Many liberals, particularly on the
Democratic side of the aisle, are wringing their hands over the fact that some
of the top picks to replace Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court are devout
people of faith.
One
of these picks, Amy Barrett, was grilled about her faith when she was chosen to
sit on the seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Senator Diane Feinstein expressed
dismay over the fact that when she reads Barrett’s speeches, “The conclusion
one draws is that the dogma lives loudly in you.”
The insinuation of Feinstein and her
Democrat colleagues was that Barrett's strong faith disqualified her from
serving as a federal judge. Their anti-faith attack revealed a tragic departure from America’s founding
generation where faith was protected and considered an asset to good
government.
The Faith of the First Chief Justice
If Feinstein was concerned about
Barrett, she would be doubly concerned with John Jay the first Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court. Jay (1745-1829) was one of the authors of The Federalist Papers and served as
President of the Continental Congress from 1778-79. In
1789 George Washington appointed
him as the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, a post he held until
1795 when he resigned to serve as Governor of New York.
Jay was a devout Christian whose
faith “lived loudly” in him, enough to disqualify him in the eyes of our
modern, liberal senators. After all, he once publicly declared,
Unto
Him who is the author and giver of all good, I render sincere and humble thanks
for His manifold and unmerited blessings, and especially for our redemption and
salvation by His beloved Son. Blessed be His holy name.
The Faith of the Second Chief
Justice
John Marshall (1755-1835) who succeeded John Jay as Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court, would also be rejected by Feinstein and her
cohorts. Nonetheless, many consider him to be the greatest Chief Justice the Court has
known, even though, like Jay, his faith “lived loudly” in him.
In
one of his writings, Marshall clearly states
what every Founding Father
assumed: The founding documents and
institutions on which the nation was formed presuppose a faith commitment to
Christian principles and values. He wrote,
No
person, I believe, questions the importance of religion in the happiness of man
even during his existence in this world. The American population is entirely
Christian, and with us Christianity
and religion are identified. It would be strange, indeed, if with such a
people, our institutions did not presuppose Christianity, and did not refer to
it, and exhibit relations with it.
That
Marshall saw no problem with expressions of faith in government is demonstrated
by the fact that he ordered the Supreme Court facilities be made available to a
congregation for their Sunday gatherings. So, each Sunday, the singing of
Christian hymns and the preaching of God’s Word could be heard ringing through
the chambers of both the House of Representatives and the Supreme Court.
What
Marshall considered “strange” has become the norm with the modern Democrat
party. How far removed from the founding generation are Senator Diane Feinstein
and those who share her ideology!
Faith
in God Necessary for a Stable Court and Society
The Founders considered faith in God a great asset
because it meant the person acknowledged a transcendent moral guide that is
predictable, reasonable, fair and applicable across the board. An atheist or
agnostic, on the other hand, is left to his own finite, subjective opinions, subject
to the sway of whatever might be faddish or culturally popular at a given time.
James Madison expressed the view of the founding generation when he said, “Before any man can be considered as a
member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of
the Universe.”
Indeed, although there was tolerance for those of
various faiths, there was a hostility toward atheism in early America. This was
born out when a judge in the court of Chester
County in the state of New York, threw out the testimony of a witness when the
witness admitted he did not believe in the existence of God.
The judge said that by denying the
existence of God, the witness had “destroyed all the confidence of the court in
what he was about to say.” He went on to say that it was the first time he had
met someone who did not acknowledge the existence of God, and that he knew of no case in a Christian country where a witness had
been permitted to testify without such belief.
This event was recorded by the French sociologist,
Alexis de Tocqueville, and occurred during his visit to America in 1831. Tocqueville said the incident was merely noted in the
newspaper without further comment.
The
Founders Would be Appalled at Feinstein and Her Colleagues
Yes, belief in the all-knowing, all-powerful God of
the Bible—the Moral Governor of the Universe--was considered an important asset
for judicial appointees and all public officials by the founding generation.
Washington, Jefferson, Franklin and Madison would all be astonished and
appalled at the modern hostility towards people of faith that is so rampant in our nation today.
Dr. Eddie L. Hyatt is on a mission to reconnect America with her severed Christian roots and help ignite another national, spiritual awakening that will sweep across the land. His books on the topic can be found on Amazon and on his website at www.eddiehyatt.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment