RSample.com

Article Six of the Constitution expressly forbids the government from asking religious tests of candidates. But for some reason, churches have applied the same restrictions on candidates for public office who are also members of their faith community.

Article Six states in part, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”(US Constitution) The Framers wisely understood that the government had no place in determining the orthodoxy or spiritual soundness of any candidate running for office – or those duly elected by the people.

The need for an effective faith in the lives of those seeking political office, though, was never far from the minds of the Founding Fathers. James Madison writes:

Religion [is] the basis and Foundation of Government. (1785) Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe. (1785) We have staked the whole future of the American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future…upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God. (Summit Ministries)

There are countless other references to the how James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and others felt about the need of a moral, religious public servant. Yet, how do we rectify this deep felt religious requirement and Article Six of the Constitution?

The answer seems clear – while it is not the role of the government to determine faith and orthodoxy, it IS the role of the local church to do so. Since the majority of the Founding Fathers were either Anglican or Presbyterian (Religious Affiliation of the Founding Fathers), Article 25 of the Westminster Confession of Faith is relevant:

Unto this catholic visible Church Christ hath given the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the saints, in this life, to the end of the world: and doth, by His own presence and Spirit, according to His promise, make them effectual thereunto. (Confession of Faith)

It is the role of the church to gather and instruct the faithful in the life and discipline suitable for the following of Christ. In the church, the elders have been given a specific role: “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.” (Titus 1:9) It follows, then, that anyone seeking to public service – considered a high calling by John Calvin – should be examined by the local church in terms of faith, religious practice, and spiritual maturity. In other words – it is the role of the local church to administer a “religious test” – making sure that those who are elected are first representatives of Christ and then secondly representatives of those who put them in office.

According to a Pew Foundation study, close to 80% of all members of the House and Senate consider themselves Christian. (The Religious Makeup of Congress) Yet, we continually see these Christians vote for abortion and other issues that are clearly in contradiction to the Gospel of Christ.

It is time for churches to make sure that those who claim to be followers of Christ are actually carrying that out in their votes and actions in public office. The Roman Catholic Church has been in the forefront of holding her members accountable – Top Catholic Cardinal Says ‘No Way’. BreakPoint Ministries just awarded Tony Hall their prestigious Wilberforce Award for his commitment to Christ while in public office. But more must be done. Are churches asking candidates in their pews questions of faith and service? Are churches praying for people in public office and meeting with them regularly if they are members. Are communities of faith holding their members who are elected officials accountable for their actions? Will churches go the final step of removing from their rolls politicians who are acting against the Kingdom of God – and who show no signs of changing or repenting?

The Founding Fathers never expected the government to examine the inner spirit and faith of elected representatives. It is about time that the church started doing so.

The cat is out of the bag. The community is well aware that the church is failing in her mission.

A block get together over the weekend confirmed it. In discussing things like health care, child care, homosexuality, and single parenting the group asked “Where is the church?” Except for my wife and me, this group does not go to church. They are socially liberal, fiscally conservative, family-oriented folks. They really do not harbor any ill-will against Christianity per se, but they do have some specific questions of the church:

1. Why are you focusing on always obtaining more land, building more structures, and increasing the number of programs for your church members when people in the community in which you are doing these things are hurting?

2. Why do you focus on two sins only – abortion and homosexuality – while allowing corrupt politicians, unethical businessmen, gossiping women, and unfaithful husbands to sit on your boards and committees?

3. Why have you not provided an alternative to the culture we see around us, instead of focusing on the latest music or media trends?

Church leaders, pastors, elders, board members – do you hear what they are saying? They know that the church is called to have a unique position in our society. They know that you are to help the poor and needy, to hold all your members to the same standard, to love unconditionally, and to help people through service and discipline live according the standards of Scripture. They see you as doing none of that. They see you as places of judgment, of double-standard, of corporate land-grabbing. The really sad thing is that they do not want to see you that way. They want you to be more effective, they want you to have some sort of influence – not as a political movement, but as a first responder out of love. Because they see you as just another institution, they will not come.

Much like the fabled emperor, the only one who does not realize that she is walking around naked is the church. The community surrounding the church can see right through the façade of ballpark sanctuaries and immaculate soccer fields – they see that the church has really nothing to offer. If that isn’t damning – what is?

Technorati Profile

Jimmy Davis has a wonderful article on prayer:

Prayer (or any other spiritual discipline such as Bible reading, fasting, silence, or solitude) is not something we do to make God happy with us. No, the spiritual disciplines are meant to make space for us to hear how happy God is with us because of Jesus. When I pray to get God to love me I am a legalist who works for God to earn the favor of God. Gospel-praying means listening to God say that I already have His favor through Christ and that I can now work with God in the resurrection power His Spirit supplies.

Read the rest of the article here: The Cruciform Life

Real. Comfortable. Church. That was the billboard that overlooked the highway cutting through Knoxville for quite a while. The picture of a couch behind these words made the meaning clear – we want you to be as relaxed as possible while worshipping the King of kings.

A culture of informality has swept over this nation. Casual Fridays are now the norm in many areas – I still hesitate to sign over my hard earned check to a bank teller that is dressed down. At a local eatery that I frequent, I routinely see men and women dressed in what must be pajamas coming in to get breakfast. Customer service agents call me by my first name without asking permission. It seems that at times we are working very hard to break down the structures of civilization – all in the name of being comfortable.

This informality has spilled over into our churches. Dress for church was a special thing – our Sunday best. A tie at the least, a tie AND jacket would be preferred. Women were also tastefully and modestly dressed. The overall goal of Sunday clothes was not to show off what we have – but to put on the best garments for the formal worship of our Creator. Jackets and ties now are often the exception in our houses of worship. The standard attire for Sunday mornings is now polo shirts and pants (or shorts) for the men and comfortable (and often very revealing) dress for the women. Pastors have left their robes in the closet, and now preach in jeans and golf shirts.

Back to the billboard. In order to be theologically correct, they should have tagged on this warning: “Choose Two.” A Real Church cannot be comfortable – as the Word of God rightly preached often convicts to the very soul. A Comfortable Church is not real – as it will never address the issues that face faith and life in a biblical and fruitful way. As for being Real Comfortable – staying at home on the couch is where we would find that.

What we need is a true revival in our churches. A revival of spirit – so we may correctly and faithfully follow the Holy Spirit in all that we do. We need a revival of purpose – so that we may carry out Christ’s command. We need a revival in community – for only together can we hold each other accountable. And a revival of attitude – for we are saved by grace by none other than the King of kings and Lord of lords. In that, and not in our pursuit of the informal, may we find our comfort.

T. M. Moore has an excellent article at The Fellowship of Ailbe.  Here it is:

Statism is not a new phenomenon. Its roots can be discerned in the actions of even Biblical rulers (a point I will be arguing at length all next week at TheWilberforceProject.org). The basic tenets of statism are clear enough: government is our best hope, in every area of life, for realizing maximum human fruition and prosperity. In the statist agenda, therefore, government must assert itself by every means into every area of life, beginning with those sectors and segments most vulnerable, most obviously in distress, or most immediately open to regulation and control. Thus, government believes it knows best how to educate the children of the land. It insists that it alone should manage the mail, monitor the banks, regulate the economy, define the terms of marriage, maintain the nation’s health, and even determine who should manage the nation’s industries. Statism is like kudzu. Kudzu grows and overgrows everything when there is no deliberate effort to control and confine it within its proper bounds of utility. As kudzu turns everything it overwhelms into a vague remembrance of its former self – shapes of fences, barns, and trees, all overgrown by kudzu – so government leaves in the wake of its expansiveness mere memories of such venerable institutions as schools, families, marketplaces, political parties, the press, and even churches. Statism doesn’t just happen to a nation; it is the result of a determined effort on the part of those with a clear agenda to change the status quo by top-down efforts, enforced by legislatoin, bureaucratic control, and taxation. Statism today is threatening to engulf our nation, according to Andrew C. McCarthy, writing in the current issue of The New Criterion. In his review of Mark Levin’s new book, Lberty and Tyranny, McCarthy points out that one of the prime targets of the statist agenda, because it is his primary opposition to same, is traditional religion – especially, Christianity. The statist will not be able to pursue his full-bore agenda until he either confines, controls, or corrupts the religious leaders and institutions of his society. Today pastors must not preach political sermons. This would have horrified the pastors of the founding era. Soon they may be prevented from preaching any kind of “hate speech.” And they will comply; that tax-exempt status is just too precious. Are we building our churches on solid rock, or kudzu?