How Then Shall We Vote?
Bill Haymin
October 30, 2006
How Then Shall We vote
By Christopher J. Ortiz
The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. 2 Samuel 23:3
The time is near to cast your ballot, and a lack of godly options can frustrate the political process for any Christian. For some, the solution is to simply place a check besides every Republican on the ballot sheet. We can at least walk away knowing we participated in the great American experiment. But politics is complex, and the Christian must keep important Biblical precedents in mind when considering his vote.
Second Samuel 23 contains King David's last song. It is admittedly God- breathed, "[T]he Rock of Israel spake to me" The Lord is establishing the important characteristics for all civil leaders: they must be just, and they must rule in the fear of God.
Americans are not prone to use the term "rule." It sounds monarchical, something reserved for Kings and queens. Or, it sounds dictatorial, as in "Saddam Hussein once ruled Iraq." The Hebrew word being used (mashal) is also defined as govern, and most Americans are comfortable with that description. But, we cannot avoid the reality that magistrates must rule. They are to govern because they are given dominion in the order of God (Rom. 13:1-4). Modern man dislikes these authoritarian terms because a distorted version of democracy teaches that power resides in the people, and this power is concentrated in the right to vote.
Authority in the will of the people can be equally authoritarian. Whether the power to rule is granted to political leaders, or it is found in the people, both are capable of abuse. Power is not in the people, and it is not found in the king. Power is centered in God, made manifest through an ordained hierarchy of covenantal representatives serving God's people in manifold, decentralized institutions. These representatives will not necessarily be Christian.
The alleged power of the right to vote is also exaggerated. Our federal bureaucracy has long outgrown the power of a vote to change the nature of American civil government. The vote can only alternate the figureheads, i.e., the politicians, and politicians can only revise surface legislation. They will "add to" and rarely "take away."
To gain your vote, political parties will tell you that your vote counts. It does, but only in the minor way I briefly described above. In the end, you're voting only to establish a party's majority. This demonstrates the importance, therefore, of the party platform, and most platforms feature more additions than subtractions to governmental jurisdictions.
The Inescapable Covenant
People from all political and social persuasions desire just rulers. A liberal will say that. A conservative will say that. What's most feared today, however, is anyone ruling "in the fear of God" Modern man wants just rulers, but not rulers who fear God.
Doesn't this beg the question? What then is just? By what standard are we to determine justice for all men? How can one speak of justice without a sense of absolute moral standards for justice? If these standards exist in God, then justice and the fear of God are mutually dependent. You cannot have one without the other. Justice is, as David implied, "ruling in the fear of God."
You are probably familiar with this fundamental argument, but most people are not. They don't see the blatant contradiction of demanding justice without recognition of God and His law. If justice is somehow neutral, then the implements of justice are equally neutral. There is no need to then make reference to God when determining laws, or in voting for those who make laws.
What secular Americans don't understand - nor believe - is the covenant relationship God has with men and nations. It matters not that America has made any agreements with God, He still deals with her based upon covenant. It is the same with the civil magistrate. It matters not that the state has no contract with God. It is still His ordained servant for justice (Rom. 13:1-4), and therefore, in an obligatory relationship with Him.
If God deals with America by means of covenant, then it is to our benefit that our leaders are just, ruling in the fear of God - it results in national blessing. This is the case despite the cries of "theocracy" coming from the political left. The unbeliever is unaware that sanctions follow national disobedience, and it is only righteousness that preserves a nation and multiplies its blessing.
Statism
My concern is that a great many Christians see godly leadership as synonymous with the Republican Party. Just and God-fearing leaders are not necessarily Republican, nor are they necessarily Democrats. Each candidate must be judged on his own merit. This is especially true in local politics where an individual politician can create more noticeable change than at the federal level.
It is much easier to determine the quality of local and statewide leaders than it is national politicians. We can actually visit their churches, if they attend one. We can examine their personal histories and readily see the impact of their voting records. We can even meet them at local rallies and town meetings. This includes state representatives such as our congressmen and senators. It requires effort, but even brief research can yield important information about any candidate.
