Sermon response to Obergefell vs. Hodges

When Thomas Jefferson heard about the compromise of 1820 he responded by saying,

“this momentous question, like a fire bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the Union.”

Knell — The sound of a bell, especially when rung solemnly for a death or funeral.

Jefferson, in 1820, realized the far reaching implications of the decision, and could already see, as now an old man, the trajectory to division and bloodshed that the compromise promised. Jefferson understood that the compromise of 1820 was a sewing of the wind that would lead to later a reaping of the whirlwind.

This morning what we want to do is spend just a few minutes tracing out the implications for the Church and Christians of what it means when the public square legalizes and codifies what God says is illegal and immoral.

We do this in keeping with what we’ve been doing in Sunday School where we have been noting that God’s word, as a guide to life, is not merely a private or personal Word but also is a Word for our public civil social institutions and for our culture. In Sunday School we’ve noted that when we allow the Word of other gods to be our guide to life in our civil social and cultural institutions the consequence is that we, as a people, end up being shaped and fashioned in our personal lives by that public law with the result that we find ourselves being conformed to the character of the gods who are dictating the arrangement for the public realm. In brief, if we, as Biblical Christians do not insist upon God’s Word in the public square and culture as a guide to life for our laws then the result will be that some other god’s word will shape our identity and provide the meaning and definition of who we are. No neutrality.

This inclination to realize that Christianity is not a faith that can be cordoned off into some private personal realm is consistent with Scriptures requirement that we take every thought captive to make it obedient to Christ.

casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ,

When we examine matters like this it is for the purpose that we would,

not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of our minds, that we may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

Christianity, is a faith that does indeed provide the Spirit generated power for each of as individuals

Ephesians 4:22 to put off your old self,[a] which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, 23 and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, 24 and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.

But while a private and personal faith Christianity is also a public faith that has vast and profound implications for the public square. If these implications for the public square are amputated from the faith that consequence is the sure and certain threat of the dying off of the individual and personal faith that is so rightly cherished just as a species will diminish if you destroy the public habitat where it naturally flourishes.

The public square can never create Christianity. Only the Spirit of God can do that. However the public square can reinforce the normalcy of the Christ faith and ethos. Alternatively, the public square can work to make Christianity look to be a loathsome and vile thing.

What I’m saying here was captured by a couple of our Dutch Theologians,

“The Church is related to life as a whole. It is not a drop of oil on troubled waters. It has a mission in this world and *in the entire structure* of the world. This statement does not arise from cultural optimism. This is the confession of the kingship of Christ. For this reason, too, the Church is the Church of the Kingdom.”

~ Herman Ridderbos

“To be sure, the Kingdom of God is not of the world, but it is nevertheless in the world. The Kingdom does not exist within the narrow confines of the inner closet, restricted to church and monastery. The Kingdom is not entirely “other worldly” but has been established by Christ upon earth and stands in a most intimate—yet for us in many
respects inexplicable—relationship with this earthly life and is prepared by this life. Nevertheless, it is just as true that the Kingdom is not exhaustively present in this life, it is not merely “this worldly.” The Kingdom ‘is’ and ‘becomes.’ ”

~ Herman Bavinck, “The Kingdom of God, The Highest Good”,
The Bavinck Review (2011, v.2), p. 152, trans

So, having tried to lay some of the groundwork of what we will be looking at, allow me just a few more minutes to give the reason why we are looking at this, this morning.

And the answer is LOVE.

First Love for God. If God gives us a clear word about the rightness or wrongness of some aspect of human relationships then we are duty bound out of love to our Father in heaven to embrace His precepts both personally and individually but also to embrace that law Word of God for the public square. And God has given us that clear word for human relationships when it comes to Marriage, family, and human coupling.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 — Forbidding Sodomy

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Romans 1:26-28 — Forbidding Sodomy

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

1 Timothy 1:10 — Sodomy as immoral

The sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,

1 Corinthians 7:2

But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife & each woman her own husband. (Notice the cure to sexual immorality is not for each man to have his own husband & each woman her own wife.)

