From the Easy Chair

Book Reviews

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Conversations, Panels and Sermons

Lesson: 172-214

Genre: Speech

Track:

Dictation Name: RR161DM212

Year: 1980s and 1990s

Dr. R. J. Rushdoony, RR161DM212, Book Reviews, from the Easy Chair, excellent colloquies on various subjects.

[ Rushdoony ] This is R. J. Rushdoony, Easy Chair number 324, October 5, 1994.

I this session I will continue, as you requested, with some book reviews with Mark Rushdoony as a commentator. I did not finish in Easy Chair number 323 with Life in the Middle Ages from the Seventh to the 13th Century by Hans Bernard Goetz, published in 1993.

I would like to share with you this story which is typical of peasant tales and attests to their pride in being peasants. They did not see themselves as down trodden people. In fact , they had stories galore about how they triumphed over arrogant lords and pompous priests and self important people of various classes. One story is the fairy tale epic of the poor present {?} meaning one ox, because he owned only one ox. Well, the ox died and he had no choice but to sell his hide at the market and he only got eight pence, despite a great deal of bargaining. So on his way home we stopped to relieve himself and when he reached for grass to wipe himself he found a treasure of silver. And so his son went to the advocate... advocate to get scales to weigh out the silver which was a mistake because the advocate became suspicious and accused {?} of theft.

Well {?} claimed he got the money from the sale of his ox hide. The advocate, the steward and parish priest, the village dignitaries, in other words, wanted to get rich, too. So they slaughtered all their cows, skinned them and took the hides to the city market with the result that they were unable to get rid of the hides because they demanded outrageous amounts.

So instead of getting rich they were dragged into court, fined and had to pay their fines with the hides. So they decided to get even with {?} and to kill him.

{?} then resorted to another trick. He daubed pig’s blood all over his wife as if he had killed her and then he revived her in front of the dignitaries by playing his flute. Everybody thought her to be younger and much more beautiful than she had before, because of her {?}. {?} said that was what would happen.

So these men purchased the flute from {?} at an outrageous price, went home and killed their wives. But none of them were able to revive their wives. So they came again to kill {?}. So he performed his next miracle by hiding silver in the rear of his breeding mare and calling on the three dignitaries to witness that the horse once petted defecated coins instead of ordinary dung.

Well, immediately they bought his mare for 15 pounds, a lot of money. So the priest was in charge of it. He took the mare home, fed her, petted her but all he got was horse manure. And, of course, he examined the horse manure very, very diligently looking for the silver.

So he finally found a solitary penny that had somehow gone through the stomach of the horse. The advocate and the steward found nothing. So they decided again to kill him.

So {?} begged to be allowed to choose the manner of his death. He turned the rest of the money over to the lords so that they could drink their fill. He told a passing swineherd who wanted to know why he was in the barrel and he said, “It is because people are forcing ... going to force me to become an advocate.”

So the swineherd said, “Well, I will trade places with you. I would like to be a big shot in the town.”

So when he climbed into the barrel the drunks came back and took the barrel and dropped it into the ocean. So {?} returned to the village with a large herd of pigs that the had bought. And when he was asked where he got all the wealth to buy pigs he said that the pigs had come directly from paradise on the bottom of the sea where pigs were plentiful.

So the priest, the advocate and the steward threw themselves immediately into the sea.

Now those were the so called poor, down trodden peasants. And they enjoyed their life. They had a lot of fun telling stories about the high and the mighty, which is a fact of life. I wish I could recall all the stories that the Indians among whom I spent eight and a half years would tell about federal Indian service officials. They relished the stories and they had fun. They were not down trodden.

Well, to go on to another book, this is by the reverent Curtis I. Crenshaw, Man as God: The Word of Faith Movement... The Word of Faith Movement. It is published, I believe the price is 10 dollars, by Footstool Publications, published in 1994. P O Box 161021, Memphis, Tennessee 38186.

Pastor Crenshaw is pastoring a church, I believe, in Mississippi. I think it is Forest, Mississippi, but perhaps I am wrong. I know that I have been there in Forrest and preached there.

