Politics of the Worldly Way

In the year of our Lord 1620 AD a band of brave folks left the Old World and took out across the mysterious ocean of the Atlantic in a vessel that today would be inadequate for such a journey. It was a journey into the unknown on the faith they would reach their destination and establish a new way of life free from the political restrictions against their beliefs of the nation they were leaving behind. They were as children leaving the security of home and going out on their own to forge a new life in a new world. But they were not alone as they went with their faith in the Almighty God whom they believed would assure them the victory. They went with His blessing and set the foundation for the birth of a great nation 150 + years later. They traveled across the great ocean into the unknown to a land of uncertain promise and formed a pact upon their landing to define the cause and purpose. This pact is known to us today as the Mayflower Compact and in part reads, “….Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and the honor of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; Do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a Civil Body….” ‘Mayflower Compact,’ dated November 11, 1620.

After 150 + years of deprivation and through steadfast perseverance, the people of this new world displayed tremendous courage by taking on the world’s superpower, Great Britain, and gaining their freedom from that oppressive force, they formed a new nation which stood as a beacon of hope for all in the world. James Madison wrote, “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” Their beliefs were founded upon the precepts contained between the covers of the Holy Bible, the absolute truth of God’s Word. John Adams, the second president of the United States, wrote in 1789 a concurring statement, “Our Constitution was designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.” What an amazing and true statement that a “Government of the people, by the people, for the people,” was designed on the people’s desire to live to the standard of truth found in the scriptures. Our first President, George Washington, said, “It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the Providence of Almighty God.” Our founding fathers knew that we existed not by our own wisdom but by the grace of the all-powerful, all knowing, and ever present God in the heavens. In the beginning our Nation, the United States of America, fashioned the rule and order of this new society in the perfect example of God’s community the Trinity. That this new nation was to be a community submissive to each member with the common purpose of obedience to the standard of truth found in God’s law through His Word. Samuel Adams rejoiced with these words, “We have this day restored the Sovereign to whom all alone men ought to be obedient. He reigns in Heaven, and with a propitious eye beholds his subjects assuming that freedom of thought, and dignity of self-direction which He bestowed on them. From the rising to the setting sun, may His kingdom come.” Over the next centuries our nation grew into the sole supper power and friend to those in need of a guiding hand, a beacon on light in a darkened world.

The Constitution of the United States was written and guided by Biblical principles. The Bill of Rights as well with the first amendment of the Constitution prohibiting Congress from making any law that establishes a government religion. Europe was filled with government supported religions and our fore fathers did not want the government at any time in the future to force a religious belief on the people as this would deprive a fundamental right of man to liberty. To do so would deprive man of a privilege given to all mankind, the right to free will. This first amendment reads as follows. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” It is a good amendment and with good intention that the government is not to institute or deprive the personal religious beliefs of the people and Thomas Jefferson expanded its meaning with his interpretation by the statement of “Separation of Church and State.” His statement on the first amendment was this, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” This wall of separation between Church & State is acceptable to me in that the state cannot dictate my relationship with God, neither can the state elevate other religious beliefs ahead of my own. But the wall of separation between Church & State does not mean the exclusion of God from the state and it certainly does not mean the exclusion of God from the people. It means that it is the responsibility of man and state by their own consciousness to worship God as they believe proper.

In the result of this liberty, neither state nor the people have accepted their responsibility that comes with liberty. There is a moral standard, that true moral standard that this new world, this country and this nation was founded upon. In 1781 the Congress of the United States was committed to upholding the moral standard of the people to the Christian principles founded in the Scriptures. “On September 12, 1782, the full Congress approved that Bible, and it soon began rolling off the presses. Printed in the front of the Bible is a congressional endorsement declaring, in part: Resolved, that the United States in Congress assembled… recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States.” The Congress knew the profound thoughts of John Adams and that if man was left with no moral guide, no foundation upon which to build his principles that man would digress to the lower plains of morality. That was then and now we as a nation have, both government and people, forsaken the standard that made us the people we once were.

Our government has failed to uphold the moral standard upon which our nation was founded. We have moved away from the moral ethic of Biblical principles that the laws which govern the people to a system not founded on the truth found in the precepts of the Bible to what is now and called Contemporary Law. The definition of Contemporary Law is, “The term contemporary community standards is a standard used to test descriptions or depictions of sexual matters, which was first adopted by the United States Supreme Court in 1957 in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476. In the Roth case, the Court put forth its test for determining whether a work is obscene as “whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to prurient interest.” This will normally permit the use of county standards or federal district standards, if a federal case. In fact community standards may be utilized without reference to a precise geographical area.” What our government now bases its determination of justice and truth is what is contemporary and acceptable for the moment. Before we based our law upon the unchanging and enduring Word of God and now we have moved to the ever changing mood of a contemporary society. We no longer conform to a high standard before us but a vague standard that follows behind popular opinion. If society moves to believe that an action previously morally wrong is now correct, then truth becomes the reality of the moment, it is no longer solid but fluent, and it is no longer true and cannot be tested by time.

