Sponsors

Blogging for Theocracy Email Print

By Frederick Clarkson
11/29/2005 09:15:51 PM EST

The Chalcedon Foundation, the seminal think tank of the Christian Reconstructionist movement, founded by the late theologian of theocracy, R.J. Rushdoony, has a blog - new this month. The blog's early posts include some tart observations about my new site  Talk to Action -- and even tarter responses to John Sugg's article on Christian Reconstructionism in Mother Jones magazine. Among other things, blogger Chris Ortiz, says the article is "amateurish" -- although he does not say how.

For Talk to Action's part, he says the order of the day is "fearmongering," and tales of "conspiracy" -- although Ortiz also has some kind words for one of the co-founders.

Chalcedon, headed by Rushdoony's son Mark Rushdoony these days, is aggressively seeking to define and to defend Reconstructionism, which has played a central role in shaping the theogy and politics of development of the Christian Right for a half-century.

Chris Ortiz, the Communications Director of Chalcedon is, like Gary North and other Reconstructionist leaders, seeking to distance Reconstructionism from Christian Right leaders like Pat Robertson and James Dobson -- whom they see as corrupted by the GOP and the Bush administration. Ortiz says that Chalcedon plans to publish a series of criticisms of the Christian Right over the next year.  

Meanwhile, Ortiz writes that has been very concerned about a backlash against the theocratic movement by "the far left." He has attended two conferences on the Christian Right sponsored by the New York Open Center and the Graduate Program of the City University of New York. I was a speaker at both events and had the pleasure of meeting him at the second one.  Chris appreciates civil discourse, as do we at Talk to Action. He also respects people who seek to get their facts right; and who seek to understand rather than smear people with whom they disagree. So do we.

Nevertheless, he holds some strong views about the goings on at Talk to Action, and elsewhere. Regarding the Talk to Action's e-conference on the religious right, he writes:

"It seems the order of the day is "fearmongering." Many of the essays featured by these alleged "experts" on dominionism are filled with the usual factual errors we've seen for some time -- this clearly displays the slack hand they labor with. When you make simple mistakes of basic facts it's difficult for readers to swallow your thesis.

In early October of 2004, I predicted that if Bush were to secure a second term that there would be a backlash from the far left. The reason being that progressives are convinced Bush's rise to power was in the fiery chariot of the Religious Right.

The essence of their tale of conspiracy involves a direct influence by Christian Reconstructionists on the popular pundits of the Christian Right (e.g. Falwell, Robertson, LaHaye, Dobson, Perkins, Barton, etc.). There is no doubt that multitudes have borrowed from Rushdoony, North, and Bahnsen; but you would hardly find the patriarchs of Christian Reconstruction siding with the political tactics of the Christian Right.

We should expect an increase in this progressive resistance in 2006. I suspect it will last so long as Bush is in office. My concern is the mistreatment and continued slander of R.J. Rushdoony and the message of Christian Reconstruction.

A piece of friendly advice for Chris: He should realize that many of us have been interested and concerned about these matters since long before Mr. Bush, and will continue to be interested and concerned long after he leaves office. But these are discussions and debates for another day.  

For today, let's welcome Chris Ortiz and Chalcedon Blog to the blogosphere.


KEYWORDS: , ,

Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!

< Hariri Probe Falling Apart? | U.S. Plants Paid Propaganda in Iraq's Press >
 Display:
Blogging for Theocracy | 2 comments (2 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)
It is more than likely (none / 1)
that the right-wing noise machine and their weird slimy tentacles in the blogospere will be screaching at and sliming Mother Jones -- and probably Talk to Action as well.

But there is a secret I shall now reveal exclusively to Cortexans:  slime shrivels up when you laugh at it.

It's a scientific fact.

And I swear I didn't hear it in intelligent design class.

by Frederick Clarkson on 11/30/2005 01:06:04 AM EST

Interesting (none / 1)
You know, as a Christian, part of me thinks that nothing could be better than this country putting a little more of what Jesus taught into our government. But then I remember the whole thing He taught about "rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's", and I also remember that the framers had a very good reason for the separation of church and state.

Throughout history, whenever the Church and the halls of power became too intertwined, the outcome has never been good. The inquisition, the crusades, Henry VIII's religious persecution, the Puritans, and so on. This is because power often attracts those who are easily corrupted by greed and ambition, and when you allow the leaders of the church to dance in those circles, the corruption only spreads.

I am always willing to talk to someone who is interested about my beliefs (one of which is most definitely NOT that the God of Love will send everybody that didn't join the right religious club with the right baptism ritual or whatever to an eternal lake of damnation and fire, but that's just me). But I believe that when Jesus talked about his disciples going out and changing the world, he meant through people's hearts, not through their rulers.

Teach people to love one another and be kind. And to start by teaching yourself (He was pretty clear about that part).

All that being said, it seems as though these particular Reconstructionists are at least people with whom we can have a conversation about this subject, which is heartening.

I do think they make the same mistake that 'honest conservatives' make. The very nature of their movement is an invitation to corruption, and while their intentions and motives may, in fact, be honorable, the real life application turns out to be a far cry from what they thought it would be.

If you don't understand someone, consider that the shortcoming may not lie with that person, but rather with your own understanding.

by Aethern on 11/30/2005 04:41:35 AM EST

Blogging for Theocracy | 2 comments (2 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
 Display: