Mainstream Baptist Claims Theocratic "Links" to the SBC
A central means to substantiating the anti-theocratic conspiracy theory is find the "link" between the Christian Reconstructionists and other protestant organizations. Bruce Prescott of Mainstream Baptist has mentioned more than once what he sees as the "clear tie" between Chalcedon and the Southern Baptist Convention. He writes:
It's true. I don't deny it. We published Bruce Shortt's book. The title, however, is actually The Harsh Truth About Public Schools. Prescott misses the title by listing it as The Harsh Truth About Public Education. Is that a big deal? Not really. It just lends support to my claim that our critics are not as careful as they should be. They publish too quickly.
We did not hire Bruce Shortt to write his critique of public schools. Mainstream publishers were reluctant to touch a controversial manuscript that could upset their constituency. They did not rush to Shortt's door. Through a series of events we met up with Bruce and offered to publish the book. The reason is that Chalcedon has long criticized the public school system while advocating home schooling and privately owned Christian schools.
The value we saw in Bruce's manuscript was that he exhaustively documented in historic cases what Rushdoony addressed philosophically. We thought it would be a great fit for our catalog of titles. But, as anyone familiar with our catalog knows, we rarely publish authors other than Rushdoony. Therefore, a book must bear an important message for us to include it in our list of volumes.
Does that constitute a link between Chalcedon and the SBC? I don't think so. We rarely speak with Bruce as he is involved in his own crusade for Christian education. We certainly do not correspond with the SBC. We do pray for Bruce's success in the SBC but do not finance any initiatives he might undertake.
According to Prescott, our publishing of Shortt is a standard "script" that we follow in our obsessive desire to take over the world:
This is a joke. Prescott is speculating in the most pernicious way. Behold his rhetoric: we "attack" and then "take over." We, the wicked theocrats, are seeking "a system of religious schools and homeschools paid for at the public expense." Our desire is to "indoctrinate children" in the ways of theocracy.
This is yet another baseless accusation with no supporting evidence. Dr. Prescott, we simply seek to educate our own children, and we don't want your money to do it. We will not place our children in your beloved public school system. However, we are currently paying for YOUR children to go to school to learn your secularist ways. Despite the fact that we sacrifice time and money to homeschool, or pay costly tuitions at Christian academies, we are still giving our tax dollars to sustain the public education system. You've got it all backwards.
There's no link between Chalcedon and the SBC. As to whether a single southern Baptist reads our materials I cannot surmise. I imagine they do. Do we have similar goals? We might see eye-to-eye on some things, but there is no coordination between the camps. Suggesting more than this is to overlay a conspiracy on a non-existent relationship.
You know, Dr. Prescott, you're probably correct. As a Christian parent, I would want to know if homosexuals were teaching my children in a tax-funded public school system. You seem to be equally outraged if a theocrat served a similar teaching position.
Prescott concludes by offering fair warning to the innocent teachers of the public school system:
In typical sensationalist fashion Prescott threatens teachers with facing a tyrannical dictatorship. How he landed at that conclusion I'll never know. Bruce Shortt is not advocating a takeover of public schools. Shortt offered a bolder proposition in the 2004 Southern Baptist Convention. It was rejected, as Prescott is fully aware. Shortt was petitioning for the removal of SBC children from the public school system. His tome provided sufficient evidence for such a petition, and in the Christian perspective is by no means radical. What's radical is sending Christian children to be trained in a humanistic worldview - one that divorces God from areas of study while espousing pluralism, secularism, and the acceptance of alternate sexual lifestyles.
As Christians we bear the right to remove our children from the public education system. We feel it is biblical to do so.
Those who doubt there are links between Southern Baptists and theocratic Christian Reconstructionists should look inside the front cover of the December 2004 issue of the Chalcedon Report. There the chief publishing house for Reconstructionist thought, Chalcedon, announces that it has published Bruce Shortt's book, The Harsh Truth About Public Education. Bruce Shortt, along with T.C. Pinckney, leads the movement against public schools within the Southern Baptist Convention.
It's true. I don't deny it. We published Bruce Shortt's book. The title, however, is actually The Harsh Truth About Public Schools. Prescott misses the title by listing it as The Harsh Truth About Public Education. Is that a big deal? Not really. It just lends support to my claim that our critics are not as careful as they should be. They publish too quickly.
We did not hire Bruce Shortt to write his critique of public schools. Mainstream publishers were reluctant to touch a controversial manuscript that could upset their constituency. They did not rush to Shortt's door. Through a series of events we met up with Bruce and offered to publish the book. The reason is that Chalcedon has long criticized the public school system while advocating home schooling and privately owned Christian schools.
The value we saw in Bruce's manuscript was that he exhaustively documented in historic cases what Rushdoony addressed philosophically. We thought it would be a great fit for our catalog of titles. But, as anyone familiar with our catalog knows, we rarely publish authors other than Rushdoony. Therefore, a book must bear an important message for us to include it in our list of volumes.
Does that constitute a link between Chalcedon and the SBC? I don't think so. We rarely speak with Bruce as he is involved in his own crusade for Christian education. We certainly do not correspond with the SBC. We do pray for Bruce's success in the SBC but do not finance any initiatives he might undertake.
According to Prescott, our publishing of Shortt is a standard "script" that we follow in our obsessive desire to take over the world:
We've read this script before. First they attack the schools, then they organize a movement to take them over, and then they take them over. They did that in the Southern Baptist Convention.
Now they are taking on the public schools. When they are done, we will have a system of religious schools and home schools, paid-for at public expense, that will dutifully indoctrinate children in their theocratic ways.
This is a joke. Prescott is speculating in the most pernicious way. Behold his rhetoric: we "attack" and then "take over." We, the wicked theocrats, are seeking "a system of religious schools and homeschools paid for at the public expense." Our desire is to "indoctrinate children" in the ways of theocracy.
This is yet another baseless accusation with no supporting evidence. Dr. Prescott, we simply seek to educate our own children, and we don't want your money to do it. We will not place our children in your beloved public school system. However, we are currently paying for YOUR children to go to school to learn your secularist ways. Despite the fact that we sacrifice time and money to homeschool, or pay costly tuitions at Christian academies, we are still giving our tax dollars to sustain the public education system. You've got it all backwards.
There's no link between Chalcedon and the SBC. As to whether a single southern Baptist reads our materials I cannot surmise. I imagine they do. Do we have similar goals? We might see eye-to-eye on some things, but there is no coordination between the camps. Suggesting more than this is to overlay a conspiracy on a non-existent relationship.
The first stage of their campaign is passing resolutions at Convention meetings encouraging the parents of school children to investigate the homosexual agenda at the public school. Any school that teaches tolerance of homosexuals will soon be under attack.
You know, Dr. Prescott, you're probably correct. As a Christian parent, I would want to know if homosexuals were teaching my children in a tax-funded public school system. You seem to be equally outraged if a theocrat served a similar teaching position.
Prescott concludes by offering fair warning to the innocent teachers of the public school system:
For all those school teachers who are fed-up with the bureaucracy in public schools, you are going to love working for these autocrats.
In typical sensationalist fashion Prescott threatens teachers with facing a tyrannical dictatorship. How he landed at that conclusion I'll never know. Bruce Shortt is not advocating a takeover of public schools. Shortt offered a bolder proposition in the 2004 Southern Baptist Convention. It was rejected, as Prescott is fully aware. Shortt was petitioning for the removal of SBC children from the public school system. His tome provided sufficient evidence for such a petition, and in the Christian perspective is by no means radical. What's radical is sending Christian children to be trained in a humanistic worldview - one that divorces God from areas of study while espousing pluralism, secularism, and the acceptance of alternate sexual lifestyles.
As Christians we bear the right to remove our children from the public education system. We feel it is biblical to do so.
