Dr. Curtis Freeman, Research Professor of Theology at Duke Divinity School, accused me of being shrill in my critique of Professor Newman's essay on the Idolatry of Pluralism.
He's right. I was shrill.
I was shrill because the last place I expected to find an unqualified quotation from a Christian Reconstructionist was in an essay by a moderate Baptist seminary professor on the Associated Baptist Press newswire. After sounding bugles for more than a decade warning moderate Baptists about the rise and advance of Dominionism within the Southern Baptist Convention, finding its undetected influence within CBF circles was more than a little disconcerting to me.
Professor Newman's mistake was not difficult to make. When clearly explained, Christian Reconstructionist ideas are so extreme that almost everyone discounts them as beyond the pale of consideration. Most scholars refuse to waste their time reading Reconstructionists and they are quick to ridicule anyone who suggests that Dominionists could possibly exert significant influence in post-modern America.
Professor Newman's major mistake was to assume that a writer who wrote in such a clear and lucid style -- using highly sophisticated logic and reasoning -- would be too bright to be a white supremacist Christian Reconstructionist. Only those who take the time to read their writings and listen to them speak will know how thoroughly Reconstructionist thought patterns resonate with those of Frances Schaeffer. Their bibliolatrous presuppositional apologetic is essentially the same. They only differ on how far they are willing to press the logic of inerrancy in civic life. The more logical they are, the more thoroughly they want to apply biblical law.
Perhaps this exchange will encourage more people to heed and take note of the increasing challenge that Christian Reconstructionism, Domionism and Christian Nationalism is presenting.