A Christian Nation... Once Upon a Time
The epicenter of present political debate between sacred and secular is the question of America's religious identity. Were the founding fathers intending a secular society by initiating the Constitutional amending process with the following?
A small snippet from the farewell address of George Washington adequately portrays the essential religious and political makeup of the infant nation:
Therefore, the basic identity of the nation was Christian at the time. Denying this does not solve the present political dilemma anymore than those who affirm it. It's simply not 1791. It's 2006 and America is a grossly different nation.
I believe the debate over our religious origins will not prove to be a profitable one for either side. Is America a Christian nation? Yes, I think so. But, it's also a secular nation. It has become so. It is a humanistic nation, and a nation of pluralists. It is a nation of multiple personalities with each persona vying for corporate dominance.
The Constitutional Battle
Both sides are laying claim to the Constitution, but neither side has adequately described the nature of this marvelous document. The secularists are genuinely in error because they make appeals to the Constitution in matters of moral legislation with the mantra "separation of church and state." This is a misuse of the Constitution because it contradicts the stated purpose of the document.
When discussing the Constitution, Rushdoony often noted that the Constitution did not provide us with substantive morality, but rather legislative morality -- meaning it's intent was to shape the legislative process not declare abortion as murder. So, when secularists appeal to the Constitution and a separation of church and state as to why certain laws should not be enacted they are reaching for the wrong document. The Constitution will only aid them in policing the legislative process not whether an issue is inherently religious.
A Religious Issue
This is really the central question. When exactly does an issue become religious? Is it only issues regarding homosexuality and abortion that are religious? In a democratic society can Christians use the political process to enact and or change laws? Of course they can. So can the secularist. How do you think they got abortion legalized in the first place? But, that same process may one day see Roe v Wade overturned.
When does an issue become religious? And, by what standard will you then judge any substantive moral question? Will it be conventional standards such as pragmatism, positivism, and utilitarianism? Why did the founding fathers not create any document of substantive morality? Firstly, they would leave it up to the states to decide. Secondly, they lived in a predominantly Christian society where God's Word was the primary source document for substantive moral legislation. And, better yet, they lived amongst a more responsible citizenry that better demonstrated self-government than today's American social dependency.
Theocracy Looms
The fear mongering of many secularists is the threat of theocracy -- a Christian takeover of the present apparatus of the federal government. News flash: it ain't gonna happen! Believe you me, Bush and Cheney respond to Halliburton, KRB, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing, not James Dobson. The thought is laughable. No, the Religious Right is an electoral tool because they represent a massive conservative constituency. Therefore, the executive branch will placate them and cultivate a controlled alliance, but not on Dobson or Robertson's terms.
Is there a threat to abortion on demand? God, I hope so. Anything to start washing the last 30+ years of state sponsored bloodshed. If that were to happen, which I doubt, it would likely amount to a slightly watered down version of present abortion policy. But, like lowering gas prices it'll shut people up. We're so pathetic.
But changing (or adjusting) Roe v Wade does not equate to theocracy. That's just asinine. Debate over issues like abortion are to be expected. These are serious matters and the Christian outcry is perfectly reasonable. (I am always dumbfounded at how the secular left offers not a hint of conscience as to the questionable morality of abortion, not a hint. It's as if we were discussing a woman's right to join the military. You'd think such bleeding hearts could at least shed one drop of sympathetic blood for the unborn. Nope. Not a drop. In fact, they demonstrate an even greater callousness by their recent change from "pro-choice" to "reproductive rights for women." This is a textbook example of Orwellian doublespeak. Abortion means termination. How in the hell did that become "reproductive rights?" It's the Christian who may one day need "reproductive rights" as a line of defense against the myth of overpopulation and the left's desire to reduce birthrates.)
May the Best Man Win
We are a far cry from the Christian culture of early America. How in the world the secularists can imagine the founding fathers were sitting in Starbucks sipping lattes and reading The Nation contradicts even the most progressive textbooks. No, a good many founding father was reading his Bible and attending church. The simplicity of agrarian living at the time helped to curb the political discussion, and little time was spent on the matter of the church's influence on the state. The focus was on keeping the state out of the church.
Yet, the church has a moral voice because it holds a document of substantive morality. At present, it should not seek to alter the Constitutional legislative process, but it can use that process to seek change in public morality. However, our goal is not simply the imposition of trivial morality on others. Of greater concern to the Christian should always be the preservation of the church's mission more so than the aimless debate over Intelligent Design. However, other moral issues must be contended for because of their heinous nature. We should seek to change the abortion ruling because it's murder -- a REAL holocaust. (And in this sense, the liberals are the greatest of "holocaust deniers." To them, it's simply good medicine. How Nazi is that?)
Is the stopping of abortion on demand the imposition of morality on others? You bet your life it is. Just the same as the prohibition of any kind of murder is an imposition of morality. The left knows this, and therefore works to remove the idea of murder, death, or termination. In doing so they make it a debate over a woman's right to choose or to govern her own body. This was too easily done. Again, there should be some hesitancy on the part of liberals to at least show some semblance of conscience regarding the unborn instead of demeaning their brief lives as irrelevant in light of the mother's "choice."
In Closing
America was once a devoutly Christian nation. It is no longer. Are there millions of Christians? Yes, but they are a far cry (including myself) from the Christians who lived closer to the reformation. What about the future? Good question. I'm still praying and working for theocracy. What does that mean? For me, it's when men and women are governing their individual lives by the standards of God's law in every area of life. I do not believe this is anytime near. Likely, it's several generations away. But, I can do my part by applying my faith now and instilling that same mission in my children. I can also encourage my brothers and sisters to do the same.
I'm not called to "reclaim America." I'm called to build the city of God irregardless of the flag that waves over the statehouse. My allegiance is to Christ and His Word (though there is always a soft spot in my heart for the once Christian South!). Although it is a marvelous document the Constitution is just that, a document. It will not save man from his sinful pursuit of power. That should be evident by the present despotism being cast over America. No, my hope is in the Lord and what He plans for the future of this world. I can't look back to 1791 as a goal. Providence has brought us where we are and our sins have gotten us this present tyranny. I will commit myself, then, to a greater learning of obedience. If you are a Christian, I encourage you to join me. If you are not, then I pray God grant you repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth (2 Tim. 2:25).
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...It is gross anachronism to paint the early Americans as a horde of left-wing secularists bent on multi-cultural pluralism and a strident distrust of Christianity. It is likewise an error to prop up our 18th century ancestors as theocrats who haphazardly neglected to add an establishment clause to declare America a Christian state. Yet, it is some form of the former and the latter that is presently crossing swords over the title deed to America.
A small snippet from the farewell address of George Washington adequately portrays the essential religious and political makeup of the infant nation:
With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint councils and joint efforts, of common dangers, sufferings, and successes."The same religion," "with slight shades of difference." By this Washington spoke of the diversity of Christian faith expressions represented throughout the Colonies. And the Constitution was meant as a limiting factor for the state lest it grant undue warrant to any one branch of Christianity as was the case in Great Britain. The Constitution writers were quite familiar with the persecution of the continental puritans, and deemed religious liberty of chief significance by including it in the First Amendment.
Therefore, the basic identity of the nation was Christian at the time. Denying this does not solve the present political dilemma anymore than those who affirm it. It's simply not 1791. It's 2006 and America is a grossly different nation.
I believe the debate over our religious origins will not prove to be a profitable one for either side. Is America a Christian nation? Yes, I think so. But, it's also a secular nation. It has become so. It is a humanistic nation, and a nation of pluralists. It is a nation of multiple personalities with each persona vying for corporate dominance.
The Constitutional Battle
Both sides are laying claim to the Constitution, but neither side has adequately described the nature of this marvelous document. The secularists are genuinely in error because they make appeals to the Constitution in matters of moral legislation with the mantra "separation of church and state." This is a misuse of the Constitution because it contradicts the stated purpose of the document.
When discussing the Constitution, Rushdoony often noted that the Constitution did not provide us with substantive morality, but rather legislative morality -- meaning it's intent was to shape the legislative process not declare abortion as murder. So, when secularists appeal to the Constitution and a separation of church and state as to why certain laws should not be enacted they are reaching for the wrong document. The Constitution will only aid them in policing the legislative process not whether an issue is inherently religious.
A Religious Issue
This is really the central question. When exactly does an issue become religious? Is it only issues regarding homosexuality and abortion that are religious? In a democratic society can Christians use the political process to enact and or change laws? Of course they can. So can the secularist. How do you think they got abortion legalized in the first place? But, that same process may one day see Roe v Wade overturned.
