Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066 – A Great Wrong

Posted on December 9, 2020 by admin

The Great Wrong of Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942

Blog by Donald P. Shoemaker

Highway 395 runs north/south on the eastern side of the Sierra Nevada mountains in California. I have driven it many times on my way to backpacking or hiking in the Sierra or to visit Mammoth Lakes.

Along one bleak, arid segment of the highway you come to Manzanar, where 11,000 Japanese Americans were placed during World War II (120,000 were interned in ten relocation centers). I remember the first time I stopped there when the only thing to see was the old guard house at the entrance along with a couple of plaques. Even then, it was a very moving experience.

Now the location has a fine museum and you can drive around and see signs telling you what buildings were at various locations. Manzanar was not a “concentration camp” by any means, but it was not a retreat either. Winters were cold; summers very hot. The centers were essentially prisons for those who had done nothing wrong—they were simply Americans of Japanese descent.

In post-Pearl Harbor America there was much fear of what might happen on our West Coast. Would an attack come? Would people of Japanese descent support Japan? There was no evidence that they would and there were no acts by them against the U.S. Still, President Roosevelt, encouraged by California Governor Earl Warren, signed Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942 that led to the internment camps.

Beside the forced and quick internments, these prisoners in most cases lost their livelihoods, possessions and properties.

As a descendent of German immigrants, how would I feel had the government rounded up German Americans and put them in such places?

Let the memory of this great wrong keep us from doing anything like it again.

Youth in Church Leadership?

Posted on December 9, 2020 by admin

Youth in Church Leadership?

Blog by Donald P. Shoemaker

“Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith and in purity.” – 1 Timothy 4:12 (New International Version)

In January 1970, shortly after my 25^thbirthday, my wife and I boarded a plane in South Bend, Indiana to fly via Chicago to Los Angeles. The runway in South Bend required the use of a snowplow before the plane could land to get us. We found the Los Angeles area to be one fine place in January!

I was candidating to become the pastor of Los Altos Brethren Church in Long Beach. When the church extended a call to me a couple of weeks later, I accepted. We followed the plan to move in the summer, and I became the pastor of that church in August of 1970.

To a few who didn’t want me as pastor, I was “that kid.” I was having breakfast at Bob’s Big Boy one morning when another pastor phoned the restaurant to reach me. I saw the waitress come down the row of booths and ask at each table, “Are you a reverend?” But when she came to my table, she looked at me and walked right on to the next table!

I was pretty GREEN and I made my share of mistakes. But one thing I did rightly was to show respect to the older believers in the church and listen to them. (By “older” I mean those who were as I now am, 50 years later!)

The Apostle Paul’s words to young Timothy (1 Timothy 4:12 above) were relevant to me. Of course, Timothy was likely well into his 30’s and it’s a valid question to ask how far Paul’s words can be stretched to fit church leaders in their 20’s. Yes, I had my master’s degree from seminary and was trained in pastoral and theological matters, but was I seasoned enough to lead a congregation?

What should a young church leader do and not do?

First, the young leader must repudiate today’s “Cult of Youth.” * This was strong in 1970, with the campus unrest and protests. Remember “You can’t trust anyone over thirty”? Of course, no one from that era still believes that!

The church should be a counter-culture to the “Cult of Youth.” Instead, in church life the “cult of youth” is as bad today as it was in 1970. Biblically speaking, the leader must be someone with knowledge and wisdom, who learns from the past and is seasoned by years of testing (Hebrews 5:18). Today the Apostle Paul could rightly insist, “Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are OLD, but set an example for the YOUNGER believers…”

Second, the young leader must avoid shooting his toes off by making foolish mistakes in words or actions, and especially in attitude. “Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall” – Proverbs 16:18.

“You are to follow me because God put me over you!” (Pastor, where did you get the idea you alone are Spirit-filled and above accountability?)

“I’ve got the education to know what the issues are and what’s best for the church!” (But maybe you are answering questions no one is asking!)

“I just preach The Truth and let the chips fall where they may.” (You may find yourself in the “chipper”!)

“I unfold the Bible’s meaning in great depth.” (But you don’t need 50 minutes to do it. A 25-30 minute sermon will be a better sermon.) In seminary we thought ourselves to be clones of John MacArthur.)

What other presumptuous words, attitudes and actions can you think of?

Third, the young leader must follow the FULL meaning of 1 Tim. 4:12. The verse has a “do” phrase as well as a “don’t” phrase. If the young pastor wants to avoid being looked down on, this pastor must earn the people’s trust as a leader. And it is done by being “an example for the believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith and in purity.”

My mentor in my early pastoral career (1968-70) was Pastor Gordon Bracker, under whom I served as associate pastor in Elkhart, Indiana. At my installation service in Long Beach in 1970 he gave me three words of advice in front of all, “Love the people, love the people, love the people.”

* TIME Magazine featured the “cult of youth” twice recently (Dec. 23-30, 2019 and Feb 3, 2020). Greta Thunberg, 16, is TIME’s “Person of the Year” showing “The Power of Youth.” But the real “Persons of the Year” were the protestors in Hong Kong and Venezuela.

The Book of Revelation — How to find truth in it

Posted on December 9, 2020 by admin

Finding Truth in the Book of Revelation

Blog by Donald P. Shoemaker

Everyone yearns for a better tomorrow.

The Book of Revelation takes us through the turmoil and trials of life and leads us to a better tomorrow—an eternal city. Interpretations abound on how to understand this fascinating and yet bewildering book. Here are my guidelines:

Always keep this fundamental principle of interpretation in mind: The Book of Revelation was written to seven existing churches in Asia Minor (present-day Turkey). Read chapters 1-3 to see this fact. It had great significance to First Century Christians facing severe testings. Any interpretation of this book that does not see it through the eyes of these believers is suspect!
Try reading this book doxologically – as a Book of Worship (which it certainly is). The book has many themes and poetry that have led to rich Christian music. For examples, check out these passages: 1:4-7; 4:6-11; 5:6-14; 11:15-18; 15:3-4; 19:1-8 and “The Holy City” by Frederic Weatherly (1892).
The Book of Revelation has lots of symbolism and drama (like The Chronicles of Narnia)—don’t get too dogmatic over the details! The details add to the drama without each of them calling for interpretive significance.
The Book of Revelation depicts heaven and earth as places of conflict between good and evil. Experience tells us that’s true on earth, but are we open to the possibility of such conflict happening in the unseen realm of spirits?
The book’s basic message is this: The present times are tough—it may look like evil is winning. But God still rules. His plan is on schedule. “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ” (11:15).
The book’s challenge is: Stay strong, resist evil, keep the faith—Judgment Day is coming, with vindication and reward for the “overcomer.”
Finally, the Book of Revelation extends this invitation to everyone: “The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come. And let the one who hears say, ‘Come.’ And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price” (22:17). This invitation to come to Jesus still stands.

The Bible’s “Herod’s”

Posted on December 9, 2020 by admin

Narratives of the Bible’s “Herods”

Blog by Donald P. Shoemaker

1. Herod the Great – No Room for God’s Son

“Better to be Herod’s pig than his son,” said Herod’s friend Augustus Caesar. The pig was safer.

Herod the Great, whose kingship over the Jews was due to the good grace of the Roman Senate, was known for his ruthlessness as well as his largesse. One of his many great projects was the renovation of Jerusalem’s Temple. But he also slew many in his own family including one of his wives, Mariamne.

This Herod ruled for 37 years. Readers of the Bible meet him in the Gospel of Matthew, when the Magi approach him with the question, “Where is he who is born King of the Jews? We have seen his star in the east and have come to worship him” (Matthew 2:3).

Not a man known for tolerance, Herod tried to trick the Magi. “Go and make a careful search for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him” (2:8).

The Magi found the Christ Child in Bethlehem. They bowed before him in worship and presented him gifts. But after being warned by an angel, they returned home without returning to Herod. *

Realizing he was “had,” Herod furiously ordered the death of all the Jewish boys in Bethlehem ages two and under—another account to add to history’s long list of atrocities against the Jewish people. ** Jesus’ family fled to Egypt.

Herod died shortly thereafter. Joseph and Mary and Jesus immigrated back to Israel from the relative safety of Egypt. Fearful of Herod’s son Archelaus who now reigned in Herod’s stead in Judea, Joseph settled his family in Galilee.

Herod the Great against Jesus—He reminds us that the world often has no tolerance for Jesus—not for his teachings, not for his people, not for him.

* Here we have another New Testament instance of Civil Disobedience. I previously wrote of the Apostle Paul’s civil disobedience (see the two-part series on Civil Disobedience in my 2020 September and October newsletters). The Magi obeyed “higher” authority when it conflicted with the “lower authority” of Herod.

** While this account has not been verified in any secular histories, it is totally consistent with Herod’s ruthless and paranoid disposition. Josephus writes about Herod: “Antiquities of the Jews” Book 14, Chapters 9-33; “Wars of the Jews” Book 1.

2. Herod the Tetrarch – No Room for God’s Law

The next “Herod” we meet in the Gospels is “Herod the Tetrarch,” one of Herod the Great’s many sons. Also known as “Herod Antipas,” he ruled Galilee for over forty years, till A.D. 39.

The House of Herod would make quite a soap opera series today, with its many intrigues. Antipas divorced his wife so he could marry Herodias, wife of his brother, Herod II (Philip). Josephus put it this way: “Herodias took upon her to confound the laws of our country, and divorced herself from her husband while he was alive, and was married to Herod Antipas.” *

Enter a strange prophet, the forerunner to Jesus whom we call “John the Baptist.” He denounced Herod with “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife” (Mark 6:18). **

John “spoke truth to power” (to use a tattered phrase), so Herod jailed him and wanted to kill him. Irony of ironies, Herod knew in his heart John was a righteous man and liked to hear him speak. Herod is thus a type of many a person who knows truth when he hears it and rectitude when he sees it. But when conviction strikes the heart he wants to “kill the messenger.”

Read the dreadful story of how John was executed as a birthday gift to Herodias’ daughter (Mark 6:17-29)!

We meet Herod the Tetrarch one more time, when the Governor, Pontius Pilate, sent Jesus to stand before him. Herod was delighted, for he had heard about Jesus and hoped Jesus would perform a miracle for him. ***

But Jesus does not cast his pearls before swine. So Herod ridiculed and mocked him and sent him back to Pilate, who soon thereafter ordered Jesus’ crucifixion (Luke 23:1-12).

Herod the Tetrarch—against God’s Law and against Jesus. He reminds us that the Word of God cuts us to the heart and exposes our evil thoughts and deeds. He also reminds us that we can’t have Jesus on our own terms.

* Again, Josephus is our source: “Antiquities of the Jews” Book 18, Chapter 5. John the Baptist was popular with the Jewish people and many regarded the later destruction of Herod’s army as punishment from God for killing John (18:5:2).

** Herod broke the Law of Moses: the 7^thand 10^thcommandments plus Leviticus 18:16 and 20:21 against sexual relations with, and marriage to, a brother’s wife.

*** For an amazing depiction of this scene complete with ragtime piano, see Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice’s “Jesus Christ Superstar” (1970).

“Prove to me that you’re divine. Change my water into wine!”

“Prove to me that you’re no fool. Walk across my swimming pool!”

3. Herod Agrippa – No Room for God’s Glory

There is one more story about a “Herod.” Herod Agrippa I was the grandson of Herod the Great, who had actually killed his own son, Agrippa’s father.

Herod Agrippa’s political rise was due to his good “connections” with Rome. When his childhood friend Claudius became emperor, Agrippa became ruler over all of Judea and Samaria.

But only for three years. In the Book of Acts, chapter 12 we learn that the first apostle to be martyred, James the brother of John, was killed at Agrippa’s hand. Crowd-pleaser he, he also imprisoned the Apostle Peter with plans to execute him as well. But God’s angel released Peter, who then visited the believers who had earnestly prayed for him and quickly left town.

Shortly thereafter, Herod went to the seaside city of Caesarea. The people there sought an audience with him. Apparently (politicians, take note!) Herod let the fawning and flattery of the crowd go to his head.

“On the appointed day Herod, wearing his royal robes, sat on his throne and delivered a public address to the people. They shouted, ‘This is the voice of a god, not of a man.’ Immediately, because Herod did not give praise to God, an angel of the Lord struck him down, and he was eaten by worms and died.” (Acts 12:21-23)

If we’re skeptical of the biblical account, once again Josephus comes to our aid:

“The king did not rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery… A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner… And when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life, being in the fifty-fourth year of his age…”

The crowd that had flattered him then celebrated with feasting and garlands, ointments and libations, “drinking to one another for joy that the king had expired” (“Antiquities of the Jews” Book 19, Chapter 9).

Beware of flatterers!

Herod Agrippa – Crowd-pleaser and unprincipled Man of Pride. He is a type of all, politicians and preachers especially, who think more highly of themselves than they ought to think; who use their position for their own aggrandizement and not for the praise and honor of God; and who forget they stand by God’s appointment alone and that God is able to humble all who are full of themselves.

Jesus and Politics – WWJD?

Posted on December 9, 2020 by admin

Who knows what Jesus would do in today’s political climate?

Blog by Donald P. Shoemaker

“WWJD?” was asked by Al Sharpton and Doug Pagitt in a column in TIME (on-line, August 27, 2020). Pagitt is an evangelical political activist who leads a congregation in Minneapolis called “Solomon’s Porch.”

“Weighing whether or not to support Trump this year, white Christians should consider a simple, familiar question: What would Jesus do?

“This election is a test of faith–much like the one in the gospel story of Jesus’ temptation. Jesus does not give in to Satan’s promises, choosing integrity over power. Trump’s promise of white Christian supremacy is a similar test.”

Truth be told, I’m pretty well versed in political conversations and I’ve never heard Mr. Trump promise anything close to the notion of “white Christian supremacy” in the U.S. Most Evangelical Christians would distance themselves from him if he ever did, and I’d be one of the first to do so. The authors must give evidence of this charge or be guilty of bearing false witness.

And truth be told, I confess I have little idea what view Jesus would take on many modern issues and it is presumptuous of Christians to think they know. I know Jesus’ teachings shape the character of his followers (for example, see The Beatitudes in Matthew 5:1-12). But it is a leap to take his teachings and apply them to politics and government policies and officials. Certainly Jesus doesn’t teach us how to cast our ballots. Nor is how we vote in the upcoming presidential election a “test of faith” on whether we will follow Jesus or not.

I do know that Jesus’ company of followers (“the 12 disciples”) included an anti-Roman zealot named Simon and a tax collector for Rome named Matthew. Now that’s quite a political spread and may have led to some heated discussion among the disciples. But maybe Jesus kept them quiet—political persuasions shouldn’t interfere with following Jesus anyway.

Here are five points on Jesus’ teaching that I think are relevant to today’s political situation:

Jesus taught that all human authority is given by God.

This is a great theme in the Book of Daniel: “The Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes” (Daniel 4:25). When he was on trial before the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, Jesus said to him, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above” (John 19:11).

Our citizenship enables us to select leaders and affect government in many ways. But ultimately God is in charge. Wins and losses are in God’s hands. This must not cause us to slack off, but it should encourage us.

Jesus taught about our duties to both the Kingdom of God and the particular “kingdom of man” to which we belong.

“Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (Luke 20:25).

Jesus taught that God’s Kingdom and Caesar’s realm are distinct and we have duties to both. Jesus’ kingdom is unlike any kingdom on earth. “My kingdom is not of this world,” Jesus told Pilate (John 18:36).

By its nature, God’s kingdom is all-inclusive whereas Caesar’s realm is abridged. To Caesar we give limited loyalty; to God we give complete loyalty.

We can and should fulfill limited duties as members of a particular “kingdom of man.” In sum, the New Testament teaches us: Pray for your rulers, pay your taxes, obey and show honor to rulers of both lesser and greater authority (see Romans 13:1-7; 1 Timothy 2:1-5; Titus 3:1-2; 1 Peter 2:13-17).

The New Testament tells followers of Jesus how to live under authoritarian government. The right to vote would have never entered the authors’ minds.

How do we “give to Caesar” today as we live in a participative democracy? Churches can take positions and expend effort on moral issues, register voters, encourage members to write legislators and other political leaders on issues, and encourage their members to get involved in worthy causes and to vote (but not tell them for whom to vote).

The church should use its voice to encourage CIVILITY, for it is severely lacking in today’s supercharged political atmosphere. Both LEFT and RIGHT are failing at CIVILITY, from the president and others at the top on down.

Jesus taught us the priority of Kingdom Values.

“Seek first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness…” (Matthew 6:33).

We must always maintain a distinction between the ultimate issues of the Kingdom of God and the penultimate possibilities of the political process. The latter are worthwhile but not perfect. They are secondary and not primary. They need the church’s voice and attention but must not get top billing.

Our churches must teach on morally laden issues and proposals like good or bad legislation or initiatives. But be sure that the biblical “connectedness” is made clear. Of course we must be sensitive to the congregation and visitors in such matters, but avoiding the topics should not be considered an option.

Jesus taught his followers to be “people of peace.”

My denomination was known in years gone by as German Baptists or (horrors!) “Dunkards” (referring to how they baptized)—a “peace church.” It had a simple meetinghouse where the Battle of Antietam was fought during the Civil War. Antietam was the war’s bloodiest battle. The reconstructed church structure stands today as a witness to a Christian group committed to peacemaking.

Jesus taught us The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12), which should mark our political discourse. Be poor in spirit (not proud or haughty or arrogant in spirit). Be mournful and meek. Hunger and thirst after righteousness. Be merciful, pure in heart, and peacemakers. Rejoice in persecution. Those who show these qualities become salt to the world and a light that cannot be hidden.

Today’s political atmosphere creates political enemies. One Seattle council member boasts, “I don’t have any Republican friends.” Sad commentary. Well, if they’re not your friends, how should political enemiesbe treated?

Jesus taught, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you…

If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?” (Matthew 5:44, 46-47)

Jesus taught that he would build his church through his disciples who are obeying his Great Commission in the world.

The mission of the church is not necessarily to transform governments. The church’s mission is to create new followers (disciples) of Jesus throughout all the world. This is done by baptizing people who confess Jesus and, very important, teaching them to obey all that Jesus has taught us (the Gospel of Matthew, itself, is a “training manual”). Read Matthew 16:18 and 28:18-20.

As the church obeys and expands in this world, the church will find itself intertwined with cultures and governments. There is no way to avoid this. We must engage these with care and determination. We don’t have the luxury of withdrawal from culture or the political process. Jesus’ followers are loyal citizens, but “when push comes to shove” we take our stands.

Our churches can’t escape politics but we can rise above it. Our message is not political. We come together to uplift God’s Kingdom and hear from Jesus. The unity of the church must transcend all political and secular alliances.

Some Christians don’t like to hear me say this, but the church, in order to be Jesus’ church and a witness to the world, must be the place where a conservative Republican and a liberal Democrat can join hands and sing,

We are one in the bond of love…

Let us join our hand that the world will know,

We are one in the bond of love.

– Otis Skillings (1971)

Civil Disobedience “The Bible Way” (Part 2 – Paul, Citizen-Evangelist)

Posted on December 9, 2020 by admin

Civil Disobedience “The Bible Way”

Part 2 of 2 – Paul, Citizen-Evangelist

Catholic Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone has called on the City of San Francisco to end its excessive restrictions on worship.

I never expected that the most basic religious freedom, the right to worship — protected so robustly in our Constitution’s First Amendment — would be unjustly repressed by an American government.

But that is exactly what is happening in San Francisco. For months now, the city has limited worship services to just 12 people outdoors. Worship inside our own churches is banned. The city recently announced it will now allow 50 for outdoor worship, with a goal of permitting indoor services up to a maximum of 25 people by Oct. 1 — less than 1 percent of the capacity of San Francisco’s St. Mary’s Cathedral.

This is not nearly enough to accommodate the hundreds of thousands of Catholics in San Francisco. In imposing these restrictions, the city is turning a great many faithful away from their houses of prayer. [Washington Post, September 16, 2020]

Being able to gather for worship in Protestant churches or to receive the Holy Eucharist at a Catholic mass are among the most sacred activities that Christians can do. They constitute worshipful obedience to God.

Only a compelling state reason should justify limitations on church gatherings. The limitations should be the least necessary to accomplish the justifiable reason. Religious gatherings should not be bound by stronger restrictions than other gatherings face (implications of the 1^stand 14^thAmendments).

If efforts to gain more freedom to worship fail, has the time come for San Francisco churches en masseto engage in civil disobedience?

Last month I talked about examples and principles of civil disobedience from the Bible’s “Book of Daniel.” I set forth the teachings of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Civil disobedience may be justified if the state forbids us from exercising what our faith commands or forces us to do what our faith forbids. In either situation, it is fitting to strive first for a “win/win” accommodation.

Civil disobedience demands we are willing to accept the penalty that a law imposes, and by this we show respect for law.

What do we learn about Paul, the Evangelist and Roman Citizen?

First we consider a lesson taught by the Apostle Peter and the other apostles. This came from a situation that happened before Saul of Tarsus (who became Paul the Apostle) was even a believer.

The apostles were arrested for teaching about Jesus in the court of the Temple. They told the chief priest, who had given them strict orders not to teach about Jesus, “We must obey God rather than men!” (Acts 5:29).

To be accurate, we note that the order violated was a religious order, not a governmental one. Still, it seems to me that Peter’s word must be applied to secular laws that bring believers into conflict with the edicts of their faith.

Now, second, we examine the words and actions of the Apostle Paul during three of his life experiences. We bear in mind that he was a Roman citizen by birth—a status to be cherished (a Roman military commander told Paul, “I had to pay a high price for my citizenship” – Acts 22:28). Citizenship provided many privileges and protections. But, of course, not the right to vote.

The first experience of Paul we must notice happened a couple of years earlier in the City of Philippi. He and his co-evangelist Silas were jailed because they had exorcised a demon from a fortunetelling slave girl, much to her owners’ chagrin (Acts 16:21). This would not be the last time Christianity is opposed because its values clash with exploitive monetary gain!

Paul and Silas were stripped and severely beaten by Roman soldiers by order of the magistrate and then jailed with their feet in stocks (Acts 16:22-24).

The next day the magistrates ordered the release of Paul and Silas. They were told, in essence, to leave town quickly and quietly. Paul would have none of it! “They beat us publicly and without a trial even though we are Roman citizens, and threw us into prison,” Paul told the officers. “And now do they want to get rid of us quietly? No, Let them come themselves and escort us out!”

At this moment Paul engaged in civil disobedience! “No, we will not leave town quietly!” He demanded a public parade! When the officers reported this to the magistrates they were full of fear, for they had beaten and jailed Roman citizens unlawfully. “They came to appease them and escorted them from the prison.” Read the entire interesting story as recorded in Acts 16:16-40.

The second experience was when Roman soldiers rescued Paul from a mob. More interested in quelling strife than in understanding religious questions, the Roman commander rescued Paul and bound him in chains. Paul gained the commander’s consent allowing him to address the crowd, which only induced more bedlam. Frustrated to the nth degree, the commander ordered Paul to be taken to the barracks, flogged and questioned.

At that point, Paul asserted his rights as a Roman citizen: “Is it legal for you to flog a Roman citizen who hasn’t even been found guilty?” Result: “The commander himself was alarmed when he realized that he had put Paul, a Roman citizen, in chains.” Read the whole story: Acts 21:27 – 22:29.

Third and finally, Paul would assert his right as a Roman citizen to appeal his case to Caesar (Acts 25:10-12).

Here are two practical points from what we learn:

First, we should follow Paul’s example and exercise our rights as citizens of the United States. Exercise them as boldly and extensively as the need requires. Exercise them not only for religious freedom and the right to worship and serve God, but to secure your own honor and safety as a citizen.

Second, we again see that civil disobedience is appropriate when we are forbidden to practice our faith(such as the right to preach the gospel or our right to assemble in worship). It is also appropriate as a way to force attention to an unjust government order(“quiet release” from prison).

We should now see the relevance of civil disobedience to unfair restrictions against church gatherings. Is it time for churches to bind together and resist a state or county restriction that regards religious activities as “non-essential” and restricts them more than other activities (like gambling or shopping or dining)? It seems we are almost at that point.

Note: Another example of Civil Disobedience in the New Testament is the response of the Magi to King Herod’s order, “When you have found him [baby Jesus], report to me, so that I too may go and worship him” (Matthew 2:8). But the Magi, warned by an angel, disobeyed Herod’s order and, after they had worshipped Jesus, they returned home a different way (Matthew 2:11,12).

