JUDICIAL WARFARE
Christian Reconstruction and Its Blueprints For Dominion
by Greg Loren Durand

Chapter Seventeen:
Reconstructionism's Theocratic Kingdom

       Reconstructionists tend to paint other eschatologies with a very large and uncharitable brush. For example, in his book, He Shall Have Dominion, Kenneth Gentry mentioned "the intrinsic, historical pessimism in all non-postmillennial systems."⁽¹⁾ In his ususal style, Gary North wrote, "The traditional pessimillennialists have issued a clarion call: Come join us; we're historical losers. They have built their institutions by attracting people who are content to remain historical (pre-second coming) losers."⁽²⁾ Elsewhere, he alleged that all non-Reconstructionist eschatologies lead to a gnostic dichotomy between "evil matter and good spirit" and the belief that "this hostile, forever-evil world cannot be redeemed, reformed, and reconstructed,"⁽³⁾ and he insisted that Amillennialism in particular "leads to the defeat of Christians on the battlefields of culture" and teaches "the victory of Satan's forces over the church."⁽⁴⁾ Gentry likewise stated that the Amillennialist believes there will be "a continuity of cultural decline and defeat for Christianity until Jesus comes again" [emphasis in original].⁽⁵⁾ None of the Reconstructionist writers have been more bombastic, however, than R.J. Rushdoony, who denounced the Amillennial position as "impotent religion" and "blasphemy"⁽⁶⁾ despite the fact that it has been the majority eschatological view of the Reformed faith for over five hundred years.
       It will be granted that some Amillennialists, especially those within the Dutch Reformed tradition, have stressed the ever-increasing disparity between good and evil. Such was the view advanced by Cornelius Van Til:

       All common grace is earlier grace. Its commonness lies in its earliness.... At the very first stage of history there is much common grace. There is a common good nature under the common favor of God. But this creation-grace requires response. It cannot remain what it is. It is conditional. Differentiation must set in and does set in. It comes first in the form of a common rejection of God. Yet common grace continues; it is on a "lower" level now; it is long-suffering that men may be led to repentance.... Common grace will diminish still more in the further course of history. With every conditional act the remaining significance of the conditional is reduced. God allows men to follow the path of self-chosen rejection of Him more rapidly than ever toward the final consummation. God increases His attitude of wrath upon the reprobate as time goes on, until at the end of time, at the great consummation of history, their condition has caught up with their state....
       But when all the reprobate are epistemologically self-conscious, the crack of doom has come. The fully self-conscious reprobate will do all he can in every dimension to destroy the people of God. So while we seek with all our power to hasten the process of differentiation in every dimension we are yet thankful, on the other hand, for the "day of grace," the day of undeveloped differentiation. Such toleration as we receive on the part of the world is due to this fact that we live in the earlier, rather than in the later, stage of history. And such influence on the public situation as we can effect, whether in society or in state, presupposes this undifferentiated stage of development.⁽⁷⁾

       Van Til's postulation that the reprobate can ever become "epistemologically self-conscious" in history is simply untrue. All unbelievers are forced to be inconsistent with their rebellion against God and His created order in order to even function in society; this is one manifestation of God's common grace, which, while dispensed indiscriminately to all men, is really for the benefit and protection of His Church (1 Timothy 4:10). For the unbeliever, "epistemological self-consciousness" is only fully achieved in hell when all common grace has been removed and he is left entirely to himself.
       Van Til's doctrine of declining common grace, however, is not a necessary feature of Amillennialism and should not be used to caricaturize the position as a whole, as North and Gentry have done. One can expect a general parallelism between good and evil in history without giving up the Amillennial position. This seems to be the implication of such passages as Matthew 24:37 and 2 Peter 3:3-4. It should also be noted that even some theonomic Postmillennialists have interpreted Revelation 20:7-9 as a prediction of a future worldwide, though short-lived, revolt against Christ's theocratic Kingdom.⁽⁸⁾ Amillennialists would similarly interpret this passage as a final revolt against the Gospel and the persecution of the Christian Church which results in the second advent of Christ, the ultimate destruction of the wicked, and the creation of the "new heavens and new earth." Whereas the Reconstructionist is forced by his system into a contradiction — i.e., it is difficult to image how the ungodly will be as numerous "as the sand of the sea" (verse 8) and will "compass the camp of the saints about" (verse 9) if there is "majoritarian Christendom" or a "five-to-one ratio for Christians over non-Christians at the height of the millennial glory"⁽⁹⁾ — the Amillennialist, who does not insist on an earthly dominion of the Church, is not threatened in the least by this prophecy.
       North's charge of Gnosticism is unjustly leveled against Amillennialism, which teaches that heaven itself will actually be transferred to a purified earth; the earth will in fact be "redeemed, reformed, and reconstructed," but this will be done by Christ Himself when He returns. Just as Christians will be resurrected with glorified, immortal bodies at His coming, so too will the earth be resurrected and glorified. This is what Christ meant when He said, "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth" (Matthew 5:5). Without exception, every time the Scripture mentions an earthly inheritance of the saints, it is in this context; until that time, our reign is in "heavenly places" (Ephesians 2:6).
       It should be kept in mind that behind the Reconstructionists' denunciations of all other eschatologies but their own is really the belief that all Christians who reject the continuing sanctions of Deuteronomy 28 have no alternative but to "proclaim the inevitable institutional and cultural defeat of Christianity in history."⁽¹⁰⁾ Reconstructionists often try to appear as if their hope for the future rests upon a mass conversion of souls in the future,⁽¹¹⁾ but a careful reading of their literature will reveal that spiritual regeneration is not enough for them. Besides a worldwide revival, governments throughout the world must also enforce the civil penalties of the Old Testament before God's Kingdom will be fully realized in history. Rushdoony taught that Christians have been given a "cultural mandate" to take dominion over the institutions of this world, and that the "biblical blueprints for politics"⁽¹²⁾ necessarily involve the destruction of the existing social and political structures and their replacement with a Mosaic theocracy. Gary North wrote, "God wants Christians to control the earth on His behalf."⁽¹³⁾ To this, he added elsewhere, "In winning a nation to the Gospel, the sword as well as the pen must be used."⁽¹⁴⁾ However, such bluntness is rare; usually the Reconstructionists prefer instead to ease their readers' fears with doubletalk about the primacy of evangelism and revival over physical coercion:

       The Bible does not allow the imposition of some sort of top-down bureaucratic tyranny in the name of Christ....
       The basis for building a Christian society is evangelism and missions that lead to a widespread Christian revival, so that the great mass of earth's inhabitants will place themselves under Christ's protection, and voluntarily use His covenantal laws for self-government. Christian reconstruction begins with personal conversion to Christ and self-government under God's law, then it spreads to others through revival, and only later does it bring comprehensive changes in civil law, when the vast majority of voters voluntarily agree to live under biblical blueprints....
       The kingdom will not be brought in by a bureaucratic theocratic regime, but by the heart-transforming work of the Holy Spirit.⁽¹⁵⁾

       This claim that regeneration is necessary for the reconstruction of society contradicts the Reconstructionists' insistence that non-Christian societies and even "people ethically subordinate to Satan," can nevertheless accumulate God's "millennial blessings" to themselves by a mere external observance of the law. Furthermore, such disclaimers are hardly reassuring when it is kept in mind that the true Kingdom of God was already "brought in" when Christ rose from the dead and sat down at the right hand of God the Father: "And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Acts 13:32-33). The Kingdom promised to Abraham, prophesied by God's prophets throughout the Old Testament, preached by Jesus Christ, inaugurated with His death and resurrection, and proclaimed by His Apostles and the Christian Church ever since, is the present and spiritual reign of all true believers with Christ "in heavenly places" (Ephesians 2:6). Calvin wrote, "[H]e who knows to distinguish between the body and the soul, between the present fleeting life and that which is future and eternal, will have no difficulty in understanding that the spiritual kingdom of Christ and civil government are things very widely separated...."⁽¹⁶⁾ Consequently, the purpose of the Apostles in preaching the Gospel was "not to form a civil polity, but to establish the spiritual kingdom of Christ...."⁽¹⁷⁾ Calvin described the nature of this spiritual Kingdom as follows:

