What do you think?
Rate this book
The Foundations of Social Order: Studies in the Creeds and Councils of the Early Church
Every social order rests on a creed, on a concept of life and law, and represents a religion in action. Wherever there is an attack on the organization of society, there is an attack on its religion. The basic faith of a society means growth in terms of that faith, but any tampering with its basic structure is revolutionary activity. The life of a society is its creed; a dying creed faces desertion or subversion readily. Every creed, however healthy, is also under continual attack; the culture which neglects to defend and further its creedal base is exposing its heart to the enemy's knife. Because of its indifference to its creedal basis in Biblical Christianity, western civilization is today facing death and is in a life and death struggle with humanism.
Today humanism is the creedal basis of the various democratic and socialistic movements. The clearer the humanism, as in Marxism, the more direct its use of power, because it operates in terms of a consistency of principle. The conservatives attempt to retain the political forms of the Christian West with no belief in Biblical Christianity. Apart from vague affirmations of liberty, they cannot defend their position philosophically. They therefore become fact finders: they try to oppose the humanists by documenting their cruelty, corruption, and abuse of office. If the facts carry any conviction to the people, they lead them only to exchange one set of radical humanists for reforming radical humanists. It is never their faith in the system which is shaken, but only in a form or representative of that system. The success of the subversives rests on their attack on the creed of the establishment, and its replacement by a new creed.
Then the foundations are provided, the general form of the building is determined. When the creed is accepted, the social order is determined. There can therefore be no reconstruction of the Christian civilization of the west except on Christian creedal foundations.
Today humanism is the creedal basis of the various democratic and socialistic movements. The clearer the humanism, as in Marxism, the more direct its use of power, because it operates in terms of a consistency of principle. The conservatives attempt to retain the political forms of the Christian West with no belief in Biblical Christianity. Apart from vague affirmations of liberty, they cannot defend their position philosophically. They therefore become fact finders: they try to oppose the humanists by documenting their cruelty, corruption, and abuse of office. If the facts carry any conviction to the people, they lead them only to exchange one set of radical humanists for reforming radical humanists. It is never their faith in the system which is shaken, but only in a form or representative of that system. The success of the subversives rests on their attack on the creed of the establishment, and its replacement by a new creed.
Then the foundations are provided, the general form of the building is determined. When the creed is accepted, the social order is determined. There can therefore be no reconstruction of the Christian civilization of the west except on Christian creedal foundations.
226 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 1, 1978
25 people are currently reading
262 people want to read
About the author
Rousas John Rushdoony
136 books147 followersRousas John Rushdoony was a Calvinist philosopher, historian, and theologian and is widely credited as the father of both Christian Reconstructionism and the modern homeschool movement. His prolific writings have exerted considerable influence on the Christian right.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
April 1, 2009
Very good.
March 2, 2022
What are the foundations of social order? Humanists will likely answer a well-functioning state with law and order. But what is the source of law? What is the role of the state? Rushdoony argues that the source of law is God. A well ordered society is founded upon a law order based on Trinitarian creeds such as was written at Chalcedon.
In fact, it is the Chalcedonian creed, that Rushdoony argues is the foundation of western liberty and prosperity. A society that embraces Trinitarianism recognizes that the state is a ministry of God, not God on earth. A Trinitarian society has a state under the authority of God, not man. The state in a Trinitarian society has open markets, a restrained state and consequently economic prosperity and justice.
The book reviews the creeds and councils of the early church, explains the heresies involved in each. Rushdoony doesn't claim the creeds are perfect, but does argue that they are the foundation of social order and the blessings found in the west.
Much of the book is slow and plodding, but it is important material and I recommend reading the book to fully understand the implications of the early church creeds and the manner in which God blessed and protected his church and his Word through imperfect men.
In fact, it is the Chalcedonian creed, that Rushdoony argues is the foundation of western liberty and prosperity. A society that embraces Trinitarianism recognizes that the state is a ministry of God, not God on earth. A Trinitarian society has a state under the authority of God, not man. The state in a Trinitarian society has open markets, a restrained state and consequently economic prosperity and justice.
The book reviews the creeds and councils of the early church, explains the heresies involved in each. Rushdoony doesn't claim the creeds are perfect, but does argue that they are the foundation of social order and the blessings found in the west.
Much of the book is slow and plodding, but it is important material and I recommend reading the book to fully understand the implications of the early church creeds and the manner in which God blessed and protected his church and his Word through imperfect men.
November 29, 2020
One of the most impactful books I've read regarding social order and the relationship between society, the state and Christians. I would recommend this book to anyone who is trying to make sense at a fundamental level what is happening today in the United States. This is really a must read for Christians.
