R. J. Rushdoony, Reconstructionist and Racist Bigot

by Lorette C. Luzajic

Part 4 of the Pillars of Faith series.

The name of this theologian may be unfamiliar, but most men of God are his heirs.

Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, Howard Ahmanson, James Dobson, D. James Kennedy — almost every fundamentalist follows Rousas John Rushdoony, 1916-2001. Newsweek once referred to Rushdoony’s Chalcedon Foundation as the think tank of the religious right.

But what you won’t hear in Sunday school is that Rushdoony is a racist, sexist, Jew-hating bigot who denies the holocaust. Don’t take it from me: The British Centre for Science Education refers to him as “a man every bit as potentially murderous as Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot or anyone else you may want to name amongst the annals of evil.”

Democracy Is of the Devil

Pullquote: To keep the secular indoctrination of sciences, arts, and feminism from poisoning society, Rushdoony advocated the death penalty according to Leviticus laws.

R.J.’s basic philosophy was that the Old Testament gave white man dominion over the earth, the animals, women, and heathen nations. Theocracy is God’s will, and democracy is apostasy — only Christians should be able to vote.

To keep the secular indoctrination of sciences, arts, and feminism from poisoning society, Rushdoony advocated the death penalty according to Leviticus laws. Among the 18 capital crimes were of course, adultery, witchcraft, homosexuality, and blasphemy.

Rushdoony is the driving backbone behind the home schooling movement, to guarantee kids would be brainwashed by the O.T. and not by history and literature.

Because R.J. sought to reconstruct the O.T. laws and overturn the apostate civic society, his work is called the Reconstructionist Movement.

Dominion and Stoning

R.J.’s foundation is a web ministry and magazine espousing Reconstructionist theology, promoting home schooling as defense against secularism. “The state, the school, the arts and sciences, law, economics, and every other sphere [is] to be under Christ the King. Nothing is exempt from His dominion.”

The magazine publishes thought provoking articles like W. Einwechter’s on stoning the rebellious child. “It displays the wisdom and mercy of God in restraining wickedness so that the righteous might flourish in peace.” (Jan. 99)

Slavery was Awesome for the Negro

Pullquote: “The move from Africa to America was a vast increase of freedom for the Negro, materially and spiritually.”

R.J. is best known for Institutes of Biblical Law, an 800 page opus on “the heresy of democracy.”

Here are a few interesting statements from the book:

“The move from Africa to America was a vast increase of freedom for the Negro, materially and spiritually.”

Lazy slaves were “an albatross that hung the South, that bled it.”

“The University of Timbuktu never existed. The only thing that existed in Timbuktu was a small mud hut.”

“Some people are by nature slaves and will always be so.”

“The urge to dominion is God-given and is basic to the nature of man. An aspect of this dominion is property.”

“The false witness borne during World War II with respect to Germany (i.e., the death camps) is especially notable and revealing…. the number of Jews who died after deportation is approximately 1,200,000 … very many of these people died of epidemics.”

“All men are NOT created equal before God.”

“The matriarchal society is thus decadent and broken… matriarchal character of Negro life is due to the moral failure of Negro men, their failure …to provide authority. The same is true of American Indian tribes which are also matriarchal.”

And here are some quotes from Foundations of Social Order:

“An employer therefore has a property right to prefer whom he will, and he can prefer whom he will in terms of color, creed, race, or national origin.”

“Selective breeding in Christian countries has led to … the progressive elimination of defective persons.”

“A ‘Litany’ popular in these circles identifies ‘God’ with the city, with the ’spick, black nigger, bastard, Buddhahead, and kike,’ with ‘all men,this concept runs deeply through the so-called Civil Rights Revolution… But …no society has ever existed without class and caste lines.”

The True Agenda of the Christian Right

But what about Christ’s softer love thy neighbour touch?

His son-in-law, North, explains for him that the Sermon on the Mount was clearly an ethical guide for slaves only!

Most of R.J.’s followers wisely keep his name out of their sermons. But careful examination of the Institutes on which their work is based reveals the truth: power and privilege for white men — God’s only true incarnation — is indeed the true agenda of the Christian right.

Lorette C. Luzajic writes about all kinds of interesting people at Fascinating People.

Everybody's a Christian
I Find This Post Very Offensive
The Church of LDS May Get Its Day in Court
The Inevitable Atheist Church
  • Custador

    Waaaaiiit for it…. Waaaaiiiit for it…. “He wasn’t a true Christian, though!”

    Uhu. Really. Hmmm.

  • Jeremy

    I’m no fan of religious right leaders like Falwell and Dobson, but you linked them–and most other Christians–to this Rushdoony nut without any explanation or justification. Every Christian I’ve ever known would despise the teachings of Rushdoony that you’ve described here (assuming your descriptions are accurate).

    I can imagine a church pulpit where the minister is describing the crimes of the Khmer Rouge and then concluding that all atheists are followers of this philosophy. We’d object, but after reading this article, perhaps we aren’t much different from those fear-mongering Christians after all.

    • Daniel Florien

      1) Rushdoony is quite popular in Christian theological circles (not to laymen), especially Reformed/Calvinistic. Lorrette is picking on his “evil” teachings, but most ignore them or don’t know about them.

      2) I actually disagree with Lorette’s conclusion. I agree with you that you can’t link the religious right to white supremacy through a common theological ancestor and that we wouldn’t want them to use the same logic with us. That’s what they attempted to do in Expelled — they said Darwin supported slavery, thus evolutionists all support slavery! Or some nonsense like that.

      • Custador

        Actually Darwin was a major anti-slavery campaigner. He got it from his grandfather, Josiah Wedgewood (the famous porcelain maker), who left most of his fortune to anti-slavery charities.

      • Question-I-thority

        The True Agenda of the Christian Right

        This header followed by comments about conspiracy and concluding that white male supremacy is the true agenda of the Christian right wing is over stated in my (former) experience as an Evangelical. The above conclusion can only be sustained if one believes that hard line Dominionists are the predominant right wing of Christianity which is a very narrow and unrealistic interpretation. It’s somewhat akin to saying that racial supremacy is the true agenda of the political right.

        Also, correlation is not causation. If the broad right wing of Christianity shares some characteristics to some more or less extent, that is not an indication in itself of Rushdoony’s influence.

    • BurnSpeed

      Great the pol pot/stalin/mao was an atheist argument. The khmer rouge did not derive their philosophy or morality from atheism. This man derived his morality straight from the Bible, and he wasn’t misinterpreting either this is where the bible leads you if you are honest with yourself and applying what is writen.

    • The Wrath of Oliver Khan

      You sound so … what is the word? Oh yeah … concerned.

      And yeah, there is a major difference between Lorrette’s argument and the tired old canard about Stalin/ Mao/ Pol Pot, as BurnSpeed pointed out. Communism does not derive from a lack of belief in a god or gods. On the other hand, you can draw some direct linkages between Rushdoony’s work and crap like the Left Behind series – his ideas have passed through filters like Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins to be softened up a bit for wider consumption. Obviously there are many Christians (perhaps most Christians) who would be appalled at the racist aspect of Rushdoony’s work – but I suspect there are a lot more than you realize who would agree that only Christians should be able to vote, for example, or that we should return to some form of biblical law.

      • Jeremy

        If I’m “concerned” it’s because I wish the level of discourse would rise above that of the Jerry Falwells and Rush Limbaughs of the world, but this writer is spewing the same nonsense, just from the other side of the coin. Linking “almost every fundamentalist” to one guy who most of them have never heard of is absurd.

        It’s sensationalist, finger-pointing fear-mongering, as bad as the “Storm is Gathering” ad on TV. We can’t legitimately criticize the religious right for perpetuating ridiculous stereotypes and paranoia if we commit the same.

        • Audrey

          I somewhat agree with Jeremy’ position. But… Let’s point out how another historical religious figure may have influenced future events and perhaps discuss if there are similarities.

          Martin Luther was outspokenly anti-semitic. This is fact and documented in his writings. I was raised as a Lutheran and wasn’t even aware of this aspect of his beliefs. I don’t think most Lutherans do nor do I think most Lutherans are anti-semites either.

          On the other hand, his teachings were a lot more widely known in Germany and probably significantly more influential on later people’s behavior. I am not stating that Martin Luther’s beliefs and teachings directly contributed to the holocaust, but I do believe they set a tone for people’s belief systems.

          Couldn’t this apply to RushLoony’s impact on the the belief systems of today’s fundies?

  • Dr. Karl E. Taylor

    R.J.’s best bud, Garry North, was one of the loud paranoiacs that worked people into a froth over the Y2K bug. Reading his essays on it, you could almost see the giant woody in his pants at the mere thought of economic collapse and total world anarchy. (North is an economist by profession, and not a very good one)

    Strangely enough, all of his writings on Y2K vanished, by August of that year. North has made a number of failed predictions in the past. Most of them have led to failed financial endeavors that have cost investors millions. Give Garry North a Google and get ready from a trip down Woo Woo Lane.

  • Baconsbud

    I have known a few christians that I would say follow these types of doctrine. There are few christians I actually fear but they are the ones. I figure given the right leader, they would be willing to commit acts just like any extreme religious group.

  • http://blog.nicholascloud.com ncloud

    Sadly, I used to own a copy of Rushdoony’s “Institutes”, as well as a large tome North wrote that I’m drawing a blank on right now. In some homeschool circles, these are used as part of the curriculum, but in my experience, those circles are relatively small and usually don’t mesh well with the general homeschool population. Another author to watch out for is Greg Bahnsen, who, along with Rushdoony, was a disciple of Cornelius van Til’s special “presuppositional apologetic”, in which god is the necessary assumption for any logical statement. I have read several of Bahnsen’s works as well. These authors are very much tied to the Reformed/Calvinist branch of theology, which basically asserts that god is the grand puppet master who “wills” everything that happens “for his own glory”.

  • Sunny Day

    I just threw up a little bit in my mouth.

  • thegirlcanwrite

    I guess my conclusion about white supremacy was more sarcasm about the patriarchal order of the ‘biblical worldview’ than a specific kkk connection for the average evangelist- though Rushdoony’s words speak for himself.

    Those who espouse recon/dominionism do believe that old sunday school story that other nations are poor because they haven’t embraced god, or that god blessed us and not them- just like in mormonism, it used to be that black people or chines people couldn’t make it to the celestial world because they hurt god in the last world. So it’s back to the ‘heathens’ thing and that is racism in my book.

    However, Jeremy, I don’t mean to hatemonger one bit because I’m still in the road halfway between belief and unbelief. Christianity is my heritage and I happen to love my progressive church very much, we are very active in human rights. I don’t attend currently as I sort out my stuff without the emotion of ceremony to sway me.

    That said, I stand behind my research and Institutes speaks for itself. Below you can pick up on why I say that many, many groups and denominations are tied to or influenced by Rushdoony.

    sorry for the long post!!!!!!!!!

    “Card-carrying Reconstructionists are few,” wrote John Sugg in Mother Jones (Dec. 2005).

    Indeed, Falwell himself wrote an article making it clear he did not espouse their movement. Yet after 9/11 he publicly affirmed that God’s punishment for gays and feminists had begun by terror.

    Sugg writes, “Reconstruction’s major impact has been through helping to found and guide cross-denominational and secular political organ-izations. The Council for National Policy—a group that holds meetings for right-wing leaders, once dubbed “the most powerful conservative group you’ve never heard of”—was founded in 1981 as a project of top John Birch Society figures (see “The Fountainhead”). Its members included Rushdoony, Gary North, Tim LaHaye, former Reagan aide Gary Bauer, and activist Paul Weyrich, who famously aimed to “overturn the present power structure of this country.”

