A desire to change society for the good has led many Christians to look favorably at Reconstructionism.
Although Pat Robertson failed in his bid to become U.S. President, the effects of his campaign remain evident. Recently Robertson backers in the Arizona Republican party joined with supporters of the state’s former governor, Evan Mecham, to pass a controversial resolution declaring the United States “a Christian nation,” and stating that the U.S. Constitution created “a republic based upon the absolute laws of the Bible, not a democracy.”
To create such a republic is the goal of the Christian Reconstructionist movement, which in the last few years has accelerated its emergence from obscurity. Generally, the movement’s proponents hold that the civil laws of Old Testament, theocratic Israel are normative for all societies in all times. Under such a system, such crimes as homosexuality and adultery would be capital offenses, punishable by death, according to some theonomists.
Leading Reconstructionist spokespersons are quick to add that the establishment of such a republic would have to be achieved through democratic means, and would, by virtual necessity, be accompanied by mass spiritual revival, including large-scale conversions to Jesus Christ.
The debate over Christian Reconstructionism, also referred to as theonomy, addresses the fundamental principles of how Christians ought to influence the societies in which they live. Some predict this will be the most important debate among evangelicals well into the 1990s.
Increasing Influence
One point on which both advocates of and detractors from Christian Reconstructionism agree is that the movement’s influence is rapidly on the rise. According to theonomist author Gary Demar, this is reflected by the increased demand for Reconstructionist literature and speakers among Christian colleges. Publishers, including Nashville, Tennessee-based Wolgemuth and Hyatt, are increasingly supplying outlets for authors who tend toward theonomic analysis.
Theonomist Joseph Kickasola, professor of international studies and Hebrew at CBN University, believes the perceived increase in Reconstructionist influence is better understood in terms of a “Biblical Law of Revival,” of which theonomists are a part. This revival, says Kickasola, has been accompanied by a “diminishing of dispensationalism,” especially among charismatics who, he says, are coming to see that “charismatic dispensationalist” is “a contradiction in terms.”
John Muether, professor at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, said that while doing research for a book on theonomy, he found the movement’s influence within Reformed theological circles “far more pervasive” than he had anticipated. Muether is one of some 15 professors at Westminster seminaries (East and West) working on a book whose goal is to provide an analysis of Reconstructionism from a Reformed theological perspective.
Muether suggests the widespread perception of unprecedented crisis in America has given rise to theonomy’s attractiveness. Noting theonomy’s postmillennial emphasis on preparing the world for Christ’s return, he notes, “Historically, millenarianism [an emphasis on the end times] has always risen in times of perceived crisis.”
Lutheran theologian Richard John Neuhaus, an opponent of Reconstructionism, maintains the movement’s growing popularity is due to the “false perception of certainty” it offers. “There is a felt market need for specific answers that come from God, not from somebody’s judgment,” he says.
Hazy Picture
One reason for divergent opinions of Christian Reconstructionism is that the term is variously understood. According to DeMar, anyone who believes that the entire Bible “applies to every facet of life” is in some sense a Reconstructionist. He suggested it is ironic that Prison Fellowship’s Charles Colson, a critic of theonomy, relies on the Old Testament for his positions on prison reform.
Determining which people and organizations should properly be considered theonomist is far from an exact science. The organization Coalition on Revival (COR), for example, counts among its supporters avowed theonomist leaders R. J. Rushdoony, considered the patriarch of Christian Reconstructionism, and prolific theonomist author Gary North.
But among those who have signed the COR manifesto (which does not reflect uniquely theonomist positions) are theologian J. I. Packer and Robert Dugan, director of the National Association of Evangelicals’ Office of Public Affairs, both of whom maintain they oppose theonomy.
COR founder and director Jay Grimstead, when asked if he is a theonomist, replied, “I don’t call myself one.” He added, “A lot of us are coming to realize that the Bible is God’s standard of morality … in all points of history … and for all societies, Christian and non-Christian alike.… It so happens that Rushdoony, [theonomist Greg] Bahnsen, and North understood that sooner.”
Grimstead added, “There are a lot of us floating around in Christian leadership—James Kennedy is one of them—who don’t go all the way with the theonomy thing, but who want to rebuild America based on the Bible.” He said the question of how much of the Old Testament ought to be applied is “absolutely unsettled” among COR members.
On Forming Coalitions
Jay Grimstead was the original executive director of the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI), which held three major consultations over a ten-year lifespan that ended in 1987 by ICBI’s own design (CT, Nov. 6, 1987, p. 42). Grimstead founded the Coalition on Revival (COR) in 1982, partly, he said, to take up the battle against liberal theology where ICBI left it. Though he felt the ICBI could have been more aggressive, his respect for them remains high.
In the COR “Manifesto for the Christian Church,” the organization is described as “a network of evangelical leaders from every major denominational and theological perspective who share a vision for and a commitment to revival, renewal, and reformation in Church and society in America.”
The document contains no teaching unique to theonomy, though it is signed by most of the acknowledged Christian Reconstructionist leaders in America. Among signatories not identified with Reconstructionism are theologian J. I. Packer; urban ministry specialist John Perkins; Ralph Winter, director of the U.S. Center for World Mission; Robert Dugan, director of the National Association of Evangelicals’ (NAE) Office on Public Affairs; and former World Vision International president Ted Engstrom.
Lutheran theologian Richard John Neuhaus said coalition building in general is a “dicey proposition.” He advised against entering coalitions wherein disagreement with some members “cuts to the bone,” stating that such a determination is a matter of an individual’s “prudential judgment.” Neuhaus added that coalitions tend to be dominated by the “hard-nosed ideologues” who are most committed to obtaining their goals.
The NAE’s Dugan said he has had very little involvement with COR, but that he signed the COR manifesto because it is a “consensus document” with which he agrees. “If [COR] adopts a more specific [Reconstructionist] agenda,” Dugan said, “I’d take my name off of it.”
Theonomic “Impulse”
Despite the uncertainty over how to define Reconstructionism, CBN’s Kickasola cites what he says is the major unifying element in the Biblical Law Revival movement: its doctrine that the kingdom of God on earth was inaugurated by Christ. He contrasts this with the dispensationalist view that the kingdom will be inaugurated after Jesus’ second coming.
According to COR’s Grimstead, an entire generation of Christian leaders has been “wrongly influenced by a less-than-biblical theology coming out of the Scofield Bible.” He says this misguided theology includes a view of the world as Satan’s world. “Now,” he says, “we’re seeing that it’s God’s world, and he wants us to be its stewards, the conscience of society.” He adds, “We believe the church is to blame for the terrible state of Western civilization.”
Thus the tone of the current movement, however it is labeled, is active, not passive, with an emphasis on changing society by taking control of its institutions. Westminster seminary’s Muether sees such a “theonomic impulse” in Christian activist groups such as Operation Rescue (though Muether does not suggest Operation Rescue leadership is theonomist).
And Christians are becoming more politically active in their states, in addition to those in Arizona. Theonomist Joseph Morecraft, pastor of Chalcedon Presbyterian Church in Dunwoody, Georgia, recently said that believers in that state are working through the Republican party to declare the Bible the source of civil law. An associate of Morecraft said the political activists regard the question of who, technically, is a theonomist as irrelevant.
Potential Dangers
Westminster seminary’s Muether fears the church’s mission is being unduly politicized by the movement. Indeed, several scholars have said they regard Christian Reconstructionism as the “liberation theology” of the political Right.
Ronald Sider, president of Evangelicals for Social Action and a favorite target of theonomists’ attacks, maintains the Reconstructionist movement is damaging the already tainted image of evangelicals in American society. He noted that, according to research done by the Williamsburg Charter Foundation, nearly one-third of those in the academic community regard evangelicals as a threat to democracy.
Sider affirms that biblical values ought to influence public policy, but he said this must happen within the context of pluralism. “It’s absolutely crucial,” he says, “that evangelical Christians take the lead in insisting there be freedom of religion for everybody.”
Lutheran theologian Neuhaus cites what he calls the “ominous possibility” that the resurgence of evangelical involvement in the public arena of the last decade will be co-opted by theonomy, because theonomy offers “the appearance of a coherent rationale.” He maintains, “To turn the Bible into a code book or a blueprint for societal reordering is to deny what the Bible itself presents itself to be, which is the story of God’s salvation of a sinful world in Jesus Christ.”
Neuhaus said he is encouraged that some Christians are “rediscovering the classic Christian, biblically and theologically grounded understanding of the relationship between salvation and the right ordering of society.”
Sider acknowledged, however, that Christian scholarship by and large has not adequately addressed the question of the relevance of the Old Testament for Christian living. “The focusing of that question,” he said, “is [Christian Reconstructionism’s] greatest contribution.”
By Randy Frame.