For many Christians, voting consistently Republican is the simple means to getting through an election. This neglects a foundational premise to the Biblical thinking espoused in Christian Reconstruction. As faithful Christians dedicated to the advancement of the Kingdom of Christ, we are opposed to Statism [ The practice or doctrine of giving centralized government control over economic planning and policy] as man's soteriological [ the theological doctrine of salvation as effected by Jesus] solution. In other words, the state as an institution cannot save man. If Christians are Republican, it should be because republicans work for a constitutional republic where THE RULE OF LAW TRUMPS STATIST POWER [emphasis mine]. In reality, modern republicanism seems far from the paleoconservative [Extremely or stubbornly conservative in political matters] model of yesteryear.
The new conservatism bears a close resemblance to classic liberalism and is equally statist. Political choices today come down to which flavor of Statism you prefer. It's difficult to decry the liberal desire for the bloated welfare state when the other party is pushing for the bloated warfare state. Voting Right or Left is merely a selection in policy, not a vote for the reduction of civil government.
Both republicans as well as Democrats can be Statists. In fact, most of them are. Sometimes a candidate is only Republican because he supports deregulation. He may be socially liberal on other issues. Sometimes a candidate is only a Democrat because he supports the labor movement. He may be socially conservative on issues important to most Christians. Researching the policies of individual candidates is our responsibility as citizens. Don't be surprised if your research yields unpleasant results and you are forced to consider other options - like third parties.
Third Parties
The damage ascribed to third parties is usually isolated to executive offices such as the presidency. It's rare that you hear about a local sheriff or council member who lost votes to a third party candidate. The argument proceeds that a third party removes potential votes from the candidate closer to the third party position. So, a vote for the third party candidate is actually a vote for the opposition.
However, third parties are found on both sides of the aisle, and both mainstream candidates lose votes to those independent parties closest to their political persuasion. But, third parties are quite effective at forcing the mainstream parties to refine their positions. This can only be helpful.
The largest third party is the Libertarian Party. They are also the third largest political party in America. The party began thirty-five years ago and formed out of disillusioned Republicans and Democrats who wanted an alternative to the "lesser of two evils." The Libertarians have been successful at securing a good many seats in local politics, although they've supported a presidential candidate.
Probably the next most newsworthy third party is the Green Party - formed in 2001 as a new version of the Association of State Green Parties. It managed to quickly garner attention by supporting the presidential candidacy of Ralph Nader.
A group fond to our hearts is the newly organized Constitution Party. Its origins lie in the Taxpayers Party that began in 1922 supporting the presidential candidacy of our good friend, Howard Phillips. The Constitution Party platform probably best represents the true desire of most conservative Christians, a return to the type of freedom intended by America's founding fathers - a freedom guarded by the Constitution and one conducive to religious liberty.
As a communications specialist I am always looking for ways that marginalized groups can reach a wider audience. I've studied numerous examples in both business and politics, and I've learned that sometimes you've got to do something unexpected to achieve your desired results. If I had any advise to offer third parties, it would be to focus as many resources as possible on local elections. Although securing the presidency would be the premier endorsement, a third party is not out of the race if it doesn't gain the Oval Office. Third parties can make great strides in local politics. They are also quite effective at educating local constituencies to the important features of their party's platform.
What would be interesting to see is a political party that actually refrained from participating in a presidential election in order to focus its much-needed resources on securing local seats. I'm not sure how effective such a step would be, but it might aid local chapters by allowing them to devote 100 percent of their campaign energies to winning local elections. Local chapters typically have to divide their resources in order to support the national candidate. Either way, third parties are here to stay. I recommend researching such parties because they may represent your sincere convictions much better than a mainstream party.
Reorganizing Republicans
The GOP is clearly losing its luster. The most significant government expansions in recent history have occurred during their leadership. Most disturbing is their push for greater police and surveillance powers in the hands of the state. Their overemphasis upon terrorism is undoing the fabric of freedom in a way far worse than any overseas threat.
But there are those who do not deem it wise to leave the GOP for a third party. If these dedicated conservatives are to prevail, they must rethink their political strategy. Reconstituting a political party as old as the GOP requires a clear statement of purpose. In this case it should still be the reduction of government, only focused upon the Constitution - the standard for balanced power. I recommend organizing a faction within the GOP that emphasizes the importance of the Constitution." They might call themselves "Republicans for the Constitution."
The implications are obvious. First, this Republican wing can create a constitutional emphasis. Second, they can pressure other Republicans to state their position in relation to the Constitution. Third, they can position those who ignore them as unconstitutional or at least compromising.
The subdivision could help bring the Republican platform back to a more traditional conservative position. Chapters of Republicans for the Constitution can then spring up locally all over the nation with a focus upon educating their constituencies in our national principles.
The true battle in America is a battle for the mind. And any battle for the mind must be waged by effective communications. Two of the more useful tools are differentiation and repositioning. You establish your identity, or differentiate yourself, by repositioning your competition. A third party is certainly different, but maybe too different for some. For them, the simple modifier, "Republicans for the Constitution," might be sufficient to creating their desired change.
The Larger Purpose
How we should vote is a difficult question to answer when separated from the larger discussion of the Christian aim in politics. For what purpose are we striving? Is it to only reverse Roe v. Wade? Is it to reduce taxes? Or is it an effort to reduce the size of government? It's none of these things by themselves. Why do we want a reduction in the size of government? Are we proposing anarchy? Certainly not. We want less civil government so that we may exercise more self-government. We want less taxation so that we may establish godly institutions. This larger purpose is rarely discussed.
Returning to our initial text, ruling in the fear of God equates to empowering and equipping citizens for Christian responsibility - teaching them to govern themselves in terms of God's law. It does not mean imposing Biblical law upon an unwilling population. Less civil government should result in more Christian responsibility. This means that my vote is only a minor step in the larger task of exercising dominion through Christian self-government. Therefore, my voting should be directed towards those candidates who enable Christian responsibility. The challenge, of course, is locating those potential leaders. If we don't have them, we should be raising them up. A great many are doing that very thing. This is the importance of Christian education. This is the Chalcedon Foundation.
Copyright 2006, by Christopher J. Ortiz
The Ministry of Chalcedon
Established in 1965, Chalcedon (kal-SEE-dun) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) and Christian educational organization devoted to research, publishing, and promoting Christian reconstruction in all areas of life.
Chalcedon is geared to all who understand that Jesus Christ speaks to the mind as well as to the heart.
We believe that the whole Word of God must be applied to all of life. It is not only our duty as individuals, families and churches to be Christian, but it is also the duty of the state, the school, the arts and sciences, law, economics, and every other sphere to be under Christ the King. Nothing is exempt from His dominion. We must live by His Word, not our own.
Chalcedon is premised on the belief that ideas have consequences. It takes seriously the words of Professor F. A. Hayek:
"It may well be that scholars tend to overestimate the influence which we can exercise on contemporary affairs. But I doubt whether it is possible to overestimate the influence which ideas have in the long run."
Chalcedon's resources are being used to remind Christians of this basic truth: What men believe makes a difference.
"Therefore men should not believe lies, for it is the truth that sets them free" (John 8:32).
Chalcedon's activities include foundational and leadership roles in Christian reconstruction. Our emphasis on the Cultural or Dominion Mandate (Genesis 1:28) and the necessity of a return to Biblical Law has been a crucial factor in the challenge to Humanism by Christians in this country and elsewhere. Chalcedon's involvement in and commitment to Christian education began with its inception when founder Rousas John Rushdoony pinpointed the Christian and home schools as the most important institutions in reversing the influence of secular Humanism.
Our scholars speak regularly at conferences in America and overseas for various churches, schools, and private organizations. Chalcedon also hosts its own regional conferences across America.
In an era of uncertainty and fear of doom, Chalcedon presents a message of victory and envisions our age as a great opportunity for the consistent Biblical believer. A world that is increasingly pessimistic and disillusioned with the failure of secular Humanism is now feeling the impact of Christians who are exercising dominion and reclaiming lost spheres of authority for Christ the King.
copyright © 2005 The Chalcedon Foundation • www.chalcedon.edu • All Rights Reserved Worldwide.
Every Christian could value any organization that has solid Biblical principles and answers to many of life's issues. The Chalcedon Foundation is that kind of an organization.
Though we may not agree with every thing, that any organization or writer says, there is much that we can learn. We can improve our understanding of issues, by being opened and exposed to such penetrating ideas, which the Chalcedon Foundation and the writers that contribute to them give.
By Bill Haymin, 2006
By Christopher J. Ortiz
The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. 2 Samuel 23:3
The time is near to cast your ballot, and a lack of godly options can frustrate the political process for any Christian. For some, the solution is to simply place a check besides every Republican on the ballot sheet. We can at least walk away knowing we participated in the great American experiment. But politics is complex, and the Christian must keep important Biblical precedents in mind when considering his vote.
Second Samuel 23 contains King David's last song. It is admittedly God- breathed, "[T]he Rock of Israel spake to me" The Lord is establishing the important characteristics for all civil leaders: they must be just, and they must rule in the fear of God.
Americans are not prone to use the term "rule." It sounds monarchical, something reserved for Kings and queens. Or, it sounds dictatorial, as in "Saddam Hussein once ruled Iraq." The Hebrew word being used (mashal) is also defined as govern, and most Americans are comfortable with that description. But, we cannot avoid the reality that magistrates must rule. They are to govern because they are given dominion in the order of God (Rom. 13:1-4). Modern man dislikes these authoritarian terms because a distorted version of democracy teaches that power resides in the people, and this power is concentrated in the right to vote.
Authority in the will of the people can be equally authoritarian. Whether the power to rule is granted to political leaders, or it is found in the people, both are capable of abuse. Power is not in the people, and it is not found in the king. Power is centered in God, made manifest through an ordained hierarchy of covenantal representatives serving God's people in manifold, decentralized institutions. These representatives will not necessarily be Christian.
The alleged power of the right to vote is also exaggerated. Our federal bureaucracy has long outgrown the power of a vote to change the nature of American civil government. The vote can only alternate the figureheads, i.e., the politicians, and politicians can only revise surface legislation. They will "add to" and rarely "take away."
To gain your vote, political parties will tell you that your vote counts. It does, but only in the minor way I briefly described above. In the end, you're voting only to establish a party's majority. This demonstrates the importance, therefore, of the party platform, and most platforms feature more additions than subtractions to governmental jurisdictions.
The Inescapable Covenant
People from all political and social persuasions desire just rulers. A liberal will say that. A conservative will say that. What's most feared today, however, is anyone ruling "in the fear of God" Modern man wants just rulers, but not rulers who fear God.
Doesn't this beg the question? What then is just? By what standard are we to determine justice for all men? How can one speak of justice without a sense of absolute moral standards for justice? If these standards exist in God, then justice and the fear of God are mutually dependent. You cannot have one without the other. Justice is, as David implied, "ruling in the fear of God."
You are probably familiar with this fundamental argument, but most people are not. They don't see the blatant contradiction of demanding justice without recognition of God and His law. If justice is somehow neutral, then the implements of justice are equally neutral. There is no need to then make reference to God when determining laws, or in voting for those who make laws.
What secular Americans don't understand - nor believe - is the covenant relationship God has with men and nations. It matters not that America has made any agreements with God, He still deals with her based upon covenant. It is the same with the civil magistrate. It matters not that the state has no contract with God. It is still His ordained servant for justice (Rom. 13:1-4), and therefore, in an obligatory relationship with Him.
If God deals with America by means of covenant, then it is to our benefit that our leaders are just, ruling in the fear of God - it results in national blessing. This is the case despite the cries of "theocracy" coming from the political left. The unbeliever is unaware that sanctions follow national disobedience, and it is only righteousness that preserves a nation and multiplies its blessing.
Statism
My concern is that a great many Christians see godly leadership as synonymous with the Republican Party. Just and God-fearing leaders are not necessarily Republican, nor are they necessarily Democrats. Each candidate must be judged on his own merit. This is especially true in local politics where an individual politician can create more noticeable change than at the federal level.
It is much easier to determine the quality of local and statewide leaders than it is national politicians. We can actually visit their churches, if they attend one. We can examine their personal histories and readily see the impact of their voting records. We can even meet them at local rallies and town meetings. This includes state representatives such as our congressmen and senators. It requires effort, but even brief research can yield important information about any candidate.
For many Christians, voting consistently Republican is the simple means to getting through an election. This neglects a foundational premise to the Biblical thinking espoused in Christian Reconstruction. As faithful Christians dedicated to the advancement of the Kingdom of Christ, we are opposed to Statism [ The practice or doctrine of giving centralized government control over economic planning and policy] as man's soteriological [ the theological doctrine of salvation as effected by Jesus] solution. In other words, the state as an institution cannot save man. If Christians are Republican, it should be because republicans work for a constitutional republic where THE RULE OF LAW TRUMPS STATIST POWER [emphasis mine]. In reality, modern republicanism seems far from the paleoconservative [Extremely or stubbornly conservative in political matters] model of yesteryear.
The new conservatism bears a close resemblance to classic liberalism and is equally statist. Political choices today come down to which flavor of Statism you prefer. It's difficult to decry the liberal desire for the bloated welfare state when the other party is pushing for the bloated warfare state. Voting Right or Left is merely a selection in policy, not a vote for the reduction of civil government.
Both republicans as well as Democrats can be Statists. In fact, most of them are. Sometimes a candidate is only Republican because he supports deregulation. He may be socially liberal on other issues. Sometimes a candidate is only a Democrat because he supports the labor movement. He may be socially conservative on issues important to most Christians. Researching the policies of individual candidates is our responsibility as citizens. Don't be surprised if your research yields unpleasant results and you are forced to consider other options - like third parties.
Third Parties
The damage ascribed to third parties is usually isolated to executive offices such as the presidency. It's rare that you hear about a local sheriff or council member who lost votes to a third party candidate. The argument proceeds that a third party removes potential votes from the candidate closer to the third party position. So, a vote for the third party candidate is actually a vote for the opposition.
However, third parties are found on both sides of the aisle, and both mainstream candidates lose votes to those independent parties closest to their political persuasion. But, third parties are quite effective at forcing the mainstream parties to refine their positions. This can only be helpful.
The largest third party is the Libertarian Party. They are also the third largest political party in America. The party began thirty-five years ago and formed out of disillusioned Republicans and Democrats who wanted an alternative to the "lesser of two evils." The Libertarians have been successful at securing a good many seats in local politics, although they've supported a presidential candidate.
Probably the next most newsworthy third party is the Green Party - formed in 2001 as a new version of the Association of State Green Parties. It managed to quickly garner attention by supporting the presidential candidacy of Ralph Nader.
A group fond to our hearts is the newly organized Constitution Party. Its origins lie in the Taxpayers Party that began in 1922 supporting the presidential candidacy of our good friend, Howard Phillips. The Constitution Party platform probably best represents the true desire of most conservative Christians, a return to the type of freedom intended by America's founding fathers - a freedom guarded by the Constitution and one conducive to religious liberty.
As a communications specialist I am always looking for ways that marginalized groups can reach a wider audience. I've studied numerous examples in both business and politics, and I've learned that sometimes you've got to do something unexpected to achieve your desired results. If I had any advise to offer third parties, it would be to focus as many resources as possible on local elections. Although securing the presidency would be the premier endorsement, a third party is not out of the race if it doesn't gain the Oval Office. Third parties can make great strides in local politics. They are also quite effective at educating local constituencies to the important features of their party's platform.
What would be interesting to see is a political party that actually refrained from participating in a presidential election in order to focus its much-needed resources on securing local seats. I'm not sure how effective such a step would be, but it might aid local chapters by allowing them to devote 100 percent of their campaign energies to winning local elections. Local chapters typically have to divide their resources in order to support the national candidate. Either way, third parties are here to stay. I recommend researching such parties because they may represent your sincere convictions much better than a mainstream party.
Reorganizing Republicans
The GOP is clearly losing its luster. The most significant government expansions in recent history have occurred during their leadership. Most disturbing is their push for greater police and surveillance powers in the hands of the state. Their overemphasis upon terrorism is undoing the fabric of freedom in a way far worse than any overseas threat.
But there are those who do not deem it wise to leave the GOP for a third party. If these dedicated conservatives are to prevail, they must rethink their political strategy. Reconstituting a political party as old as the GOP requires a clear statement of purpose. In this case it should still be the reduction of government, only focused upon the Constitution - the standard for balanced power. I recommend organizing a faction within the GOP that emphasizes the importance of the Constitution." They might call themselves "Republicans for the Constitution."
The implications are obvious. First, this Republican wing can create a constitutional emphasis. Second, they can pressure other Republicans to state their position in relation to the Constitution. Third, they can position those who ignore them as unconstitutional or at least compromising.
The subdivision could help bring the Republican platform back to a more traditional conservative position. Chapters of Republicans for the Constitution can then spring up locally all over the nation with a focus upon educating their constituencies in our national principles.
The true battle in America is a battle for the mind. And any battle for the mind must be waged by effective communications. Two of the more useful tools are differentiation and repositioning. You establish your identity, or differentiate yourself, by repositioning your competition. A third party is certainly different, but maybe too different for some. For them, the simple modifier, "Republicans for the Constitution," might be sufficient to creating their desired change.
The Larger Purpose
How we should vote is a difficult question to answer when separated from the larger discussion of the Christian aim in politics. For what purpose are we striving? Is it to only reverse Roe v. Wade? Is it to reduce taxes? Or is it an effort to reduce the size of government? It's none of these things by themselves. Why do we want a reduction in the size of government? Are we proposing anarchy? Certainly not. We want less civil government so that we may exercise more self-government. We want less taxation so that we may establish godly institutions. This larger purpose is rarely discussed.
Returning to our initial text, ruling in the fear of God equates to empowering and equipping citizens for Christian responsibility - teaching them to govern themselves in terms of God's law. It does not mean imposing Biblical law upon an unwilling population. Less civil government should result in more Christian responsibility. This means that my vote is only a minor step in the larger task of exercising dominion through Christian self-government. Therefore, my voting should be directed towards those candidates who enable Christian responsibility. The challenge, of course, is locating those potential leaders. If we don't have them, we should be raising them up. A great many are doing that very thing. This is the importance of Christian education. This is the Chalcedon Foundation.
Copyright 2006, by Christopher J. Ortiz
The Ministry of Chalcedon
Established in 1965, Chalcedon (kal-SEE-dun) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) and Christian educational organization devoted to research, publishing, and promoting Christian reconstruction in all areas of life.
Chalcedon is geared to all who understand that Jesus Christ speaks to the mind as well as to the heart.
We believe that the whole Word of God must be applied to all of life. It is not only our duty as individuals, families and churches to be Christian, but it is also the duty of the state, the school, the arts and sciences, law, economics, and every other sphere to be under Christ the King. Nothing is exempt from His dominion. We must live by His Word, not our own.
Chalcedon is premised on the belief that ideas have consequences. It takes seriously the words of Professor F. A. Hayek:
"It may well be that scholars tend to overestimate the influence which we can exercise on contemporary affairs. But I doubt whether it is possible to overestimate the influence which ideas have in the long run."
Chalcedon's resources are being used to remind Christians of this basic truth: What men believe makes a difference.
"Therefore men should not believe lies, for it is the truth that sets them free" (John 8:32).
Chalcedon's activities include foundational and leadership roles in Christian reconstruction. Our emphasis on the Cultural or Dominion Mandate (Genesis 1:28) and the necessity of a return to Biblical Law has been a crucial factor in the challenge to Humanism by Christians in this country and elsewhere. Chalcedon's involvement in and commitment to Christian education began with its inception when founder Rousas John Rushdoony pinpointed the Christian and home schools as the most important institutions in reversing the influence of secular Humanism.
Our scholars speak regularly at conferences in America and overseas for various churches, schools, and private organizations. Chalcedon also hosts its own regional conferences across America.
In an era of uncertainty and fear of doom, Chalcedon presents a message of victory and envisions our age as a great opportunity for the consistent Biblical believer. A world that is increasingly pessimistic and disillusioned with the failure of secular Humanism is now feeling the impact of Christians who are exercising dominion and reclaiming lost spheres of authority for Christ the King.
copyright © 2005 The Chalcedon Foundation • www.chalcedon.edu • All Rights Reserved Worldwide.
Every Christian could value any organization that has solid Biblical principles and answers to many of life's issues. The Chalcedon Foundation is that kind of an organization.
Though we may not agree with every thing, that any organization or writer says, there is much that we can learn. We can improve our understanding of issues, by being opened and exposed to such penetrating ideas, which the Chalcedon Foundation and the writers that contribute to them give.
By Bill Haymin, 2006
Print
Email