       That the strength and utility of the kingdom of Christ cannot... be fully perceived, without recognising it as spiritual, is sufficiently apparent, even from this, that having during the whole course of our lives to war under the cross, our condition here is bitter and wretched. What then would it avail us to be ranged under the government of a heavenly King, if its benefits were not realised beyond the present earthly life? We must, therefore, know that the happiness which is promised to us in Christ does not consist in external advantages — such as leading a joyful and tranquil life, abounding in wealth, being secure against all injury, and having an affluence of delights, such as the flesh is wont to long for — but properly belongs to the heavenly life. As in the world the prosperous and desirable condition of a people consists partly in the abundance of temporal good and domestic peace, and partly in the strong protection which gives security against external violence; so Christ also enriches his people with all things necessary to the eternal salvation of their souls, and fortifies them with courage to stand unassailable by all the attacks of spiritual foes. Whence we infer, that he reigns more for us than for himself, and that both within us and without us; that being replenished, in so far as God knows to be expedient, with the gifts of the Spirit, of which we are naturally destitute, we may feel from their first fruits, that we are truly united to God for perfect blessedness; and then trusting to the power of the same Spirit, may not doubt that we shall always be victorious against the devil, the world, and everything that can do us harm. To this effect was our Saviour's reply to the Pharisees, "The kingdom of God is within you." "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation" (Luke xvii. 21, 22). It is probable that on his declaring himself to be that King under whom the highest blessing of God was to be expected, they had in derision asked him to produce his insignia. But to prevent those who were already more than enough inclined to the earth from dwelling on its pomp, he bids them to enter into their consciences, for "the kingdom of God" is "righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Rom. xiv. 17). These words briefly teach what the kingdom of Christ bestows upon us. Not being earthly or carnal, and so subject to corruption, but spiritual, it raises us even to eternal life, so that we can patiently live at present under toil, hunger, cold, contempt, disgrace, and other annoyances; contented with this, that our King will never abandon us, but will supply our necessities until our warfare is ended, and we are called to triumph: such being the nature of his kingdom, that he communicates to us whatever he received of his Father.⁽¹⁸⁾

         My kingdom is not of this world. By these words [Christ] acknowledges that he is a king, but, so far as was necessary to prove his innocence, he clears himself of the calumny [of insurrection]; for he declares, that there is no disagreement between his kingdom and political government or order; as if he had said, "I am falsely accused, as if I had attempted to produce a disturbance, or to make a revolution in public affairs. I have preached about the kingdom of God; but that is spiritual, and, therefore, you have no right to suspect me of aspiring to kingly power." This defence was made by Christ before Pilate, but the same doctrine is useful to believers to the end of the world; for if the kingdom of Christ were earthly, it would be frail and changeable, because the fashion of this world passeth away, (1 Cor. vii.31); but now, since it is pronounced to be heavenly, that the whole world were overturned, provided that our consciences are always directed to the kingdom of Christ, they will, nevertheless, remain firm, not only amidst shakings and convulsions, but even amidst dreadful ruin and destruction. If we are cruelly treated by wicked men, still our salvation is secured by the kingdom of Christ, which is not subject to the caprice of men. In short, though there are innumerable storms by which the world is continually agitated, the kingdom of Christ, in which we ought to seek tranquility, is separated from the world [emphasis in original].⁽¹⁹⁾

       Charles Hodge likewise wrote:

