Michael J. McVicar
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- January 2016
- ISBN:
- 9781469622743
- eISBN:
- 9781469622767
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of North Carolina Press
- DOI:
- 10.5149/northcarolina/9781469622743.003.0004
- Subject:
- Religion, Religious Studies
This chapter discusses how Christian Reconstructionism had grown out of Rushdoony’s hostile relationship with the editors of Christianity Today, most notably Carl F. H. Henry, as he tried to ...
More
This chapter discusses how Christian Reconstructionism had grown out of Rushdoony’s hostile relationship with the editors of Christianity Today, most notably Carl F. H. Henry, as he tried to challenge other conservative Christians to see Mosaic law as the antidote to the perceived lawlessness of the 1960s. After failing to create an expedient alliance with businessman and philanthropist J. Howard Pew in an attempt to influence Christianity Today and the neoevangelical coalition it represented, Rushdoony turned his attention to fully articulating his vision of Biblical law as an alternative to the “law and order” discourse emerging among his fellow conservatives. He argued that Biblical law could provide the necessary mechanism to reconstruct America into a neofeudal Protestant state that would eventually usher in Christ’s second coming.Less
This chapter discusses how Christian Reconstructionism had grown out of Rushdoony’s hostile relationship with the editors of Christianity Today, most notably Carl F. H. Henry, as he tried to challenge other conservative Christians to see Mosaic law as the antidote to the perceived lawlessness of the 1960s. After failing to create an expedient alliance with businessman and philanthropist J. Howard Pew in an attempt to influence Christianity Today and the neoevangelical coalition it represented, Rushdoony turned his attention to fully articulating his vision of Biblical law as an alternative to the “law and order” discourse emerging among his fellow conservatives. He argued that Biblical law could provide the necessary mechanism to reconstruct America into a neofeudal Protestant state that would eventually usher in Christ’s second coming.
David Harrington Watt
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- January 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780801448270
- eISBN:
- 9781501708541
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Cornell University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7591/cornell/9780801448270.003.0006
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
This chapter examines three texts of the 1930s and 1940s that built upon and went beyond the polemics of the 1920s. The first, H. Richard Niebuhr's “Fundamentalism,” appeared in a highly respected ...
More
This chapter examines three texts of the 1930s and 1940s that built upon and went beyond the polemics of the 1920s. The first, H. Richard Niebuhr's “Fundamentalism,” appeared in a highly respected reference work published in 1931, the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. The second, an informal memo by Talcott Parsons called “Memorandum: The Development of Groups and Organizations Amenable to Use against American Institutions and Foreign Policy,” was written in 1940. The third text is Carl F. H. Henry's 1947 book The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. During this time, antifundamentalism embedded itself in standard reference works in a way that suggested that it was a simple truth, not one side of a controversy.Less
This chapter examines three texts of the 1930s and 1940s that built upon and went beyond the polemics of the 1920s. The first, H. Richard Niebuhr's “Fundamentalism,” appeared in a highly respected reference work published in 1931, the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. The second, an informal memo by Talcott Parsons called “Memorandum: The Development of Groups and Organizations Amenable to Use against American Institutions and Foreign Policy,” was written in 1940. The third text is Carl F. H. Henry's 1947 book The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. During this time, antifundamentalism embedded itself in standard reference works in a way that suggested that it was a simple truth, not one side of a controversy.
