abstract: |

Skip Navigation

Dear Sir: I am responding to your request in the recent The Christian Statesman for letters to the editor. I have two comments: one positive and looking forward, and one negative and looking back.

Positive: I would like to commend the vision of the NRA's new president, Mr. Ziegler, for his proposals to make the NRA more visible, and to explain further to the public what recognition of the crown rights of our Lord will mean in the public, political realm of the real-world future. The effort is long overdue, and deserves strong support.

Negative: In explaining what the Christian principles of civil government should mean today, in America, the NRA must point to models of the past. I realize that many NRA members don't have a Reformed Presbyterian background, but I do think that the NRA's model really has to be the Second Reformation in Scotland, when the Covenants were truly owned and malignants rejected. I think it is much more helpful to point to the great leaders of the past, like Rutherford or MacMillan, who were able to express themselves in vivid, simple, trenchant language, than to talk about modern obfuscationists like Rushdoony who dress up the grand old ideas with complex, faddy, fancy terms. (In this connection, the NRA's republication of Messiah the Prince is very encouraging.) When explaining what the NRA's ideas mean for the 21st century, let's hear less about Rushdoony and words like "reconstructionism", and more about Rutherford and the Covenants! Thanks for your attention.

-Bob Emery, Albany, NY

The editor responds: Jeff Ziegler is a man of vision and action. I too am thankful that the Lord has raised him up at this time to press forward the crown rights of Jesus Christ.

I believe that the primary model that we should point to is the Hebrew Republic established by divine power and revelation. This is the only inspired, infallible model that we have. All other models are mixtures of truth and human error. The Second Reformation in Scotland was an important attempt (though by fallible men, of course) to implement the standards of God's covenant in both church and state. There is much for us to learn in the faithful and godly efforts of these great men of God. The Puritans in New England provide us with another important model, and one closer to home.

I agree that the men you speak of are great leaders of the past. However, I cannot share your views on Rushdoony's work. He has made a major contribution to the church's understanding of God's law. Let us learn from the past and build upon the work of the great men who have gone before. But we should also be willing to learn from the teachers that God has given to us in our generation (for God is faithful to raise up men to teach and apply His Word in each generation). Our primary allegiance must be to Christ and the written Word of God.

back to top