Well, this is a very worthwhile book. Here is a first rate mind, Curtis Crenshaw. He is the kind of man we should have in Christian colleges and seminaries. But, oh, no, he is not the kind they hire. He looks a the word of faith leaders and calls attention to the many, many serious errors such as their belief in knowledge is salvation, their conversion of moral problems into metaphysical ones which is a fearful one, their belief that man can pronounce a binding word if he is a spiritual person, their implicit pantheism and so on and on and on. They are not truly Protestants.

Their thinking is more Anabaptist. And I would like to call attention at the same time to a book I turned to again and reread, in part, after reading Crenshaw’s superb study. The book is Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals by Wolf William Balke, B, as in boy, A L K E. This was published in 1982 and is not currently in print as far as I know. But, at any rate, what Balke points out very clearly is that the Anabaptist rejected the fundamental premises of the Reformation. They did not believe in the Old Testament or God’s law. They readily ran into some fearful errors and then pulled in their horns and became a withdrawn group. But their entire outlook was, well, really a continuation of the late medieval pietistic cults. They are basically animistic. Their Authoritarianism is not so much a scriptural, but an ecclesiastical Authoritarianism. They separate the realm of the spiritual and the sensory.

This kind of thing we see again and the word of faith movement that Crenshaw deals with exemplifies this quite thoroughly. I am glad to see that he does in passing call attention to the origin of this type of thinking in the modern era. It was Charles Finney, who as Crenshaw points out, rejected every major doctrine of Christianity, promoted an experience subsequent to conversion which he called the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

Well, Finney created something which is very, very wicked and which is still with us, an implicit denial of the personhood of the Holy Ghost. Finney held that revivals and Spirit filled manifestations could be created by the proper manipulation of a crowd and a people so that the so-called Spirit filled experiences were really manipulated experiences, psychological phenomenon, not the work of the Holy Spirit. And this has led to a major revolution in the life of the church. We cannot manipulate people and say it is the work of the Holy Spirit. And this is the great evil of the word of faith movement of the Finneyites who are not in the word of faith movement. So he very tellingly deals with this fact.

Now he points out, too, that the Puritans, contrary to much prejudice and bigotry, were not the intolerant people that many claim they were. The Anabaptists in New England refused to worship with Cotton Mather even though he invited them. Mather would have allowed them to join his church and all the New England churches were very tolerant. But the Anabaptists were very intolerant of the Puritans and very exclusive. They felt that they alone had the truth and nobody else did. And as a consequence, their hostility has led some scholars to assume that it was beaus they were persecuted.

The Quakers were another such group in that time. the Quakers in those days were a bit crazy in too many cases. And they were banned finally from Massachusetts Bay colony because of the kid of thing they did. Quaker women would strip stark naked and walk into a church during the services to be a living parable to show that the churches of New England are naked in the sight of God and worthless and so on.

So they finally kicked them out of the Massachusetts Bay colony. It was impossible to live in a place where people feel they have the right to be disruptive.

It makes you think of some people today who think that being disruptive is somehow noble.

So do get mad as God. You will fid it an excellent education in a great many of the evils of our time within the church. You have him dealing with people like Copeland, Kenyon, Cass, Oral Roberts, Kenneth Hagan, Robert Tilden and many, many others, Pat Robertson for his part in it also and others as well. This is truly an outstanding book.

Well... oh, Mark, did you want to comment on that?

[ M Rushdoony ] No, I just happened to read a quote from Sam Jones who, I think, was maybe a generation or two...

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] ... after Finney.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] And it was something to... to the effect that ... that the... the... the man must... must save himself, man must convert himself and then God regenerates.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] He was following in the footsteps of... of Finney.

[ Rushdoony ] Exactly, exactly. The technique is with men and they can control the Holy Spirit by their techniques.

[ M Rushdoony ] Well, that is what you use, then, on ... on television when you see this... this ... this showmanship, this .... the artificiality of so many preachers. What is... what is amazing is that so many people fall for it and they continue to go for it. When Bakker went to jail there were people who were still supporting him financially for some time after he went to jail.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] It... it... people are looking for that kind of preacher.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] And they don’t want to let go of them.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, I know at least one person who lost everything. Her husband had left her a tremendous inheritance. He was a very important person and she gave it all to the Bakkers and when he went to jail she actually began to fall apart. I think she believed that if he had not gone to jail somehow all the blessings would fall and she would be fine again.

Well, I am going to turn to a very different sort of book now. This one is written by a professor. He is a professor at Oxford University. This book is exceedingly important, published just this year. Well, no, it was published first in December of last year. The title is.... the author is John Carey, C A R E Y, The Intellectuals and the Masses: Pride and Prejudice Among the Literary Intelligentsia; 1880 to 1939 published by Saint Martin’s Press in New York.

Well, this book begins by telling us—and it is a very wise book to an extent and very tragic otherwise. The title is the intellectuals and the masses. Who are the masses? And he says it is a fiction created by the intellectuals. You and I, everybody around us who isn’t a part of the intelligentsia is a member of the masses. Well, we are not like our neighbors. We are very different, but the term was used.

Now the masses have become a problem as far as the intellectuals are concerned. They have led to too many people in the world. Every place is overcrowded. Moreover, the common man or whatever you want to call the masses, is intrusive. He is in your face every time you turn around and who wants to see him? So that there is a great deal of hostility.

Nietzsche held to this idea and his Zarathustra says, “Many, too many are born and they hang on their branches much too long. I wish a storm would come and shake all this rottenness and worm eatenness from the tree.”

He went on to say, this was in Zarathustra, in the will to power that a declaration of war on the masses by higher men is needed. In other words, we need to, one way or another, kill off most people. And not only Nietzsche, but Yeats, Bernard Shaw, {?}, Hanson... and Hanson was very famous for Norwegian novelist when I was growing up. And he wrote, I quote, “I believe in the born leader, in the national... in the natural despot, the master, not the man who is chosen, but the man who elects himself to be ruler over the masses. I believe in and hope for one thing and that is the return of the great terrorist, the living essence of human power, the caesar,” unquote.

And Carey comments, “Hanson eventually found his great terrorist in Hitler.” Even when Hitler committed suicide Hanson, one of the supposedly great novelists of this century, Norwegian, published an admiring obituary so this is what Carey traces and George Bernard Shaw, of course, shared these opinions and popularized them, acting as though he was spoofing, but meaning every word of it.

They also feel, these high brows, as Carey says, that the masses are degraded and threatening, but also not fully alive. And some of them have said that the common man lacks a soul. Thomas Hardy, for example, only a handful of the people alive really have souls.

Well, D. H. Lawrence as similar he wrote, “The mass of mankind is soulless. Most people are dead and scurrying and talking in the sleep of death.” And at another point he said, “Three cheers of the inventor of poison gas.”

Well, Nietzsche held—and I quote, “The great majority of men have no right to existence, but are a misfortune to higher men,” unquote.

D. H. Lawrence in a letter said he would like to take the great masses and he says, “If I had my way I would build a lethal chamber as big as the crystal palace with a military band playing slowly in a {?} working brightly. Then I would go out into the back streets and main streets and bring them in, all the sick, the halt and the maimed. I would lead them gently and they would smile me a weary thanks. And the band would softly bubble out the Hallelujah Chorus. Of course the gas would also bubble out.”

Well, E. M. Forrester also believed that war was good because it would dispose, he hoped of the hordes of mankind and it would clean the land. Some of them have said that ... and are saying that we need to remove people from vast portions of the earth and let nature flourish. Nobody allowed to go in there, of course, except these chosen, self appointed leaders.

Carey goes on and on. Let schools be closed at once. D. H. Lawrence said the great mass of humanity should never learn to read and write.

If you think this is just spouting, we had a conference in Cairo recently where not as honestly they were still talking about the same kind of thing, too many people. The writers felt that modern art should be anti popular, written so that nobody understands it. If a place or thing becomes popular, drop it because it can’t be good if the common man likes it. Common man should not be taught to read. They should be illiterate.

Now, of course, this is what they are saying about us. Dean {?} of the Church of England in 1928—and I can remember this—said that democratic man is a species of ape. He was called the gloomy dean, I believe, of Saint Paul’s, because he didn’t see much hope for mankind.

And Ezra Pound, for example, and I quote, “For Ezra Pound humanity apart from artists is merely a mass of dolts, a rabble representing the waste and the manure from which grow the trees of the arts. In Pound’s {?} the multitudes and their leaders transmogrify to a torrent of human excrement. Democracies electing their sewage. This vision of what he calls the great R S hole was meant, Pound explained, as a portrait of contemporary England,” unquote.

