Pastor is on vacation so yesterday one of his assistants preached the sermon. It was based on the line "Thy Kingdom Come" in the Lord's Prayer (Our Father for Catholics).
While he went into a lot of detail and rummaging around in the Bible, in my opinion he left out the most important thing. And that is how do you relate to talk of kings and kingdoms in a country that threw off the yolk of kingship more than 200 years ago? Especially with a major election only a few weeks away!
The problem with kingship, Bible-style, is that it contradicts a major founding principle of the United States that "governments derive their powers from the just consent of the governed." The Constitution starts out "We the People." Fortunately most people in the pew don't think about these things too deeply, otherwise there might be trouble.
You see, kings today are not what they used to be. Should either Charles or William come to the British throne, what will their job be as king? Divine right went out centuries ago. Kings nowadays (queens too) are mostly figureheads. This is not what the Bible talks about when it talks about kingship, yet I dare say this is probably what most Americans think about when they think about kingship.
What if someone would have stood up during that sermon and said, "I am an American. I don't bow to kings of any type. I choose my leaders and they govern me only with my just consent." That would have brought things to a screeching halt.
I used to know a preacher who liked to say that "Rebellion is from the evil one." And certainly such an attitude would be considered rebellion. You are definitely NOT to think of yourself as God's equal. That was Satan's sin. Never mind that we live in a country founded on rebellion. That we glorify it every Independence Day. That our national anthem glorifies the war we fought to be free.
There is a profound disconnect between the two ideas. And there are some Christians, called Dominionists, who realize this and are actively working to overthrow the separation of church and state and establish their version of theocracy. They are not talked about much in the Christian world in the same way that opposition to anti-bullying legislation by so-called family organizations aren't talked about ether in these circles. It's considered bad form to raise the subject. But those of us on the outside--we are aware and we do know about these things.
When John F. Kennedy was running for President, his Catholic faith was a source of concern to many non-Catholics who felt that it would be opening the door for the Pope to take over. He had to reassure them that that wouldn't happen. I feel that that was a valid question, and I would ask the same of any one else running for President--where do you stand if it comes to a conflict between the Constitution and your beliefs? While I don't think anyone should be barred from being President because of their religion (in fact the Constitution expressly prohibits that!) I do think some hard questions ought to be asked.
While he went into a lot of detail and rummaging around in the Bible, in my opinion he left out the most important thing. And that is how do you relate to talk of kings and kingdoms in a country that threw off the yolk of kingship more than 200 years ago? Especially with a major election only a few weeks away!
The problem with kingship, Bible-style, is that it contradicts a major founding principle of the United States that "governments derive their powers from the just consent of the governed." The Constitution starts out "We the People." Fortunately most people in the pew don't think about these things too deeply, otherwise there might be trouble.
You see, kings today are not what they used to be. Should either Charles or William come to the British throne, what will their job be as king? Divine right went out centuries ago. Kings nowadays (queens too) are mostly figureheads. This is not what the Bible talks about when it talks about kingship, yet I dare say this is probably what most Americans think about when they think about kingship.
What if someone would have stood up during that sermon and said, "I am an American. I don't bow to kings of any type. I choose my leaders and they govern me only with my just consent." That would have brought things to a screeching halt.
I used to know a preacher who liked to say that "Rebellion is from the evil one." And certainly such an attitude would be considered rebellion. You are definitely NOT to think of yourself as God's equal. That was Satan's sin. Never mind that we live in a country founded on rebellion. That we glorify it every Independence Day. That our national anthem glorifies the war we fought to be free.
There is a profound disconnect between the two ideas. And there are some Christians, called Dominionists, who realize this and are actively working to overthrow the separation of church and state and establish their version of theocracy. They are not talked about much in the Christian world in the same way that opposition to anti-bullying legislation by so-called family organizations aren't talked about ether in these circles. It's considered bad form to raise the subject. But those of us on the outside--we are aware and we do know about these things.
When John F. Kennedy was running for President, his Catholic faith was a source of concern to many non-Catholics who felt that it would be opening the door for the Pope to take over. He had to reassure them that that wouldn't happen. I feel that that was a valid question, and I would ask the same of any one else running for President--where do you stand if it comes to a conflict between the Constitution and your beliefs? While I don't think anyone should be barred from being President because of their religion (in fact the Constitution expressly prohibits that!) I do think some hard questions ought to be asked.