       As to the nature of this kingdom, our Lord Himself teaches us that it is not of this world. It is not analogous to the kingdoms which exist among men. It is not a kingdom of earthly splendor, wealth, or power. It does not concern the civil or political affairs of men, except in their moral relations. Its rewards and enjoyments are not the good things of this world. It is said to consist in "righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Rom. xiv.17). Christ told his hearers, "The kingdom of God is within you." The condition of admission into that kingdom is regeneration (John iii. 5), conversion (Matt. xviii. 3), holiness of heart and life, for the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God; nor thieves, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10; Gal. v. 21; Eph. v. 5).⁽²⁰⁾

       The separation of Church and State has thus been a predominant tenet of the Reformed faith for five hundred years.⁽²¹⁾ Gary North, on the other hand, correctly noted that Reconstructionists "are the only Christians on earth calling for the building of a biblical theocracy,"⁽²²⁾ and supposedly it is they, not the mainstream "antinomian" Christian Church, who will be used of God to establish and rule His earthly Kingdom. In fact, the future does not look very bright for non-Reconstructionist Christians:

       All who are content with a humanistic law system and do not strive to replace it with Biblical law are guilty of idolatry. They have forsaken the covenant of their God, and they are asking us to serve other gods. They are thus idolaters, and are, in our generation, when our world is idolatrous and our states also, to be objects of missionary activity. They must be called out of their idolatry into the service of the living God....
       "Christian" man is thus doubly a sinner when he is antinomian and despises God's law: he has denied the law in Adam, and now, with consummate profanity, he denies it in the name of Christ. He thus doubly denies the everlasting covenant, and doubly transgresses the laws.⁽²³⁾

       Rushdoony apparently viewed non-Reconstructionist Christians as unconverted idolaters in need of evangelism. It should be remembered that idolatry is on the Reconstructionist list of capital offenses, and even though such "antinomians" are to be subjected to "missionary activity" in today's "idolatrous" (i.e. pluralistic) society, it was made very clear by Rushdoony that they would be viewed as "traitors" under a theonomic system: "This condemnation does not apply to a missionary situation, where the land is anti-God to begin with: this is a situation for conversion. It does require a nation grounded in God's law-system to preserve that order by punishing the basic treason against it."⁽²⁴⁾ Furthermore, as in any totalitarian system, it seems that freedom of dissent and even theological debate would also be stifled in his imagined theocracy, for "intellectual attack" (public criticism) upon the law system will be viewed as a "social evil" to be punished by the magistrate.⁽²⁵⁾ One need only read Deuteronomy 13:5, of which the above words were a commentary, to learn what Rushdoony had in mind for such "enemies of the State": "Idolatry is thus not only punishable by law as socially detrimental, it is in fact a capital offense. It constitutes treason to the King or Sovereign, to Almighty God."⁽²⁶⁾ Elsewhere, he accused these alleged “antinomians” of “bearing false witness,” and wrote thusly of their punishment: “The false witness concerning Jesus Christ, to which all unbelievers, all apostate churchmen, and all nations and institutions which deny His sovereignty and His law-word, with one accord assent, that law requires their death (Deut. 19:16-21). So Christ puts evil away from His realm, both in time and in eternity.”⁽²⁷⁾
       According to Gary North, the Reconstructionist agenda involves installing candidates in public offices with the long-term goal of undermining the political system: "[I]f 'we, the regenerate, covenanted people' ever get a sufficient number of votes, we could legally amend the Constitution.... [D]emocratic persuasion is only an intermediary step to coercion" [emphasis in original].⁽²⁸⁾ Thus, the Reconstructionists, while decrying democracy as "heresy" and the inevitable enemy of Christianity,⁽²⁹⁾ are more than willing to use the democratic process to set up their system, under which democracy will perish, non-Christians and non-Reconstructionist Christians will be disfranchised⁽³⁰⁾ and perhaps even executed,⁽³¹⁾ and "every jot and tittle" of the localized and thus now inoperative penal sanctions of the Mosaic code will be enforced against all dissenters:

