Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: RPCNA Testimony, Voting and the Explanatory Declaration

Expand Messages
  • Shawn Anderson
    Hi Glenn, Larry, et al, Recently I posted the RPCNA Testimony on the Civil Magistrate on my Blog. I won t post it all here, but only that which is pertinent to
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 15, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Glenn, Larry, et al,

      Recently I posted the RPCNA Testimony on the Civil Magistrate on my Blog. I won't post it all here, but only that which is pertinent to voting.


      RPCNA Testimony

      15. The Christian, when such action involves nodisloyalty to Christ, ought to be involved in the selection of and tovote for civil rulers who fear God, love truth and justice, hate evil,and are publicly committed to scriptural principles of civil government.
      Ex. 18:21; Deut. 16:18; 2 Sam. 23:3; Rom. 13:3.

      16. It is sinful for a Christian to take an oath which compromises his supreme allegiance to Jesus Christ. It is also sinful to vote for officials who are required to take an oath which a Christian himself could not take in good conscience. Voting involves the voter in responsibility for any act required of the official as a condition of holding his office.
      Deut. 10:20; Isa. 45:22-23; 2 John 1:11; 1 Tim. 5:22.

      17. The Christian must profess publicly and the Church must witness, that Christ is the Ruler of every nation.Whatever the official action of the civil government of a nation maybe, the Christian in his civil actions must always exhibit his loyaltyto Christ. The Christian must relinquish every right or privilege of citizenship which involves him in silence about, or denial of the supreme authority of Jesus Christ.
      Matt. 5:13-14; Prov. 3:5-6; Ps. 37:7; Matt. 22:21; John 17:14-15; Mark 13:9.

      So we see some qualifications attached to voting in the RPCNA. Now the question of whether or not these are taught and principles practiced, I couldn't answer. One practice that was implemented was to offer a declaration when asked to swear to the Constitution. When I went to the COVFAMIKOI conference this summer (and had the opportunity to meet elders Bump and Pockras) Pastor Pockras told me about the "Explanatory Declaration" and recently sent it to me.

      Explanatory Declaration

      Explanatory Declaration to be given by members of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America when asked to swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America:

      "I take this oath, pledging my loyalty and allegiance to mycountry, but declaring my supreme allegiance to the Lord Jesus Christ,Whom Almighty God has appointed Ruler of Nations, and expressing mydissent from the Constitution's failure to recognize and to acknowledgethe Divine Institution of Civil Government."

      Pastor Charles Brown, on his posts on RP History , puts this history forward regarding an explanatory declaration, though I'm not sure if it's the same one:

      a. 1918: Teachers in New York (and later in Pennsylvania and Indiana) were required to take a loyalty oath to the state.

      b. Since many RPs were teachers, the synod responded by approving an "Explanatory Declaration" as a substitute for the oath.

      c. The declaration was designed to be a test case, but the courts always upheld it.

      If you want to check out my post, which is only a larger selection of the RP Testimony on the Civil Magistrate, which I found relevant and necessary for meditation, you can go here:

      Selections from the RPCNA Testimony on the Civil Magistrate 

      Thanks,
      -Shawn Anderson
      Albany, NY
    • Larry Bump
      ... I was taught that. I haven t voted for a President since Reagan (before I was a Christian). I have see precious few that I could vote for, and none won
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 15, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Shawn Anderson wrote:

        > So we see some qualifications attached to voting in the RPCNA. Now the
        > question of whether or not these are taught and principles practiced, I
        > couldn't answer.
        >

        I was taught that.
        I haven't voted for a President since Reagan (before I was a Christian).
        I have see precious few that I could vote for, and none won their
        parties nomination.
      • Glenn Ferrell
        I haven t voted for a major party candidate for President since 1988. I have voted for some third party candidates. Now, I m at the point where I doubt I can
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 16, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          I haven't voted for a major party candidate for President since 1988.  I have voted for some third party candidates.
           
          Now, I'm at the point where I doubt I can vote for anyone who does not explicitly recognize the being and attributes of Almighty God, the Divine Authority of Holy Scripture, the law of God as the paramount rule, and Jesus the Messiah, the Savior, and Lord of all, and promise to do nothing in the exercise of their office inconsistent with the word of God.
           
          I certainly will not vote for a Roman Catholic, Mormon, or Arminian, nor anyone not accountable to the the officers of a biblical church.
           
          I don't suppose I'll be voting for a while.
           
          Glenn
           
           

          J. Glenn Ferrell, Pastor, Sovereign Redeemer Presbyterian Church, Boise, Idaho   http://sermonaudio.com/reformationidaho



          To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
          From: lbump@...
          Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:30:13 -0400
          Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: RPCNA Testimony, Voting and the Explanatory Declaration

          Shawn Anderson wrote:

          > So we see some qualifications attached to voting in the RPCNA. Now the
          > question of whether or not these are taught and principles practiced, I
          > couldn't answer.
          >

          I was taught that.
          I haven't voted for a President since Reagan (before I was a Christian).
          I have see precious few that I could vote for, and none won their
          parties nomination.

        • Larry Bump
          ... I have the same scruples, and the same conclusion! LArry
          Message 4 of 14 , Sep 16, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Glenn Ferrell wrote:

            > I certainly will not vote for a Roman Catholic, Mormon, or Arminian, nor
            > anyone not accountable to the the officers of a biblical church.
            >
            > I don't suppose I'll be voting for a while.

            I have the same scruples, and the same conclusion!

            LArry
          • Samantha E
            Given the subject of voting being up right now, what would any of you here say regarding Ron Paul who is running for president (Republican) in the next
            Message 5 of 14 , Sep 16, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Given the subject of voting being up right now, what would any of you here say regarding Ron Paul who is running for president (Republican) in the next presidential election (USA)?  Below is his statement of faith as sent to me by a friend.
              ~Samantha
              -----------------------------
              Subject: Very interesting!
              Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:09:39 -0600

               

              Statement of Faith
              By Rep. Ron Paul, MD.

              The Covenant News ~ July 21, 2007
              We live in times of great uncertainty when men of faith must stand up for our values and our traditions lest they be washed away in a sea of fear and relativism. As you likely know, I am running for President of the United States, and I am asking for your support.

              I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.

              I have worked tirelessly to defend and restore those rights for all Americans, born and unborn alike. The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideal of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.

              In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, H.R. 1094. I am also the prime sponsor of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. I have also authored H.R. 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.” Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken and will continue to advocate direct action to restore protection for the unborn.

              I have also acted to protect the lives of Americans by my adherence to the doctrine of “just war.” This doctrine, as articulated by Augustine, suggested that war must only be waged as a last resort--- for a discernible moral and public good, with the right intentions, vetted through established legal authorities (a constitutionally required declaration of the Congress), and with a likely probability of success.

              It has been and remains my firm belief that the current United Nations-mandated, no-win police action in Iraq fails to meet the high moral threshold required to wage just war. That is why I have offered moral and practical opposition to the invasion, occupation and social engineering police exercise now underway in Iraq. It is my belief, borne out by five years of abject failure and tens of thousands of lost lives, that the Iraq operation has been a dangerous diversion from the rightful and appropriate focus of our efforts to bring to justice to the jihadists that have attacked us and seek still to undermine our nation, our values, and our way of life.

              I opposed giving the president power to wage unlimited and unchecked aggression, However, I did vote to support the use of force in Afghanistan. I also authored H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the president the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage aggression against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation.

              On September 17, 2001, I stated on the house floor that “…striking out at six or eight or even ten different countries could well expand this war of which we wanted no part. Without defining the enemy there is no way to know our precise goal or to know when the war is over. Inadvertently more casual acceptance of civilian deaths as part of this war I'm certain will prolong the agony and increase the chances of even more American casualties. We must guard against this if at all possible.” I’m sorry to say that history has proven this to be true.

              I am running for president to restore the rule of law and to stand up for our divinely inspired Constitution. I have never voted for legislation that is not specifically authorized by the Constitution. As president, I will never sign a piece of legislation, nor use the power of the executive, in a manner inconsistent with the limitations that the founders envisioned.

              Many have given up on America as an exemplar for the world, as a model of freedom, self-government, and self-control. I have not. There is hope for America. I ask you to join me, and to be a part of it.

              Sincerely,

              Ron Paul


              For More Information Contact:
              Paul Dorr
              Iowa Field Director
              RonPaul2008@...
              Phone: 712-758-3660

              Ron Paul 2008
              Presidential Campaign Committee
              www.RonPaul2008.com
              Phone: 703-248-9115
              FAX: 703-248-9119



              Commentary Index

              Back to The Covenant News
              Covenant News | P


              ----- Original Message ----
              From: Larry Bump <lbump@...>
              To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 8:30:11 PM
              Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: RPCNA Testimony, Voting and the Explanatory Declaration

              Glenn Ferrell wrote:

              > I certainly will not vote for a Roman Catholic, Mormon, or Arminian, nor
              > anyone not accountable to the the officers of a biblical church.
              >
              > I don't suppose I'll be voting for a while.

              I have the same scruples, and the same conclusion!

              LArry




              Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
            • Larry Bump
              ... I have a serious problem with this line, and would need clarification of some others.
              Message 6 of 14 , Sep 18, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Samantha E wrote:
                > Given the subject of voting being up right now, what would any of you
                > here say regarding Ron Paul who is running for president (Republican) in
                > the next presidential election (USA)? Below is his statement of faith
                > as sent to me by a friend.
                > ~Samantha
                >
                > I am running for president to restore the rule of law and to
                > stand up for our divinely inspired Constitution.


                I have a serious problem with this line, and would need clarification of
                some others.
              • Ic Neltococayotl
                Larry, Well the Republican Party calls itself God s Party. So they need their Sacred Writ if they are going to call themselves that. Like Hezbollah, which
                Message 7 of 14 , Sep 18, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Larry,

                  Well the Republican Party calls itself God's Party. So they need their
                  Sacred Writ if they are going to call themselves that. Like Hezbollah,
                  which means the Party of God. Both are warmongers.

                  More politically driven than God-fearers, in my view. Most of politicos
                  put their party first and God second, unless they can use Him for their
                  own ends...then flows the Christianise

                  Edgar


                  --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Larry Bump <lbump@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > Samantha E wrote:
                  > > Given the subject of voting being up right now, what would any of
                  you
                  > > here say regarding Ron Paul who is running for president
                  (Republican) in
                  > > the next presidential election (USA)? Below is his statement of
                  faith
                  > > as sent to me by a friend.
                  > > ~Samantha
                  > >
                  > > I am running for president to restore the rule of law and to
                  > > stand up for our divinely inspired Constitution.
                  >
                  >
                  > I have a serious problem with this line, and would need clarification
                  of
                  > some others.
                  >
                • Larry Bump
                  ... I haven t been too wild about them since that Lincoln fellow. Larry
                  Message 8 of 14 , Sep 18, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Ic Neltococayotl wrote:
                    > Larry,
                    >
                    > Well the Republican Party calls itself God's Party. So they need their
                    > Sacred Writ if they are going to call themselves that. Like Hezbollah,
                    > which means the Party of God. Both are warmongers.


                    I haven't been too wild about them since that Lincoln fellow.

                    Larry
                  • forisraelssake
                    ... In fairness to Paul, he is anti-war to the utmost and despises war and is the only Republican candidate for presidency that is against the
                    Message 9 of 14 , Sep 18, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > Larry,
                      >
                      > Well the Republican Party calls itself God's Party. So they need their
                      > Sacred Writ if they are going to call themselves that. Like Hezbollah,
                      > which means the Party of God. Both are warmongers.
                      >
                      > More politically driven than God-fearers, in my view. Most of politicos
                      > put their party first and God second, unless they can use Him for their
                      > own ends...then flows the Christianise
                      >
                      > Edgar
                      >

                      In fairness to Paul, he is anti-war to the utmost and despises war and
                      is the only Republican candidate for presidency that is against the
                      military-industrial complex, voted against the Iraq War in the House,
                      and makes the immediate withdrawal of all American forces from Iraq a
                      part of his platform. (Actually he wants all American troops out of
                      every country in the world, and the US out of the UN and the UN out of
                      the US). He is running as a Republican because of the reality of the
                      two-party state, not because he is part of the cult of Lincoln.

                      Elder Bump, if you could vote for Ronald Reagan, then you could
                      happily and joyfully vote for Ron Paul, who exceeds Reagan in all
                      respects. I support Mr Paul. (Though as a Canadian that is of little
                      help with the nomination process.)

                      http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/ - Articles by and about Paul

                      --Chris
                    • Larry Bump
                      ... I was not a believer when I voted for Reagan. I would not have, had I the same scruples I do now. Larry
                      Message 10 of 14 , Sep 18, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        forisraelssake wrote:
                        > Elder Bump, if you could vote for Ronald Reagan, then you could
                        > happily and joyfully vote for Ron Paul, who exceeds Reagan in all
                        > respects. I support Mr Paul. (Though as a Canadian that is of little
                        > help with the nomination process.)

                        I was not a believer when I voted for Reagan. I would not have, had I
                        the same scruples I do now.

                        Larry
                      • Deejay
                        Many folks including Christians, voted for George Dubya, cos he supposedly wears his faith on this sleeve, yet as a somewhat ignorant Brit bystander, I find
                        Message 11 of 14 , Sep 19, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment

                          Many folks including Christians, voted for George Dubya,  cos he supposedly "wears his faith on this sleeve," yet as a somewhat ignorant Brit bystander, I find that an oxymoron in many respects. I'm not questioning his estate, just that his so-called "Christian stance"  when he openly practices pluralism amongst other things; it would probably be better if he didn't "wear his faith on his sleeve" that way he couldn't bring it into disrepute!

                          ~Deejay


                          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Larry Bump <lbump@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > forisraelssake wrote:
                          > > Elder Bump, if you could vote for Ronald Reagan, then you could
                          > > happily and joyfully vote for Ron Paul, who exceeds Reagan in all
                          > > respects. I support Mr Paul. (Though as a Canadian that is of little
                          > > help with the nomination process.)
                          >
                          > I was not a believer when I voted for Reagan. I would not have, had I
                          > the same scruples I do now.
                          >
                          > Larry
                          >

                        • Larry Bump
                          ... That is also very much my thought on the subject.
                          Message 12 of 14 , Sep 19, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Deejay wrote:
                            > Many folks including Christians, voted for George Dubya, cos he
                            > supposedly "wears his faith on this sleeve," yet as a somewhat ignorant
                            > Brit bystander, I find that an oxymoron in many respects. I'm not
                            > questioning his estate, just that his so-called "Christian stance" when
                            > he openly practices pluralism amongst other things; it would probably be
                            > better if he didn't "wear his faith on his sleeve" that way he couldn't
                            > bring it into disrepute!
                            >


                            That is also very much my thought on the subject.
                          • Ic Neltococayotl
                            That is the way of politicians; Their own power, position, and political party FIRST...Christ (if they claim to be a Christian) a woefully distant 2nd (and
                            Message 13 of 14 , Sep 19, 2007
                            • 0 Attachment
                              That is the way of politicians; Their own power, position, and
                              political party FIRST...Christ (if they claim to be a Christian) a
                              woefully distant 2nd (and that is being charitable)...

                              Edgar


                              --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Deejay"
                              <crazy_calvinist@...> wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              > Many folks including Christians, voted for George Dubya, cos he
                              > supposedly "wears his faith on this sleeve," yet as a somewhat
                              ignorant
                              > Brit bystander, I find that an oxymoron in many respects. I'm not
                              > questioning his estate, just that his so-called "Christian stance"
                              when
                              > he openly practices pluralism amongst other things; it would probably
                              be
                              > better if he didn't "wear his faith on his sleeve" that way he
                              couldn't
                              > bring it into disrepute!
                              >
                              > ~Deejay
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Larry Bump lbump@
                              > wrote:
                              > >
                              > > forisraelssake wrote:
                              > > > Elder Bump, if you could vote for Ronald Reagan, then you could
                              > > > happily and joyfully vote for Ron Paul, who exceeds Reagan in all
                              > > > respects. I support Mr Paul. (Though as a Canadian that is of
                              little
                              > > > help with the nomination process.)
                              > >
                              > > I was not a believer when I voted for Reagan. I would not have, had
                              I
                              > > the same scruples I do now.
                              > >
                              > > Larry
                              > >
                              >
                            • Deejay
                              Agreed. Edgar. I ve been a political dissenter the last few years when its come to voting here in England. As to vote for any of them seems to be to condone
                              Message 14 of 14 , Sep 19, 2007
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Agreed. Edgar. I've been a political dissenter the last few years when
                                its come to voting here in England. As to vote for any of them seems
                                to be to condone them and their idolatory, and something one can't do
                                without in affect voting for evil. Something I don't see God
                                advocating any one doing in Scripture--supporting evil--under any
                                circumstances.

                                ~Deejay


                                --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Ic Neltococayotl"
                                <puritanpresbyterian@...> wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                > That is the way of politicians; Their own power, position, and
                                > political party FIRST...Christ (if they claim to be a Christian) a
                                > woefully distant 2nd (and that is being charitable)...
                                >
                                > Edgar
                                >
                                >
                                > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Deejay"
                                > crazy_calvinist@ wrote:
                                > >
                                > >
                                >
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.