William F. Buckley’s ‘Conservative Movement’ Still-Born, Dead-On-Arrival, Because it Was Godless...

The American View ^ | 3/3/2008 | John Lofton ("recovering Republican, recovering conservative")

[Jim Robinson]

William F. Buckley’s ‘Conservative Movement’ Still-Born, Dead-On-Arrival, Decades Ago, Because it Was Godless, Against Christ, Ignored God’s Word

Contact: John Lofton, 301-873-4612, 410-760-8885, JLof@aol.com

MEDIA ADVISORY, March 3 /Christian Newswire/ — Recovering Republican John Lofton, Editor of TheAmericanView.com and co-host of “The American View” radio show with the Constitution Party’s 2004 Presidential candidate Michael Anthony Peroutka, has issued the following statement:

“Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.” – Psalm 127.

The Lord Jesus Christ did not build the “conservative movement” house. Thus, it was a house built on sand, it fell and great has been the fall of it, a recent example of this fall being the “conservative movement’s” support for President of George W. Bush who has given us the most Godless, unconstitutional, debt-ridden, big spending Federal Government in our history.

Even though most of its “leaders” claimed to be Christians, the “conservative movement” was dead-on-arrival because, from the beginning, it’s political plan was Godless, against Christ, and ignored the Bible. This “movement” vainly imagined succeeding without honoring Christ, succeeding through bread-alone, flesh-and-blood-only-politics when God tells us the REAL battle is a spiritual war which must be fought in the full-armor of God (Ephesians 6:10ff).

An example of the Godlessness I allude to occurred when I was on Bill Buckley’s “Firing Line” program June 24, 1987. Referring to him having told Malcolm Muggeridge that he (Buckley) did not believe there was a Christian means of organizing society, I asked Bill: “Wouldn’t God’s Laws, wouldn’t the Laws of Christ be a means of organizing a society?” Buckley said: “No. No….The consent of the governed in societies ruled by the people is the ultimate source of authority.”

Alexander Solzhenitsyn was once asked how just a few Communists could take over his country when it had a thousand years of being Christian? He replied: “We forgot God.” The leaders of the “conservative movement,” politically-speaking, forgot God. They forgot that the Lord Jesus Christ is Lord over ALL, including politics. They forgot that He is King of kings, Lord of lords, with ALL power in Heaven and on earth. They forgot Psalm 2:12 commands: “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.”

I know all of what I say here is true because, from the inside, I ran with this “conservative movement” from the mid-1960s to 1980 when God, by His grace alone, raptured me from among this Christless crowd – something for which, literally, I will be eternally grateful.

To hear much more on this subject, please click here to hear the latest “The American View” radio show http://www.theamericanview.com/dictator/media/997/show_145.mp3

If you’d like to interview John Lofton, you may reach him by calling: 301-873-4612; 410-760-8885; or by email: JLof@aol.com.

[Little Bill]

I belong to a Reformed Church, Confessions of Westminster and Savoy, I think that we might have a problem with Rapture. We do read the Bible but we do have a problem with Novelties.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

“In other words, Buckley’s view of government was of Washington’s America, while Lofton’s is Calvin’s Geneva.

I prefer the former.”

Me too. I read Paul Johnson’s “A History of Christianity” and was appalled how Christianity degraded itself once it got power within the Roman government. With the fall of Rome, Christianity supplied the structure that people needed in its vacuum. Bishops took the role of Roman Senators. People did not distinguish between civil and ecclesiastical authority. Politics entered the Church—and the Church abused its power.

Then when the Protestants rebelled against Catholicism, they repeated the error, blending Church with State and leading to the 30 years war in Germany. In both examples, Protestant and Catholic, Church and State suffer when blended.

Finally in the US, we split the government from religion and we have had the most successful, prosperous nation in history, and the only major economic power with a strong Christian base in its population.

The failure lies not in Christ, but in humanity and our inability to govern ourselves, let alone others. The wisdom of our nation’s founders in separating the powers of government was, in my opinion, divinely inspired. May we return to such wisdom and follow the Constitution again.

[tacticalogic]

Their poliical aspirations to not extend beyond thier own people, and their own local issues. Perhaps “political involvement” wasn’t the most accurate term. “Political ambition” might be more appropriate.

[Vision]

This can be taken a step further by saying the modern interpretation of Christianity has been the failure. Starting with the priest pedophilia scandals which have devastated the public’s trust, to teaching ideas that collecting wealth is unGodly.

[Hacksaw]

The Calvinists AND the Catholics had better get their acts together - and I do mean TOGETHER - or the godless secularists and the Islamists are going to make sure we’re utterly destroyed.

Well, it's not Catholics that you'll find posting articles every Sunday trashing Calvinists.

[Truthsearcher]

By that definition Fidel Castro has no political ambition?

Look, the corruption in the hearts of man will always lead them to seek power. Therefore both politics and religion tend to drift toward power, and that’s where they always end up meeting.

They are mutually bad influences on each other.

[unspun]

"All we like... sheep...?" (Isaiah 53:6)

Pinging some philosophically and theologically engaged FReepers along with the unofficial, unceremonial Huckabee list, for their weighing.

Weighing (the need to acknowledge the Lord, that those labor in vain unless He builds...) on one side of the scale along with (America's peculiar Adams/Madison "secular government," which is yet based upon it's sovereign People's acknowledgment of the One who has clearly afforded it -- yes by His teaching and also by His "providence" of dynamic grace, intimately involved) on the other.

Is it about being overt vs. covert?

[redfog]

I agree with Buckley: “The consent of the governed in societies ruled by the people is the ultimate source of authority.”

Christ said His kingdom is not of this world, and that we should render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.

God rules the world through two kingdoms: the secular and the spiritual.

Of the many ways of organizing a secular (government) kingdom, a limited, constitutional, federal republic - ultimately responsible to the people - beats all others, hands down (including a theocracy).

Should secular government acknowledge Christ and seek His blessing? Yes.

Should secular government be established according to the rules of the Bible? I don’t think so.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

“All religions are collectivist by nature.”

Regarding Christianity and Judaism, that is false.

The eighth commandment, “You shall not steal” precludes socialism, communism, and collectivism. Acts 2 is often cited as an example of Christian communism, but all giving and sharing was voluntary. Peter, in judging Ananias for his deceitful gift said, in Acts 5:
“ 1Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.

3Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.”

The money was fully in their control, before and after the sale. They gave the offering, saying it was the whole value of the property, but holding back some for themselves.

Private property was not abolished, but supported.

Giving is not obligatory, but voluntary, as Paul notes in 2 Corinthians 9:

6Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously. 7Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. 8And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that in all things at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

” Weighing (the need to acknowledge the Lord, that those labor in vain unless He builds...) on one side of the scale along with (America’s peculiar Adams/Madison “secular government,” which is yet based upon it’s sovereign People’s acknowledgment of the One who has clearly afforded it — yes by His teaching and also by His “providence” of dynamic grace, intimately involved) on the other.

Is it about being overt vs. covert?”

Not at all. It is about being Christian or non-Christian as individuals. That’s the beauty of our Republic. If the majority of people are Christians, they will elect people with Christian values and Christian values will prevail. Also, society in general will be permeated with Christian values. If the majority of people are non-Christian, non-Christian values will prevail in government and in society in general. We truly reap what we sow—a Biblical maxim in action.

The Republic was founded upon prayer and God, even if there is no official national religion, Christianity was assumed by the national government and all state governments.

I believe the approach Christians should take is to maximize evangelism, with the intent of improving society from the bottom up. It won’t be improved through the federal government from the top down.

[deuteronlmy232]

Alright, since you have brought the Bible in, let me throw a curve at everyone. Are you aware of the promise God made to Abram in Genesis 12?

1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Back during the Revolutionary War our fledgling nation had a real cash shortage. The war was about to be lost till a Polish Jew by the name of Hyman Salomon came on the scene. He loaned the US between $600,000 and $800,000. He also managed to secure literally millions more for the country. Had it not been for Mr. Salomon, the war may very well have been lost.

After the war, he died and left his widow and four children near poverty. Mrs. Salomon went to Congress asking for payment on the money loaned by her husband. Congress asked for records, Mrs. Salomon gave them to Congress, Congress promptly lost them. Mrs. Salomon never recieved a penny, she was forced to remarry to feed her children.

Verse three: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

I think our Republic would be more secure if today we were to repay the debt owned the Salomons. And yes I know it would be in the billions, maybe trillions of dollars.

[unspun]

I’m listening and thought I’d post a note or two...

I’ve tended to turn off Richard Vigeurie, John Lofton, and a couple guys I tend to lump in with them (yes, Howard Philips - just Lofton refer to him) because it seemed they were, a. attempting unrealistic power moves and/or were, b. possibly proponents of “dominion theology.” Is Lofton really a dominionist? Or, does he realize what Christ told Pilate — that His kingdom is not of this world?

I have to agree though, that any and all sin is definitively “disorderly.”

About half-way through the broadcast now and Lofton has failed to make a case with me that Buckley’s conservatism is “Godless.” However, he is making a case that Buckley may have failed to see that as God governs individuals he therefore, thoroughly governs them when they act in groups.

Did Buckley really mean “ultimate” when he said “ultimate?”

Lofton’s bringing up something akin to a conspiracy theory that some say Buckley did not write “God and Man at Yale” strikes me as weird — as most conspiracy theories are.

Into the segment on Vigeurie now. Lofton seems to be in the American fundamentalist Christian tradition. It is my own experience that such a person tends to have a weakness for taking the perfection of Christ and trying to measure others by it. This becomes very frustrating to them, since no one measures up.

Notice that Lofton does not really propose a working antithesis to Buckley, in that he does not describe how being blatant and demanding about the perfection of God among a grossly imperfect people will bring about a better government (or better anything else).

While Buckley tended to be a bit more libertarian than I think wise, I doubt he would have been nearly as effectual if he had adopted Lofton’s demands of perfection from we who cannot bootstrap ourselves into perfection.

Buckley could have had an even more accute sense of how to influence for the good without aduleration and compromise — but his mission was more humble than Lofton’s implied but unstated mission. Buckley wanted to (paraphrase?) “Stand athward history and cry, ‘Stop!’” and he may have succeeded beyond his dreams.

Lofton seems to want to stand athwart God’s judgment of fallen humanity and cry, “Wait, we can do it right!” No, we can not. We can only shed as much of Christ’s light to show both eternal and temporal ways of being (two very different streams) and work our preservational salt into the stuff of the world for awhile, to preserve the kingdom of men while working with God as He well collects his Kingdom from out of it.

E.g., we have to function with homosexuals and we do not have to (pardon me) bend over for them, to address one of Lofton’s anecdotes.

[Ann Archy]

Is Lofton that little fat guy that used to be on Fox Sunday morning and always had big scoops that never cam thru as fact??

[unspun]

I think our Republic would be more secure if today we were to repay the debt owned the Salomons. And yes I know it would be in the billions, maybe trillions of dollars.

Hm.... Well, it has been over fifty years since then.

[unspun]

Excellent points, I’d say. I’d also say that as we evangelize, we also must take care of all our other responsibilities — including that of being our parts of Caesar.

When we take care of all of the responsibilites, “all things work together for good.”

I think it can be said that the the genius of our nation’s founding includes that it can survive times when our Sovereign People are more and less Christian — to some extents — and still provide for the freedom of hearts to turn.

[unspun]

Please pardon some of the grammatic problems in the above.

[RichInOC]

Whaaaaaa...?

“Verrrrrry interesting...but schtupid.”

—Arte Johnson as Wolfgang

[Marysecretary]

The bible may not say ‘rapture’ but it certainly talks about one person in a field being taken and another isn’t, and other similar kinds of verses. It intimates that some will go and some will not. I don’t know what you mean about novelties. It’s end times stuff and maybe you don’t believe in that?

[jdm]

Someone upthread stated that Lofton is a Calvinist

Who would have guessed?

[Gumlegs]

If William F. Buckley isn’t conservative enough for you, the problem isn’t William F. Buckley.