The Cultural Struggle

This is chapter 9 of The Effect of the Jesuit Eschatologies on America Today – by Dr. Ronald Cooke

The cultural struggle in America today arises from the second Jesuit commentator on the Apocalypse, Luis Alcasar. He dismissed the Man of Sin from the church. He postulated the rise of Antichrist in the first century and his demise by AD 70. Even Emanuel Lacunza took some time to completely refute such an idea of Antichrist. Showing that the Jesuits contradicted one another. Alcasar wrote his work in 1604, and such a view of Antichrist, and the book of Revelation, had never been heard of in church history before. Charles Hodge says of this view,

The second class (of interpreters of the Apocalypse) includes the modern German interpreters who, denying any real prediction of the future, confine the views of Daniel and John to their contemporary history. To this class belong Ewald, De Wette, Lucke, and others.¹

No doubt, if Hodge were alive today, he would have to include the names of North, Rushdoony, Jordan, Morecraft, Gentry, and De Mar, and all the other theonomists and reconstructionists all follow the Jesuit here and the German apostate writers to boot.

All reconstructionists of necessity must follow Alcasar, the Jesuit, so that Antichrist is no more. In this way they can call for the christianizing of the world, since there is no antichrist opposition to contend with, now, or in the future.

Had Clarence Larkin lived a little longer he could have added to that wonderful revival of Jesuit eschatology in Catholic Church, but strange to say, “it has been wonderfully revived since the beginning of the nineteenth century, and that among Protestants.” Had he lived he could have added, that the Preterist view of the book of Revelation which was started by the Jesuit, Luis Alcasar, has now been wonderfully revived in 1970, and that among Protestant Reformed Presbyterian and Baptist Reconstructionists.

The “wonderful revival” that Larkin speaks of here is the complete loss of the Protestant Reformed view of the Man Of Sin, and the recognition of the two Jesuit views in modern times among Protestants. For when a modern critic of Gary North the modern “Reformed” reconstructionist writer, wrote to him about this issue, North replied,

David Chitton’s masterful commentary on the book of Revelation forever destroys the biblical case for identifying the Pope as Antichrist. It is now no longer worth discussing, assuming that it ever was, Since I paid a small fortune to get out Days of Vengeance, you can rest assured that I have no inclination to equate the Pope and the Antichrist… Please do not send me any more letters like this one. I do not appreciate them. I do not want to debate this issue. This issue was laid to rest a century ago by all Protestant denominations. ²

So the Jesuit, Luis Aleasar, has completely triumphed over both David Chilton and Gary North, the modern “Reformed” Reconstructionists. His answer is typical of the modern Jesuit’s response to such a question. For the Jesuit, of course, does not equate the Pope with Antichrist, nor does he want to debate such an issue. He wants all to submit to Rome without so much as a whisper of dissent.

Also, it is patently false to say that this issue was laid to rest by ALL Protestant denominations a century ago. For the Missouri Lutheran Synod still looks upon the papacy as the Antichrist of Scripture. So does the WELS, Lutheran body. Several Reformed bodies who still take The Westminster Confession of faith as their standard also have not laid that teaching to rest. Several Reformed Baptist groups also have not fallen for the Jesuit Preterist position as Gary North obviously has.

Perhaps North means what Larkin said, that there was a wonderful revival of Jesuit teachings more than a century ago within many Protestant churches, which then all laid to rest the true Protestant teaching. A seismic change indeed!

As to Chilton’s commentary being masterful, Greg Bahnsen, the modern prolific writer on Reconstructionist topics, did not agree. He said basically that his friend, David Chilton’s book was marred by poor hermeneutics, so he did not consider it a masterpiece at all.

David Chilton, who makes many strange comments in this book while defending and promoting Jesuit Reconstructionism, toward the end of his life began to wonder about the Reconstructionists and Reconstructionism that he once praised. The glibness which characterizes some of the statements in his commentary on the book of Revelation had given place to “gut-wrenching” experiences before he died.

In his taped message Ecclesiastical Megalomania, Chilton near the end of his life reports on the church which he attended in Tyler, Texas. In this church that is considered the mother church of Reconstructionism, Chilton recounts some of the bizarre things that went on there, and some of the strange teachings that came forth from the pulpit. He mentions that he had “gut-wrenching struggles over whether or not he might be excommunicated over disagreeing about whitewall tires.” He mentions that two people left the church. Then he also says that some members fled to “the relative freedom of the Roman Catholic Church.” And that when other members talked of leaving that the message from the pulpit was that the original couple who had left. “had left the faith and that they were not Christians any more, and were going to hell.”

Chilton was still a Reconstructionist but he was obviously greatly disturbed by what he was experiencing in this “famous” church. Shortly after making his tape, David Chilton suffered a heart-attack. He recovered but then died later. Dr. Robbins, to whom we are indebted for this information, wrote at the end of Chilton’s article, “One wonders if the terror and desperation he felt in the Tyler Church contributed to his health problems.” After his heart attack, Chilton and his lecture were attacked by Gary North, the chief financier of the Tyler Church,

Dr. Robbins adds,

“North threatened this editor in writing with “destruction” for publicizing Chilton’s speech. Several former members of the Tyler Church spoke to the editor after we published this review, saying that Chitton had not told the half of it. They were still frightened of the leaders of the Reconstructionist Tyler church, years after they had left. ³

So much for Jesuit Reconstructionism.