The Cost of Compromise

The Wall Street Journal reports that twenty five percent of Protestants and better that fifty percent of Catholics voted for president-elect Barack Obama. They cast their vote despite his clear anti-life record and the agenda of abortion support and economic enslavement that his party has vowed to support. If you identify yourself among these numbers you have compromised your principles, the Church, and your God.

Can someone explain this?

How does one who lays claim as an heir or heiress to Christ support and put in a place of authority leaders who have promised to forward a culture of death at all costs? Does the sanctity of life, every life, that is a reflection of the imago dei in even the unborn child mean nothing? Holiness in a follower of Christ does not compromise holiness in their actions.

I read Christians who claim that it is Obama and his coalition’s support for the poor that made their compromise valid. They say that government will now do more for the least of these. Sadly, this is not the gospel of Jesus. The fruit by which the orphans and widows are cared for comes from individual disciples transformed by the Holy Spirit into the likeness of Christ . This spiritual fruit is not provided by government. It comes from the capital C Church, the community of saints who together, in their transformed state, seek out the least of these and serve them through the desire of their heart, not a mandate of human authority. Government imposed solutions are nothing more than an abdication of the responsibility given by our Lord. We compromise and we fail.

For those who will respond by saying that God places all of our leaders in their positions of authority, I would ask that they read their bible again. Read particularly in Judges. Not all leaders are in place for the good. Sometimes, leaders and their failure before God cause us to repent and return to Him in our brokenness, despondent and terrorized by the decisions that we have made.

Pray.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “The Cost of Compromise

  1. Unfortunately, I have a feeling that we will find out the cost of that compromise in the coming months. What’s worse, I think there were a whole lot of other reasons not to vote for Obama, especially for Christians. Oh well, I guess we’ll just have to turn over some tables like Christ did in the temple.

  2. “If I want people to stop doing something, the best thing I can do for it to stop it permanently is to tmake it illegal.”

    The above statement is a necessary assumption to get someone from being anti-abortion to being politically “pro-choice”, even to the point of single-issue voting. I don’t believe that is a reliable assumption, and I am therefore fully anti-abortion but am willing to vote pro-choice.

    Look at the Presidents we elected since Roe v. Wade: none of them have made a dramatic difference one way or another. I don’t think that there is a way to prove that criminalizing abortion is the best way to decrease abortions in the long run. Could it be that investing more heavily into conversing with American culture (rather than coercion through legislation) and loving with Christ-like grace the women of unwanted pregnancy would be more likely to lead our nation into a moral shift away from abortion? In fact, the criminalization of abortion may lead, ultimately, to the long-term INCREASE of abortions when compared to the efforts of education and counseling, because the criminalization will be too sudden and radical for American culture to digest.

    Consider this hypothetical. Path A: at time zero, I begin pursuing educational efforts and raise up an army of persuasive volunteers, ready to not just vote against abortion but to commit their resources to convince, love, provide, and give freely to people struggling with abortion.

    Path B: at time zero, legislates against abortion, leading to a spike of “black market” abortions and fleeing to other countries where abortion remains legal, potentially ultimately leading to a collapse and reversal of the legislation and a backlash response that cements abortion as eminently acceptable in American morality.

    I posit that in Path A, the number of abortions will be much lower over the ten year period than in Path B, and that at the end of Path A, the electorate may be ready to themselves enact with popular support anti-abortion legislation. In Path B, the number of abortions in that ten year period may be much higher, and at the end of Path B, you have a people suspicious and averse to regulating abortion legislatively.

    As of right now, I believe in a pro-choice solution to the total reduction of abortions because I think the most lasting change is the change people CHOOSE. Thus, I believe a pro-choice culture and environment enables the persuasion for people to choose against abortion to quicken and thrive.

    (By the way, I have not heard President-elect Obama renounce abortion as murder, and I seriously disagree with his personal view on this. But he was not running to be my spiritual or moral leader; he ran for the office of president. Morality DOES matter, but it is moral to vote for someone who will make the biggest overall positive impact, not to vote on an isolated moral issue whose landscape has not significantly changed in the last 30 years of presidents.)

  3. Brian – I believe you’re right; we will soon find out the cost of our compromise and many are going to balk at the price. The trouble will be that the decision cannot be reversed and everyone will be forced to live with it. Will we have the courage to confront when we didn’t have the strength to choose in the first place?

  4. anakainosis – a very thoughtful contribution that I appreciate very much. You are right in saying that morality cannot be legislated. Change in human behavior comes from one on one relationship in which we convince one another of the correctness of a certain position. Any changes in abortion practice and law will be derived from this rather than the long shot hope of legal change.

    The compromise of which I spoke is a result of the weak doctrine that many Christians hold. They do not posses a sound set of holiness principles that guide their decision making and actions. If God’s principles are your principles, your decisions will align with the purposes of God. If the person you are electing demonstrates that he will work actively in a way contrary to God’s principles, your choice is simple. Compromise is not an option.

Comments are closed.