When does an issue become religious? And, by what standard will you then judge any substantive moral question? Will it be conventional standards such as pragmatism, positivism, and utilitarianism? Why did the founding fathers not create any document of substantive morality? Firstly, they would leave it up to the states to decide. Secondly, they lived in a predominantly Christian society where God's Word was the primary source document for substantive moral legislation. And, better yet, they lived amongst a more responsible citizenry that better demonstrated self-government than today's American social dependency.
Theocracy Looms
The fear mongering of many secularists is the threat of theocracy -- a Christian takeover of the present apparatus of the federal government. News flash: it ain't gonna happen! Believe you me, Bush and Cheney respond to Halliburton, KRB, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing, not James Dobson. The thought is laughable. No, the Religious Right is an electoral tool because they represent a massive conservative constituency. Therefore, the executive branch will placate them and cultivate a controlled alliance, but not on Dobson or Robertson's terms.
Is there a threat to abortion on demand? God, I hope so. Anything to start washing the last 30+ years of state sponsored bloodshed. If that were to happen, which I doubt, it would likely amount to a slightly watered down version of present abortion policy. But, like lowering gas prices it'll shut people up. We're so pathetic.
But changing (or adjusting) Roe v Wade does not equate to theocracy. That's just asinine. Debate over issues like abortion are to be expected. These are serious matters and the Christian outcry is perfectly reasonable. (I am always dumbfounded at how the secular left offers not a hint of conscience as to the questionable morality of abortion, not a hint. It's as if we were discussing a woman's right to join the military. You'd think such bleeding hearts could at least shed one drop of sympathetic blood for the unborn. Nope. Not a drop. In fact, they demonstrate an even greater callousness by their recent change from "pro-choice" to "reproductive rights for women." This is a textbook example of Orwellian doublespeak. Abortion means termination. How in the hell did that become "reproductive rights?" It's the Christian who may one day need "reproductive rights" as a line of defense against the myth of overpopulation and the left's desire to reduce birthrates.)
May the Best Man Win
We are a far cry from the Christian culture of early America. How in the world the secularists can imagine the founding fathers were sitting in Starbucks sipping lattes and reading The Nation contradicts even the most progressive textbooks. No, a good many founding father was reading his Bible and attending church. The simplicity of agrarian living at the time helped to curb the political discussion, and little time was spent on the matter of the church's influence on the state. The focus was on keeping the state out of the church.
Yet, the church has a moral voice because it holds a document of substantive morality. At present, it should not seek to alter the Constitutional legislative process, but it can use that process to seek change in public morality. However, our goal is not simply the imposition of trivial morality on others. Of greater concern to the Christian should always be the preservation of the church's mission more so than the aimless debate over Intelligent Design. However, other moral issues must be contended for because of their heinous nature. We should seek to change the abortion ruling because it's murder -- a REAL holocaust. (And in this sense, the liberals are the greatest of "holocaust deniers." To them, it's simply good medicine. How Nazi is that?)
Is the stopping of abortion on demand the imposition of morality on others? You bet your life it is. Just the same as the prohibition of any kind of murder is an imposition of morality. The left knows this, and therefore works to remove the idea of murder, death, or termination. In doing so they make it a debate over a woman's right to choose or to govern her own body. This was too easily done. Again, there should be some hesitancy on the part of liberals to at least show some semblance of conscience regarding the unborn instead of demeaning their brief lives as irrelevant in light of the mother's "choice."
In Closing
America was once a devoutly Christian nation. It is no longer. Are there millions of Christians? Yes, but they are a far cry (including myself) from the Christians who lived closer to the reformation. What about the future? Good question. I'm still praying and working for theocracy. What does that mean? For me, it's when men and women are governing their individual lives by the standards of God's law in every area of life. I do not believe this is anytime near. Likely, it's several generations away. But, I can do my part by applying my faith now and instilling that same mission in my children. I can also encourage my brothers and sisters to do the same.
I'm not called to "reclaim America." I'm called to build the city of God irregardless of the flag that waves over the statehouse. My allegiance is to Christ and His Word (though there is always a soft spot in my heart for the once Christian South!). Although it is a marvelous document the Constitution is just that, a document. It will not save man from his sinful pursuit of power. That should be evident by the present despotism being cast over America. No, my hope is in the Lord and what He plans for the future of this world. I can't look back to 1791 as a goal. Providence has brought us where we are and our sins have gotten us this present tyranny. I will commit myself, then, to a greater learning of obedience. If you are a Christian, I encourage you to join me. If you are not, then I pray God grant you repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth (2 Tim. 2:25).