    Sugg suggests that using ‘many fronts’ and indeed, using ‘foot soldiers’ who don’t even know what exactly they are working toward is key to the success of the movement. And successful it is. The power within the government and media worldwide is staggering. The ultimate goal of the Reconstruction philosophy and the Dominionists is to deny authority (judges, courts, teachers) and even citizenship to non-Christians. Using catchphrases like ‘restoring biblical law’ or ‘biblical worldview’ ‘regular’ Christians like my father support their many arms without even knowing the background.

    As Gary North wrote, “We must use the doctrine of religious liberty…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 constructing a Bible-based social, political, and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God.”

    Sugg writes, “Reconstruction’s major impact has been through helping to found and guide cross-denominational and secular political organizations.”

    Hence, even when some of our figureheads deny their reconstructionist roots, they are still working towards the ultimate goals.

    But many “out” reconstructionists were involved in George Bush’s advisory, headships behind ‘compassionate conservatism.’

    Some organizations or public figures with ties to and or beliefs in Reconstructionism/Dominionism include:

    The Council for National Policy
    Roy Moore
    Coalition on Revival (Sugg: “one of its founding documents is signed by 116 Christian right activists, including Rushdoony, mega-evangelist D. James Kennedy, and Roy Jones, a top staffer at the Republican Senatorial Committee.” D. James Kennedy was the evangelist of Coral Ridge Ministries, a megabucks, megawatt media and the masses enterprise)
    Feminist Majority Foundation
    Christian Coalition
    Chalcedon Foundation
    Christian Coalition of America
    Constitution Party
    Christian Dominionists
    American Vision Ministries
    Every Nation
    National Reform Association
    Center for Christian Statesmanship
    Morningstar Internation
    Institute for Canadian Values
    League of the South
    Association of Free Reform Churches
    Christian Worldview
    Joel’s Army
    Coral Ridge Presbyterian
    Christian Nation
    Christian Identity
    Christian Heritage Party of Canada
    Christian Voice (UK)
    Concerned Citizens Party
    Concerned Citizens United Against Drugs and Terrorism
    Americans for Truth about Homosexuality
    Immanuel Free Reformed
    Vision Forum Ministries
    Christian Research Network
    Coral Ridge Ministries
    Focus on the Family
    Moral Majority!
    Reclaiming America
    George Grant
    multimillionaire Steven Hotze,
    Mike Huckabee
    Evangelism Explosion
    Alliance Defense Fund
    Southern Baptist Convention
    Salt and Light Awards
    Assemblies of God
    Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act
    Kingdom Now
    Spiritual Renewal
    Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship International
    Promise Keepers
    Yoido Full Gospel Church (750 thousand members in Korea)
    Freedom of Mind Institute
    Prosperity Gospel
    Stealth Evangelism
    Word Faith
    God’s Army
    Coalition for National Policy
    Traditional Values Coalition
    Foundation for Traditional Values
    Personal Freedom Outreach
    Campus Crusade for Christ
    Prison Fellowship Ministries,
    Gospel Communications
    Assemblies of God
    Elijah’s Army
    Third Wave
    Love Bombing
    Institute in Basic Life Principles

    The Ties Run Deep

    A Nation Under God

    American Fascists by Christian war/politics journalist Chris Hedges

    Reclaiming America for Christ

    • Question-I-thority

      If you are going to list signers to a “founding document” isn’t it important to establish for the reader what the founding document states? Is there definitive language in this document to support your statement that white male supremacy is the true agenda of the Christian right?

    • Custador

      Isn’t it funny that “Americans for Truth about Homosexuality” want to spread the exact opposite of what their name suggests?

  • http://iwant2knowyourstory.blogspot.com/ Niva Tuvia
  • thegirlcanwrite

    to Question I Thority and others interested,

    Yes, point taken, it may be important to establish to the reader what the founding document states. But I’ve already tested Daniel’s gracious space, I’m sure, by the length of the post and as I noted, I was quoting from writer Sugg, whose article is linked for further research on the reader’s part.

    I am sorry if my flippant and bitter ‘agenda’ conclusion was less than clear in the original article- my bad. Nowhere did I use the words ‘white supremacy.’ I was more sarcastically referring to the “biblical wordview” of Old Testament patriarchy as I already noted. And that includes man as headship, slavery, and the exclusion of other world views which would include religious groups. O.T. advocates all kinds of racism and sexism and ism and a whole lot of killing, and that is what Rushdoony advocated. Surely some of the organizations in affiliation or tied do not advocate white supremacy or the death penalty for every apostate, but nor do I hear them speaking against human rights abuses. They use the same Old Testament after all, and with a belief in ‘inerrancy of the Bible” there is no room for evolution or progressive religiosity.

    If you would like to know more about the founding documents and the lovely views on women, inerrancy, nonbelievers, and more of God’s truths, a quick google of Coalition on Revival will take you right to http://www.reformation.net. There are dozens of documents available to read.

    Best wishes

    • Baconsbud

      Thanks for the link and hope to be able to come back in a few days with comments about it. What little I have read of it, it scares me that so many think this is the truth.

    • Question-I-thority

      Thanks for the response Loretta. I deeply share your detestation of dominionism and encourage you to write further on the subject. That is why I take strong issue with your conclusion:

      But careful examination of the Institutes on which their work is based reveals the truth: power and privilege for white men — God’s only true incarnation — is indeed the true agenda of the Christian right.

      You did not use the words ‘white male supremacy’ but that is the meaning of your statement, is it not?

      The reference to a list of organizations with ties to dominionism reminds me of the ties Obama had with terrorists. I am a former pentecostal and as such am quite familiar with the Assembly of God denomination which happens, I believe, to be the largest pentecostal organization in the world. The idea that their agenda is power for white men or that they are dominionist is simply not believable.

      Again, I give you my support and hope that my criticisms can lead to a better dismantling of the trash that Rushdoony exemplifies. You might want to look into the views of young, post Bushco evangelicals.

      • thegirlcanwrite

        Question I Thority

        I should have written instead “power and privilege for men” instead of “for white men” which immediately created a focus away from the rest of the article, where Rushdoony’s own words would speak for themself. “white” is of course assumed to be more powerful than the others anyhow and left out would have let the onus of the Institutes on O.T. law take more of the stage than “white”.

        Live and learn, but I’m glad we’re thinking about important issues.

        I thank you for a thoughtful response. There’s an excellent article over at http://www.theocracywatch.org called What is Dominionism? Palin, the Christian Right, & Theocracy, by Chip Berlet.

        It discusses the reconstructionist slash dominionist issue, and the author explains to people like me that they are not one and the same. I already knew they aren’t one and the same, but they do believe in O.T. law, which means death penalty for just about everyone else who doesn’t, and that is my main concern. Some dominionists are now aware of this themselves – they are spreading the Lord’s dominion which sounds nice. Berlet discusses at length the subtle nuances between the terms, and several other related terms.

        His article is important and mentions the Assemblies in particular who don’t all espouse all of the doctrine.

        Yet I do believe that spending too much time extricating subtle doctrinal nuances one from another takes away from the main points that these organizations together are creating a powerful theocratic monopoly that is not exactly based on the Sermon on the Mount, and more people need to be aware that it’s not just a couple of crackpots who believe in public stonings and other pleasantries of Mosaic law.


  • http://exfundamentalist.blogspot.com Lorena

    But careful examination of the Institutes on which their work is based reveals the truth: power and privilege for white men

    So far so successful, at least in the Christian church, less so but still successful in the workplace.

  • freewilly

    Only Calvinists follow Rushdooney. The whole Theocrasy thing is wholly a CALVINIST idea because of their idiotic belief in Predestination they have no respect for Freedom, since they don’t think God even gave us freedom of the will!!!! THEY are dangerous to be sure! Anyone who doesn’t believe in FREE WILL is dangerous.

    • freewilly

      free willy!!!!

  • Fumika’s Planet

    The main problem with articles like this, and the myriad responses to it from those pre-disposed to agree with it, is in what it doesn’t say rather than what it does.

    I would have thought that, in attempting to counter a philosophy, it was important to provide more than a simple, “I don’t like Theonomy”, which is the sum total of the preceding remarks in their entirety. (The fact that people that frequent this website don’t like Rushdoony is of small consequence to us anyway, but whatever…) I suppose congratulations are in order anyway: you’ve admitted you have a problem, which is a start. But in order to counter Theonomy, a numerically small idea common at present only to Calvinists like me (and not all Calvinists, either), it’s incumbent to provide more than just bile, invective, and flat-out nonsense paraded as truth.

    Here’s my challenge: Provide a valid, logically consistent alternative to Theonomy. Show the world (or those poor souls like me who somehow straggle onto your site) that you actually have something in reserve. After all, as Neil Peart said, “To criticize is to presuppose an alternative.”

    Question: What’s yours?

    Here’s how to go about it (now how many opponents do you know of that will actually give you a heads-up on where to start with answering them!). Go to this url:


    and download (for free! Gratis!) the book ‘Christian Reconstruction: What it is, What it isn’t’ by Gary’s North & DeMar. Read it. Find the philosophical, logical and Scriptural inaccuracies in it. We contend that there are none, but maybe you know better. Then write about it here. I’ll check back in a week or two to see what you’ve done. Howzat, huh?

    I hope some of you will take this challenge on: after all, what better way to get a name for yourself than to philosophically dismantle an entire philosophy of life! So who’s up for it?

    • Lorette

      Thank you Fumika’s Planet for your thoughts. It is definitely impossible to say everything in a few hundred words or less, and so I aim to say those things that are left out of our Sunday Schools and even colleges about some of the figureheads of faith. Rushdoony’s bigotry is NOT a limited heritage by a long shot, unfortunately, though few would say “I follow Rushdoony.”

      I’m not going to personally take your challenge, FP, because I’ve already polluted my mind with too much reading of Gary North, who would simply be a blubbering jester and a parody of all that is wrong with this world if he didn’t have influence in spheres that seem so susceptible to propaganda. My friend, your challenge to find things ‘philosophically’ wrong is impossible- philosophy is abstract opinion and he’s welcome to his sick mind. Scriptural inaccuracies- by that I don’t think you mean inaccuracies in the Scripture which is the first place to begin such an assignment. But if you did mean that, start with Bart Ehrman and work your way through a vast library of work by various thinkers. As Obama so wisely stated, “I take the Scripture seriously and that’s why I don’t take it literally.”

      I WILL offer an alternative, FP. Have you heard of Canada? It’s where I live. It’s not perfect, but it’s considered near the very top of best places to be in the world. Toronto, specifically, where I am, manages astonishingly to be a clean, safe city where women aren’t scared to come home from work at four in the morning. We have our problems, for sure, but drugs and crime are extremely low and the streets are very clean. We have communities from hundreds of countries around the world and churches for every conceivable religion, plus restaurants run by immigrants of every kind. We don’t allow guns and we don’t need them. Canada doesn’t have conscription and we don’t have any nuclear arms. Our population is low so our resources are relatively sustained. Homosexuals inhabit every part of the city, and few redneck bastards see any need to beat them or ‘not hire them’ and few Christians fear their religious rights being trod on. They are thriving community members who contribute to our art, culture, music, food, business, and more. Immigrants’ cultural icons, “idols” – and festivals from every religion and land around the world make this a colourful and beautiful place. In our universities, atheist scholars work side by side with religious ones, whether Christian, Hindu, Jewish, etc. Jewish and Muslim people walk side by side on the streets. Muslims and Christians or secularists mingle in malls.

      Are we falling apart? Well, we have our problems. But we are one of the cleanest, safest, sanest cities (and country) in the world.

      This is your alternative, FP.

  • http://thereligiouspolitic.blogspot.com Tobias

    R.J.’s basic philosophy was that the Old Testament gave white man dominion over the earth, the animals, women, and heathen nations.

    If you will be so kind as to provide me with a reference to this idea, I would be grateful for it. However, in my reading through Rushdoony, I have never found anything which stated that the “white man” had some natural higher authority over a person with any other skin color.

    • Lorette

      Hello Tobias, as I clearly noted, the statements listed come from Rushdoony’s writings, Institutes of Biblical Law and Foundations of Social Order.

      • http://thereligiouspolitic.blogspot.com/ Tobias

        I am aware of what you claim, and I am currently reading through the tome that is “Institutes”, but I have not read those. My question is: Have you read it? If so, can you tell me where you found these quotes? I have seen some strange quotes by Rushdoony, but have not yet come across the ones you mention.

        • Lorette

          Hi Tobias,
          If any of my research is wrong, I’m more than willing to cop to it. I’m not perfect, and I hope my pursuit of truth also means I’m willing to eat crow if I unintentionally make mistakes. Thanks for keeping me on my toes. These references below should get you started:

          heresy of democracy pg 747 Institutes of Biblical Law Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1973

          The ‘civil rights’ revolutionary groups are a case in point. Their goal is not equality but power. The background of Negro culture is African and magic, and the purposes of magic are control and power. . . Voodoo or magic was the religion and life of American Negroes. Voodoo songs underlie jazz, and old voodoo, with its power goal, has been merely replaced with revolutionary voodoo, a modernized power drive.” ibid p. 61

          holocaust has been exaggerated pg 588

          The law is humane and also unsentimental. It recognizes that some people are by nature slaves and will always be so pg 251

          Segregation or separation is thus a basic principle of Biblical law with respect to religion and morality. Every attempt to destroy this principle is an effort to reduce society to its lowest common denominator. Toleration is the excuse under which this levelling is undertaken, but the concept of toleration conceals a radical intolerance. 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 as though no differences existed. p 294

          But integration and equality are myths; they disguise a new segregation and a new equality…Every social order institutes its own program of separation or segregation. A particular faith and morality is given privileged status and all else is separated for progressive elimination. p 296

          All men are NOT created equal before God; the facts of heaven and hell, election and reprobation make clear that they are not equal. Moreover, an employer has aproperty rights to prefer whom he will in terms of “color” creed, race or national origin. p 509-510

          The matriarchal society is thus decadent or broken society. The strongly matriarchal character of Negro life is due to the moral failure of Negro men, their failure to be responsible, to support the family, or to provide authority. The same is true of American Indian tribes which are also matriarchal today.” p 203

          Unequal yoking means more than marriage. In society at large it means the enforced integration of various elements which are not congenial. Unequal yoking is in no realm productive of harmony; rather, it aggravates the differences and delays the growth of the different elements toward a Christian harmony and association. p 257

          The false witness born during World War II with respect to Germany is especially notable and revealing. The charge is repeatedly made that six million innocent Jews were slain by the Nazis, and the figure–and even larger figures–is now entrenched in the history books. Poncins, in summarizing the studies of the French Socialist, Paul Rassinier, himself a prisoner in Buchenwald, states: Rassinier reached the conclusion that the number of Jews who died after deportation is approximately 1,200,000 and this figure, he tells us, has finally been accepted as valid by the Centre Mondial de Documentation Juive Contemporaine. Likewise he notes that Paul Hilberg, in his study of the same problem, reached a total of 896,292 victims.
          Very many of these people died of epidemics; many were executed. We will return to this matter again….
          Let us examine again the mass murders of World War II, and the background of false witness during World War I and later. Life had become so cheap and meaningless to these heads of state and their camp followers that a murder or two meant nothing. Likewise, a generation schooled to violence in motion pictures, radio, literature, and press could not be expected to react to a murder or two. The result was a desperately twisted mentality which could only appreciate evil as evil on a massive scale. Did the Nazis actually execute many thousands, tens, or hundred thousands of Jews? Men to whom such murders were nothing had to blow up the figure to millions. Did the doctor perform a number of experiments on living men and women? A few sterilized women and a few castrated men and their horrified tears and grief are not enough to stir the sick and jaded tastes of modern man: make him guilty of performing 17,000 such operations. The evils were all too real: even greater is the evil of bearing false witness concerning them, because that false witness will produce an even more vicious reality in the next upheaval. Men are now “reconciled” to a world where millions are murdered, or are said to be murdered. What will be required in the way of action and propaganda next time?
          p 586-/588

          The cultural mandate is thus the obligation of covenant man to subdue the earth and to exercise dominion over it under God (Gen. 1:26-28) …All enemies of Christ in this fallen world must be conquered.” p 724

          The “civil rights” revolution, for example, has only the vaguest sense of the burdens of responsibility, which any person thinking in terms of reality and the future needs to have. Instead, the “civil rights” revolutionists speak endlessly of past evils, not merely real or imagined evils of their own experiencing, but all evils which they believe their ancestors suffered. Similarly, some labor union men, and American Indians, dwell endlessly on past history rather than present reality. This inability to live in the present means a radical incapacity for coping with the future.
          p 157

          Man was created to exercise dominion under God and as God’s appointed vice-regent over the earth. Dominion is thus a basic urge of man’s nature.” p 448

          * In colonial New England the covenantal concept of church and state was applied. Everyone went to church, but only a limited number had voting rights in the church and therefore the state, because there was a coincidence of church membership and citizenship. The others were no less believers, but the belief was that only the responsible must be given responsibility. One faith, one law, and one standard of justice did not mean democracy. The heresy of democracy has since then worked havoc in church and state, and it has worked towards reducing society to anarchy.
          p. 100

          … a ‘Litany’ popular in these circles identifies ‘God’ with the city, with the ’spick, black nigger, bastard, Buddhahead, and kike,’ with ‘all men,’ and calls for communion with all men as they are… This concept runs deeply through the so-called Civil Rights Revolution… But this total communion without law, communion beyond good and evil, militates against everything in man. No society has ever existed without class and caste lines. The more social distinctions are denied, the more force is required in society to bring men together, and the more force prevails in society, the less the communion.” ~ R.J. Rushdoony, The Foundations of Social Order, p. 17, 159

          The condition of the Irish immigrants on arrival was far worse than that of slaves: they had no master to feed and clothe them or to provide shelter. The Irish moved from semi-slavery in Ireland to freedom in America only a few years before the Negro gained emancipation. After a century and a quarter, or less, the Irish are a leading power in the United States, and the Negroes remain on the lowest strata. The basic difference between the Irish and the Negro has not been color: it has been character. The Negroes demand more aid, i.e., more slavery and slave-care, and dwell on their sufferings. Politics of Guilt and Pity (Fairfax, VA: Thoburn Press, [1970] 1978), pp 3-4, 19, 25.

          couldn’t find the exact pages for albatross and other slave stuff but more of the same nonsense in droves, is found here, including this sick tidbit: “The Negro moved from an especially harsh slavery, which included cannibalism, to a milder form. Much is said about the horrors of the slave ships, many of which were very bad, but it is important to remember that slaves were valuable cargo and hence property normally handled with consideration.”

          R.J. Rushdoony, Politics of Guilt and Pity (Fairfax, VA: Thoburn Press, [1970] 1978), pp 3-4, 19, 25.

          And if you can find it, A Return to Slavery promises to be more of the same …

          • http://thereligiouspolitic.blogspot.com/ Tobias

            Hey Lorette, thanks for providing the references!

            I will check these out and see what I think of them in their context. I have been working through the book with a group, and even though we agree with some of the points which you would probably find unreasonable, we all took note that Rushdoony does have a racist undertone at the very least. I personally haven’t got to his major sections on race, but quite a few people have noted their opinion that he was a racist.

            Anyway, thanks again for the references, I hear these quotes off and on, but never ave been given any actual references to see what kind of context there is. I suppose I will write some sort of review on my linked blog, but I can’t promise it will be soon.

  • james

    Rushdoony was born in New York City, the son of recently arrived Armenian immigrants.
    Hes not white! His first job was as a missionary to Native Americans.

  • Tim

    The only thing I am skeptical about is your motive! How much of Rushdoony, North, or whoever else you try to attack have you, open-minded and without bias, read, studied and thoroughly pondered. Your comparisons to Hitler, Stalin, Pol-Pot, is typical of the unreasoning bigotry that you state marks the right-wing. I remind you that Hitler was a right-winger while Stalin was a polar opposite left-winger, as was Pol-Pot the Berkeley educated, former Buddist monk. The end results, however, were the same; no free thought, no rights, no love and no life to any and all who opposed them. Extremists, such as yourself, serve only to polarize while attempting to demonize. It’s your website, do with it as you wish. As for my thoughts and reasoning abilities, I’ll seek more open-minded thinking elsewhere.

    • Ty

      We’ll miss you, Tim.

      • Sunny Day


  • Ken

    SInce you are so worried about this individual and the influence he’s had on others, why don’t you take a look at the “founder” of Planned Parenthood. After all, you are setting yourself up as the guardian of truth. Want to lable Rushdoony as a racist? Margaret Sanger, fits the bill perfectly and her organization to this day eliminates (percentage wise) a great deal more blacks than whites. And that my friend is the facts. Not your sloppy reporting on Rushdoony by pulling out one or two sentences from a book of 800 pages. I would venture to say that less than 1% of all the (ignorant) comments on here are made by people that have never even seen a copy of his book. People, you may not like what your heard (ABOUT) Rushdoony, but let me strongly recommend you read something before you gullibly believe someone else. Especially someone that has a site “against” religious thouht. He has an ax to grind. Then again, “The British Centre for Science Education” refered to him “a man every bit as potentially murderous as Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot or anyone else you may want to name amongst the annals of evil.” I guess that settles it. And by the way, in reference to Darwin. No-one said Darwin was … but his scientifc philosophy certainly led to it and still does.

    • Jabster

      … and you have no connection with Rushdoony at all do you?

      Oh and if want to make an agrument for why he’s not a racist please do try a little harder than “look over their, now she’s a racist so Rushdoony obviously isn’t” and then followed up with “No-one said Darwin was … but his scientifc philosophy certainly led to it and still does.”

    • Lorette C. Luzajic

      Hi Ken,
      Rushdoony’s not the only character I’m worried about. The series was born as my lifelong faith began crumpling under the weight of the idiocy of the messengers. Many faithful (and unfaithful) have no idea what kind of leaders they are blindly following, and I was guilty of that to some degree, despite thinking I was a ‘free thinker.’ So beyond Rushdoony, the Pillars of Faith series is meant to simply draw out a few of the facts beyond what we normally hear. While certainly everyone has faults and I don’t wish to harbour a mean spirit, there is nothing wrong at all with pointing out the mean truth. Many who cherish their copies of Institutes, or the Calvin tome it was inspired by 500 years back, have no idea the darkness that is layered throughout.

      As far as M. Sanger- yes, there are millions of other racist people, not just Rushdoony. We all have racism inside of us. It is, in fact, part of evolution- we used to kill and sometimes eat enemy tribes. It’s a very natural fear of the other. As we evolve through history, we come to a point where people from other places are no longer ‘heathens’ and we do business together, intermarry, mingle. We stop seeing each other as ‘other’ except to celebrate or refute various cultural practices. We accept some traditions and loath other- i love sushi, for example, but can’t even try slugs. We stop thinking we were so superior and chosen by God and recognize multifactorial issues that separated us or made us different. I would love to say I’m not racist, but that would be a lie for anyone. Working out right and wrong, working out when to accept and when to abscond, these are lifelong issues. But the most evolved among us so far, cannot speak like Rushdoony or Calvin, to mutter like cavemen on how women and blacks are soulless slaves.

      So as far as Sanger, you’d be surprised to know I already know all about her, and the story is not quite as you tell it, but yes, eugenics was popular at the time and she was involved in this philosophy to some degree. Yet your ignorance is astonishing, showing the predictable puppetry of the people behind the scenes who parrot fearmongering nonsense. First of all, so what? We’ve got one ‘atheist racist’ – bully for you!!!! what about the centuries of African American slavery, masterminded and justified by Christians who saw it as merciful to heathen Africa?

      Second, Sanger’s work was to provide contraception and sterilization, not abortion. She didn’t believe in abortion! Did you pro life group tell you she was one of you? She said the best way to prevent murder was to prevent it- make birth control available to everyone.

      Yes, she did say some things about the elimination of boll weavils and disease and suggest that ‘feeble minded’ people, or desperately poor people who didn’t want to, not breed. She did not intend to ‘exterminate’ black people, but to eliminate the problems of inner cities and rural areas where women had no chance at all because they were always pregnant, often without any paternal support. She did not wish to prevent only poor blacks from ‘breeding’ but also poor whites.

      Now, certainly we don’t use language like ‘feeble minded’ anymore, but that was just old school lingo for slow or crazy.Let’s recall the thousands and thousands of nuns, priests, and Christian missionaries who tortured the ‘feeble minded’ because mentally ill people were ‘demon possessed.’ Who cut the tongues out of native Indian children or shot them and made them into dog food. They achieved their genocide here in Canada and in your United States. All in the name of the cross.

      While certainly Sanger used some terminology that makes us cringe, those were the words of the day. She did actually prevent thousands of unwanted births, prevented abortions, and gave women and families some freedom to control their future. Contrary to what you think, women don’t always want ten kids, with or without dad, and they are grateful not to have to croak or be sick from childbirth. In the early 19600s, it was revolutionary to bring birth control to the population. Your ridiculous idiotic pre/post millennial philosophers who bark in the face of the facts that we are ‘not overpopulated’ are the same ones who refuse to care for the poor or motherless or sick. That’s ‘socialist.’ Why don’t you go to India and work to make child brothels unnecessary, or clean up the water where there are too many million people’s waste going in? You’ve thought it- don’t deny it: why do those people keep having so many babies? BECAUSE THEY DON’T HAVE BIRTH CONTROL, d’uh. You think God will provide and that poor prostitute tots in the Phillipines are clearly punishable heathens and that’s why God is not providing. When it’s simpler than that: Malthus was right all along, despite anti-choice propaganda that we need to keep breeding more shoppers into this world. Overpopulation- it has expanded from a couple bill to seven bill THIS CENTURY alone in all of history- is a big reason for dwindling resources. The second big reason is how greedy we are- we use most of the world’s resources.

      And finally, Darwin- adaptation and survival of the fittest doesn’t always mean kill and desist. Today it means the homophobic bully pulverizing people is not wanted. That doesn’t contribute. Today the metrosexual has more mating options in some civil societies because society needs different models to survive. It’s a very limited scope to think adaptation simply means killing off what you don’t like. That’s a very Judeo-Christian model, where nature has various subtleties. If you pulverize and rape women, you risk prison and losing your girl to a sweeter talker. And so the more refined gentleman who can distinguish between fine wines is the ‘fittest’ even though he’s not a walking steroid. Adaptation isn’t just about conquering and pillaging.

      Dissing Darwin is just so lame. He wasn’t an evil man who tried to bring Satanic fury to the world. He was a reader, thinker, and scientist who was greatly intrigued and puzzled and frightened by the implications of what was unravelling. No matter where you stand on the God question, Darwin was heroic for bringing science to life and leading in a new age of inquiry. Not every Christian refuses the idea of evolution. Not every faith is literal, much is cultural. But even if it is, many see no problem marrying the mysteries and thanking God for their brains. And not every atheist is a foaming eugenicist. Quite the contrary.

      Thanks for listening.

  • Jay M

    Theocracies one of the worst forms of governance there is. It’s dependent on keeping the masses ignorant so they won’t question their “Divinely appointed” kings that reinforce the man-made divisions of royalty, nobility, clergy, and commoner. It seems like the trend of cultural and intellectual degradation is just a plot to get these wackos in office eventually, I’ll recommend all gays, atheist, those of alternative faiths (I’ve been telling Wiccans to stop being fluffy because of wackos like this theocracy supporter who has a false sense of entitlement to kill witches) to obtain weapons to defend themselves from anyone who would seek to kill them. They’ll even go after other Christians:

    “Can America in fact go the way of Bosnia? Is ‘Civil War II’ part of our future? Is that what it will take to rescue our culture? Bill Lind is now working to answer these questions in a book-length version of Victoria – a novel in the form of a ‘future memoir’ that will rock and shock the ‘Politically Correct’ Establishment. . .

    “She was not a particularly bad bishop. She was, in fact, quite typical of Episcopal bishops of the first quarter of the 2lst-century – agnostic, compulsively political and radical, and given to placing a small idol of Isis on the altar when she said the Communion service. By 2037, when she was tried, convicted and burned for heresy, she had outlived her era. By that time only a handful of Episcopalians still recognized female clergy, and it would have been easy enough to let the old fool rant out her final years in obscurity. But we are a people who do our duty. “I well remember the crowd that gathered for the execution – solemn, but not sad, relieved that at last, after so many years of humiliation, the majority had taken back the culture. Civilization had recovered its nerve. The flames that soared above the lawn before the Maine statehouse that August afternoon were, as the bishopess herself might have said, liberating.” [The Next American Revolution]”

    Her only so-called “Crimes” were being female and in a position of spiritual authority, and perhaps that Isis thing, not that there’s anything wrong with Isis since only false religions say “Only men can be priest” and condone killing over difference in spiritual reasons.

    More proof Christianities false and has no moral credibility:


  • http://www.dwellingwithgod.com Jay G.

    I’m wondering if this comment will stay? Probably not, but I shall see.

    It is funny that you said this, “Christ’s softer love thy neighbour touch.” This is a perfect illustration of wrong your view of the Christian God is. God is a God of love, yes indeed. He is also a God of wrath and indeed the wrath of God will be poured out on many for all eternity in Hell.

    Hell is not a separation of God. Hell is a separation of God’s blessings, love, compassion, etc. Hell is the wrath of almighty God. God will be in Hell dishing out His just and glorious wrath for all eternity to those that deny Him. Read Revelation 14:10-11. They shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the Lamb and the Holy angels for ever and ever. The smoke of Hell from the burning of the flesh is pleasing to God. Haven’t you ever read the pleasing aroma to God.

    There are no such thing as Atheists. Just people that try to persuade themselves into thinking there is no God. But deep down your heart is pounding in fear.

    Of course your worldview does not fit with a Christian scholar. Duh! First off you don’t want to understand because your a suppressor of truth. Secondly, you must realize that Theology is a field of science in the same way Biology is a field of science to nature. Theology is a science to the written word of God. This is how God designed every, He wants man to work. And through the work we can experience Him.

    So with that said, R.J. Rushdoony views are His scientific observations. Biblical scholars examine each other and criticize each other. Biblical scholars are scientists of Theology. This is why there are different views among Christendom.

    • Ty

      It will stay, because no one here cares at all.

      No need to delete meaningless babble.

      • Jay M

        Also notice that his interpretation of “God” is a sadist and a favoritist. Comparing Theology to a valid science like Biology is a non-sequitor since Theology presupposes faith and the outre notion that the bible is “Gods” word. Take, for example, the Noah’s Ark myth. How would all the animals get there? How could you have tens of thousands of pounds of food? And thousands of animals (since there are thousands of species)? What about the suffocating air pressure and frigid temperatures above Mt.Everest?

        One would have to be a complete idiot to believe some magical man rose from the dead, and that a “just” god tortures somebody simply for being an Atheist.

        Civilized countries such as ancient Greece, Rome, China, India, Egypt, and Assyria had far greater civilizations than the donkey nomadism of ancient Palestine. Also, prior to the Dark Ages Rome had a high standard of living, education, aqueducts, cleanliness, sanitation, and social mobility for slaves. Then the Dark Ages came, Sacred Temples were desecrated and unjustly robbed, churches exercised a false sense of entitlement to kill so-called “Heathens” and even the 10 commandments are inferior since they only apply to other members of the “in-group” explaining why the church felt it had the right to rob and murder so-called “Heathens”. Ignorance and superstition became the order of the day. And slavery (oops, I mean “Indentured servitude” and “Serfdom” mine apologies) was made permanent. The ONLY obligation of a slave is to find freedom by any means necessary.

    • DarkMatter

      “There are no such thing as Atheists. Just people that try to persuade themselves into thinking there is no God. But deep down your heart is pounding in fear.”

      Where and when you have done greater works than jesus (John14:12) that atheists know god exist? Where and when you have heal the sick, raise the dead or cast out demons?

      When did you do the supernatural works of god before humans?

    • Siberia

      There are no such thing as Atheists. Just people that try to persuade themselves into thinking there is no God. But deep down your heart is pounding in fear.

      Darling, children fear the dark. I do not.
      You should try sometimes. Living without fear is great.

    • trj

      A God of love that savours the sweet aroma of humans roasting forever in Hell. Verily, his divine love is beyond my mere human comprehension.

      • Jabster

        “The flood of course did not change God’s attitude toward man and his sin. But it only pleased God to destroy man off the face of the earth. And the flood only was the reaction of God’s hatred and anger. For us the flood should be recognition that God does not tolerate sin at all. He is merciful and graceful but we must come to his terms of peace with him.”

        This has got to be a Poe …

        • trj

          Doubtful. He’s got a comprehensive website dedicated to such fundamentalist drivel.

    • Sunny Day

      “They shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the Lamb and the Holy angels for ever and ever.”

      Stop, you’re turning me on.

      • Jay M

        If one uses deductive reasoning and applies modern knowledge and thinking techniques one can find that the hell concept is completely asinine, especially if one doesn’t falls on the wrong end of the artificially created division of “Saved” vs “Heathen” Coincidentally [sic] you go to hell for not following the very authorities that propagate such nonsense. Let the Christians keep their hell concept to themselves. If they are so fond of a sadist “god” that loves to burn people, let him burn the christians themselves.

        Hasn’t the world have had enough of these man-made divisions of “legitimate” and “illegitimate” and “Royalty” and “Commoner” and “Jew” and “Gentile”?

        Reinforcing a false sense of specialness at the expense of viewing the out-group as “evil” is simply puerile and wrong. These Christian reconstructionist are tres declasse, uncouth, ignorant, gauche, and not fit to be apart of a civilized society.

        I mean, how would Mr.Christ feel about these weirdos? If he’d approve of them, then he is an idiot not worth worship.

  • Jay M

    Is there any way to declare these filthy, ignorant reconstructionist dogs a terrorist organization? And to pass legislation to ensure that the home schooling courses they give aren’t accredited (so that their so-called “Degree” isn’t worth the paper it’s written on?)