Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Can a Christian be a Libertarian?

This debate seems to have popped up around me lately. In my last blog post, I made the point that although I am Christian (Reformed and Complementarian) and a Libertarian, if someone wants to have an abortion, that is their right. I don’t condone the action and don’t ask me to participate, but I won’t stop them.

Dr. Albert Mohler would have difficulty with that position. For those not in the know, Dr. Mohler is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and the Joseph Emerson Brown Professor of Christian Theology. In his recent podcast, The Briefing, Dr. Mohler makes the following relevant observations regarding the death of David Kock.

“The important thing to recognize here is that the traditional conservative movement in the United States has consisted of three parts for the last several decades. That would include big business and corporate interests and then the libertarian movement and then Christian conservatives. Those three have been necessary components of that larger conservative movement, although the worldview of those three components is not exactly the same.”

“In the news story on David Koch's death in the Wall Street Journal, the reporters write, "Although he was a liberal on social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage, Mr. Koch used his fortune to support conservative causes such as lower taxes, free trade, and fewer regulations." It also notes, "He was the Libertarian Party's 1980 vice-presidential candidate." Again, the Libertarian Party, the Libertarian Movement. And here's where we need to recognize something very, very important. David Koch was often identified as a conservative. But the Wall Street Journal says even as he was a conservative on fiscal matters, he was a liberal on social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage."

"This is where the Christian worldview reminds us that when you are looking at the dignity of human life and the structures of human life given to us in creation that allow for human happiness and human flourishing, then you're not a conservative if you argue for or allow for the revolution and rejection of both human dignity when it comes to the life of the unborn and the dignity and sanctity of marriage. My final observation based upon a biblical worldview is this. If you do not recognize the full measure of human dignity and if you do not recognize the sanctity of marriage as given to us by the Creator, then there will be virtually nothing left to conserve, and that includes free enterprise.” (Emphasis added).
(For the entire podcast or a transcript of the relevant portion, I will provide this link:

The purpose of my blogs is to express my views and not as a forum for debate, but a reader also questioned my position as it relates to Matthew 18. (Which I will ask the reader to review on his own- it is simply too long to reprint for my purposes here).
I have long realized that there may be some confusion or perceived inconsistency between my beliefs. It was always my intention to address the intersection of my faith and my politics. Now is as good a time as any.

I cannot compare my bona fides to those of Dr. Mohler. His opinions are his and they are well-reasoned. I concede that Dr. Mohler is correct that Libertarianism may not align with traditional Christianity. I can, however, raise what I feel to be a cogent and persuasive argument for my position. Libertarianism and traditional, conservative Christianity are not mutually exclusive.
I begin with the Westminster Confession of Faith of which I am familiar as a former Presbyterian (and perhaps soon to be Reformed Baptist). I recognize that the Westminster Confession of Faith is not as persuasive as the Bible, but since it is based upon Reformed biblical precepts, I believe that it provides a sound introduction to my reasoning.

Chapter V, Paragraph 1 provides that “God, the great Creator of all things, doth uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, actions, and things, from the greatest even to the least, by his most wise and holy providence, according to his infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of his own will, to the praise of the glory of his wisdom, power, justice, goodness, and mercy.” (footnotes omitted although I encourage you to check the footnotes for the Biblical texts that support this and the following citations).

I am completely unable to do anything without the prior action of God. This does not relieve me of free-will, nor does this relieve me of my responsibility to spread the Gospel. Furthermore, Chapter III provides that “some men are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others fore-ordained to everlasting death.” Now, if you are not a believer in the Reformed concept of pre-destination, stop reading now and we will just continue to disagree. (I will not debate Reformed theology when many theologians more capable than I can make the position more clearly than I).

If you are a Reformed-kind of person, you can see where I am going. I cannot control what another person is going to do. I can only spread the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. I maintain my principles and share them, but I cannot force them on you. Only God can convict the heart of mankind. I am not responsible for your sin unless I propogate that sin. If you are ordained to accept God’s Word, it is solely through the actions of God.

Assuming that the reader is inclined to accept, if not fully agree, with my position, the reader may raise another question: Why wouldn’t I support laws that would further the Kingdom?
As I see it, there is one very dangerous consequence to this action. You cannot legislate God. It would change the government of these United States into a Theocracy. For those of you who believe this is a good idea, you must have forgotten about the Old Testament. David and Solomon, both held up as the best of the Kings fell short of a Godly ideal. It didn’t work out so great then… why would today be any better? Short answer- it would not. Man is totally incapable of following God’s Word and we would very quickly fall into the risk of false idols and teachings.
Thus, I believe that Libertarianism is the best and most consistent response for me. Christians continue to spread the Good News. God works in the hearts of all. I cannot control, but I can use my God-given talents to persuade. You are free to take the actions that you feel led to take- less government involvement in the day-to-day life of everyone. And in the meantime, I look forward to the perfect Rule of God in Heaven.

Thursday, September 12, 2019

The Christian Attorney and Free Speech

The Christ-professing attorney may soon become extinct.  Once again, the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is recommending a change to the Rules of Professional Conduct.  Yes, attorneys have Rules of Professional Conduct.

The proposed amendment "is intended to make it professional misconduct for a lawyer, in the practice of law, to intentionally manifest bias or prejudice, or engage in harassment or discrimination."  This proposal was made by the Disciplinary Board in the belief that, "it is in the best interests of the profession and the public to amend its rules to formally disapprove the conduct of any lawyer" who engages in such conduct.  In a curious turn, the Board continues that this "does not limit the ability of the lawyer to accept, decline or withdraw from a representation in accordance with Rule 1.16." 

Now, I must admit- I'm a libertarian kind-of guy (person?). I want to be free to live my life, and I want you to be free to live yours. I am pro-life, but if you are not- that is your right. I disagree, but I won't stop you. All I ask is that you don't ask me to participate.

I am, what I am now informed, is a cis-gendered male. Fine. I prefer "male." I don't really care how you identify. You may torture the language in your choice of pronoun and I will do my best to accommodate you. 

I am also a God-inspired-the-whole-Bible believing Christian who affirms that "By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life, and others fore-ordained to everlasting death." (Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter III, paragraph 3).  I have QUILTBAG (I prefer this acronym over the LGBT...) friends and acquaintances. I love them as fellow humans, but they may undertake actions of which I cannot approve. I also have cis-gendered friends, but they may undertake actions of which I cannot approve. In these cases, I may not- in good faith- represent them.  My life is already one of sin- but I don't need to flaunt these before God.

The Disciplinary Board wants me to take my faith and sacrifice it on the altar of secularism. Or at least not profess my faith too loudly, lest it make someone feel harassed or discriminated against. This seems like letting the camel's nose under the tent. As an attorney, I know there is a difference between a rule and the interpretation of the rule. Once my ability to express myself as a Christian is restricted, it will soon be gone.