Sinister: The Attempt By the State to Co-opt Religion

Sources: Army of the Lord? Obama Seeks Health Care Push From Pulpit - Political News - FOXNews.com; http://faithinpubliclife.org/content/feature/140000_participate_in_historic.html; http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/08/obama_health_care_pitch_to_rab.html; http://www.americanpapist.com/2009/08/politics-lies-and-obama-who-tells-them.html

Seeking to bolster his health care plan in the rising objections from Catholic Bishops and other pro-life religious groups, who have pointed out that — despite White House claims — the Health Care reform is indeed a sanction for paying for abortions, fetal stem cell research and a denial for the rights of conscience; Obama has sought to reach out to certain groups of pastors and rabbis in order to push for support for his plan.

I find this to be rather chilling.  When a church speaks out against abortion and candidates who support it, it is labeled a violation of the separation of Church and State.  However, when Obama wants to bolster support for health care, it is suddenly all right for the state to enlist the churches to promote a partisan view.

The church which is the puppet for the state is putting man over God, and is an intrusion both against the freedom of religion, and a violation of the separation of Church and State so often invoked when religion speaks out against evil in the state.

If it is illegal for a church to say that a vote for a pro-abortion candidate is a sin, then it stands to follow that it must be similarly illegal for the state to seek to sway the churches in supporting a partisan political agenda.

The fact that it is set aside at the convenience of the government shows it is not the rule of law we live under, but the injustice of arbitrary enforcement of rules to benefit one’s allies and punish one’s opponents.

Without the just enforcement of the law with equality for all, we do not have a Republic where the rule of law is supreme, but a government of oligarchy (rule by a few self-interested men).  America is now ready for a government which sets aside the constitution at its own convenience and hides behind it when it wishes to justify its actions.

Under this action, we do not have pure despotism, but as Lincoln warned, despotism with the base alloy of hypocrisy.

Sinister: The Attempt By the State to Co-opt Religion

Sources: Army of the Lord? Obama Seeks Health Care Push From Pulpit - Political News - FOXNews.com; http://faithinpubliclife.org/content/feature/140000_participate_in_historic.html; http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/08/obama_health_care_pitch_to_rab.html; http://www.americanpapist.com/2009/08/politics-lies-and-obama-who-tells-them.html

Seeking to bolster his health care plan in the rising objections from Catholic Bishops and other pro-life religious groups, who have pointed out that — despite White House claims — the Health Care reform is indeed a sanction for paying for abortions, fetal stem cell research and a denial for the rights of conscience; Obama has sought to reach out to certain groups of pastors and rabbis in order to push for support for his plan.

I find this to be rather chilling.  When a church speaks out against abortion and candidates who support it, it is labeled a violation of the separation of Church and State.  However, when Obama wants to bolster support for health care, it is suddenly all right for the state to enlist the churches to promote a partisan view.

The church which is the puppet for the state is putting man over God, and is an intrusion both against the freedom of religion, and a violation of the separation of Church and State so often invoked when religion speaks out against evil in the state.

If it is illegal for a church to say that a vote for a pro-abortion candidate is a sin, then it stands to follow that it must be similarly illegal for the state to seek to sway the churches in supporting a partisan political agenda.

The fact that it is set aside at the convenience of the government shows it is not the rule of law we live under, but the injustice of arbitrary enforcement of rules to benefit one’s allies and punish one’s opponents.

Without the just enforcement of the law with equality for all, we do not have a Republic where the rule of law is supreme, but a government of oligarchy (rule by a few self-interested men).  America is now ready for a government which sets aside the constitution at its own convenience and hides behind it when it wishes to justify its actions.

Under this action, we do not have pure despotism, but as Lincoln warned, despotism with the base alloy of hypocrisy.

Caesaropapism: Tyranny in America Has Come

Source: Belmont Abbey Head: Washington Instructed Officials to Pursue Discrimination Charges

"First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me."

—attributed to Martin Niemöller

 

Last week, I had written about the attack on Belmont Abbey College by the EEOC.  Today, Life Site News (LSN) writes about some interesting information revealed by the Charlotte division of the EEOC.  It seems that the decision to reopen the case did not originate at the local office, but was insisted on from Washington.

It seems that this could be linked to the denial of conscience protections from the Obama administration when it comes to religious run hospitals and individuals who oppose distributing abortifacent contraception and the like.

So here is the dilemma: To be obedient to the demands of the state, a religious institution must abandon its fidelity to the moral teachings of the religion it belongs to.

So, the question is, how did we allow ourselves to have our freedom of religion taken away from us?  How did Christians sacrifice their values to vote for a government which violates our First Amendment rights?

It seems that for now, believers are in a situation where they must either choose between their faith and their nation.  We will be called to choose between obeying the state and obeying God.  The answer we must choose of course is to serve God, rather than the state when the state demands of us to disobey God.

This may mean we will need to abandon things like Accreditation.  We probably will need to renounce the tax exempt status of the Church if this is to be used as a gag to prevent the Church from speaking out in America.

Belmont Abbey College has stated that they would rather close down than to abandon their fidelity to the Church.  This is the right attitude of course.  However, the problem is that it should not have to be in this position.  Nor should Christian doctors and pharmacists be forced to choose between arbitrary government edicts and their faith.  Again, Christian hospitals and orphanages should not be forced to choose between compromising their beliefs and closing their doors.

The fact that the current administration in Washington is forcing through its ideological agenda and demanding compliance with these laws indicates a profound disrespect for religion.  The so-called “wall of separation” between Church and State has been shown to be a one way barrier: religion is forbidden any access to the state, but the state may meddle in religion in any way they choose.

This is Caesaropapism: The state placing itself above the spiritual authority of the Church, and insisting that loyalty to the state take precedence over the obedience to the Church.

So what are we to do?

First of all, we must serve God rather than men.  If the state insists on something contrary to the will of God, we must be faithful to God rather than to men.  However, we must not behave as lawless ones.  Where a law is just before God, we are to show that we are faithful to doing what is right.  If we behave as rebels and the state punishes us for defying a just law, then what credit is it to us?

So even if the state forces us into a state where we must stand up against it, we must always do so in a way which is Christian, blessing those who curse us and loving those who hate us.

Caesaropapism: Tyranny in America Has Come

Source: Belmont Abbey Head: Washington Instructed Officials to Pursue Discrimination Charges

"First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me."

—attributed to Martin Niemöller

 

Last week, I had written about the attack on Belmont Abbey College by the EEOC.  Today, Life Site News (LSN) writes about some interesting information revealed by the Charlotte division of the EEOC.  It seems that the decision to reopen the case did not originate at the local office, but was insisted on from Washington.

It seems that this could be linked to the denial of conscience protections from the Obama administration when it comes to religious run hospitals and individuals who oppose distributing abortifacent contraception and the like.

So here is the dilemma: To be obedient to the demands of the state, a religious institution must abandon its fidelity to the moral teachings of the religion it belongs to.

So, the question is, how did we allow ourselves to have our freedom of religion taken away from us?  How did Christians sacrifice their values to vote for a government which violates our First Amendment rights?

It seems that for now, believers are in a situation where they must either choose between their faith and their nation.  We will be called to choose between obeying the state and obeying God.  The answer we must choose of course is to serve God, rather than the state when the state demands of us to disobey God.

This may mean we will need to abandon things like Accreditation.  We probably will need to renounce the tax exempt status of the Church if this is to be used as a gag to prevent the Church from speaking out in America.

Belmont Abbey College has stated that they would rather close down than to abandon their fidelity to the Church.  This is the right attitude of course.  However, the problem is that it should not have to be in this position.  Nor should Christian doctors and pharmacists be forced to choose between arbitrary government edicts and their faith.  Again, Christian hospitals and orphanages should not be forced to choose between compromising their beliefs and closing their doors.

The fact that the current administration in Washington is forcing through its ideological agenda and demanding compliance with these laws indicates a profound disrespect for religion.  The so-called “wall of separation” between Church and State has been shown to be a one way barrier: religion is forbidden any access to the state, but the state may meddle in religion in any way they choose.

This is Caesaropapism: The state placing itself above the spiritual authority of the Church, and insisting that loyalty to the state take precedence over the obedience to the Church.

So what are we to do?

First of all, we must serve God rather than men.  If the state insists on something contrary to the will of God, we must be faithful to God rather than to men.  However, we must not behave as lawless ones.  Where a law is just before God, we are to show that we are faithful to doing what is right.  If we behave as rebels and the state punishes us for defying a just law, then what credit is it to us?

So even if the state forces us into a state where we must stand up against it, we must always do so in a way which is Christian, blessing those who curse us and loving those who hate us.