       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.⁽³²⁾

         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.⁽³³⁾

       This strategy is not only dishonest, it is also unrealistic. Modern Americans are far too accustomed to civil and religious liberty to allow for the establishment of a theonomic totalitarianism in which the followers of Rushdoony and North will "exercise biblical dominion under God by obeying and enforcing God's holy law."⁽³⁴⁾ Reconstructionists often write and act as if Article VI and the First Amendment had never been inserted into the United States Constitution with their obvious disestablishment of religion and the erection of the proverbial "wall of separation" between Church and State. The few Reconstructionists who may be successful in getting elected to public office will find themselves backed up against this wall and "stoned" by public opinion if they should ever attempt actually to do in the civil realm what they postulate in their writings. Therefore, the peaceful take-over of government in this country by the election of large numbers of Reconstructionists to public office may be inspirational fuel for conservative political rallies, but it is highly unlikely that it will ever manifest in reality.
       One of the clear differences between the administration of the Old Testament and the New Testament is that God's covenantal dealings with mankind are no longer national, but are now individual. To be sure, the Church of the redeemed is called "an holy nation" (1 Peter 2:9), but the designation is wholly spiritual, not earthly. It cannot be stressed enough that the seat of the Christian's reign is in "heavenly places," not on earth. In the words of John Calvin, "it is a Jewish vanity to seek and include the kingdom of Christ under the elements of this world...."⁽³⁵⁾ Although "Christendom" has existed in a general sense (those cultures in which professing Christians comprise the majority), there has been no successful theocratic "covenant nation" established since the advent of the New Testament nearly 2,000 years ago.
       The notion of a modern theocracy also directly contradicts the words of Christ in the thirteenth chapter of Matthew:

       And another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn....
       Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; the field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear (verses 24-30, 36-43).

       One important thing to notice in this passage is that the righteous do not "shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father" until after the "harvest"; the "wheat" and the "tares" are said to grow together in the world within the context of the common grace covenant until the final day of judgment, and then, it is Christ's angels who will "gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity," not the Reconstructionists who have gained control of the government and have started ripping up the tares themselves with the penal sanctions of the Mosaic law. The New Testament repeatedly declares that the wicked will be consumed because they have not obeyed the Gospel, not because they have refused to subject themselves to the Old Covenant. The Bible teaches that Christ's second advent will occur when the whole world has heard the Gospel and the entire number of the elect has been gathered into His Church (Matthew 24:31; John 11:52; Ephesians 1:10).

Endnotes

1. Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, page 457.

2. Gary North, Foreword in Chilton, Days of Vengeance, pages xxv, xxix.

3. North, Tools of Dominion, pages 59, 60; North, Healer of the Nations, page 345.

4. North, Tools of Dominion, page 967.

5. Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, page xxvi.

6. Rushdoony, essay: "Postmillennialism Versus Impotent Religion," The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, Winter 1976-77.

7. Van Til, Common Grace and the Gospel, pages 82-83, 85.

8. Gentry conceded that there will be a "brief rebellion," but he insisted that it will be instigated by "a minority" who have not been converted to Christ [He Shall Have Dominion, page 253; emphasis in original]. Later on in the same book, the size of the rebellion seemed to have grown somewhat in Gentry's imagination:

       At the end of the kingdom era and just preceding Judgment Day, Satan is loosed very briefly (a "little while," Rev. 20:3) from his bondage. During this short period of time, he is allowed to gather a sizeable force of rebels, who will attempt to supplant the prevailing Christian majoritarian influence in the world (Rev. 20:7-9). Under His providential rule, Christ's spiritual kingdom will have spread over the face of the earth and have dominated human life and culture for ages. But all men are never converted during any period of history. Consequently, upon Satan's brief loosing, he quickly incites to war repressed children of wickedness" (ibid., page 418).

       One has to wonder why these "children of wickedness" will feel so "repressed" when, according to Gary North, even people who are "ethically subordinate to Satan" will be experiencing the covenantal blessings of Deuteronomy 28 in the millennial period.
       David Chilton wrote that this final rebellion will occur when "God's Kingdom has realized its earthly potential...." (Days of Vengeance, page 520). It is very strange, therefore, for Reconstructionists to constantly harangue other eschatologies for their "pessimism," when their own earthly dominion, having reached its highest potential, will apparently end in a rebellion of such magnitude that the direct intervention of Christ Himself will be needed to rescue the Church from destruction.

9. Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, page 254.

10. North, Political Polytheism, page 160.

11. According to North, "The road to the comprehensive peace of God begins with the transformation of the covenant-breaking heart. Personal regeneration must precede comprehensive social reconstruction. This has always been the position of Christian Reconstruction" (ibid., page 20).

12. This was the subtitle of George Grant's book, The Changing of the Guard: The Biblical Blueprint For Politics (Fort Worth, Texas: Dominion Press, 1987). Grant has since disclaimed the Reconstructionist label.

13. North, Liberating Planet Earth, page 23.

14. North, Journal of Christian Reconstruction, Volume Six, Number 1, page 198.

15. North, Tools of Dominion, pages 55, 57.

16. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Chapter XX:1.

17. Calvin, ibid., Book IV, Chapter XX:12.

18. Calvin, ibid., Book II, Chapter XV:4.

19. John Calvin, Commentary on the Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1993), Volume II, page 209.

20. Hodge, Systematic Theology, Volume III, page 857.

21. In his response to James Henley Thornwell in the October 1863 issue of the Southern Presbyterian Review (see Appendix Four), Thomas E. Peck demonstrated that the civil magistrate derives his authority from God as Creator, not from Christ as Mediator. Consequently, while the magistrate must enforce the moral law, which "forever bindeth all" (Westminster Confession, Chapter XIX:5), he is under no obligation to establish the specific laws which God has designed to govern the Body of Christ.

22. North, Tools of Dominion, page 53.

23. Rushdoony, Law and Society, pages 316, 468. This last statement, in which the original Adamic covenant and that instituted by Christ are implicitly identified as merely different administrations of the one “everlasting covenant,” must be understood in light of Rushdoony’s explicit denial of the traditional Reformed doctrine of the Covenant of Works. Consequently, his charge of “antinomianism” was brought against anyone who rejects his radical monocovenantalism in favor of the bi-covenantal distinction between law and gospel found in orthodox Covenant theology (see Chapter Four).

24. Rushdoony, Institutes of Biblical Law, page 39.

25. Rushdoony, ibid., pages 93-94.

26. Rushdoony, ibid., page 66. While it may be granted that Rushdoony's views at this point are not universally held among Reconstructionists, an inquisitorial spirit is nevertheless inherent in their system of which the public in general, and the Christian Church in particular, ought to be made aware.

27. Rushdoony, ibid., page 574.

28. North, Political Polytheism, page 101.

29. Rushdoony, Institutes of Biblical Law, page 100.

30. In Political Polytheism, Gary North wrote, "[Reconstructionists'] long-term task is to create a theocratic republic in which only voting church members are allowed to vote in civil elections...." (page 600, footnote).

31. North complained that "those who say that Christian Reconstructionists would 'kill anyone who is not a Reconstructionist' are blowing smoke. They are bearing false witness against their neighbors. Where are their footnotes proving such an accusation? There are none" (ibid., page 594). Documentation has already been provided above which shows this "accusation" to be a valid one, at least in Rushdoony's case.

32. North, ibid., page 87.

33. Gary North, essay: "The Intellectual Schizophrenia of the New Christian Right" in Christianity and Civilization: The Failure of the American Baptist Culture, Number I (Spring, 1982), page 25.

34. North, Tools of Dominion, page 53.

35. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Chapter XX:1.