July 4, 2025
Rushdoony, Rousas J. Foundations of Social Order: Studies in the Creeds and Councils of the Early Church. Ross House Books: Vallecito, CA, 1998.
Do not let the subtitle fool you. This book is not an exposition of early church creeds. Rather, it is a reflection upon some themes in the early church for the purpose of attacking current humanism and statism. To be sure, many of Rushdoony’s insights are quite fresh. They just are not relevant to patristic theology. For all of my criticisms of this book, and there will be many, it is mostly well-written and engaging. When he was at his best (think before 1973), Rushdoony was a good writer.
The book begins and ends, at least structurally, around the Apostles’ Creed. The middle of the book is a discussion (not exposition) of some tangents related to the Councils.
The opening chapter illustrates the problem with Rushdoony, and this problem is in every book he wrote. He gets the first part of a fact correct and then proceeds to draw inferences that are not there. For example, he argues that the Creed (whether Apostles’ or Nicene; it does not matter) is a specific historical creed. It affirms history (Rushdoony 6). That is true. But from that claim he makes a number of assertions that simply are not in the creed. For Rushdoony, because God is maker, there is a history. Because history is ordained by God, there is an eschatology. And if there is an eschatology, it must be postmillennialism. Whether you think that is true or not, you cannot get postmillennialism from the Nicene Creed.
Nicea
Nicea was the victor of history over imagination. Or so he thinks. Rushdoony does a good job rebutting Arius and tying Arius’s views in with modern neo-orthodoxy. He clinches the argument, noting that Arius’s Jesus, not being divine, cannot reveal the Father (10). All of this is quite good, but we get no actual exposition of the Creed.
Constantinople 381
Constantinople was the triumph of certainty against skepticism. Again, we have the same methodological problem. The fathers at Constantinople, while they were most certain about their conclusions, were not concerned with skepticism.
Ephesus: The Worship of Man Condemned
Rushdoony starts off well. Nestorius saw the Word as united to man, but not become man. But what he gives with one hand, he takes away with another. He asserts, “Nestorius was a humanist whose basic religious motive was man-worship” (37). This is very close to psychologizing. How does Rushdoony even know Nestorius’s motives?
Chalcedon
He is a quiz question: what was the purpose of the Council of Chalcedon? You probably answered with something like “clarify Christ’s two natures.” Rushdoony, while affirming that, would probably say, or in fact did say, “To hand statism its major defeat” (53). Even on a historical level, this claim would not be true for many centuries. The Byzantine emperor was not a Jeffersonian farmer.
Stated another way, for Chalcedon, “If the two natures of Christ were confused, it meant that the door was open to the divinizing of human nature; man and the state were potentially divine” (54). That might be an interesting reflection from Chalceon, but it is not what Chalcedon was discussing.
The Athanasian Creed: The One and the Many
If he gets other chapters wrong, he actually does a decent job in this chapter. He begins by correctly noting this Creed has nothing to do with Athanasius. Its language is entirely Augustinian. He correctly notes, and the ESS advocates today would do well to hear, that “the only subordination in the Trinity is economic and relative, not essential” (74).
Constantinople II
Rushdoony makes some claims that are either confusing or factually wrong. For one, “the true universal is the Triune God” (86). Does he mean that other universals (justice, goodness, horse, etc) are ruled out? It is not clear. He then claims “the universals of Scholasticism became the Hellenic ideas or forms” (87). If someone makes a claim like this, he is obligated to prove it by examples. Rushdoony, true to form, does no such thing. In any case, he is wrong. Etienne Gilson (God and Philosophy) regularly proved that the Scholastics saw God as being; whereas we have being by analogy.
Filioque and Icons
Since Reformed in the 20th century did a mostly bad job on the Trinity, and few dealt with the Filioque, we must credit Rushdoony for calling attention to it.
As to iconoclasm, on one hand Rushdoony holds that images of Christ are valid. On the other hand, he rejects Nicea II, rightly noting its similarities to paganism.
Conclusion
Every notable thing about Rushdoony is in this volume, for better or worse. When he gets the facts right, he almost always draws the wrong conclusion. At other times he is simply wrong. The student would do well to read this volume after reading many peer-reviewed volumes by actual patristic scholars.
Do not let the subtitle fool you. This book is not an exposition of early church creeds. Rather, it is a reflection upon some themes in the early church for the purpose of attacking current humanism and statism. To be sure, many of Rushdoony’s insights are quite fresh. They just are not relevant to patristic theology. For all of my criticisms of this book, and there will be many, it is mostly well-written and engaging. When he was at his best (think before 1973), Rushdoony was a good writer.