If a wheel is squeaky enough it can influence the law of the land to comply with its desires without reference to what is known to be the truth. If the government now has the ability to rationalize the truth, then it is no longer truth. This concept not only has debased our way of life but has muddied the clear vision that once guided the light of our nation. The value of our law has fallen to what seems right to a man. “There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.” (Proverbs 14:12) A government without accountability can legislate upon the people that which is morally incorrect in the name of contemporary justice. My question is this is the sate legislating a moral standard upon the religious beliefs of the people to which the government is supposed to serve and protect? Is this an affront to each ones liberty to worship God in the manner they believe is worthy of His majesty?

What effect can this change have of our society as a whole? Let us look at the progression of Roe vs Wade. Roe vs Wade was argued in the Supreme Court in1973 ruling in favor of legalizing abortion with the support of the 14th amendment of the Constitution section 1. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” I do not see where the United States is abiding by the fourteenth amendment when it is violating the right of its yet unborn citizens. Yet, Contemporary Law twisted that truth of the fourteenth amendment and now here in the United States it is legal to murder a child before it is born at the discretion of the child’s parents. But by Contemporary Law we did not fall far enough and have submitted to partial birth abortion as well. From a House Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee we hear this report. “While most babies are in their 20th to 24th week when aborted in this manner, babies are aborted as late as the ninth month! This was admitted to by abortionist Dr. McMahon who, in 1995, submitted to the House Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee a graph and explanation that showed he aborted healthy babies even in the third trimester!” Does it stop here or after a child is a liability to the parents, after a child is considered problematic to society, or when it is just too inconvenient to bring the child up? How far can this line of thought go without a morally founded society to prohibit it? My God, the parents, those who are supposed to show, in the example of God Almighty, an unconditional love towards their child. Can this happen? Can the government decide that a particular group of society is a nuisance to society as a whole and therefore must be removed? Do you think not?

In 64 AD Nero persecuted the Christians of Rome. It was rumored that Nero had set Rome to blaze and to offset this charge distracted the citizens of Rome with the Christian persecutions. The Christians were generally hated by the Roman citizens and no protection of their rights was granted by the authorities. The Christians were considered a nuisance to the Roman society and Nero had no problem enforcing his actions against them. The following is an account of what they endured by the Roman historian Tacitus.

“In their very deaths they were made the subjects of sport: for they were covered with the hides of wild beasts, and worried to death by dogs, or nailed to crosses, or set fire to, and when the day waned, burned to serve for the evening lights. Nero offered his own garden players for the spectacle, and exhibited a Circensian game, indiscriminately mingling with the common people in the dress of a charioteer, or else standing in his chariot. For this cause a feeling of compassion arose towards the sufferers, though guilty and deserving of exemplary capital punishment, because they seemed not to be cut off for the public good, but were victims of the ferocity of one man.”

What happened to the Christians in Rome also happened to the Jews in Germany under Adolf Hitler. It was the German governments answer, the final solution to their problems, and as a result six million Jews were exterminated. Could this happen in the United States? Ask yourself this, with the principle of Contemporary Law what system of justice could stop it from happening here?

It may be just my opinion but Separation of Church means that the Church stands on Holy ground that is sovereign to the Lord Jesus Christ who is the head of the Church. It does not come under the control of the city, country, state, nation, or world government. It is God’s ground and answers to His sovereign will. Yet how long I wonder for reasons of taxation, or to seek one in sanctuary, or because the teaching of the Church is a threat to government authority, before the separation of Church will be denied.

In 2010 President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which states that contraceptives are added to the list of preventive services covered by the ACA. President Obama did this under the mandate of the 2000 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission which stated that companies that provided prescription drugs but denied contraceptives violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This is in direct opposition of the Catholic Church. The government has twisted truth, has invaded the religious beliefs of Catholics who wish to remain true to their beliefs as based on the God they serve. Can the government enforce its will upon the Church because it believes that the Church is a threat to the common good of the nation? Is this separation of Church and State? I think not, but does it matter, no one seems to be concerned enough to grab their own squeaky wheel and get the attention of the government for the people.

What is the Christian, who still has a moral standard in Christian ethics, to do? More than say “Oh My Gracious!” 73% of Americans profess to be of the Christian faith. How can this be? What are they doing? Has their light been dimmed by their apathy? Are they truly making a stand for Jesus Christ? Do they have faith in that they profess to believe?

My fellows who believe upon the name of Jesus Christ have faith upon His commandments. Do we truly love Him, then we will keep His word. “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” (John 14:15) We are the light of the world and through Him the only hope for the lost in the world. He is the Lord of all and how heart wrenching it will be on that day when the King of kings and Lord of lords says to the many throngs before Him and declares, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.” (Matthew 7:23) All of mankind will be held accountable to Him for the path chosen through this life. “Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God.” (Romans 3:19) We have a responsibility to our God and those who set before us this great country given to us by the grace of God to sustain it for the Glory of God and the advancement of the Christian Faith.

Thomas N Kirkpatrick

First Baptist Church of Durant, March 26, 2014

wordpress analytics