restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations
The Presidents Faith
In response to last weekends PBS story on Bushs faith, perhaps I may be permitted to quote from an essay I wrote back in August of 2003 entitled Why Do Conservative Christians Uphold the Scriptures Yet Compromise on the Constitution?:
Ironically, the very same conservative Christians who follow the Scriptures when it comes to matters of morality (e.g., same-sex marriage, the ordination of homosexuals, abortion) fail to uphold the Constitution when it comes to matters of freedom. The Neocon-Christian Right alliance, which came to power during the Reagan era, now controls the conservative movement, wielding its influence through such mouthpieces as the Weekly Standard, the National Review, and the New Republic.
Say what they may, but adherents to this alliance are completely out of sync with the Constitution. Our politicians may assert that all Americans have the right to free health care, education, and retirement benefits, but none of these so-called rights is supported by the Constitution, and hence the case is closedor ought to be. The Republican Party calls itself the party of limited government, but after three years of George W. Bush can anyone name a single regulation that has been repealed or a single agency that has been abolished? Even the National Endowment for the Arts, which is perhaps the most unconstitutional establishment in America, struts along exuberantly. And the problem is not just the Republican Party. On matters of foreign policy, trade policy, immigration policy, and socialized medicine, the two major parties have become inseparable twins.
Thus, while I genuinely appreciate the fact that our president espouses faith in Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior, and while I also appreciate the dead earnestness with which he approaches the issues of the day, I cannot agree that his policieshis faith-based initiative, for example, or his spreading of democracy at the point of a bayonetare compatible with the document he swore an oath to defend and protect, the United States Constitution. Perhaps thats why my readers will understand my excitement when I first ran across the preamble to the Constitution Partys platform. In no uncertain terms it acknowledges both the absolute Lordship of Jesus Christ (nothing here about Christians and Muslims praying to the same God) as well as the foundational significance of the U.S. Constitution, which itself is based on biblical law:
We, the members of the Constitution Party, gratefully acknowledge the blessing of the Lord God as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of this Nation. We solemnly declare that the foundation of our political position and moving principle of our political activity is our full submission and unshakable faith in our Savior and Redeemer, our Lord Jesus Christ. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Divine Providence as we work to restore and preserve this Nation as a government of the People, by the People, and for the People.
The U.S. Constitution established a Republic under God, rather than a democracy.
Our Republic is a nation governed by a Constitution that is rooted in Biblical law, administered by representatives who are Constitutionally elected by the citizens.
In a Republic governed by Constitutional law rooted in Biblical law, all Life, Liberty and Property are protected because law rules.
The tragedy of our times is that the situation is desperate but Christians are not. If the saints became as desperate as the situation, something might change. The Scriptures portray the times in which we live in terms of an emergency that calls for urgency. Earnestness is no substitute for the leadership of the Holy Spirit, for men may be in dead earnest about causes far removed from the truth.
In the end, there is no need to call into question the genuineness of the presidents faithor his sincerity. He believes his causes are just. That is as it should be. But sincerity is no gauge of truth. There must be a touchstone, an immovable foundation, upon which to make ones decisions. In our country, that touchstone is our precious Constitution. As former Republican Senator Barry Goldwater once put it:
I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is needed before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents interests, I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.
Our delinquent generation will not get back on the right track until it heeds the Founders legacy of constitutional government rooted in biblical law. And blind allegiance to a lesser of two evils mindset will only get in the way.
May 4, 2004
David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. His latest book, Why I Stopped Listening to Rush: Confessions of a Recovering Neocon, will be released this year.