As Americans, we talk a lot about the rights we have. This is a result of our founding documents. The Declaration of Independence states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The first ten amendments to the Constitution are called "The Bill Of Rights". But it is axiomatic that where there are rights, there are also responsibilities, or duties. The founders didn't say alot about these duties. The sentence quotes above from the D-of-I is directly followed by the sentence, "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." And the constitution enumerates the way we give this consent -- by voting. We are not told to what extent that we are to be involved in the process; we are a free country after all. But the right to vote also seems to imply the duty to vote, as a minimum level of involvement in the process. I will not go on at length as to how our current level of enfranchisement came about; that is well documented in many other places. I do want to address the duty to vote. In this election year many people are so disenchanted with the candidates that they have decided to, or are at least considering, staying home, and not voting. This is wrong. It is our duty, as American citizens, to vote. The Constitution never promises that we will have ideal candidates to choose from. It has been my experience, having voted in nine presidential elections, and eighteen congressional elections, that the ideal candidate rarely exists. We are all fallen men and women, after all. No, our duty is to learn what we are able about the available candidates, and then vote for the one that we think is the better of the available candidates. Often we call this 'voting for the lesser of two evils', and so it sometimes is. A better way to look at it is to say that we are voting for THE BEST CANDIDATE AVAILABLE, in our opinion. At this point some would say that they do not wish to give their consent to be governed by any of the available candidates. What must be remembered is that they will be governed by one of them, so it would behoove them to do what they can to have some say in the matter, which is to vote. Then, leave the results to our sovereign God, who removes rulers and raises up rulers (Daniel 2:21, paraphrase).
If you are a Christian you also have another duty; to pray for the election, and for the candidates - all of the candidates. Pray that God's will be done (Matthew 6:10); pray that all of the candidates would be drawn to Christ, and acknowledge Him as their Lord and Savior; pray that He would give wisdom to whoever is elected. And prayer for your own heart as well, that you would "love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." (Matthew 22:37)
Friday, June 27, 2008
Thursday, June 19, 2008
How should Presbyterians pray?
R. Scott Clark's "Heidelblog" has a great posting on 'group prayer' by Henry M. Lewis. (It is a reposting from the Nicotine Theological Journal 3 (October, 1999): 1-4, by permission of the publishers.)
A sample:
"IF, HOWEVER, PRAYER IS NOT about making ourselves vulnerable to others or displaying in spontaneous fashion our heartfelt trust in God, if it is actually, as the Shorter Catechism has it, “the offering up to God for things agreeable to his will, in the name of Christ,” then perhaps a better version of small group prayer would be to read Scripture and then pray on the basis of what God’s word reveals. Instead of acting like Quakers and letting the Spirit lead, Presbyterians should be relying upon the inscripturated word that is supposed to govern all things Reformed. A prayer meeting, Reformed style, should be a dialogue between God and his people, with Scripture reading, and then a prayer in response, another Scripture reading, and another prayer, and so on. At least this way, God would get some say in what his people are praying, and the requests might actually be for things revealed in the Bible - like perseverance, not health."
As 'they' say, "Read the whole thing".
A sample:
"IF, HOWEVER, PRAYER IS NOT about making ourselves vulnerable to others or displaying in spontaneous fashion our heartfelt trust in God, if it is actually, as the Shorter Catechism has it, “the offering up to God for things agreeable to his will, in the name of Christ,” then perhaps a better version of small group prayer would be to read Scripture and then pray on the basis of what God’s word reveals. Instead of acting like Quakers and letting the Spirit lead, Presbyterians should be relying upon the inscripturated word that is supposed to govern all things Reformed. A prayer meeting, Reformed style, should be a dialogue between God and his people, with Scripture reading, and then a prayer in response, another Scripture reading, and another prayer, and so on. At least this way, God would get some say in what his people are praying, and the requests might actually be for things revealed in the Bible - like perseverance, not health."
As 'they' say, "Read the whole thing".
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
The importance of general elections...
G. K. Chesterton, in his book 'Orthodoxy', wrote the following:
"I am still as much concerned as ever about the Battle of Armageddon; but I am not so much concerned about the General Election."
"I am still as much concerned as ever about the Battle of Armageddon; but I am not so much concerned about the General Election."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)