leading Reconstructionists to chum around with such figures as televangelist D. James Kennedy (whose Coral Ridge Ministries also employed militant Reconstructionist George Grant as a vice president) and National Association of Evangelicals lobbyist Robert Dugan.

In recent years, however, the COR has lost many of its best-known members; former Virginia lieutenant governor candidate Mike Farris, for example, told The Washington Post that he left the group because "it started heading to a theocracy...and I don't believe in a theocracy." John Whitehead, a Rushdoony protégé who, with Chalcedon assistance, launched the Rutherford Institute to pursue religious litigation, has moved with some vigor to disavow his old mentor's views.

Prominent California philanthropist Howard F. Ahmanson Jr., who has given Rushdoony's operations more than $700,000 over the years, may also be loosening his ties. According to the June 30, 1996, Orange County Register, Ahmanson has departed the Chalcedon board and says he "does not embrace all of Rushdoony's teachings." An heir of the Home Savings bank fortune, Ahmanson has also been an important donor to numerous
other groups, including the Claremont Institute, the Seattle-based Discovery Institute and--just to show how complicated life gets--the Reason Foundation, the publisher of this magazine (for projects not associated with its publication).

The continuing, extensive Reconstructionist presence in fields like the home schooling movement poses for libertarians an obvious question: How serious do differences have to become before it becomes inappropriate to overlook them in an otherwise good cause? The printed program of last year's Separation of School & State Alliance convention constituted an odd ideological mix in which certified good guys such as Sheldon Richman, Jim Bovard, and Don Boudreaux alternated with Chalcedon stalwarts like Samuel Blumenfeld, Howard Phillips, and Rushdoony himself.

Lest such relations become unduly frictionless, here's a clip-and-save sampler of Reconstructionist quotes to keep on hand:

On the link between reason and liberty: "Reason itself is not an objective `given' but is itself a divinely created instrument employed by the unregenerate to further their attack on God." The "appeal to reason as final arbiter" must be rejected; "if man is permitted autonomy in one sphere he will soon claim autonomy in all spheres....We therefore deny every expression of human autonomy--liberal, conservative or libertarian." Thus affirmed Andrew Sandlin, in the January Chalcedon Report.

Intellectual liberty (other religions department): Hindus, Muslims, and the like would still be free to practice their rites "in the privacy of your own home....But you would not be allowed to proselytize and undermine the order of the state....every civil order protects its foundations," wrote the late Recon theologian Greg Bahnsen. Bahnsen added that the interdiction applies to "someone [who] comes and proselytizes for another god or another final authority (and by the way, that god may be man)."

Intellectual liberty (where secularists fit in department): "All sides of the humanistic spectrum are now, in principle, demonic; communists and conservatives, anarchists and socialists, fascists and republicans," explains Rushdoony. "When someone tries to undermine the commitment to Jehovah which is fundamental to the civil order of a godly state--then that person needs to be restrained by the magistrate...those who will not acknowledge Jehovah as the ultimate authority behind the civil law code which the magistrate is enforcing would be punished and repressed," wrote Bahnsen.

On ultimate goals: "So let us be blunt about it," says Gary North. "We must use the doctrine of religious liberty to gain independence for Christian schools until we train up a generation of people who know that there is no religious neutrality, no neutral law, no neutral education, and no neutral civil government. Then they will get busy in constructing a Bible-based social, political and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God."

Contributing Editor Walter Olson is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of The Excuse Factory: How Employment Law Is Paralyzing the American Workplace (The Free Press).

Visit Walter Olson's official Web site

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ahmanson; callingallcliques; christianbashing; conviction; doninionism; fearmongering; garynorth; iwantthefirststone; lies; moorebashing; ownpetard; palpatine; palpatinecra; ronpaul; roymoore; rushdoony; selfloathing; slander; startthepurge; witchhunt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-127 next last
To: Chancellor Palpatine
Although it’s not well known, President George W. Bush’s former welfare guru, Marvin Olasky, has clearly been influenced by Reconstructionists. Olasky, who coined the term "compassionate conservatism," has written several books over the years studded with references to Reconstructionist writers like Rushdoony, North, DeMar and Grant. (Grant, is a former columnist for Olasky’s World magazine.)
41 posted on 11/14/2003 9:03:54 PM PST by Stew Padasso (Head down over a saddle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
as long as it makes God happy, eh?

42 posted on 11/14/2003 9:15:49 PM PST by Robert_Paulson2 (robert... the rino... LWMPTBHFTOSTA....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
These people are very, very scary..............
43 posted on 11/14/2003 9:23:54 PM PST by SeaDragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
I believe another FReeper answered... I have not really kept track of his career. If he has apologized sincerely then that's fine. However, he always turned off with what seemed to me to be self righteous zeal.
44 posted on 11/14/2003 9:38:01 PM PST by cyborg (let's klap another klippies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
for later..
45 posted on 11/14/2003 9:45:51 PM PST by troublesome creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jorge; Chancellor Palpatine; Robert_Paulson2
Well then, it sounds like guilt by association.

Lie down with dogs...get up with fleas.

Kennedy has extremely close ties to these folks, and vice versa. You can whine about "guilt by association" all you want, but they find each other's company to be congenial, and dominionists are not wont to give the title "Christian" to those who disagree with their rantings.

I've been told by a student of the Rushdoony/North clan that I am not a Christian (I am a Catholic), and that I could expect to have my civil liberties curtailed in a theonomist society--to include not being permitted ownership of any weapon, or anything that might BE a weapon. "2nd Amendment? We don't NEED no steenkin' 2nd Amendment!"

46 posted on 11/14/2003 9:47:58 PM PST by Poohbah ("Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons?" -- Major Vic Deakins, USAF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I've been told by a student of the Rushdoony/North clan that I am not a Christian (I am a Catholic)....

Yes, I've had a few Christian friends claim that Catholics are not genuine Christians. Of course some of them were the same ones who said I was going to Hell because I agreed with Charles Stanley on the doctrine of eternal security.

They are wrong on both accounts.

47 posted on 11/14/2003 10:06:53 PM PST by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Thank you for pointing out the lies in this article. I know
Gary North and his family personally. He hasn't lived in Tyler for @ 5 years. His primary focus is the free amarket system and economics. His father in law Rushdonny died a couple of years ago and they had differences of opinion on
many issues. I've never heard Gary talk about the death penalty for all these things, other than pointing out they did recieve the death peanlty in the old testament.
48 posted on 11/14/2003 10:15:11 PM PST by flowergirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nmh; Chancellor Palpatine
None of them have ever advocated death for homosexuality or alcoholism.

No, they take their cues from the OT Law.

Your instincts are right to be concerned about this movement. There are a few reconstructionists on this very forum.

49 posted on 11/14/2003 10:22:22 PM PST by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
Sounds like Old Testament Judaism, not New Testament Christianity, to me. Jesus said whoever is without sin should cast the first stone at the adulterer; I figure, woe to those who mess with Jesus or his teachings to advance their selfish political agendas.
50 posted on 11/14/2003 11:07:53 PM PST by Darheel (Visit the strange and wonderful.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah; Jorge; Chancellor Palpatine; Nebullis; Robert_Paulson2
I've been told by a student of the Rushdoony/North clan that I am not a Christian (I am a Catholic),...

Like you, I am Catholic and I've been told I am not a Christian by three FReeper Calvinists' I "could" name.

Rushdooney is dead, but his movement is NOT. This is a worthwhile post, CP. Thanks for posting it and for the ping.

51 posted on 11/14/2003 11:12:33 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: onyx
This is a worthwhile post, CP. Thanks for posting it and for the ping.

Another goofball makes the list. Better keep your heads down before JimRob notices you all. Then you can make more excuses why he shouldn't put your neo-con divisive asses in the Smokey Back Room.

Insert laughter here.

52 posted on 11/14/2003 11:19:51 PM PST by nunya bidness (sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness
Why don't hit abuse if you already haven't?

FR is a forum for the exchange of ideas and opinions in relation to conservative politics and politics in general.

Nobody *pinged* you, so what IS your problem?
53 posted on 11/14/2003 11:24:07 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Nobody *pinged* you, so what IS your problem?

My problem is that self-professed "legal professionals" have abused this forum to sell their "lifestyle" at the expense of legitimate debate by posters who don't agree with their "proven" shortcomings.

You can pretend you don't know what I'm "talking" about but as time goes by most will become familiar with the likes of CP and his underlings and move on.

Me? I like getting dirty. So bring it.

54 posted on 11/14/2003 11:30:44 PM PST by nunya bidness (sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness; Admin Moderator
You show up, make smarmy remarks, totally off topic, to those you don't like. I thought that I was the only one you stalked, but I guess I was wrong.

Now, either post something about the article, or just go away.

55 posted on 11/14/2003 11:32:30 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness
Me? I like getting dirty. So bring it.

I don't. So after talking to you, I need a shower. See ya.

56 posted on 11/14/2003 11:33:22 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
This is a hit piece designed to promote a flame war.

Your turn.

57 posted on 11/14/2003 11:34:05 PM PST by nunya bidness (sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
What? You mean Christians can be be wackos who want to kill infidels? I'm sure we will soon have a chorus of voices here on FR demanding that we nuke Vallecito.
58 posted on 11/14/2003 11:34:36 PM PST by MattAMiller
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Perhaps you should do a wee bit more research and see if your assumptions can be proved.
59 posted on 11/14/2003 11:37:55 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness
And YOU know ALL about hit pices, flame wars, hit & run posts, etc., don't you ? LOL

I've read the article, I've read the links, I've read the quotes, and I've read, over the years, the posts by FREEPERs, who are obviously followers of this garbage.If you disagree with the article, then post refutation...instead of hit pieces TO various posters and claiming that you can/will " get dirty " and to bring it on. Elsewise, go someplace, wherever that might be, where your brand of posting is enjoyed by most.

60 posted on 11/14/2003 11:47:15 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-127 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson