RECONSTRUCTION THEOLOGY AND HOME EDUCATION [Rushdoony, HSLDA, Gary North]

To more clearly understand the increasing divisiveness in homeschooling and the various leaders involvement in a political religion, it is necessary to become familiar with some of the facets of Christian theology and theocracy.

"Theocracy, the direct rule of a nation by God through divinely selected spokesmen, has many exemplars in the modern world. Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Iraq are nations with obvious theocratic tendencies. Israel's political parties exhibit growing theocratic patterns. In the United States, the Christian Reconstruction movement proposes the purest form of theocracy. Reconstructionism…believes that the law given for the political and legal ordering of ancient Israel is intended for all people at all times; therefore American is duty bound to install a political system based entirely on biblical law."

Reconstructionist theologian David Barton offered this definition: "The Christian goal for the world is the universal development of Biblical theocratic republics, in which every area of life is redeemed and placed under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and the rule of God's law."

The term 'dominion theology' comes from Genesis 1:26-28 of the Bible where God's purpose for man is stated: Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." So God created man in his own image…And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." (RSV)

Sometimes termed 'dominion' or 'kingdom' theology, "dominionism revolves around the idea that Christians and Christians alone, are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns. An earlier source of dominion theology was an evangelical philosopher named Francis Schaeffer…Schaeffer's 1981 book, A Christian Manifesto…remained one of the Christian Right's most important texts into the 1990's."

"Individuals from a wide variety of backgrounds and ecclesiastical communions are influenced by and committed to these ideals, from conservative Roman Catholics to Episcopalians to Presbyterians to Pentecostals, Arminian and Calvinist, charismatic and non-charismatic, high Church and low Church traditions are all represented in the broader umbrella of Reconstructionism, (often in the form of the 'Christian America' movement)."

Many of the leaders of the so-called hard or Christian Right are followers of the teachings of Rousas John Rushdoony. R.J. Rushdoony is the spiritual leader of Chalcedon Foundation, a California organization dedicated to Christian Reconstruction. According to the Foundation, a Christian Reconstructionist is a Calvinist, holding to the principles that God, not man, is the center of the universe and beyond; a Theonomist, believing that God's law is found in the Bible; a Presuppositionalist, believing that he holds to the Faith because the Bible says so and has no need to prove it; a Postmillennialist believing that Christ will return to earth only after the Holy Spirit has empowered the church to advance Christ's kingdom in time and history and a Dominionist taking seriously the Bible's commandment to the godly to take dominion in the earth. "The Christian Reconstructionist believes the earth and all it's fullness is the Lord's; that every area dominated by sin must be 'reconstructed' in terms of the Bible. This includes, first, the individual; second, the family; third, the church; and fourth, the wider society including the state."

The Dominion theology movement places Judeo-Christian biblical law above any and all constitutional law, including the U.S. Constitution. "Postmillienialists believe that righteous human beings, essentially servants of Christ, must achieve positions of influence in societies in order to prepare the world for the Messiah's return."

In his excellent 1996 book, With God on Our Side, William Martin used a sampling of the views of several noted Reconstructionists to give a sense of how a Reconstructed America would be: "The federal government would play no role in regulating business, public education, or welfare…[S]ome government would be visible at the level of counties…but citizens would be answerable to church authorities on most matters subject to regulation…income taxes would not exceed ten percent - the biblical tithe - and social security would disappear…[P]ublic schools would be abolished in favor of home-schooling arrangements, and families would operate on a strict patriarchal pattern. The only people permitted to vote would be members of 'biblically correct' churches. Most notably, a theonomic order would make homosexuality, adultery, blasphemy, propagation of false doctrine, and incorrigible behavior by disobedient children subject to the death penalty, preferably administered by stoning…a reconstructed America would have little room for Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, or even non-Reconstructionist Christians. 'The Christian', one Reconstructionist author has asserted, 'must realize that pluralism is a myth…R.J. Rushdoony, also regards pluralism as a heresy, since, in the name of toleration, the believer is asked to associate on a common level of total acceptance with the atheist, the pervert, the criminal, and the adherents of other religions."

Other noted Reconstructionists include Greg Bahnson, David Barton of WallBuilders, Inc., David Chilton, Gary DeMar of American Vision and Worldview Magazine; Ted DeMoss of Christian Business Men's Committee; Kenneth Gentry, Jay Grimstead of Coalition on Revival; James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church; Tim LaHaye of American Coalition for Traditional Values; Mrs. Connie Marshner of Free Congress Foundation; Rev. Joseph Morecraft; Gary North of Institute for Christian Economics; Mark Siljander of Global Strategies, Inc.; Randall Terry of Operation Rescue and Rev. Donald Wildmon of American Family Association. Dr. Kennedy, Rev. LaHaye, Mrs. Marshner, Mr. North, R.J. Rushdoony, and Rev. Wildmon are all members of the Council For National Policy.

"Whether it is acknowledged or not, Reconstructionism has profoundly influenced the Christian Right. Perhaps its most important role within the Christian Right can be traced to the formation in 1982 of the Coalition on Revival (COR)…Founded and headed by Dr. Jay Grimstead, COR has sought in this way to create a transdenominational theology…The COR leadership has significantly overlapped with the Christian Right, and has included: John Whitehead, Don Wildmon…Tim LaHaye and D. James Kennedy, Randall Terry…Steven Hotze, Rev. Glen Cole…Michael Farris…Robert Dugan…Bill Dannemeyer…Mark Siljander…R.J. Rushdoony, Gary North, Joseph Moorecraft, David Chilton, Gary DeMar… and Rus Walton."

It is difficult for secular homeschoolers to understand the apparent double standard when Christian homeschoolers are discriminatory against them at the local support group level, while at the same time, courting their efforts when it comes to state or national political causes. Understanding Reconstructionist Theology and Theocracy is important because it reflects understanding on the division in the homeschooling community between secular and religious members, and the theocratic motivations of politically manipulating the community.

Gary North declared, "All long-term social change comes from the successful efforts of one or another struggling organizations to capture the minds of a hard core of future leaders."

Reconstructionists believe that Christian schools and the homeschooling movement are the key to capturing those minds. Joseph Moorecraft said in 1987, that the Reconstruction movement was made up of a small number but expected a massive acceleration in 25 to 30 years 'when those kids that are now in Christian schools have graduated and taken their places in American society, and moved into places of influence and power.'

It's interesting to note that Reconstructionist Jay Rogers wrote, " A little known fact: R. J Rushdoony, aside from being the founder of Christian Reconstruction, is also the founder of the modern home schooling movement. Most people who deride the Reconstructionist movement for being 'too political' don't realize that." This declaration completely ignores the work of secular writers, such as John Holt, who promoted homeschooling as an alternative in the 1970's and '80's.

When it comes to politics, the principles are simple: "The long-term goal of Christians in politics should be to gain exclusive control over the franchise. Those who refuse to submit publicly to the eternal sanctions of God by submitting to His Church's public marks of the covenant--baptism and Holy Communion--must be denied citizenship, just as they were in ancient Israel."

"Gary North claims that 'the ideas of the Reconstructionists have penetrated into Protestant circles that for the most part are unaware of the original source of the theological ideas that are beginning to transform them.' North describes the 'three major legs of the Reconstructionist movement' as 'the Presbyterian oriented educators, the Baptist school headmasters and pastors, and the charismatic telecommunications system.' What this means is that hundreds of thousands of Pentecostals and charismatic Christians, as well as many fundamentalist Baptists, have moved out of the apolitical camp. Many have thrown themselves into political work - not merely as voters, but as ideologically driven activists, bringing a reconstructed 'Biblical world view' to bear on their area of activism."

The Home School Legal Defense Association/Foundation has many links to Reconstructionism. In his well-researched 1995 book, Home Schooling: The Right Choice, HSLDA attorney Christopher Klicka frequently quotes Reconstructionst writers, notably Rushdoony and Barton. In addition to including Rushdoony's "The Difference Between Christian Education and Humanistic Education", the book's forward was written by D. James Kennedy and many of the ideals expressed seem Reconstructionist, however, he does not state specifically that he is a Reconstructionist.

The relationship between President Michael Farris of HSLDA and Tim and Beverly LaHaye goes back to the early 1980's when Michael Farris was head of the legal department of Concerned Women for America. Tim LaHaye was attempting to start a television ministry that failed. In 1983 he started the American Coalition for Traditional Values which was similar to the now defunct Moral Majority, its goal being to mobilize Christians to register and vote. Some accounts indicate Michael Farris was deeply involved with ACTV while others do not mention his involvement. ACTV closed down shortly after the 1986 elections. Tim LaHaye withdrew from his television ministry when it was publicized that his church was funding an anti-Catholic group. In 1985 he further withdrew after it became known that CWA had accepted 'generous help' from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church which teaches the divinity of the Rev. Moon in direct conflict with Christian teachings. In 1987 Rev. LaHaye was forced to resign as co-chair from Jack Kemp's presidential campaign because newspapers printed divisive passages from his writings, which were anti-catholic and anti-Semetic.

The New York Times profiled Michael Farris' campaign for Lt. Governor of Virginia as part of a series of articles about Christians in politics. It is noted that Michael Farris' name appeared as a co-author of a policy paper by Jay Grimstead's "Coalition on Revival, which has called for the United States to reclaim itself as a 'Christian nation.' (Farris says that he only worked on an early draft of the document and that the organization included his name without his permission.)"

Farris's name appears among ninety-seven Christian intellectuals who signed the Coalition for Revival's 1986 'manifesto' which declares, "We believe America can be turned around and once again function as a

Christian nation as it did in it's earlier years. The document lists Farris and…Virginia C. Armstrong as co-authors of the section entitled 'The Christian World View of the Law,' which states, 'We affirm that a society must inevitably choose between conflicting legal foundations and views of law and should choose Christian views and a Christian foundation because the Christian system is vastly superior to all alternatives." Farris denies ever signing the document or co-writing the section on a Christian view of the law although Armstrong recalls that she and Farris wrote different parts of the section and "he certainly seemed to be in general agreement" of the finished version.

Michael Farris, in his 1992 book, Where Do I Draw The Line?, addressed Reconstructionism. He quotes Francis Shaeffer's Christian Manifesto to explain our nation's slide into its current cultural condition but he also takes an opportunity to note that, "there are those who advocate the idea that America should enact the Old Testament law right down to the rules for conducting trials. I am not one of those people but I do believe the moral principles of God apply to every age."

However, when discussing classical education in The Future of Home Schooling, he recommends as "one of the best programs I have seen that offers a clearly Christian classical education is David Quine's World Views of the Western World…World Views is a three-year program that is built largely around the works of Francis Schaeffer. Students still read Homer, Socrates and Machiavelli. But these are balanced not only by Schaeffer's works, but also by St. Augustine, Luther and Calvin."

As homeschoolers we should be very careful not to assign guilt by association. It is probable that some of the individuals involved in homeschooling and/or HSLDA are Reconstructionists, while others who associate with them are not. Prominent Reconstructionists are often given a forum to advance their cause at HSLDA conferences but it is unknown whether HSLDA itself is a Reconstructionist organization. HSLDA has ties to the Reconstructionist movement through former employees such as attorney Doug Phillips, the son of prominent Reconstructionist Howard Phillips, founder of the U.S. Taxpayers Party and HSLDA founder James Carden who was instrumental in introducing the concept of home schooling to Bill Gothard of Advanced Training Institute of America, himself a prominent Reconstructionist. Carden was among the 100 families who piloted the ATIA program in 1984/85. Board member Jeff Ethell may have been influenced by Reconstruction ideas while a student at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia, where noted Reconstructionist Cornelius Van Til taught for nearly 50 years. In his 1959 book, R.J. Rushdoony lavishly praised Van Til's philosophy and the influence it had on him.

Christopher Klicka attended Regent University where 'longtime Dean of the Law School, Herb Titus…used Rushoony's book in his introductory law course… "Christopher Klicka, who has been deeply influenced by R.J. Rushdoony, writes: 'Sending our children to the public school violates nearly every Biblical principle…It is tantamount to sending our children to be trained by the enemy'…Klicka also advocates religious selfsegregation and advises Christians not to affiliate with non-Christian homeschoolers in any way. 'The differences I am talking about…have resulted in wars and martyrdom in the not too distant past.' According to Klicka, who is an attorney with the Home School Legal Defense Association, 'as an organization, and as individuals, we are committed to promote the cause of Christ and his Kingdom."

Former HSLDA employee Inge Cannon was previously employed by Bill Gothard's Institute of Basic Life Principles where she was involved with the development of ATIA's homeschool curriculum. Several of HSLDA's interns come from or plan to attend Oak Brook College of Law and Government Policy which is part of Bill Gothard's ATIA. Also, Tim LaHaye, considered to be a prominent Reconstructionist, is associated with Michael Farris' political action committee, Madison Project Fund Inc., as well as having ties to him through Concerned Women for America. Many of the ideals, particularly exclusivism and selfsegregation as promoted by prominent Christian homeschooling leaders like Christopher Klicka and Gregg Harris, are Reconstructionist in nature. As homeschoolers we must be careful when examining the religious motivations of our fellow homeschoolers not to attach labels which may not be appropriate. However, it would be more honest of HSLDA and others to define their belief status when placing themselves in positions of moral authority over homeschoolers, who are perhaps of other, contrary, beliefs.

1 Gary North, "Westminster's Confession: The Abandonment of Van Til's Legacy", Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1991, p. 227.

2 Derek H. Davis, "Religious Pluralism and the Quest for Unity in American Life", Journal of Church & State, Spring 1994, Vol. 36, Issue 2, page 245.

3 Frederick Clarkson, "Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence", The Public Eye, March and June 1994.

5 J. Ligon Duncan III, Moses' Law for Modern Government: The Intellectual and Sociological Origins of the Christian Reconstructionist Movement, Atlanta Georgia, October 15, 1994.

6 Rev. Andrew Sandlin, "The Creed of Christian Reconstruction", Chalcedon Foundation, (http://www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html.)

7 Alec Foege, The Empire God Built - Inside Pat Robertson's Media Machine, (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1996), page 176.

8 William Martin, With God On Our Side, (New York: Broadway Books, 1996), page 353-354.

9 PRO-S.O.C.S. (Separation of Church and State), "The Righteous Revolution: Could there be a theocracy in America's future?", 1996.

10 Sara Diamond, "Dominion Theology: The Truth About the Christian Right's Bid for Power".

11 "Council For National Policy Membership List", Institute for First Amendment Studies.

12 Frederick Clarkson, "Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence", The Public Eye, March and June 1994.

14 Jay Rogers, What is Theonomy?, ww.forerunner.com/theofaq.html, no date. Theonomy means "God's law".

15 Gary North, Political Polytheism: The Myth of Pluralism (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989), p. 87.

16 Frederick Clarkson, "Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence," The Public Eye, March and June 1994.

18 William Martin, With God On Our Side, New York: Broadway Books, 1996, page 270.

20 Leslie Kaufman, "Life Beyond God," New York Times Magazine, October 16, 1994.

21 Michael Farris, Where Do I Draw The Line?, Minnesota: Bethany House, 1992, page 15.

22 Rozell and Wilcox Second Coming The New Christian Right in Virginia Politics, Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996, page 100-101.

24 Michael Farris, The Future of Home Schooling, Washington D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 1997, page 16.

25 "In Memoriam", Home School Court Report, Vol. 13, No. 3, May/June 97, page 10.

26 Bruce Barron, Heaven On Earth? The Social and Political Agenda of Dominion Theology, Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 1992, pages 37, 39.

27 Frederick Clarkson:, Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence, Part 3: No Longer Without Sheep.

I got to this thread about 2 years too late it would seem, however, first let me assure you that I am not Christian but certainly not anti-christian in any respects. I was raised Catholic and hold several Christians as my closest friends.

What concerns me here is first and foremost the obvious (from the view of an outsider looking in) assumption that just because someone uses the same words to define their faith, they must believe the same thing I have had to endure countless people assuming that I am an amoral sex freak because I am a self confessed Neo-Pagan on the one hand and have been mistaken for a kind Christian due to my charity work and profession on the other. The fact is that I would be surprised if many of the Christians on this board would have more in common with the CR people than they do with me, but I would also be surprised if I found that admitting that I am a Pagan right off the bat inspired confidence in those same people.

The truth of the matter is that firstly, the Christian Reconstructionists are anything but the nice and cuddly Christians who believe in the Christian admonition to love thine neighbor and the ethics espoused by such teaching stories as the story of the good Samaritan. The charges leveled at them by this article are indeed true (for the most part, although perhaps slightly sensationalized) although it may take a bit of digging to see the truth.

First I'll point you to this site which is set up to sell a video of the biggest heroes of the Recon movement, especially interesting to listen to is the video response of George Grant to question nine. In it he espouses the belief (held by every major player in the movement) in the absolute necessity to reestablish Old Testament law. Also see Rushdoony's video response to the same question where he decries Autonomy in favor of theonomy (please note that while neither of these guys answer the question, the subject of the question is what will happen to non-Christians in a Christian ruled society:

http://forerunner.com/revolution/questions.html

Here you can find everything else you could ever hope to find out about the CR, including what to expect as far as the new (or really old) laws they plan to institute when they take over (oh boy, a return to slavery and stoning deaths of non Christians that talk about their beliefs, don't get me started on the marriage of virgin rape victims with their attacker...):

http://www.serve.com/thibodep/cr/cr.htm

Just a couple more little tidbits for those that still don't think these guys are actually trying to institute a forcible takeover of the government (this is from the above site):

"The long-term goal of Christians in politics should be to gain exclusive control over the franchise. Those who refuse to submit publicly to the eternal sanctions of God by submitting to His Church's public marks of the covenant--baptism and holy communion--must be denied citizenship, just as they were in ancient Israel.

Gary North, Political Polytheism: The Myth of Pluralism (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989), p. 87."

And then:

"So let us be blunt about it: 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.
Gary North, "The Intellectual Schizophrenia of the New Christian Right" in Christianity and Civilization: The Failure of the American Baptist Culture, No. 1 (Spring, 1982), p. 25."

How is that for a link to home schooling... I'm not saying that all home schoolers are doing this, I do think that these guys are though and that is the point I would like to make.

By looking back at the posts on this thread I was disgusted to see Vonnegut's formula from "Breakfast of Champions" being demonstrated in perfect clarity. The idea is that a person doesn't choose his or her beliefs based upon sound judgement and rational thinking but upon what their friends say and feel. If an enemy brings up a great idea then it is automatically scrutinized and if real reasons to go against it aren't found the case is just closed and the opposite opinion is followed.

These guys are freaks, plain and simple and to defend them is to defend a group that wants to specifically take over the U.S. and replace it with their own literal interpretation of biblical law, with all the good old prohibitions against eating shell fish (an "abomination" if you go by Old Testament law) and the requirements that disobedient children be stoned to death by the family.

On the other hand, I didn't see a single citation of these sites of which I know many of them have been operational for at least 3 years. I know, I found out about these guys back then and found this site within 5 minutes of searching, you guys really didn't even try to show documented evidence of this group's activities in relation to this article and I found it within just a few minutes! No, I'm not patting myself on the back, it wasn't even really a challenge, and that is my point.

If any of us humans want to be taken seriously we have to accept the fact that people (as opposed to an individual) are stupid and we need to have everything layed out before us if we are to look at things seriously. If we really want to have our ideas looked at and taken seriously we have to take the trouble to at least try to communicate why we think we are right. You guys didn't even try.

If we are to try to understand each-other we need to be able to understand that communication is a two way street, one person must try to tell their position in words the listener can understand and the listener must try to understand what the speaker is saying even if the two can't stand each-other. If there is a breakdown on either side then the meaning of the words get lost in transmission.

Please represent humanity better in the future, I don't want the aliens to think that we all act like cattle.

Lots of love and mental hugs,
Rob

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.