Jude 1:7

Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Mark 10:6-9 — The Definition of Marriage

But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

So, Love to God is why we are looking at this matter this morning.

But also love to neighbor.

No love is found in supporting a legal codification of behavior that supports and so encourages human misery.

A study done in Vancouver British Columbia observed that participation in the homosexual lifestyle knocks life expectancy for a Canadian male back to what it was in 1871. The Centers for Disease Control reports that homosexuals are 50 to 60 times more likely to become infected with AIDS than other groups. Love for people requires me, as a minister of Christ, to warn people against self inflicted damage against who and what God designed them to be.

Love to family.

And what of the generations that are to come behind. Does not love to my family require me to do all in my power to give them a landed legacy that looks more like the Kingdom of God then it looks like Sodom and Gomorrah? Out of love for my people who have gone before and for my family yet to be we are duty bound to break the mold of politically correct speech and behavior.

So it is love to God, neighbor love, and love to family that compels us to hate that which is evil while clinging to what is good.

Now having said all that as preparatory let us consider for just a few moments what the implications are for the legalization of un-natural Marriage.

1.) The Unraveling of the Christian faith

It is simply not possible to make an attack on Christian notions of Marriage and family without at the same time attacking the Christian faith. The Christian Marriage and family is where the Christian faith is passed on generationally. If the marriage and family can be redefined then the Christian faith will be redefined.  If words like morality and immorality can be redefined then the Christian faith will be redefined along with it.

We are seeing this happen already. Books like, “God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships” are being written that inform us that the Church has been wrong for 2000 years on this issue.  The effect of this is to unravel and redefine the Christian faith.

If sin is not sin then what is the Lord Christ dying for? If sin is not sin then what need reconciliation, redemption, or sacrifice? If sin is redefined then the whole Christian faith is redefined and so unravels.

2.) The unraveling and destruction of Marriage

We have to understand that the consequence of what has happened is not the enlarging of the Marriage tent but the destruction of the Marriage tent. If marriage can mean anything then marriage means nothing. If the definitional boundaries are taken away from marriage then marriage as marriage is just a word that has no objective transcendent meaning.  The purpose in sodomite marriage, when clearly and rationally thought through, is not to make marriage more accessible to more people. The purpose is to destroy marriage.

Activist Massha Gessen was charitable enough to be explicit about this when she said on radio,

“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.

The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist.

3.) The unraveling and destruction of Christian family

In allowing unnatural coupling and marriage we have simultaneously allowed the State to regulate and re-define family in a non Christian direction. In doing so we have given the State more control over deciding family relationships. In Christian marriage the assumption is that a child is to be raised by his or her biological parents.  But if marriage can be redefined to mean any coupling then it stands to reason that family can be redefined to be any arrangement that State deems satisfactory.

Melissa Harris Perry quote

Gender legal theorist Martha Fineman, calls for state-subsidized care-giving units to replace marriage and the family.

With the destruction of family will come even more destruction of children. With the rise of the divorce culture Children of the past 60 years have not been the same as children of the years prior to that (see Barbara Whitehead’s work). With the rise of unnatural marriage Children will once again bear the brunt of the injury so that the Christ haters can make one more leap “forward” in social engineering the social order.

A missing parent from either gender leaves a child wounded. One could say that when it comes to family life that parents belong to their children more than children belong to their parents. Christian marriage and family, while ultimately is for God, is for the children more than it is for the parents. In unnatural marriage it is the children who are the crushed.

4.) The denial of God’s property rights in us in favor of the State as God’s property rights over us.

Scripture teaches that “the earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.” God is the one who has property rights over all of creation. As such God sets the parameters of reality. When the State operates to define reality vis-a-vis God the State is operating to seize God’s property rights and seeks to ascend to the most high to be God walking upon the earth.

