
R. J. Rushdoony once sought to establish a Christian university. In this vision, he both failed and succeeded. While there exists no actual campus, Rushdoony did something greater. In books, essays, sermons, and lectures, he reasserted the unity of truth. For such a unity to exist, all truth must have a common basis. For Rushdoony, building upon the foundations of Augustine, Calvin, and Kuyper, that foundation was Scripture. Visualized graphically, Rushdoony’s university resembles a wagon wheel where the hub of the wheel is God’s revelation to us the Bible and every academic department is a spoke connected to that central revelation.
Had he authored have a dozen books, Rushdoony would still have been a pivotal thinker in one or more specific areas. As an interpreter and popularizer of Cornelius Van Til’s presuppositional apologetics, Rushdoony could have rested upon his own writings in apologetics and philosophy. Likewise, his essential writings on Christian education, which have had a major impact on the growth of Christian education, could have sufficiently established him as an educator, or he could have been a historian. Certainly, his theological writings earned him the title of theologian. As it happened, Rushdoony’s prolific mind and writings hopped across academic disciplines, sometimes tying disparate ideas together, exploring thought from a variety of angles, and always gathering in a huge net a wide range of insights to be gleaned and inanities to be scorned from his encyclopedic reading and memory.
The term Christian Reconstruction became the identifying mark of Rushdoony’s thought. Rarely has such a theological term engendered so many different reactions. For many, it was an oasis of delight after suffering from overly pietistic forms of Christianity. It was also a call to action. It was not a humanistic “Yes, we can,” but rather a God-breathed cultural mandate. For many Christians, the liberating force of Christian thought rescued their minds and brought thought itself under the law-word of God. For many, Christian Reconstruction enabled them to see that the collection of Bible stories for moral edification, commonly called the Old Testament, was a blueprint for godly dominion.
Such were the reactions of those who found delight in Rushdoony’s works. But others recoiled from his writings. For his most virulent opponents, Christian Reconstruction beckoned frightening images of an oppressive theocratic state, armed with a ready supply of stones for every deviation from Rushdoony’s theological pronouncements. Rushdoony’s writings were triumphal biblicism, revived postmillennial social gospel, law-works salvation, and extreme rightwing fanaticism. Since Rushdoony’s writings were voluminous and his pronouncements unreserved, it was always easy to find a point of disagreement with Rushdoony and from that splinter, posit a whole logging industry.
Time will both preserve Rushdoony’s books and calm the passions on both sides. While Rushdoony preached a slow, postmillennial salt-and-light cultural infiltration of Christianity, some of us zealots yearned for an immediate theonomic kingdom. In recent years, Rushdoony’s opponents, perhaps as shrill as ever, have generally lost their audiences. So we have time to think out the implications of Rushdoony’s writings and consider where they take us.
For this reason it is good that The Cure for Souls: Recovering the Biblical Doctrine of Confession by Rushdoony has been published by Ross House Books. In word association, when someone says, “Rushdoony,” we say, “Ten Commandments,” “Christian Reconstruction,” “Dominion,” “Postmillennialism,” and so on. We describe him as a theologian, a cultural critic, or as a philosopher, but it is important to remember that Rushdoony’s foremost calling and labor was as a pastor.
Rushdoony never lost sight of this pastoral calling as he explored and discussed many topics and issues. Rushdoony’s life-long labor for Christian Reconstruction, a labor that began long before the term itself was applied to it, was pastoral in scope. All too often forgotten is the fact that Christian Reconstruction is based on “the cure of souls.” It was never premised on a political takeover, for that would simply be one more version of the same humanistic statism that Rushdoony deplored. It was never merely an intellectual paradigm, for that would have been the same intellectual elitism (or gnosticism) that plagued the church since its earliest times. It was never just unrestrained Calvinistic theological dogmatism, for that was the theological impotence Rushdoony rejected all his life.
Christian Reconstruction was premised on spiritual regeneration, on the one-by-one conversion of lost men, the mustard seed growth of the kingdom, the gentle change wrought by the Holy Spirit over the whole earth. Rushdoony said, “The most effective cure of souls is the preaching of the Word of God. It is not only faith that comes by hearing, but also repentance, a change of heart and life, humility, a submission to correction, and more.” Souls responding to the preached Word of God would become the laborers for Christian Reconstruction in the fields of church, family, school, state, and for all of society.
This book is subtitled Recovering the Biblical Doctrine of Confession. The recovery of confession is necessary because Catholics have warped the doctrine into an act that implies self-salvation. But Catholics are not alone in being in error. Protestants have sidestepped confession, in part, by trading it for personal testimonies. The world has aped confession, especially the world of celebrities. For those imprisoned by cable television, there is a never ending dialog of the rich and famous, right along side the obscure and lowly, proudly confessing the most sordid and degenerate lifestyles, past actions, and personal beliefs.
Rushdoony said, “The word confession is not primarily associated with the confession of sins but with confessing Christ.” He emphasizes this point repeatedly, saying later, “By this simple act of confession of faith in Jesus Christ, the whole burden of sin is forever removed. By this simple act of confession of faith in Jesus Christ, we step from the realm of sin into the realm of God’s righteousness in Jesus Christ.”
He does not deny the necessity of confessing our sins, but he notes the dangers in this type of confession being primary. He says, “To confess sins, to deal with confession of sins at length, is to continue struggling in terms of the law, trying to make atonement by word of mouth, by acts of contribution or penance, trying to gain a personal righteousness in terms of our own nature.”
Divided into forty-nine short chapters, this book lends itself to devotional reading. But it is not the sentimental or “spiritual” type of devotional; rather, it fits C.S. Lewis’ preferred type of devotional reading. Lewis said, “I believe that many who find that ‘nothing happens’ when they sit down, or kneel down, to a book of devotion, would find that the heart sings unbidden while they are working their way through a tough bit of theology with a pipe in their teeth and a pencil in their hand.” The Cure of Souls can surely cause the heart to sing unbidden.
Being a book so focused on pastoral and experiential faith, The Cure of Souls may seem different from the “normal” writings of Rushdoony, but it still has several of his key writing characteristics. First, it takes a central theme—the contrast of Biblical confession with sinful humanistic confession, in this case—and then replays that theme with variations of approach and application. Second, it displays the typical Rushdoony sweep of expansive reading and decades of human observations. Footnotes site sources ranging from news magazines to theological studies to topical books of all kinds. Third, it includes much historical research, particularly regarding both proper and improper uses of confession in the history of the church. Fourth, it continually builds upon Rushdoony’s adherence to Reformed theology, Reformed standards, and the basic Reformed emphasis on the sovereignty of God and sufficiency of God’s grace.
The Cure of Souls takes its place among the numerous works that comprise the university that Rushdoony built. Basic to the failure of the modern university—including all too many Christian universities—is the error of trying to build a tower of Babel, rather than community united on God’s Truth. The soul, and not the mind, is the center of man’s redemption. It is by confessing Christ as Savior—savior in the cosmic, rather than just the ecclesiastical sense—that the way is opened to truth and hope. It is by confessing Christ that one truly begins studying in God’s university.

