Politics is not the answer, Jesus Christ is.
Politics has become the religion of the left and so many followers of Jesus have avoided politics as though it were sinful or dirty.
This too is wrong. We are to be the light of the world. - THE WHOLE WORLD.
Paul tells us in 1 Timothy 2:
First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time. For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying) as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth. Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and dissension.
If there is one part of our society that is dark and needs the light of Jesus Christ, it is in politics/government. Please be praying for "kings and all who are in authority" in America.
These articles, opinions and essays below are included in this spirit. Please enjoy and use them as a resource in determining your role as a Citizen of both the kingdom of God and of the United States.
by Ron Prentice californiafamilcouncily.org
Voting as Worship?
“Why should I vote?” What is the benefit of voting when a single judge has the power to render every vote null and void?
Why vote? There are many reasons, but the best reason that I can give you is that voting is an act of worship.
Consider these scriptures:
· Isaiah 60:21 – Yours, O LORD, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor, for everything in heaven and earth is yours.
· Romans 11:36 – For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever!
· I Corinthians 10:31 – So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.
When we vote, all who know God have the opportunity to bring glory to God. Voting can be an act of service to God, and thus, worship of Him. I’m not a scholar in the languages of Hebrew and Greek, but my studies inform me that several words in those biblical languages mean both “worship” and “service,” and it should be understood that in doing one, we are also doing the other!
A worldview that is centered on the living God and the biblical text takes in all areas of life. Real faith is all encompassing and cannot be compartmentalized. As God’s people, we have the opportunity to bring glory to Him in every thought and deed, including voting.
However, choosing to participate in the voting process with the motivation to glorify God does not guarantee godly results. That is the business of a sovereign God. Our business is to strive to glorify God in all things, “for everything in heaven and earth is” His.
Voting is just one way that we “walk our talk,” worshipping God and proclaiming His glory. When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen:
"Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!"
"Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!"
Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples!"
"I tell you," he replied, "if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out." – Luke 19:37-40
A Sacred Duty: Why Christians Must Vote
This fall Americans will go to the polls and elect a president—one who will influence the direction in which the country’s moral compass will point. But according to a recent report, only a third of evangelical Christians—those who ought to be most concerned with moral values—will actually vote. These are shocking figures. Of all people, we ought to vote, not just as a right, but as a spiritual duty. All it takes is to lose your right to vote, as I did once, to know how precious that is.
The Rev. Curt Young in Silver Spring , Maryland, told his flock just before the last presidential election why they needed to vote. Just a short distance from his church is the Capitol, the Supreme Court, and the offices of Congress. Young wanted his congregation to know that the Scriptures have a lot to say about our responsibility to choose leaders.It was such a good message that I want to offer you a part of it today. In Deuteronomy 16, he pointed out, Moses tells the Israelites: “You shall appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes . . . and they shall judge the people.”
The term judges and officials covered all government leaders. Besides hearing cases and rendering decisions, they set public policy and could even call out the military in a crisis. Given these heavy responsibilities, the criteria for selecting judges were strict. They were to be men who feared God, who were committed to the truth, and who hated dishonest gain. And they were warned: “You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality; and you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe . . . subverts the cause of the righteous.”
When Moses commanded the Israelites to appoint God-fearing leaders, he wasn’t just talking to a handful of citizens who felt like getting involved. Young noted that the command was directed to all citizens. And modern Christians are under the same obligation to choose leaders who love justice.
Ironically, the Scriptures warn that if we value prosperity over justice, we’ll end up losing both. Moses told the Israelites to “follow justice and justice alone.” He follows this command with a promise that they will “live and possess the land the Lord your God is giving you.” In other words, if you want prosperity, choose leaders committed to justice. In the Old Testament, God often sent people to find particular individuals to lead. Today, in our modern democracy, free citizens act as God’s agents for choosing leaders, and we do it by voting.
So there’s no excuse for those who don’t take the trouble to vote. But to vote, you have to register.
While polls show that Christian young people care about the issues that have an impact on our lives, most of them are not registered to vote. That means they are left out of the political process. So register today, get young people to register, and then, in November, get out of the pews and into the polling booth to perform our sacred duty of choosing our leaders.
Learn more about what we do
Choosing Evil vs. Limiting Evil
What happens if two opposing candidates both support abortion?
First of all, refrain from putting any labels or endorsements on anyone. Don't call them anything. Or, if you prefer, call them both pro-abortion. Then just ask a simple question: Which of the two candidates will do less harm to unborn children if elected?
For example, is either of the candidates willing at least to ban partial-birth abortion? Is either of them willing to put up some roadblocks to free and easy abortion? Will either support parental notification, or parental consent, or waiting periods? Has either of them expressed a desire to ban late-term abortion, or to support pregnancy assistance centers? How about stricter regulation of abortion facilities? Has either candidate expressed support for that idea? Nobody is saying that's the final goal. But ask these questions just to see whether you can see any benefit of one of the candidates above the other.
One of the two of them will be elected; there is no question about that. So you are not free right now, in this race, to really choose the candidate you want. Forces beyond your control have already limited your choices. Whichever way the election goes, the one elected will not have the position we want elected officials to have on abortion.
In this case, it is morally acceptable to vote for the candidate who will do less harm. This is not "choosing the lesser of two evils." We may never choose evil. But in the case described above, you would not be choosing evil. Why? Because in choosing to limit an evil, you are choosing a good.
You oppose the evil of abortion, in every circumstance, no matter what. You know that no law can legitimize even a single abortion, ever. If the candidate thinks some abortion is OK, you don't agree.
But by your vote, you can keep the worse person out. And trying to do that is not only legitimate, but good. Some may think it's not the best strategy. But if your question is whether it is morally permissible to vote for the better of two bad candidates, the answer -- in the case described above -- is yes.
Cardinal John O’Connor, in a special booklet on abortion, once wrote about this problem, “Suppose all candidates support ‘abortion rights’? … One could try to determine whether the position of one candidate is less supportive of abortion than that of another. Other things being equal, one might then morally vote for a less supportive position. If all candidates support "abortion rights" equally, one might vote for the candidate who seems best in regard to other issues” (1990, “Abortion: Questions and Answers”).
In this context, the question also arises as to whether one is required to vote for a third candidate who does not have a strong base of support but does have the right position. The answer is, no, you are not required to vote for this candidate. The reason is that your vote is not a canonization of a candidate. It is a transfer of power. You have to look concretely at where the power is really going to be transferred, and use your vote not to make a statement but to help bring about the most acceptable results under the circumstances.
Of course, our conscience may be telling us, “Don’t say it’s impossible to elect the candidate who doesn’t have a strong base of support.” Of course, it is possible to elect almost anyone if the necessary work is done within the necessary time. God doesn’t ask us to base our choices on “the possibility of miracles,” but rather on solid human reason. The point is that if there’s a relatively unknown but excellent candidate, the time to begin building up support for that person’s candidacy is several years before the election, not several months. What you have to ask as Election Day draws near is whether your vote is needed to keep the worse candidate (of the two, less acceptable but more realistic choices) out of office.
USE YOUR VOTE TO BLOCK THE WORST CANDIDATE. THEN YOU WILL HAVE DONE THE MOST GOOD WITHIN YOUR POWER.
essay excerpts by Fr Frank Pravone of Priests for Life
VOTING FOR A MIRACLE
The Lessor of two Evils
May I encourage you to read again the essay by Fr Frank Pravone of Priests for Life. In it he quotes Cardinal O'Conner. Neither one of them agree about voting for a third candidate just because they are closer to your values.
Please consider these points again:
1. There are two teams on the court. Our political system is built that way. One of the two major candidates is going to win, not the third-party candidate. If you vote for a team up in the stands, you waste your vote AT BEST, AT WORST you hinder those trying to elect the best of the two choices available. (There are other factors to consider than just being pro-life.)
2. Fr. Pravone "use your vote not to make a statement but to help bring about the most acceptable results under the circumstances."
3. Fr. Pravone "God doesn’t ask us to base our choices on “the possibility of miracles,” but rather on solid human reason."
4. Feeling good about your vote and accomplishing good can be very far apart. Because, by voting for a third party candidate....you have just yielded one vote to the side you oppose most and made it harder for everyone else who is struggling mightily to gain the most conservative lawmakers possible.
5. Failing to cast a vote for a viable candidate means you are willing to accept the worst possible outcome, and I just don't see that as a defensible Godly position.
5. I agree we should not compromise Godly Principals for some potential political gain. But one of the two main candidates will win. Fr. Pravone states clearly "we are still responsible for the consequences of not voting, just as we are responsible for the consequences of voting."
6. Fr. Pravone - It is morally acceptable to vote for the candidate who will do less harm. This is not "choosing the lesser of two evils." In this case you would not be choosing evil. Why? Because in choosing to limit an evil, you are choosing a good.
7. In the final analysis we can never ask anyone to vote against their conscience.
You’re voting for more than individual candidates; you’re voting for which party sets the agenda.