When the State sets itself up as God then we also lose our property rights even in our own children and property. We exist for the State and are naught but agents of the State. In the state we love and move and have our being. With these kind of property rights over us the State begins to control all. What we now get is social justice in our courts, social gospel in our Churches, and even a social engineering that creates a kind of social predestination where the state assigns all from its suffocating web of diktats. In the States redefinition of marriage there is the work of god who, speaking by divine fiat, is speaking reality into existence.

Christians are to champion God’s reality and insist that they are to be ruled by God’s law,

“Then let us not think that this Law is a special Law for the Jews; but let us understand that God intended to deliver us a general rule, to which we must yield ourselves … Since, it is so, it is to be concluded, not only that it is lawful for all kings and magistrates, to punish heretics and such as have perverted the pure truth; but also that they be bound to do it, and that they misbehave themselves towards God, if they suffer errors to rest without redress, and employ not their whole power to shew greater zeal in their behalf than in all other things.”

John Calvin, Sermon on Deuteronomy, sermon 87 on Deuteronomy13:5

With this Hodges vs. Obergefell we have the testimony put starkly of the Fascist confession; “Everything (including marriage) inside the State and nothing is outside the State.” It is the owner. We, as God’s people, are its property.

The only answer for this is a wise and well thought out resistance by any and all menas. I’d rather die explicitly belonging to God then to live falsely belonging to the Idol State as a piece of property to do with as it deigns.

Conclusion

“When principles that run against your deepest convictions begin to win the day, then battle is your calling, and peace has become sin; you must, at the price of dearest peace, lay your convictions bare before friend and enemy, with all the fire of your faith.”

― Abraham Kuyper

Out of love for the Gospel — a Gospel that begins with the Holiness of God and His opposition to sin — we must resist. Out of love for Christ and His Work — a work that makes no sense if we are not allowed to label sin as sin — we must resist. Out of love for the Spirit who leads us in a sanctification that requires us to have nothing to do with the works of darkness we must resist.

 

HOOVER CHRONICLES FDR’S FAILURES WHICH BROUGHT US TO WAR (VI)

“Sixth, Indeed, the greatest loss of statesmanship in all American History was the tacit American alliance and support of  Communist Russia when Hitler made his attack in June 1941. Even in the false theory that American military strength was needed to save Britain had now visibly vanished. By diversion of Nazi furies into the swamps of Russia, no one could any longer doubt the safety of Britain and all the Western world. These monstrous dictators were bound to exhaust themselves no matter who won. Even if Hitler won military victory, he would be enmeshed for years trying to hold these people in subjection. And he was bound even in victory to exhaust his military strength  — and the Russians were bound to destroy any sources of supplies he might have hoped for. His own generals opposed this action.

American aid to Russia meant victory for Stalin and the spread of Communism over the world. Statesmanship again imperiously cried to keep out, be armed to the teeth and await their mutual exhaustion. When that day came there would have been an opportunity for the US and Britain to use their strength to bring a real peace and security to the free world. No greater opportunity for lasting peace ever came to a President and he (FDR) muffed it.”

Herbert Hoover
Freedom Betrayed — pg. 878

A Few Thoughts on the Kingdom of God


In its simplest expression “The Kingdom of God” refers to the rule and reign of God consistent with His eschatological and redemptive intent to restore the Cosmos, thus destroying all competitive Kingdoms.

It should be seen as distinct from the general idea of God’s sovereignty though it includes the idea of God’s general sovereignty. The distinctness is found in the fact that this rule and reign of God is in direct connection to His triumphing over all other competing Kingdoms in the globalizing of His Redemption.

The essence of Jesus’ teaching ministry focuses on the theme of the kingdom of God. That this is so is seen in Mark’s Gospel in reference to how the Lord Christ characterized His ministry.

Mark 1:14 “Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, 15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

The phrase “Kingdom of God” is found in sixty-one separate sayings in the Synoptic Gospels. Were we to count phraseology that is synonymous with the “Kingdom of God” our count of “Kingdom of God” language would increase to 85 references. Obviously this theme is of major import.

Indeed so important has this concept been that more than a few scholars have labeled it as the theme of the Bible. In other words they will read all of Scriptures with the “Kingdom of God” as the organizing theme by which Scripture is held together and rightly interpreted.

Illustration — Beethoven’s fifth symphony with it’s four note motif. Heard in every movement of the symphony save the 2nd. Not possible to understand Beethoven’s fifth apart from hearing how everything connects to that motif.

The Lord Christ never didactically defines the “Kingdom of God.” He will repeatedly use metaphor and similes to say what it is like. What is going on with the phraseology is that the Lord Christ is taking an already well known concept and is filling it with meaning.

So, our Lord did not invent the phrase, but built upon existing Old Testament teaching. A few examples,

Psalm 145:11 – 13 — 11 They shall speak of the glory of your kingdom
    and tell of your power,
12 to make known to the children of man your[b] mighty deeds,
    and the glorious splendor of your kingdom.
13 Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,
    and your dominion endures throughout all generations.

Psalm 103:19 —  The Lord has established his throne in the heavens,
    and his kingdom rules over all.

Isa. 45:23 — “Turn to me and be saved,
    all the ends of the earth!
    For I am God, and there is no other.
23 By myself I have sworn;
    from my mouth has gone out in righteousness
    a word that shall not return:
‘To me every knee shall bow,
    every tongue shall swear allegiance.’

Dan. 4:How great are his signs,
    how mighty his wonders!
His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,
    and his dominion endures from generation to generation.

Zech. 14:9 — And the Lord will be king over all the earth. On that day the Lord will be one and his name one.

This is far far from exhaustive. The point is that when the Lord Christ came saying “The Kingdom of God is at hand” the people listening would not have said … “What’s a ‘Kingdom of God.’

The importance of the idea is seen by the its usage at Key junctures

When John the Baptist comes preaching —   “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near” ( Matt 3:2 );

Likewise, as we mentioned at the outset, the Lord Christ says much the same — Mk. 1:14-15 / Mt. 4:17 / Lk. 4:42-43

“The time has come… The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!”

When Jesus teaches His disciples to pray He teaches them to ask — “thy kingdom come” ( Matt 6:10 )

In the Sermon on the Mount the Lord Christ in describing his people says of those poor in Spirit, of those persecuted for righteousness sake that “theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven” a Jewish circumlocution for “Kingdom of God” — Mt. 5:3, 10.

Just before the Cross our Lord Christ can say during the Lord’s Supper,

“I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day whenI drink it anew in the kingdom of God”

It is used repeatedly in the parables of Jesus as we find it here.

Debate concerning “Kingdom of Heaven” & “Kingdom of God.”

When Dispensationalism came upon the scene, for years they tried to argue that there was a difference between the “Kingdom of Heaven,” and the “Kingdom of God.” In order to satisfy the demands of their system which require that the Jews get their own Kingdom the Dispensationalists said that the “Kingdom of God was here now in Spiritual form, but “the Kingdom of Heaven” is going to come after once the Millennium begins in our future. This future Kingdom would be physical and would include Christ having a throne in Jerusalem to rule from. However, they have had to retool this thinking since it has become clear that “Kingdom of Heaven” is used interchangeably with “Kingdom of God.”

The account of the rich young ruler in Matthew 19 includes Jesus’ words saying, “I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:23).  In the very next verse, Jesus exchanged the term “Kingdom of God” for “Kingdom of Heaven”, and said this, “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

Matthew’s Gospel uses “Kingdom of Heaven” as opposed to “Kingdom of God” because it was written to a Jewish audience. Such an audience avoided using the word “God” out of a sense of such usage being inappropriate. In desiring to protect the name of God from all possible violation they used circumlocutions.

Now having laid this much out and having noted that the Kingdom of God in its essence is the rule and reign of God consistent with His eschatological and redemptive intent to restore the Cosmos we would note that the idea of the “Kingdom of God” remains a hotly debated subject in the Church in terms of how it should be exactly understood.

