February 25, 2011
Failure to Defend
The Obama administration is ending its defense of the 1996 law banning gay marriage saying they feel the law is unconstitutional. Our first reaction may be to get on our soapbox and cry foul, but quite honestly we’ll probably wring our hands, shrug our shoulders and look the other way. Sadly we in the church do something similar when we fail to come to the defense of Biblical commandments, instruction and direction.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Gail;
-----The last I knew there were three branches of government by law and a fourth by implication. We all know the three to be the legislative, the executive, and the judicial branches. I always thought these terms were quite descriptive of each branch’s function. The legislative branch creates laws, only. The judicial branch decides the constitutionality of the laws, only. The executive branch executes the effects of the laws, only. Pres. Barrak Obama may think he has eliminated a law he does not like by pronouncing it unconstitutional and refusing to execute it. But in reality all he has eliminated is his own fidelity to duty. It is quite simple to demonstrate why the constitution obligates the executive branch to duty rather than to desire. Would Pres. George W. Bush have received the same warm acceptance if he had blocked all abortions by pronouncing Roe v. Wade to be an constitutional infringement upon the unborn child’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Or if he had declared the Clean Air Act unconstitutional and disbanded the EPA? How long would he have remained in office if he had decided the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unconstitutional? If one law is free game for this kind of executive misbehavior, is any law not? If the executive branch can cross its line of authority, then why can the legislative branch not execute its own laws by itself?
-----The fact that the judicial branch has long been legislating from the bench (e.g., Roe v. Wade) exposes the failure of the implied fourth branch of government - a free press. Our lives are too busied with earning livings and raising children for everyone to avail themselves of the in-depth education needed for effectively perceiving the implications of these kinds of matters and persuading the public to demand obedience to the constitution. We leave that up to those who write our newspapers and magazines and who babble on TV and the radio. Yet, except those on the radio for the most part, these take advantage of our political illiteracy to present their own personal agendas as “popular sentiments”. And it is just human nature that sentiment successfully challenges obedience. So we now find our country in a royal mess.
-----The same goes for our churches and obeying the Word of God, but to a much lesser degree. Christ is the head of the church through being the head of every believer. The time for church leaders ruling the followers with gun in hand (as does a government) ended with the Inquisition. Now by the very pronouncement of unruly leaders, “There is another church down the street where you will be happier,” a follower has the spiritual life with the Lord he needs. If arrogant leaders of one church are bent on persecuting messengers, there are many churches close by having more humble leaders. That doesn’t do a lot of good for the one church, but it does for the others. If all church leaders were indeed humble, churches in general would function closer to the principles of the Word as their Head could bring to their life more wisdom spread throughout all their members rather than just the wisdom of the few “in control”. As things are, I guess the feet of the believers are the free press of the church.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Post a Comment