Well, he singles out certain writers, a great many key figures like Freud, {?}, Yeats, {?} and so on and on. T. S. Eliot very definitely one of them. One of the thing that repelled these people, as far as the middle classes were concerned, these are some of the English writers, was their coldness to homosexuals. The Cambridge apostles, a sodomite group called it the higher sodomy what they practiced.

Then J. V. Priestly said of the English people, “Most probably they did not know how to make love or even to eat and drink properly.”

This is what these writers have been saying. And nobody has been rising up in protest about this or calling attention to the evil involved.

To continue with Carey’s The Intellectuals and the Masses, the contempt of these people for the Christian middle class element is staggering. For example, Cyril Connelly and the unclapped grave holds that suburbs are worse than slums. And he says, “Slums may well be breeding grounds of crime, but the middle class suburbs are incubators of apathy and delirium,” unquote.

And Carey gives us many, many such quotes. They are total contempt.

George Moore, when I went to the university as a student one of the more highly regarded writers, wrote, “Injustice we worship. All that lifts us out of the misery of life is the sublime fruit of injustice. Every immortal deed was an act of fearful injustice.”

This is all a way of saying that like Nietzsche, we hate morality. We hate God. And we want the destruction of those peoples who are the people of faith. In fact, one other writer he cites, said that majority of men at present in Europe have no business to be alive. They reject the doctrine of the sacredness of human life. And one of these intellectuals says, and I quote, “Extermination must be put on a scientific basis if it is ever to be carried out humanely and apologetically as well as thoroughly. If we desire a certain type of civilization and culture, we must exterminate the sort of people who do not fit into it,” unquote.

And if you think they don’t mean business with this, you are very, very foolish, because they do. They are working to implement it and I won’t go into it here, but there are ways where they have indicated that they mean business.

These people held that art was a sacred and a religion. Clyde Bell was the one who said that. Ezra Pound felt that people have brains like rabbits and we artists who have been so long the despised are about to take over control. Mussolini was his ideal artist dictator.

Another writer, Nietzsche, said he admired only one person in the New Testament, Pontius Pilate, because Pilate could to persuade himself to take a Jewish affair seriously. One Jew more or less, what does it matter? And also this statement, “All great human beings have been criminals.”

Nietzsche also, continuing, he ridicules in Beyond Good and Evil and Twilight of the Gods the very concept of moral judgment. Nothing is inherently moral or immoral, he argues. Moral judgment never contains anything but nonsense.

Oscar Wilde said that aesthetics are higher than ethics. In other words, art more than morality.

From one end of the book to the other he gives us quotations of staggering character which tell us very, very plainly how these people regard themselves. One of the men says all artists are aristocrats and only the aristocrats should survive.

Some of these people, T. S. Eliot on the Protestant side, Graham Greene on the Catholic, maintained these things, but still maintained a façade that they were ostensibly Christian, which didn’t mean, apparently, in some cases believing in God.

Graham Greene, for example, made it clear that he was not convinced that there was a God. And yet he would continue to go to mass or confession, although later on he dropped even that. They believed that their high art was actually divine so they were saying, “We produce things that are divine.”

He deals at some length with George Gissing whose venom for the common man, for you and for me is enormous. He actually felt that only readers of poetry are capable of suffering, just as someone wrote who claims to be a good reformed scholar, although he has peculiar views for a reformed man that unless you can appreciate Beethoven and others like Beethoven, you cannot understand the gospels.

Well, Gissing, of course, was a woman hater and his love of classical literature was almost a mania Carey says. He hated everything that was godly He had a horror of people. And he regarded education for the masses as inadvisable. And so on and on. These people were monsters.

Then H. G. Wells was very emphatic about the need to get rid of people. He did not feel that there could be any social improvement unless population is controlled. And he very openly favored the elimination of most people. He hated newspapers. He hated advertising. He despised anything that he felt was beneath his dignity. He felt that ethics should be derived from two sources, Malthus and Darwin. He felt that genocide is the only answer. The swarms of black and brown and dirty white and yellow people have to go. It is their portion to die out and disappear.

So his modern Utopia and other works were designed to prepare the way for the reduction of the world’s population which was an obsession with him and with others.

Now all this leads somewhere. These are the writers that have been the popular ones, the ones that are taught in some instances in high schools, but not so much now, but in colleges and their view is that our existence constitutes a plague. What do you do with a plague? Why you work to eliminate it. And so he called H. G. Wells and others the elimination of plagues, of man.

Wyndham Lewis who, when I was a student, was highly regarded as Carey notes, “The intellectual’s intellectual,” was really so strange that if he had not been an intellectual he would have been locked up. He hated women with a passion. And Carey says he needed a constant stream of mistresses to reinforce his virile self image and often boasted about having VD which he thought a sign of potency. He did, In fact, contract gonorrhea and underwent several operations in the 1930s. To show disregard for women and children was, he believed, the proper masculine intellectual stance.

Of course, he was anything but a masculine figure. His wife Anne Hoskins, 18 years younger than he, was a working class girl and she put up with his infidelities and his decision that their union should be childless. He wanted to be the free and dashing artist so he insisted that their marriage be kept a secret.

So she had to disappear when friends came to visit. And he could to have been ore contemptuous of women and the common man.

He ... well, some of this is beyond repeating. It is sickening. He was also a racist, by the way, as was Ezra Pound and a number of these others. But, of course, somehow they are forgiven for that.

Now the interesting thing is that there was one person who did fit the ideal they all had of a leader. More than a few of them hailed him at first. Some, right straight through. But we are protected from the fact that these men liked Hitler. They felt that he was the ideal. He was an artist. He was an intellectual. Now, of course, they are bent of defaming Hitler as an artist and an intellectual. Well, that is about the only thing you can say about him that is true in terms of what these writers now and popular people are saying. He was an artist. He was or thought himself to be an intellectual and he appealed to a great many intellectuals. Remember, the professors in the German universities went overboard. They liked what Hitler represented. Only later did they separate themselves from him because of the Jewish question. And yet when I was a student in the 30s, professors were very hostile to the Jews, embarrassingly so, because their... their hatred was painful to listen to, it was so embarrassing to think that this was the intellectual leadership of our time.

Of course, their reason for it was that a lot of the Jewish scholars had come to the United States and they were getting the best jobs. They were taking the top professorships and that is what made these American academicians hateful.

Well, Hitler, of course, was ready to eliminate people, Jews and Russians, wholesale. He planed to turn the Ukraine and the Caucuses into a one of the loveliest gardens of the world. And he was going to move a population of 20 million there. At the very end, of course, he turned on the German people. He felt that they deserved to lose because they were not worthy of him.

Carey concludes that section by saying, and I quote, “The tragedy of Mein Kampf is that it was not in many respects a deviant work, but one firmly rooted in European intellectual orthodoxy.

Well, it is a very important work, but the horror of it is the postscript, because there he comes to the horrifying conclusion and I quote. “Given the state of the planet humans or some humans must now be categorized as vermin. In case this sounds alarmist, we should remind ourselves that it is already a situation in Bogota, Columbia where for the last 10 years the police and hired death squads have been hunting down and killing street children, many of whom now live in the city sewers... sewers to avoid extermination,” and so on.

Well, do what? These do in Bogotá and others in other places in Latin America make it good? Must we, as he says, come to the recognition that given the state of the planet, humans or some humans that they just now be categorized as vermin? Because he subscribes to the myth of over population, Carey comes to this conclusion. He can do nothing else, but conclude so because he has no faith and his idea is that, well, science so decrees and so it must be done. We are going to be over populated. Of course, we were a few years, according to science, going to be flooded by the melting of the polar caps or we were going to be at another phase facing a new ice age and so on. Every few years a new myth.

[ M Rushdoony ] That is pretty... pretty cold that someone could quote all that and then come up with a conclusion in agreement like that... with...with this... that... that people are the problem.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] Or quoting all those...

[ Rushdoony ] Well, they are resentful of the success of the ordinary middle class person. He has a pleasant home. He has got children. He is happy. He goes to church. Then that is monstrous. It should not be. And so they turn on them. They want them destroyed. It is the dream, of course, of Plato’s Republic. Plato wanted the philosopher kings to rule everything, the soldiers to defend the order and then the common man to be the worker and the philosopher kings to have what ever they wanted, including the women. That dream is still with us. And this is what Carey is talking about. Without faith you are not going to see the problem in man’s heart, in man’s character, in man’s lack of faith. You are going tot see it in other people. These people are not up to my level and I am going to determine what the level is. If you don’t like modern art and if you don’t like modern ballet and if you don’t like modern music, atonal music, you are unfit to live.