Some want to contend that the Kingdom of God is a political entity. Some want to contend that the Kingdom of God is only a Spiritual reality with its manifestation primarily identified with the Church. Some want to contend that God’s Kingdom is only a Future prospect. Some want to contend that the Kingdom of God is not future but is already present. While others will just say that Jesus was mistaken and wrong in His idea of a Kingdom of God.

We will spend our time this evening considering these various understandings.

As we consider the text this morning we see two points emphasized

I.) In the Parable of the Growing Seed what is Emphasized is God’s Intent and Ability To Grow His Kingdom apart from our Meddling

As we come to this we must keep in mind that this is a parable. A parable is different from an allegory. In a allegory there is a great deal of busyness where we seek to identify all the varied characters with their corresponding meaning.

An allegory is what the prophet Nathan gave to King David when rebuking him for the Bathsheba affair. Nathan, comes to David and tells him about a rich man with many flocks who takes a poor man’s only lamb to serve to his guests. Of course in Nathan’s allegory Bathsheba is the ‘lamb,” Uriah, her husband, represented the poor family with that one lamb. David was the rich villain who owned scads of sheep but  decided to steal the one loved lamb of the poor man in order to satisfy his desire. Allegory.

Here we have a parable. The parable doesn’t work the way a allegory does though it may have allegorical elements. What a parable is trying to do is to establish one main overarching point. And the point here in Mark 4 — a parable unlike many others inasmuch as Jesus doesn’t explain it — is that God grows the Kingdom absent of our involvement apart from sowing the word.

Taking the seed to be the Word of God, as in Mark 4:14, we can interpret the growth of the plants as the working of God’s Word to extend His reign and rule over men. By the growth of God’s Kingdom men are swept in. The fact that the crop grows without the sower’s intervention means that can God accomplish His purposes even when the sower is absent or unaware of what God is doing. The goal is the ripened grain. At the proper time, the Word will bring forth its fruit, and the Lord of the harvest (Luke 10:2) will be glorified.

The truth of this parable is well illustrated in the growth of the early church: “I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow” (1 Corinthians 3:6). Just like a farmer cannot force a crop to grow, an evangelist cannot force spiritual life or growth on others.

2oth Century Dutch Theologian —  —Herman Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom

[The] absolutely theocentric character of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ preaching…implies that its coming consists entirely in God’s own action and is perfectly dependent on his activity. The kingdom of God is not a state or condition, not a society created and promoted by men (the doctrine of the ‘social gospel’). It will not come through an immanent earthly evolution, nor through moral action; it is not men who prepare it for God. All such thoughts mean a hopelessly superficial interpretation of the tremendous thought of the fullness and finality of God’s coming as king to redeem and to judge.

Now, this does not mean that we as God’s Kingdom people work contrary to  God’s Kingdom expansion. We do labor has God’s workman in God’s Kingdom but we do so realizing that God Kingdom expands because of God’s initiative, action and activity.  When the Kingdom grain has ripened it will be God who gets all the glory.

The point of the Parable of the Growing Seed: “The way God establishes His Word authority in the heart of His people is mysterious and is accomplished by Divine appointment apart from human agency.”  Ours is to be faithful in what God has called to in His Kingdom remaining confident that God’s already present Kingdom will come.

Actually, this ought to encourage us. It sometimes seems that the redemptive rule and reign of God is so diminished. It seems as if there is so much working against God’s rule and reign. Yet this parable reminds us that God will reap a harvest of His Kingdom expansion and He will do so simply because that is His intent. Nothing can stand in His way. The Kings of the earth may conspire against Him but God will have His Kingdom Harvest. No weapon formed against Him can overcome Him and His intent. No conspiracy can overcome His divine conspiracy to redeem the Cosmos. The inevitable growth of God’s Kingdom is as certain and as natural as a seed giving up its fruit once planted.

So … we should not despair, be discouraged, or despondent. God is growing His victory garden and we are part of that Kingdom garden and He has made us farmer citizens in His Kingdom.

II,) In the Parable of the Mustard Seed the Emphasis is on the inevitable vast expanse of the Kingdom

This likely has a couple OT referent points.

In Ezekiel 17:22-24, God plants a tiny cedar twig on a high mountain of Israel and that twig becomes a large and fruitful tree under whose branches every kind of bird will find shelter.1  The birds there symbolize the nations that flock to Israel’s God on the glorious day of the Lord. This word-picture in both Ezekiel and Mark envisions the day when God’s sovereign and life-giving power will embrace the whole world–good news indeed!

In Daniel 4:21 the metaphor found here of “birds of the air may nest under its shade” is used to describe how the nations will find shade under a metaphorical Tree which stands for Nebuchadnezzar.  In both Daniel and here thre is more than a hint of  world wide dominion.  “The birds of the air may nest under its shade,” likely is pointing here to the fact that the Nations will come under the dominion of god’s Kingdom.

Don’t miss though the emphasis found in the idea that what becomes dominant starts out as minuscule.

It is easy to see this as the life of Christ. Christ is the Kingdom mustard seed that starts out tiny and then expands so that the Nations come it and find rest under His shade.

Application

1.) Whatever may appear to us now, we needs know that Christ’s Kingdom has the inevitability of victory.

Marxism taught and teaches,

“the victory of the proletariat [is] inevitable.

Meaning that Marxism will win out. S0me have opined that this plank of Marxism more than any other plank is what accounts for the success of Marxism’s spread.

But this was stolen from Biblical Christianity. It simply is the case instead that the victory of Christ and His Kingdom is inevitable.

The truth of this can sustain us in dark times … in persecution … in trial. Tears may last for the night but joy cometh in the morning.

The Rx To Cure Those Who Have The R2K Impulse

“… there was a dialectical (P and not P) tension between the Pietist impulse to flee the world into a new monasticism and its opposite, to identify the Christian faith with present social concerns.”

R. Scott Clark 

Let’s get this straight. On one hand Scott is telling us that it is surrender to the “Pietist impulse” when Christians retreat from the world. On the other hand Scott is telling us that at the same time it is to surrender to the “Pietist impulse” when one insists that Christians must champion the idea of Christian culture. So, per Scott, when one retreats one is giving in to the dreaded Pietist impulse, and when one engages the culture in a uniquely Christian fashion one is afflicted with the dreaded Pietist impulse.

But wait … there remains hope in shedding ourselves of Scott’s boogeyman Pietist impulse. We can embrace Scott’s R2K and go all schizophrenic. Scott would have us shed this Pietist impulse by splitting our selves in half in order to pursue the hyphenated life. Scott’s prescription is  for us to withdrawal, per monasticism, in our grace realm living while we should be fully engaged in our common realm living. According to Scott’s Escondido R2K theology the answer to the Pietistic impulse is to become schizophrenic.

My prescription for Scott is pharmacological. In order to cure his schizophrenia I recommend either a return to Biblical theology or, failing that this good Dr. prescribes some Thorazine in order to cure the schizophrenia that ails the R2K of its gnostic hyphenated life.

 

HOOVER CHRONICLES FDR’S FAILURES WHICH BROUGHT US TO WAR (IV – V)

In his book, “Freedom Betrayed,” (pg. 875f) former President Hoover chronicles 19 failures on FDR that moved the US inexorably towards an unnecessary  war (WW II). Hoover’s case is compelling.

Over the past few days I have been listing these failures as given by Hoover and you can judge if WW II was a “good war.”

The fourth major blunder in statesmanship was when Roosevelt, in the winter of 1941, threw the United States into undeclared war with Germany and Japan in total violation of promises upon which he had been elected a few weeks before.

The fifth major blunder — In the weeks before Lend-Lease and its war powers were forced upon the American people, Roosevelt knew definitely of Hitler’s determination to attack Russia, and he informed the Russians of it. He should have turned away from the undeclared war on Germany, confined Lend-Lease to simple aid to Britain by way of finances, to buy munitions, supplies and ships, thus keeping within international law. Statesmanship at that moment demanded a policy of watchful waiting.

Herbert Hoover
Freedom Betrayed — 878