Here an order from a lower ruler (Herod) should be disobeyed because it violated the will of a higher order (God’s word through the angel).

Does God Promise Protection? A Chaplain’s View

Posted on December 8, 2020 by admin

As a police chaplain, I’m always looking for good sources that link spiritual principles with police work. So at a chaplain training conference I grabbed up a book on Psalm 91, Your Shield and Buckler. The title is taken from Psalm 91:4 (KJV) –

“He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.”

The key thought of the book is, “…even though we have discovered that God has made divine protection available to us, we still have to choose to partake of His provision. We have to activate God’s Word to experience His power in our life” (page 58).

So the Bible is like a credit card. The card is just numbers on plastic—no power to you unless you ACTIVATE it. The Bible is just words on a page (or scroll, if you please)—its promises have no power for your life unless you ACTIVATE them by faith (sometimes called a “positive confession”). This is a version of the false “name it and claim it” Health and Wealth Gospel.

So officers, activate Psalm 91 and then if the bullets fly, if dangers surround you, if the plague (today: COVID-19) rages around you—God will protect all who have activated the Psalm. It’s guaranteed!

But, I thought, wait a minute! Wasn’t the Bible’s Job (Jōb) a godly, prayerful man and didn’t tragedy (death of his children and terrible financial loss and painful disease) come on him? Didn’t he say, “The Lord has given; the Lord has taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord” (Job 1:21)?

Yes and yes. And the author knows that. “Rather than place his faith in God’s ability to keep his family and him secure, Job chose to confess his fears until they ‘came upon him.’ Throughout his ordeal, Job continued speaking in fear. Job’s best-known negative confession [Job 1:21] is still misconstrued by some Christians to this day.” “Job was only half right: the Lord does give, but it is Satan who takes. He comes to steal, kill and destroy if we permit him to do so either by our words or by our actions” (page 73, bold italics mine).

This attempt to diminish Job’s heart for God won’t pass biblical examination. “Shall we accept good from the Lord and not accept adversity?” Job asked.

“In all this, Job did not sin in what he said” (Job 1:22; 2:10). Job spoke rightly!

This author is just another one of “Job’s Counselors” – the men who came to Job to tell him his suffering was his own fault. If he had just made a “positive confession” none of this would have happened to him. This kind of thinking is horribly wounding to faithful people who experience harm.

By this teaching, if a law enforcement officer is harmed or killed in the line of duty, it is because he failed to activate (claim) Divine Protection. He’s as much to blame as the officer who forgets to put a cartridge in his TASER. But what does this say to the family and fellow officers of a person known to love God with all his heart and to live faithfully before him?

I confess I’m puzzled on how best to understand Psalm 91. But Asaph, one of the Bible’s psalm-writers, would be puzzled too. He struggled with why good people suffer and the bad guys win (why bad things happen to good people). “Surely in vain have I kept my heart pure… All day long I have been plagued…” (Psalm 73:13—read the whole psalm).

For an answer, Psalm 73 tells us to go to church (so to speak) and try to understand life by looking down from the perspective of Heaven (see verses 16-26). Psalm 73:23-26 –

Nevertheless, I am continually with you;
you hold my right hand.
You guide me with your counsel,
and afterward you will receive me to glory.
Whom have I in heaven but you?
And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you.
My flesh and my heart may fail,
but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.

Churches and Political Action – Important “Do’s and Don’ts”

Posted on December 8, 2020 by admin

Churches and Political Action—What Pastors and Churches Should and Should Not Do

With election season being extremely important in American politics, what’s a pastor or church to do? Or not do? I offer these thoughts to assist you. I challenge all churches to do all they can that is legal and ethical.

Donald Shoemaker

From a LEGAL STANDPOINT, here are the “Do’s and Don’ts”:

Churches MAY NOT endorse or oppose a candidate.
Pastors MAY as individuals support or oppose candidates, but MAY NOT convey that they speak for their churches. And they should not proclaim their “personal decision” in any church medium (like the pulpit or newsletter or on-line). No preaching, “I’m not telling you who to vote for and I’m not speaking for the church, but here’s where I’m putting my support…”
Churches MAY NOT use their resources (like facilities, property or equipment) in contexts that endorse or oppose a candidate.
Churches MAY invite candidates to speak if done even-handedly and not selectively. Their presence in a service or in the pulpit MUST NOT convey the church’s support of any candidate.
Churches MAY distribute voter guides, but I don’t recommend it because almost all have a “slant” to promote. I also would not allow members or outside groups to bring literature to the church or blitz cars in the church’s parking lot with flyers. If outsiders show up or blitz the parking lot, it may be wise for the pastor to disavow the activity.
Churches MAY schedule a forum where the candidates for an office are invited to speak and answer questions. If only one shows up that’s not a legal problem, but it may not look the best and the church would need to be careful not to have the occasion appear to be an endorsement of the candidate who appeared.
Churches MAY spend money and lobby and encourage members in support of or in opposition to a ballot measure or a piece of legislation.The limitation is that the resources expended MUST NOT be “substantial”. This may be interpreted as “not more than 5% of resources”, which would almost never be exceeded in churches as reticent as many evangelical churches traditionally are. The limit applies not just to money spent but also to factors such as pastoral time.

I DO RECOMMEND these points of guidance:

Always maintain a distinction between the ultimate issues of the Kingdom of God and the penultimate possibilities of the political process. The latter are worthwhile but not perfect. They are secondary and not primary. They need the church’s voice and attention but must not get top billing.
Preach on morally laden issues and proposals like good or bad legislation or initiatives. But be sure that the biblical “connectedness” is made clear. Of course we preach sensitive to the congregation and visitors in such matters, but avoiding the topics should not be considered an option.
Have the church’s official body (Elders, board, or congregation) take positions on issues subject to the above qualifications and when the issue is important.
Do voter registration at the church before and after services. This is a non-partisan activity.
Have a forum to educate church members on ballot initiatives.
Encourage members to write elected and appointed officials to express their opinions and to ask for a vote for or against a measure.
Have your facility used for voting, subject to acceptable rules (for examples, I wouldn’t accept a demand to cover the cross but removing a literature table may be acceptable). This is a natural way of showing interest in the wellbeing of your community.
DO NOT politicize your message. By “politicize” I mean stridently or subtly speaking for or against a particular party or political stratum.
Remember, the spiritual upbuilding of the saints is always the goal in a worship service.This influences sermon style and content immensely.
Politically activist Christians must remember that the unity of the church must transcend all political and secular unities.
Remember the admonition (I’ve made it often and sometimes it’s been heard with much irritation, but at least the point wasn’t missed):

“The church is the one place where a very liberal Democrat and a very conservative Republican should be able to join hands and sing, ‘We Are One in the Bond of Love’.”

Civil Disobedience “the Bible Way” (Part 1 – The Book of Daniel)

Posted on December 8, 2020 by admin

Civil Disobedience “The Bible Way”

Part 1 of 2 – The Book of Daniel

In his remarkable “Letter from Birmingham Jail” (April, 1963) the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote about just and unjust laws and how the latter should be resisted.

“[T]here are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.

“I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all.’

“Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.”

Dr. King explains how an unjust law can be broken “justly”:

“In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.”

Dr. King then cites one of three Bible accounts I wish to highlight here. It is the story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (Daniel 3). The Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar had elevated these excellent Jewish men to roles of high responsibility. But this status didn’t make them immune to the king’s threat of fiery execution when they refused to obey his demand that they worship the image he had set up. To bow to the image would require them to break a higher commandment—God’s commandment against idolatry.

“…our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king.But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.” (Daniel 3:17-18)

They refused, said Dr. King, “on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire.”

The story tells how God delivered these three men from the fire. But God gives no guarantee of this, and the men announced their willingness to join the company of martyrs if God so willed: “God will deliver…but even if not…we will obey him and not the king when commandments are in conflict.”

A second earlier account in the Book of Daniel shows how civil disobedience was averted. Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were being groomed for their service to the king (Daniel 1). Part of this grooming was for them to eat the king’s choice food and drink. This created a moral challenge to the four men, because of the food restrictions taught in the Law of Moses.

“But Daniel resolved not to defile himself with the royal food and wine” (Daniel 1:8). This in itself could be a death sentence to the four men, but Daniel was creative and offered an alternative (you vegetarians will love it!!) to Ashpenaz, the chief court official. “Please test your servants for ten days. Give us nothing but vegetables to eat and water to drink. Then compare our appearance with that of the young men who eat the royal food, and treat your servants in accordance with what you see” (1:12-13).

“At the end of ten days they looked better than any of the young men who ate the royal food. So the guard took away their choice food and the wine they were to drink and gave them vegetables instead” (1:15-16).

Here’s a good policy: Before actually engaging in an act of civil disobedience seek a “win/win” alternative that preserves obedience to both “lower” and “higher” authority. Allow a reasonable period for an accommodation to be made. If the request is refused or ignored, then proceed with the act of civil disobedience against the lower, inferior authority.

The third account involved the Prophet Daniel himself. Deeply dedicated to his service in the Persian government, he became the victim of tricky, jealous men who wanted to turn King Darius against him. They looked for some way to accuse him of failing in his secular duties, but they found none. These men had to admit, “We shall not find any ground for complaint against this Daniel unless we find it in connection with the law of his God.” (Daniel 6:5)

So they concocted the suggestion that the king forbid all prayer to anyone other than himself for 30 days. In weakness and pride the king foolishly approved the decree.

Then what did Daniel do?

When Daniel knew that the document had been signed, he went to his house where he had windows in his upper chamber open toward Jerusalem. He got down on his knees three times a day and prayed and gave thanks before his God, as he had done previously. (6:10)

Notice: Daniel fully knew he was violating the king’s decree.

Notice: Daniel could have prayed secretly but chose to continue his open and purposeful prayer practice just as before.

Notice: Daniel didn’t start doing something new (in order, for example, to challenge the king’s decree directly and intentionally).

In these three accounts we see two forms of civil disobedience (resistance to an unjust law or authority with willingness to suffer the penalty):

Refusing to do what the state demands we do, to obey a higher law.
Doing what we ought to do, in spite of the state forbidding us.

We also see important qualities in those who practiced civil disobedience:

Their lives were honorable in the sight of both God and man.Their loyalty and diligence fulfilling secular duties under secular authority were beyond question and above reproach.
They upheld the rule of law by willingly submitting to the consequences of breaking it. Not for personal gain or pleasure, like constant speeding and accepting the occasional citation, but for living honorably before the presence of God.

The earliest Christians likewise faced questions about their loyalty to a pagan state and where to draw the line. The First Epistle of Peter gave them excellent guidance and the words still instruct us today:

Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution,whether it be to the emperoras supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor. (2:13-17)

But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. (4:15-16)

Therefore let those who suffer according to God’s will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator while doing good. (4:19)

How do you think these lessons apply to living by a higher command today?

December 2020 Newsletter

Posted on December 1, 2020 by admin

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”949″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_custom_heading text=”“A Piece of My Mind”” font_container=”tag:h1|font_size:50px|text_align:center|color:%232633ef” google_fonts=”font_family:Bitter%3Aregular%2Citalic%2C700|font_style:700%20bold%20regular%3A700%3Anormal”][vc_custom_heading text=”December 2020 Newsletter” font_container=”tag:h1|font_size:30px|text_align:center|color:%232633ef” google_fonts=”font_family:Bitter%3Aregular%2Citalic%2C700″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”2/3″][vc_column_text]

Advancing Christian Faith and Values,
Defending Religious Liberty for All,
Supporting Civility and the Common Good
through Preaching, Teaching, Writing, Activism and Reasoned Conversations

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_single_image image=”1304″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1598373738095{border-radius: 3px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

November, 2020 – A Forgotten 400th Anniversary Mayflower

The 102 Mayflower passengers occupied the Gun Deck portion of the ship for the harrowing 10-week journey (less than 4 hours today on a nonstop flight).

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1598373738095{border-radius: 3px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

The Mayflower arrived on November 21, 1620.

Much is said pro and con about the aftermath of that arrival. We must not forget the travail of natives as Europeans arrived. But this should not erase the positives.

Arriving in November, they had to survive unprepared through a harsh winter. As a result, only half of the original Pilgrims survived the first winter at Plymouth. Without the help of local Indigenous peoples to teach them food gathering and other survival skills, all of the colonists may have perished. The following year, they celebrated the colony’s first fall harvest along with the Indigenous people, which centuries later was declared the first Thanksgiving Day. (Wikipedia)

The Pilgrims were religious dissidents who yearned for religious liberty and the chance to form their own spiritual community in the New World. What appears to be exclusivity and bigotry to some today made good sense then. If you didn’t like the way of life in their version of a good society, you were free to go to another colony. Only at the federal level would an official state religion be forbidden in the United States (1st Amendment). *

Before disembarking at Cape Cod, 41 men put their signatures on “The Mayflower Compact,” a document intended to govern life in the New World.
The compact was distinctly monarchist, stating their loyalty to King James. The Pilgrim’s purpose was clear: to advance the Christian Faith. The signers promised allegiance to the government of the new colony as it established good order and just and equal laws for the general good of the colony.

The Mayflower Compact is one of our nation’s foundational documents.
“It was the foundation of liberty based on law and order, and that tradition has been steadily upheld. They drew up a form of government which has been designated as the first real constitution of modern times.” – Calvin Coolidge

We must neither deify the Mayflower party nor sugarcoat the issues brought by the arrival of Europeans. We should not grasp this or that historical event as the defining moment of America nor ignore what was positive or negative.

Some settlers saw America as a “New Israel” and tried to live accordingly. For all who lean that way, here is a verse to ponder: “When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.” (Leviticus 19:33-34 NIV)

* The courts now consider the First Amendment as binding on the states as well as the federal government.

Narratives of the “Herods” for Christmastime

Herod the Great – No Room for God’s Son

“Better to be Herod’s pig than his son,” said Herod’s friend Augustus Caesar. The pig was safer.

Herod This Herod ruled for 37 years. Readers of the Bible meet him in the Gospel of Matthew, when the Magi approach him with the question, “Where is he who is born King of the Jews? We have seen his star in the east and have come to worship him” (Matthew 2:3).

Not a man known for tolerance, Herod tried to trick the Magi. “Go and make a careful search for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him” (2:8).

The Magi found the Christ Child in Bethlehem. They bowed before him in worship and presented him gifts. But after being warned by an angel, they returned home without returning to Herod. *

Herod the Great against Jesus—He reminds us that the world often has no tolerance for Jesus—not for his teachings, not for his people, not for him.

Herod the Tetrarch – No Room for God’s Law

The next “Herod” we meet in the Gospels is “Herod the Tetrarch,” one of Herod the Great’s many sons. Also known as “Herod Antipas,” he ruled Galilee for over forty years, till A.D. 39.

Enter a strange prophet, the forerunner to Jesus whom we call “John the Baptist.” He denounced Herod with “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife” (Mark 6:18). **

Read the dreadful story of how John was executed as a birthday gift to Herodias’ daughter (Mark 6:17-29)!

John We meet Herod the Tetrarch one more time, when the Governor, Pontius Pilate, sent Jesus to stand before him. Herod was delighted, for he had heard about Jesus and hoped Jesus would perform a miracle for him. ***

But Jesus does not cast his pearls before swine. So Herod ridiculed and mocked him and sent him back to Pilate, who soon thereafter ordered Jesus’ crucifixion (Luke 23:1-12).

** Herod broke the Law of Moses: the 7th and 10th commandments plus Leviticus 18:16 and 20:21 against sexual relations with, and marriage to, a brother’s wife.

*** For an amazing depiction of this scene complete with ragtime piano, see Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice’s “Jesus Christ Superstar” (1970).
“Prove to me that you’re divine. Change my water into wine!”
“Prove to me that you’re no fool. Walk across my swimming pool!”

Herod Agrippa – No Room for God’s Glory

There is one more story about a “Herod.” Herod Agrippa I was the grandson of Herod the Great, who had actually killed his own son, Agrippa’s father.

Herod Agrippa’s political rise was due to his good “connections” with Rome. When his childhood friend Claudius became emperor, Agrippa became ruler over all of Judea and Samaria.

On the appointed day Herod, wearing his royal robes, sat on his throne and delivered a public address to the people. They shouted, “This is the voice of a god, not of a man.” Immediately, because Herod did not give praise to God, an angel of the Lord struck him down, and he was eaten by worms and died. (Acts 12:21-23)

If we’re skeptical of the biblical account, once again Josephus comes to our aid:

The king did not rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery… A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner… And when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life, being in the fifty-fourth year of his age…

Beware of flatterers!

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1598373738095{border-radius: 3px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

A Christmas Carol

Christmas Carol Heaven’s arches rang when the angels sang,
Proclaiming Thy royal degree;
But of lowly birth didst Thou come to earth,
And in greatest humility.
O come to my heart, Lord Jesus,
There is room in my heart for Thee.
– E. S. Elliot (1864)

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1598373738095{border-radius: 3px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

“Take-Aways” from the Recent Election

Which statement is true?

“Joe Biden, the President-elect, got more votes than any other candidate in history!”

“Donald Trump, the President-elect’s opponent, got more votes than any other opponent in history!”

Of course both are true, and we should not think of one without the other.

Now, the election of Lyndon B. Johnson over Barry Goldwater in 1964 was something else! Johnson won the popular vote by 22.6%! The largest proportion of the popular vote since 1820.

Johnson carried 45 states for 486 electoral votes. Goldwater carried six states (his own Arizona and five Deep South states) for 52 electoral votes. (Ronald Reagan holds the prize on electoral votes: 525 to 13 for Walter Mondale.)

And Johnson had coattails! Two Democrats were added to the Senate, thirty-seven Democrats were added to the House of Representatives. Both houses of Congress had “supermajorities” of Democrats (as if it mattered). Lyndon Johnson began his full term almost with a blank check from Congress.

In the 2020 election, Joe Biden won the popular vote 52.1% to 47.2% and will win the electoral vote when it is cast on December 14. But he did not have coattails. Republicans gained five [?] seats in the House and (pending a special election in Georgia) will have 50 to 52 seats in the Senate (loss of one or two or three). Republicans will control the Senate unless they lose three seats.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1598373738095{border-radius: 3px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Take-Away #1 – Democracy Worked!!!

“Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, but we never had to put a wall up to keep our people in.” – John F. Kennedy (Berlin, 1963)

Flaws aplenty were exposed in this year’s election process. We should commit to mending our system (see below) while appreciating it. After all, the United States is one of the world’s longest democratic traditions. Preserve it!

Take-Away #2 – The Outcome was neither a Mandate nor a Strong Message.

The nation as a whole supported a balance of power between Congress and the White House, assuming the Republicans retain their Senate majority. Regardless, the election does not show or signal a dramatic political shift.
If anything it moves the political dial more to the middle, not to the left.

Take-Away #3 – News Coverage was Slanted and it often mixed Reporting and Commentary.

News reporting (both print and electronic) has more and more compromised the “wall” between factual reporting and editorial commentary. Just read and watch the news with this reality in mind and you’ll see!

The Washington Post’s late on-line edition for November 7 said: “Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was elected the nation’s 46th president Saturday in a repudiation of President Trump powered by legions of women and minority voters who rejected his handling of the coronavirus pandemic and his divisive, bullying conduct in office.” Sounds like a huge landslide to me!

But Mr. Biden wasn’t “elected” on that Saturday (the news media are not a priesthood that anoints winners). More to the point, the close election was not a “repudiation” by “legions of women and minority voters.” That and “divisive bullying” belong in the commentary section.

TV news reporting of the campaigns was the same. The network news I’ve watched loyally for 35 years often mixed editorializing with reporting.
To see how the press slants the news, compare how the NY Times on page one (below left) depicted Mr. Trump’s choice of Mike Pence as his running mate in 2016 (lower half of right column—a man “out of sync with his times”) to Mr. Biden’s choice of Kamala Harris in 2020 (entire front page):

Take-away #4 – A Major Assessment of the Voting Process is a MUST.

“No! No! No! No!”
That was my reaction when I went to vote in 2018. I was told I had already voted in advance of Election Day! It said so right beside my name on the signature sheet. I guess my protest to the contrary was convincing. I was given a provisional ballot. Sometime later I got a letter stating my provisional votes had been accepted. But who voted and what happened?

Jesus once gave an illustration on the importance of “counting the cost” of following him (Luke 14:28-30):

…which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it? Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, saying, “This man began to build and was not able to finish.”
Wise advice. Don’t set in motion something big and important until you are sure the process will work and you will achieve your goal. Remember the chaotic rollout of “Obamacare”?

Let’s give Jesus another illustration to use: “Which of you, desiring to hold an election, would do so unless you have taken all the safeguards needed to ensure that it will be accurate and honest and timely in its results? Otherwise, when people learn of the problems, will they not mock the process and doubt its conclusions?”

Mail-in ballots were the big rollout for this election. Absentee ballots are necessary. But they are the “weakest link” in the chain of election integrity, when it comes to ensuring that the votes were truly cast by the person whose name is printed on the return form. Absentee ballots should be the back-up exception, not the primary way to vote.

The process of voting should move with reasonable dispatch and as few foul-ups as possible. This includes eliminating long lines for those voting in person and efficient, accurate calculation of results. Election observers from both major political parties should be able to view the tabulation process in a satisfactory manner without interfering or themselves being interfered with.

I remain skeptical of the safety of free-standing ballot drop-off points. I oppose “ballot harvesting” and attaching the word “official” to non-official drop-off boxes, as one party did in Southern California. Collecting ballots at places of worship is questionable, both for accuracy and for wisdom’s sake.

I’m not hereby impugning anyone’s motives. But the heavy reliance on absentee votes and the overall count process need thorough review before the next major election (2022).

“We aim at what is honorable not only in the Lord’s sight but also in the sight of man” (2 Corinthians 8:21) remains wise practice both for handling church money (the context) and processing elections.

Take-Away #5 – “Federalism” continues to be much better for our Country than Centralization of Power in Washington.

I once thought the Electoral College was a useless relic. It is not. It is one way to keep power diffused throughout the states. We have never elected a president by a nation-wide popular vote. Our system of government seeks to keep power limited in Washington and have it spread throughout the states. The Bill of Rights was intended (in part) to secure this. See especially the first, second, ninth and tenth amendments.

It would be wrong to eliminate the Electoral College. It would be unwise for a state to give all its electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote (thus diluting that state’s own election statement). I would much more prefer the model followed by Maine and Nebraska: whoever wins a congressional district picks up an electoral vote, and whoever wins the state’s entire vote picks up two additional votes (electoral votes are one per district plus two for the whole state, similar to representatives and senators in Congress—see Article 2, Section 1 (2) in the U.S. Constitution). One benefit for California: the state wouldn’t be ignored during presidential campaigns.

Our nation has almost a 250-year heritage of governance secured by:
• The Five Freedoms: Religion, the Press, Speech, Assembly, Right to Petition the Government
• Separation of Power (“Packing” the Supreme Court would make it an appendage of the Senate and White House)
• Limited Federal Government (with enumerated powers only)
• Federalism: Power to the States and to the People
• Maximum freedom for citizens and private institutions to make choices and determine how they will live and function, consistent with the rights of others and the causes of justice incumbent president [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1598373738095{border-radius: 3px !important;}”][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]

Back the Badge

“Blessed are those who
maintain justice.” – Psalm 106:3

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_single_image image=”1494″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Southern California’s Sad Fifth Anniversary

At 10:58 a.m. on December 2, 2015, Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, 29, entered Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino where his co-workers from the county Department of Health were having a training day and holiday party. The two opened fire, killing 14 and wounding 22 others.

For the next four hours the couple drove aimlessly around the area. But just before 3:00 p.m. police who were at the couple’s townhouse in nearby Redlands saw a black SUV speed by and they gave chase.

Fifteen minutes later, a ferocious gun battle broke out between Farook and Malik and two dozen law enforcement officers. Soon Farook and Malik were dead and a policeman was wounded.

The incident was very significant to me. It was 62 miles from my home. It was another incident of Islamist terrorism that requires constant vigilance by all, plus preparation and quick response by law enforcement. Peer Support Teams from other police departments came to the area to be an encouraging presence to affected law enforcement personnel. One PST was from my department, though I was not with them at the scene.

Law enforcement personnel are ready to be first responders when the call comes. They put themselves in harm’s way by running to the incident while directing others to safety. They need and deserve the support of their communities. They need to be funded, not defunded.

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com
Contact me at: donaldshoemakerministries@verizon.net[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]