[ M Rushdoony ] After what you read it is interesting that the ... that the one review here quoted from the Guardian witty, passionate and end to end readable.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. Well, readable it is. But there is not much more you can say for it. And it is sad that a man who sees this then winds up saying, “Well, what else can we do?”

Now briefly to another book which is an older one and I don't recall who urged me to pick it up once when it was marked down in a sale and said you will find some interesting things in it although it is a terrible book. The author is Pierre Nico Solinas and the title Ultimate Porno. It was published in 1981. It deals with the making of a film of that time, Caligula which apparently was about as evil and pornographic as you could get. The making of the film, what goes on, everything, is described in some detail and I do not recommend it. It is only because I found one or two statements that are revelatory. This one, I think, is. Where pornography is concerned the addiction of some people to it and drugs and the addiction of people to it, the attitude is everybody has got his hang up. So what is the beef? This one person screams. Everybody has his drug, dear Maria. So what if mine is pornography? In other words, there is nothing in the way of anything decent, anything godly that can exist. So pornography is his drug. Everybody has his drug. And the origin of that was Karl Marx, religion as the opium of the masses. Everybody has no {?}. So you people think to be moral, your opiate is to believe that stuff. So this is the world. And the horrors that go on the set, including rape, it is just, well, you have no standards.

And one of the characters I this actor, an actor says, “I think one of the great thing about Caligula is that he enjoys life. You very rarely see a film where the character enjoys living.”

So what was his enjoyment of life? It was killing people, raping people, destroying them totally. So this is the marvelous thing to this character. This is the kind of thing that our world today idealizes, exalts. And it tries all the while to defame Christians.

Any other {?} comments you would like to make?

[ M Rushdoony ] No, just I think a few other things that I have read have got me thinking. It is a comment you made, I think came from John Mark Berteaux and ... and others that Europe needed ... didn’t need revival. It needed re Christianizing and it... and it looks like it is that way, that is the case with much of ... much of the West. It needs to be re Christianized.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] And they don’t want Christianity.

[ Rushdoony ] No.

[ M Rushdoony ] They don’t want... they don’t want it so they are... they are not open to it. So they are going to have to face judgment. And the... and... and... and... and I think the judgment is the only thing that is going to open them up to... to ... to... to Christianity once again.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, all of us who stand unequivocally for our Lord are going to pay a price and are paying a price in many instances. The venom that is sent in to me in the form of letters is sometimes amazing, really amazing. These people talk and act with an insanity that is incredible and it is simply because what we represent here at Chalcedon is unequivocal Christianity without any compromise.

[ M Rushdoony ] Well, there has been a lot of that... and a lot of that comes...

[ Rushdoony ] No compromises.

[ M Rushdoony ] And a lot of that... those comments come from within the Church.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. Some of the most vicious pornographic criticism has come from within the Church. And often from people who suddenly realize the implications of what we are saying.

I recall very briefly some years ago, oh, it is in the 50s when this rather important person came to church and he complemented me at the door for my sermon. And he said, “I will be back.” And he said, “I have gone to every church in the community and I have not found any that were not an insult to my intelligence. But your preaching is intelligent and I liked it.

Well, he came for several weeks and then he dropped out and would not come near me or let me get near him, because suddenly he realized what it meant, what would be required of him, that he would have to change, he would have to be a new man and that was the last thing in the world he wanted. So he simply avoided me. At least he was a gentleman in that respect, but he couldn’t take it. And that is why they turn on those who are truly Christian. I have had letters from people, some young, some old, who have really suffered because they were the only one in their family who was Christian. Their husband or wife or their children or their parents had no use fro the faith. And looking back, of course, as one person did recently, I made some bad mistakes in dealing with them. And I had to say tactical mistakes are different from moral mistakes. The issue between you and your family—and I knew a little something of it—was a moral issue. There was no tactic that could have altered the outcome.

Well, our time is up. thank you all for listening and God bless you and let us hear form you if you really are serious about the fact that you want more book reviews.

[ Voice ] Authorized by the Chalcedon Foundation. Archived by the Mount Olive Tape Library. Digitized by ChristRules.com.