This Year’s Elections
I thought this was very well put, by an Orthodox Pastor from whom I receive regular missives, Father Patrick Reardon, of Chicago.
This Year’s Elections
Since political elections normally deal with matters of policy, I do not normally make them the subject of pastoral concern. This year, however, the national elections in our country are not concerned simply with policies but with principles.
My first comment, I suppose, should address that difference.
About policies—most questions of political concern—we may expect some legitimate disagreements among Christians. Among these we should include questions about the application of civil punishments, the funding of public education, the tax code, the authority of federal agencies, this or that social program, and so forth. These matters, properly governed by prudence, leave much room for legitimate disagreements among Christians.
My reference to “principles,” however, pertains to matters on which there can be no legitimate disagreement among Christians. Let me mention three subjects of this sort, which are at issue in this year’s national elections. I do not believe there can be legitimate disagreement among Christians with respect to:
First, the origin of human rights. These, since they come directly from the hand of God, are determined by the moral law. That is to say, no political institution can give citizens a right to do something wrong—not the Constitution, not the Congress, not the Supreme Court.
For example, even though the original Constitution, as well as acts of the Congress and decisions of the Supreme Court, denied full legal equality to Americans held in bondage, no American has ever had a “right” to own slaves. Slavery in our country was always a violation of God-given human rights, and those responsible for that violation have all answered for it at the throne of God.
Second, the unborn child in the womb has an absolute right to be born. This right, which comes from God, is subject to no qualifying circumstances, including the conditions of the child’s conception and the health of the mother. One may not murder an unborn baby. A baby in the womb has the same right to life as its mother and her doctor.
Third, marriage is the union of a man and woman. This principle, rooted in God’s creating act, can be altered by no decision of any institution or agency of government. No one can be given a right to do a wrong. Whatever name is conferred upon it, state-sponsored sodomy is an abomination to the created order. It is a radical offense against the divine Logos.
Inasmuch as these three principles are manifestly at risk in this year’s elections, it is incumbent on all Christian pastors to bring them to the attention of the flock of God.
This year’s elections involve an attempt to usurp an authority that belongs properly to God. Centuries ago, Tertullian warned that political idolatry—the effort to confer on the State an authority that belongs only to God—is the worst and most dangerous sort. Vote wisely, therefore, and in the fear of God. This year—more than any time in my memory—our votes in the election are going to be recorded in eternity.
Fr Pat


No one is compromising your principles by making it legal or illegal to define, do, or give somebody something. Are they making you do something you don’t believe in? No. So no principles are at risk in this election.
In fact, truth is universal, and depends not on what politicians say it is. So if the “truth” is that marriage is of a man and a woman, then nothing our leaders say can change that. Nor do you have any right to force your view on the population. Especially when this is of a personal view, based on your religion in which not everyone follows.
Furthermore, you cannot, nor does God want you to control the morality of another person. It holds no value when done coercively.
You are a confused “Thinker” Mr. D.P.
Thinker is absolutely correct. I would also like to add that the so-called “culture wars” should not be fought in the public arena. No, they should be fought from the home, from the family unit to their children. As for me and my house we will serve the Lord.
Is abortion against God. Absolutely. Is homosexual intercourse against God. Absolutely. But does that mean that the state should use Biblical morality as a weapon to beat people over the head? Absolutely not. Let the world go the way of the world, but let the church stand out and up in the midst of a twisted and perverse generation.
Artificially creating a society that merely resembles what a Christian society should look like is still, demonic at its core. The state forcing the depraved to behave like Christians by force is not a good thing. Clearly, if Mormons are fighting the same culture war as Christian, then that war clearly has everything to do with moralism and only resembles Christ.
You guys are choosing to miss the point and in so doing are embracing a pacifist approach to these issues. Nobody is suggesting the state use “Biblical morality” … we are pleading with “the state” to reflect the very laws of nature upon which this nation was founded (read the Declaration of Independence and Constitution).
Sorry, Matt, but DP_Thinker is absolutely NOT “absolutely correct.” From the very start his post is a syntactic muddle. What does “No one is compromising your principles” mean? No one ELSE can compromise MY principles; I alone can do that.
What someone else CAN do, though, is use the power of the sword (i. e., the state) to force me to choose between adhering to my principles and obeying a government that has chosen to make these (universal) principles illicit to some degree.
As Paul and Fr. Reardon have both made clear, these principles are not private opinions, but universal truths and natural law. DP_Thinker admits this, and yet expressly denies that these truths can be applied to human society.
Regarding your use of the word “absolutely,” Matt: in the words of Inigo Montoya, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”