The Christian Voter

Sermon Notes, Sunday, Oct. 25, 2020 Our collect for this Sunday begins: Almighty and everlasting God, you govern all things both in heaven and on earth... At this time, when governance is the preoccupation of every American citizen, with all the world watching us, how appropriate to be reminded that Almighty God is the true governor of heaven and earth. Whomever we elect as the leader of our nation, whomever we elect to assist in governing this country, this state, this city and this county, whatever issues we decide to support or reject, we cannot and will never supplant the Almighty and everlasting God as the governor of all things. We're reminded almost daily that this is a pivotal election for our nation. The stakes have never been higher. Our decision on November 3 will have a huge effect on our direction as a free people for generations to come. But be assured, no matter the outcome, our choices cannot supplant God's authority and rule over his creation, and our beloved nation. It is not only presumptuous to think so, but it is idolatrous to try. As Christians, we live by certain principles that we cannot ignore when we decide how to vote. We cannot set aside these principles. Nor would we want to. Because they provide the guidance we desperately need to make the difficult choices we face. These principles are grounded in scripture and in our unique American constitutional form of government. We've already acknowledged the first principle: the sovereignty of God. It is the over-riding principle that determines all the others. Only because God is sovereign do we dare to entrust the authority of government to sinful mankind. The second principle is the sanctity of human life. This too proceeds from the sovereignty of God who creates all life and endows it with sacredness. And the third is the separation of church and state. It's not a Biblical principle, but one that allows faith to coexist with the culture in a mutually flourishing way. These are not the only principles we adhere to, but they are the key ones in play this year. So let's be sure we understand how they apply to this election. The sovereignty of God is dramatically stated by Jesus in our gospel reading today from Matthew. The pharisees are making a last ditch effort to trap Jesus after failing several times to get him to say something incriminating. They ask him, "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" Their goal is to create division and distortion. To select any one of the ten commandments as greater than another is to elevate some aspect of God's nature over the others. The commandments in total represent God's character in relation to mankind. Is his compassion of more importance than his sense of justice? Is his Holiness more praiseworthy than his creative capacity? To make any choice would subject Jesus to the competition of the scholars and scribes, theological squabbles unbecoming of the Son of God. Jesus' answer puts things into the proper perspective. "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself." God is sovereign and deserves our total worship. Jesus then reinforces the lesson by quoting from Psalm 101, verse 1 to show that even David, the greatest King of Israel, was subservient to the Lord. Because he is sovereign, kings and governments bow to him and serve his purpose. When we apply that principle to an election, we should ask which candidate or party acknowledges God's sovereignty by word and deed. Since this is rarely discussed or debated, we need to look at the stands or platforms of the candidates to see are demonstrated. Is there is a heartfelt subservience and humility before God in their speech? Is there a prayerful searching out of God's purpose? Do they publicly acknowledge a dependence on God? Are the voices of people of God consulted? By deed if programs they call for meet genuine needs and are not for political gain only. Does the party's platform look forward to a nation under God or a nation apart from God? Is there a sense of the sacred? Is God or man thanked for our nation's blessings? Are our nation's blessings even acknowledged? It is too bad that none of the debates or town hall meetings have asked the candidates to talk about their relationship with God but that is in itself an indication of what is at stake in this election. As a nation God has become largely irrelevant and we should be afraid of that and repent for letting that happen on our watch. The second principle is the sanctity of life. Again the sanctity of life is grounded in scripture. Jesus said, "I come to bring life and bring it abundantly." In the verse before our reading today, Matthew 22:32, Jesus reminds his accusers of who God said he is to them, "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead but of the living." Life is sacred to God. It should be so also to us. And to the people we elect to lead us. Abortion is where the sanctity of life is most challenged today. Many would say that the sanctity of life is determined also by the quality of life, that life's sacredness is not honored when life is squalid or abused. That is true. If right to life is the only measure of the sacredness of life, our thinking is too shallow, and we miss much great prophetic teaching about providing for the poor and disabled. But if life is not allowed to begin, quality of life is irrelevant. As Christian voters sanctity of life in the womb must of first importance to us. It's not just one issue among many. The third principle is the separation of church and state. As I said earlier, this principle allows our faith to coexist with society. The roots of this principle are implicit if not expressly written into our constitution. The founding fathers saw two threats to the freedom and liberty they sought in our nation. The threat from the church came when the church tried to impose its values onto the life of the country. This happened in England, more than once. The results were disastrous every time. When the Cromwellians took over the government, non-puritans were persecuted. Some to death. When Mary Queen of Scots held the throne, non-Catholics met the same fate. There had to be a wall between church and state to protect the state from becoming an arm of the church. Think of the Spanish Inquisition as the vilest example of where this could lead. The other threat came if the state overwhelmed the church by legislating it into irrelevance or non-existence. The state as the legal representation of the culture has a responsibility to the church to see that religion may be freely practiced. The state could not be allowed to decree which, if any, church was sanctioned at the expense of others. Freedom of religion meant freedom to practice whatever religion one chose without fear of official reprisal. The principle of the separation of church and state has served us well for many years. But it's threatened today. The threat is not that the church will dictate to the state, but that government, acting as the voice of the culture, will restrict the faith and practice of the church. The church needs to have the right to criticize and sometimes condemn cultural practices that are morally wrong. If the state representing the culture tells the church they can no longer do so without breaking the law, then the separation of church and state has been violated. Tragically, many churches have acceded to this and turned their back on orthodox belief to accommodate the new cultural norm. The Anglican Church in North America was formed in reaction to this culturalization of the faith once received. The Bible sets the moral standard for Christian behavior that applies as good practice for all of society. If the culture wants something different, and the state sides with culture, we have disorder and conflict. The arena is sexual expression. The result is moral confusion: from a redefinition of marriage to sexual reidentification to inappropriate sex education in schools. The state says this is now the law and the church had better get agree with it. We're not to this point yet, but it is a looming storm cloud for believers. It's coming. We have a choice in this election to reassert a proper church and state separation or continue to see the voice of the church diminished. My friends, I am not telling you how to vote. I'm not telling you how I voted. I am saying that as a Christian our vote must be cast from our Christianity. And when we see the candidates and consider the issues through the lens of faith, we will have done our part if we vote accordingly. May the sovereign God bless our nation. Amen.