The book begins and ends, at least structurally, around the Apostles’ Creed. The middle of the book is a discussion (not exposition) of some tangents related to the Councils.
The opening chapter illustrates the problem with Rushdoony, and this problem is in every book he wrote. He gets the first part of a fact correct and then proceeds to draw inferences that are not there. For example, he argues that the Creed (whether Apostles’ or Nicene; it does not matter) is a specific historical creed. It affirms history (Rushdoony 6). That is true. But from that claim he makes a number of assertions that simply are not in the creed. For Rushdoony, because God is maker, there is a history. Because history is ordained by God, there is an eschatology. And if there is an eschatology, it must be postmillennialism. Whether you think that is true or not, you cannot get postmillennialism from the Nicene Creed.
Nicea
Nicea was the victor of history over imagination. Or so he thinks. Rushdoony does a good job rebutting Arius and tying Arius’s views in with modern neo-orthodoxy. He clinches the argument, noting that Arius’s Jesus, not being divine, cannot reveal the Father (10). All of this is quite good, but we get no actual exposition of the Creed.
Constantinople 381
Constantinople was the triumph of certainty against skepticism. Again, we have the same methodological problem. The fathers at Constantinople, while they were most certain about their conclusions, were not concerned with skepticism.
Ephesus: The Worship of Man Condemned
Rushdoony starts off well. Nestorius saw the Word as united to man, but not become man. But what he gives with one hand, he takes away with another. He asserts, “Nestorius was a humanist whose basic religious motive was man-worship” (37). This is very close to psychologizing. How does Rushdoony even know Nestorius’s motives?
Chalcedon
He is a quiz question: what was the purpose of the Council of Chalcedon? You probably answered with something like “clarify Christ’s two natures.” Rushdoony, while affirming that, would probably say, or in fact did say, “To hand statism its major defeat” (53). Even on a historical level, this claim would not be true for many centuries. The Byzantine emperor was not a Jeffersonian farmer.
Stated another way, for Chalcedon, “If the two natures of Christ were confused, it meant that the door was open to the divinizing of human nature; man and the state were potentially divine” (54). That might be an interesting reflection from Chalceon, but it is not what Chalcedon was discussing.
The Athanasian Creed: The One and the Many
If he gets other chapters wrong, he actually does a decent job in this chapter. He begins by correctly noting this Creed has nothing to do with Athanasius. Its language is entirely Augustinian. He correctly notes, and the ESS advocates today would do well to hear, that “the only subordination in the Trinity is economic and relative, not essential” (74).
Constantinople II
Rushdoony makes some claims that are either confusing or factually wrong. For one, “the true universal is the Triune God” (86). Does he mean that other universals (justice, goodness, horse, etc) are ruled out? It is not clear. He then claims “the universals of Scholasticism became the Hellenic ideas or forms” (87). If someone makes a claim like this, he is obligated to prove it by examples. Rushdoony, true to form, does no such thing. In any case, he is wrong. Etienne Gilson (God and Philosophy) regularly proved that the Scholastics saw God as being; whereas we have being by analogy.
Filioque and Icons
Since Reformed in the 20th century did a mostly bad job on the Trinity, and few dealt with the Filioque, we must credit Rushdoony for calling attention to it.
As to iconoclasm, on one hand Rushdoony holds that images of Christ are valid. On the other hand, he rejects Nicea II, rightly noting its similarities to paganism.
Conclusion
Every notable thing about Rushdoony is in this volume, for better or worse. When he gets the facts right, he almost always draws the wrong conclusion. At other times he is simply wrong. The student would do well to read this volume after reading many peer-reviewed volumes by actual patristic scholars.
December 17, 2018
Fantástico!
August 15, 2020
Though seemingly forced, Rushdoony’s purpose and theses in this short book - that basic creedal statements about God, man, the church, salvation, etc. directly impact our understanding of social order - is extremely timely and spot on.
April 7, 2022
Pretty good
February 25, 2016
This is an insightful look at the social implications of Christian doctrine, as that doctrine was expressed in the early creeds and councils. Whether they knew it or not, the church fathers who defended these doctrines laid down the foundations of Christendom. As Rushdoony argues, the separation of doctrine and life is a problem in our day. Doctrines do have social and political consequences. If the triune God's sovereignty is reduced in any way, it gives room for man to claim sovereignty for himself, often in the form of a powerful state. If Christ's incarnation allows for the blending of Creator and creature, if it allows for the deification of humanity or the irrelevance of God, then it also empowers man, often in the form of the state, to claim what rightly belongs to Christ. Rushdoony is occasionally hard to follow, though it is mostly due to the complex arguments of the church fathers. I have also enjoyed reading his book, The One and the Many, where he expands upon some of the themes of this book.
"Every social order rests on a creed, on a concept of life and law, and represents a religion in action...The life of a society is its creed; a dying creed faces desertion or subversion readily. Every creed, however healthy, is also under continual attack; the culture which neglects to defend and further its creedal base is exposing its heart to the enemy's knife. Because of its indifference to its creedal basis in Biblical Christianity, western civilization is today facing death and is in a life and death struggle with humanism." (p. 181)
"Every social order rests on a creed, on a concept of life and law, and represents a religion in action...The life of a society is its creed; a dying creed faces desertion or subversion readily. Every creed, however healthy, is also under continual attack; the culture which neglects to defend and further its creedal base is exposing its heart to the enemy's knife. Because of its indifference to its creedal basis in Biblical Christianity, western civilization is today facing death and is in a life and death struggle with humanism." (p. 181)
March 22, 2015
Terrific overview of the ecumenical councils, plus the creeds, with special emphasis on the political ramifications of orthodox Christianity. I don't often come across theological terms that are completely new to me, but I'd never heard of Economic Appropriation. It actually shocked me how much of the foundations of Christianity I knew nothing about - like the church's insistence that in worshipping Christ we worship only his divine, and not his human, nature. An important book, excellent for anyone who wants an introduction to the basics of the early Church councils.
April 10, 2016
In some ways this book became a little predictable after awhile, but contains many good insights. The overall thesis of the book, that credal belief shapes the social and political realities of a society and that no true justice and liberty can obtain without embracing historic, orthodox Christianity, is on the whole well argued.
March 6, 2016
Brief but insightful overview of the primary creeds and confessions of church history. Rushdoony also does a very good job at contrasting the worldviews associated with the creeds and anti-Christian worldview.
July 4, 2011
This is a great study of the Church Creeds by R.J. Rushdoony. Great book. Very informative. Everyone has a creed, something that they believe, even if it is not written down on paper.
August 4, 2017
Essential reading to understand the roots of liberty progressively introduced in the West.
July 19, 2018
Astoundingly brilliant.
March 28, 2024
This is my second time reading this book. I highly recommended it. I am using it as preparation for a Sunday School class I will be teaching that covers the first 800 years of church history. As the church contended for the faith that was once delivered to the saints, they created a social order that was based on God and not the State. This will help you to understand how society developed and why society is crumbling around us today.
April 22, 2021
Written in 1968 but no less pertinent now. Rushdoony explains the history behind what the church believes and aptly describes the problems currently facing the not-so-Christian West.
“There can therefor be no reconstruction of the Christian civilization of the west without Christian credal foundations”
“There can therefor be no reconstruction of the Christian civilization of the west without Christian credal foundations”
December 13, 2022
An outstanding book, even more timely today. "Because of its indifference to its creedal basis in Biblical Christianity, western civilization is today facing death and is in a life and death struggle with humanism." "There can be no reconstruction of the Christian civilization of the west except on Christian creedal foundations."
September 10, 2024
3.96/5
Rushdoony provides good context and historical background of the creeds. He also refers to modern society and social order which is very relevant to today. I thought sometimes it was difficult to follow and timeline was not well defined but i blame the audiobook.
Rushdoony provides good context and historical background of the creeds. He also refers to modern society and social order which is very relevant to today. I thought sometimes it was difficult to follow and timeline was not well defined but i blame the audiobook.
December 26, 2019
Muito bom! Uma análise sem igual dos credos e concílios da Igreja Primitiva.
June 21, 2023
I’ve swum philosophically downstream of Rushdoony my entire life, but this was my first real encounter with the man himself. I am — howyousay — a fan.
July 29, 2025
Most of his books are better.
September 19, 2016
Useful and thought-provoking commentary to read as part of your studies in the creeds and history of the early church.
November 26, 2022
Rushdoony walks through some of the major creeds and councils in Christian history and shows how they have been the foundation for ethics, society, Theology, and philosophy. Rushdoony tends to find statism under every rock he peeks under, and that is enlightening at times and confusing in others. As with any RJR work, you walk away with clarity in the main issues but with questions on the secondary issues and rabbit trails he inevitably goes down.
May 8, 2013
Rushdoony dimostra come i credi siano stati alla base delle libertà della civiltà occidentale e termina auspicando un loro ritorno nella fede delle persone per combattere il totalitarismo dello stato moderno.
March 3, 2014
Very good!
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews