The Importance of Swearing 3

If you were to ask a modern secular liberal to describe a civil government which requires its public officials to swear an oath to the Trinitarian God of the bible and the bible itself, then the answer would probably be "Theocracy." That would be after he finishes cursing and calling you a Nazi, extremist religious zealot, akin to Isis. But that commitment to a Trinitarian oath to the God of the bible and His word would describe most states at the time the U.S. Constitution's ratification. Does that mean that the states with such oaths were operating as constitutionally approved "theocracies?" Or were these states operating as somehow unconstitutional, in spite of the fact that these same states approved the U.S. Constitution?

So, does the U.S. Constitution require that we the people, we the states, we the nation defy God? If a public official swears to uphold the U.S. Constitution, is that official turning from a godly view of what the civil government should be? What are that official's options? If man's law comports with the principles of God's law, then it is easy - the official obeys the human law. If the law is neither in agreement with God's law nor contrary to it, it may be extraneous, it may be an attempt at salvation by law, but it is not absolute disobedience for the official to enforce it. If the human law is contrary to God's law, that is when the official must make a decision. Is it the obligation of his oath that he obey the human law, no matter what?

The fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Amazing that in two sentences, the foundational principle upon which the Constitution was written could be turned on its head. You wonder how that could be, yet it proves the very concerns the founding fathers expressed. That is, when man gains power, he exploits it to the fullest; he demands power to enforce his will, his idea of what is best for himself and the people he rules. It's the age-old story of princes vying for power, claiming they can "save" the people, gaining the powerful position they seek, then abusing it and lording it over their own people. It's the evil from which the Constitution was supposed to protect us.

John Adams in a speech to the military in 1798 warned his fellow countrymen stating, "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Quotes of the Founding Fathers: The Importance of a Moral Society, http://www.free2pray.info/5founderquotes.html, accessed on Feb. 11, 2016.

James Wilson, Signer of the Constitution; U. S. Supreme Court Justice, "Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is divine. . . . Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other."

Ibid.

Noah Webster, author of the first American Speller and the first Dictionary stated, "The moral principles and precepts contained in the scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitutions and laws. . . All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery, and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible."

Ibid.

Therefore, we can assert that following the Constitution does not mean denying the God of the bible. However, does the emphasis on tolerance of other religions and the failure to include a test clause to prevent public officials from holding a belief in a false god create a gap for religious pluralism, that is, a polytheistic society? Such a polytheistic society means that there will be constant battles, political if not military, over what is the fundamental meaning of the society, and therefore, what is the role of the civil government? In other words, it is not a recipe for peace, it is a recipe for confusion, and we know who the author of confusion is - Satan. Can we do better?