Hodge’s article appeared in the December 1981 issue of The Counsel of Chalcedon, a publication of the Chalcedon Presbyterian Church of Atlanta, Georgia, which is an early proponent of Dominionist and Christian Reconstructionist ideas. Reconstuctionist Dr. Joseph C. Moorecraft, III was the minister of the church, and Reconstuctionists Gary DeMar and Greg Bahnsen were affiliated with the magazine.

Hodge is described in 1991 as the “Executive Director of The Foundation for the Advancement of Christian Studies,” in Engadine, New South Wales, Australia, and publisher of a newsletter Christian Economics. This is not the first publication with that name, and the U.S. serial of the same name (but no apparent connection) was founded in 1950 and published by the right-wing Christian Freedom Foundation (CFF) and sent free to some 175,000 ministers.

A 1993 study by Edd S. Noell , “A Reformed Approach to Economics: Christian Reconstructionism,” cites to another publication by Hodge, calling it a “critique of Vickers’ Christian approach to macroeconomics which focuses on the Biblical material dealing with monetary economics and applies it to modern Keynesian theory and policy.” The book by Hodge is: Baptized Inflation: A Critique of “Christian” Keynesianism. Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1986.

Now Fred Clarkson will tell you that the Institute for Christian Economics is run by leading Reconstructionist Gary North, so Hodge seems firmly entrenched in that worldview.[cite]

I wondered if Hodge also embraced the same economic Darwinist ultra-libertarian ideology as the earlier Christian Freedom Foundation, so I poked around for other writings by Hodge. What turned up first was an essay on Usury, discussing how “Social Credit theory has raised the question of usury by calling for interest-free loans.” Hodge attempts to use Biblical analysis to question current lending practices among Christians. It’s online if you are interested, but I found it far-fetched and boring. [Cite]

What caught my attention were the footnotes. The first footnote was to the 1921 title Capital and Interest written by Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk , and translated by George D. Huncke and Hans F. Sennholz . I know Sennholz as one of the leading ideologues of right-wing libertarian economic theory who was affiliated with the John Birch Society publication American Opinion back in the early 1960s. In fact the 1964 masthead of American Opinion read like a Who's Who of ultraconservates and Free Marketeers: Associate Editors Revilo P. Oliver and E. Merrill Root; Contributing Editors Meford Evans and Hans Sennholz; Editorial Advisory Committee, Clarence Manion, Ludwig Von Mises, J. Howard Pew, and Robert W. Stoddard.

Pew was a major funder of the Christian Freedom Foundation, which published Christian Economics, in which Ludwig Von Mises wrote articles.

Hodge also cites his own work, which appeared as Making Sense of Your Dollars: A Biblical Approach to Wealth, published by Ross House Books, an arm of the Chalcedon Foundation, created by the progenitor of Christian Reconstructionism , Rev. R.J. Rushdoony. (I pause here to note the proponents of Rushdoony are so techno-attuned that Rushdoony has his own podcasts, even though he is dead. [Cite] )

Michelle Goldberg, author of Kingdom Coming, has been writing about how much of the Christian Right ideology was pioneered by the John Birch Society. She is right on target. And this also ties the trail back to Christian Reconstructionism Rushdoony was a member of the John Birch Society.

Fred Clarkson wrote about this in “Christian Reconstructionism: Theocratic Dominionism Gains Influence,” The Public Eye, March/June 1994:

Reconstructionist leaders seem to have two consistent characteristics: a background in conservative Presbyterianism, and connections to the John Birch Society (JBS).>

In 1973, R. J. Rushdoony compared the structure of the JBS to the "early church." He wrote in Institutes: "The key to the John Birch Society's effectiveness has been a plan of operation which has a strong resemblance to the early church; have meetings, local `lay' leaders, area supervisors or `bishops.'"

The JBS connection does not stop there. Most leading Reconstructionists have either been JBS members or have close ties to the organization. Reconstructionist literature can be found in JBS-affiliated American Opinion bookstores.

Indeed , the conspiracist views of Reconstructionist writers (focusing on the United Nations and the Council on Foreign Relations, among others) are consistent with those of the John Birch Society. A classic statement of the JBS world view, Call It Conspiracy by Larry Abraham, features a prologue and an epilogue by Reconstructionist Gary North. In fact, former JBS chairman Larry McDonald may himself have been a Reconstructionist. Joseph

Morecraft has written that "Larry [McDonald] understood that when the authors of the US Constitution spoke of law, they meant the law of God as revealed in the Bible. I have heard him say many times that we must refute humanistic, relativistic law with Biblical Law." [Cite]

In his thoughtful 1993 study "A Reformed Approach to Economics: Christian Reconstructionism," Edd S. Noell explains the nuts and bolts of how the Christian Reconstructionists view economic theory through the lens of Biblical law. Noell is an Associate Professor of Economics at Westmont College, and has done his homework. According to Noell:

The teachings of Christian Reconstructionism have been increasingly influential in recent years for evangelicals advocating social policy in various mainline denominations and independent churches. They have also induced a fairly strong and at times quite critical reaction both within and outside the Reformed community; among the sobriquets given to Reconstructionists are “ triumphalists ” and “the liberation theologians of the right.” (Bulletin, Association of Christian Economists, Spring, 1993, pp. 6-20) [Online]

I totally agree.

In fact, I think the roots of the economic theories pushed by Christian Right leaders today are in the John Birch Society and Christian Reconstructionism.

So when Stanley Kurtz over at the National Review online trashes the work of Fred Clarkson in The Public Eye, calling it conspiracy mongering and sneering that "All you have to do is quote a fringe Dominionist desperate to prove that his radical ideas are catching on," it is Kurtz who is parading his ignorance in public, not Clarkson.