Rushdoony to Robbins on the Clark–VanTil Controversy

3 Comments / Notes on the thought of Gordon H. Clark / By /

R. J. Rushdoony wrote on May 3, 1995 to John Robbins:
“Van Til had told me that the Clark case was a put-up job (and others confirmed it).  INSTEAD OF TACKLING THEOLOGY DIRECTLY, A FEW MEN URGED Clark, who was an OPC pulpit supply, to seek ordination in order to make a personal case out of it.  They did not care about the hurt to Clark and Van Til.  It was a heartless step, and Clark was deeply hurt, as was Van Til.”

3 thoughts on “Rushdoony to Robbins on the Clark–VanTil Controversy”

  1. John Bradshaw

    Thx Doug.
    I do wonder why then Dr. VanTil engaged in the controversy so much? If it is argued that he was only addressing the theology, then it didn’t matter if Clark was ordained or not, since only the theology was in question. It seems to me that Dr VanTil often said one thing then refuted that same position. He was (is) not a trustworthy teacher.

    1. douglasdouma

      It is not clear if Rushdoony is referring to the men who supported Clark and created the “Program for Action” (Edwin Ryan, Richard Willer Gray, Robert Strong, and Clifford Smith) or some or all of the men who opposed Clark in signing “The Complaint” against him (John Wister Betzold, Eugene Bradford, R. B. Kuiper, Leroy B. Oliver, N. B. Stonehouse, Murray Forst Thompson, William E. Welmers, Paul Woolley, Cornelius Van Til, Edward J. Young, David Freeman, and Arthur W. Kuschke, Jr.)

Comments are closed.