“Men like Rev. Todd Bordow, pastor of an Orthodox Presbyterian congregation in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, are saying this about bestiality:
“Not being a theonomist or theocrat, I do not believe it is the state’s role to enforce religion or Christian morality. So allowing something legally is not the same as endorsing it morally. I don’t want the state punishing people for practicing homosexuality. Other Christians disagree. Fine. That’s allowed. That is the distinction. Another example – beastiality (sic) is a grotesque sin and obviously if a professing member engages in it he is subject to church discipline. But as one who leans libertarian in my politics, I would see problems with the state trying to enforce it; not wanting the state involved at all in such personal practices; I’m content to let the Lord judge it when he returns. A fellow church member might advocate for beastiality (sic) laws. Neither would be in sin whatever the side of the debate. Now if the lines are blurry in these disctinctions,(sic) that is always true in pastoral ministry dealing with real people in real cases in this fallen world.”
A.) If the State is not to enforce Christian morality whose morality should it enforce? Morality is an inescapable category. That States have to do with enforcing morality is seen in the legislation States advance and then enforce. All legislation is enforced morality. To say that it is not the State’s role to enforce Christian morality means it is the State’s role to enforce some other religions morality. There is no morality from nowhere. All morality that is enforced is the morality of some religion
B.) If it really is the case that that R2K doesn’t believe that it is the State’s role to enforce Christian morality then it is fair to ask if, whether in a R2K social order, the State should enforce laws against, murder, rape, incest, or theft. Really, any moral morality is, by definition, Christian. There is no genuine morality that isn’t Christian because apart from Christian presuppositions morality is a myth.
C.) If we are not to punish people for Sodomy, then why punish people for any sexual deviancy?
D.) Libertarian politics is a natural fit to ana-baptist theology.
E.) Would Todd Bordow be content to let the Lord, upon His return, judge the sin of a pervert homosexual sodomizing his son?
F.) Understand that what “Rev.” Bordow is advocating is a Church where two members, who both putatively love Jesus, contending in the public square for different positions regarding Bestiality. Some Church members will be pro laws allowing Bestiality. Some members will be anti laws allowing Bestiality. Neither are challenged by the Church. Indeed the Church goes out of its way to say anything on the subject. The State and the Church, according to “Rev.” Bordow should be morally indifferent to these Biblically named crimes.
He said, “So allowing something legally is not the same as endorsing it morally.”
This pastor does not have a very good grip on what law is. Concerning.
Good article.
Church Retreat
Church retreat to Tarshish
Specially prepared fish
Far from the madding crowd
Dominion disallowed
Bret,
Some within the R2K crowd actually believe that a vote is not a verb, or an action, or sanctionable by a local session.
Witness this, by a prominent R2Ker, though not an officer, so basically not accountable for what he says, cowards way out.
The only thing I can imagine is that you think to behave politically is to behave personally. But when I vote for or against something, or even abstain from any political involvement, I’m not behaving personally morally but politically (or apolitically as the case may be). This is the part where you conflate morality and politics, but do you really think that when I vote against a candidate I am behaving personally or morally against him in the same way I act against a man when I steal his money? On that reasoning there is no way to tell someone who I vote against it was nothing personal but a principled disagreement–everything is personal, which might explain you taking 2k push back so personally.
Another cowards way out in his view, no one would challenge him with a sin against his opponent, “behaving personally or morally against him”. But, what if your opponent is voting pro-abortion in a straight up and down vote. Is that just a vote against your opponent or is it a moral vote pro or con abortion
http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/chapter-1-part-one-the-law-gospel-distinction/#comment-95274
Jerry,
If someone running for a office thinks it is ok to pick Peter’s pocket to give to Paul and if I am either Peter or Paul … well, yes, voting is personal.
These people are Zombies.
Zombies…
A very good description.
I imagine that if we are to be held accountable for idle words, votes are not insignificant.
One irony here is that men such as Pastor Bordow seem to be convinced that a proud “stand” taken under the name of “liberty”, will somehow promote individual responsibility,
when in fact all it does is propagate confusion, complacency, irrationality, and, the much desired, silence of the church. It seems this type doctrine is a sublime form of the divisive spirit the scripture warns about. God has already done the dividing, we simply need to be faithful to proclaiming it. When one takes a position such as his, it is nothing more than bowing to the statist pressure. His example of not taking a position “is” the doctrine of silence that his followers want to hear, and wish to model. The fact that these doctrines are taught by pastors, under the guise of liberty nonetheless, makes them a tree, twice dead. I wonder if he holds as fast to our constitution as he does to God’s law?
The Church Ironic
The church ironic now proposing,
On it’s members speech foreclosing,
Schizophrenically they reason,
God’s holy word proclaimed is treason.
Backing up their thought absurd,
Straight-faced proclaim God’s holy word.
Trees without Fruit
Trees without fruit uprooted twice dead
Clouds without rain is what the Lord said.
Wild waves of the sea foaming up shame,
Wandering stars they are to blame.
Jude 12,13: “These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds [they are] without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the root ; Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.”