Presidents’ Day

     Today is a national holiday, a day set aside for holy things, a holy day. Hmm. President’s Day, what is holy about this day?

     That very likely depends upon one’s perspective.

     But what do we celebrate on this day? What does the office of President set before us as a people?

     The prescribed Presidential Oath of Office is recorded in the last paragraph of Section I of Article II of the Constitution of the United States of America:

     Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:— “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

     The text for the oath can be also be seen at Presidential Oaths of Office and the text of the Constitution here.

     Our most recently elected and sworn in president stumbled at the misdirection of the administrator of the oath, Chief Justice Roberts. The oath was administered a second time, as is reported here. The chief justice administered the oath from memory, and when the President Elect did not follow completely, without the written words the chief justice’s lead became confused. Therefore, to be certain that no question would be raised later regarding the legitimacy of the ceremony, the oath was re-administered.

     The Constitution prescribes these words as THE oath that must be taken before a president elect can enter on the execution of his office. Even though it may seem a small matter to move the word faithfully to the end rather than the beginning of the phrase, it does actually change the emphasis of the oath and thereby changes the oath prescribed by the Constitution. Certainly it is right that the oath be administered again correctly.

     Is this really so important? Why did this become an issue at all?

     Why did the chief justice not bring a written copy of the oath that he was to administer to the president elect? Was it arrogance? Was it pride?

     In this age of public media in visual and audio format that is broadcast live to all the world, concern over perception of personality often supplants concern over faithfulness. If Faithfulness had been the concern of the chief justice and of the president elect, they both would have brought written copies and used them. At the very least, both men would have made certain that the chief justice used a written copy.

     This brings us back to the original question regarding Presidents’ Day. Faithfulness flows from a proper sense of what is holy. That which is holy has been set apart or sanctified. The office of President has indeed been set apart, both by men and by God. Men wrote the Constitution and established the specific offices prescribed for the governing of the United States. God established that such governance is necessary for good order and has given His blessing to this authority among men. It is absolutely necessary for good order that both those governed and those appointed to govern remain mindful of the holiness of the office. It should be held to the very highest expectations.

     Indeed, Presidents’ Day is a true holiday. Do we still hold to it faithfully? Do we even still know what this means?

America: A People of the Bible

Throughout my lifetime and especially throughout the recent election season, I have heard people challenge the Christian and Biblical moorings of this nation.

Here is a challenge to all who so say:

Whenever an oath is required of a citizen of this nation, upon what Book is that oath made?

From the oath required in the courtroom to the oath required of anyone assuming office in the United States of America, upon what Book has it been required?

Has not this singular Book been the foundation of truth and justice and the oath to be true from the very beginning of our nation until this very day?

Surely there has been and continues to exist much variance in the professions of faith that people make based upon their reading of this Book. Nevertheless, the Book has been the foundation for all that has been understood as good and true and noble in this nation.

Who can honestly deny this?

Leadership Moment

Saturday I heard on the radio a very disturbing message. It hurt my spirit to hear it. It made my heart ache.

The message was a very brief comment called “Leadership Moment” offered through a company called Equip. Since I was driving I only had the ability to stop momentarily to write down the URL for the Leadership Moment web site, and was not able to jot down a direct quote of what was presented. However, what was presented was a “Leadership Moment” reflection of the leadership demonstrated by St. Peter and the apostles in Acts 6.

The host of Leadership Moment, John Hull, gave a brief synopsis of the situation described in Acts 6, and proceeded to explain that the apostles realized that the situation would hurt the “momentum” of the Church’s growth unless action was taken.

This is a most disturbing statement.

The motives of the apostles were not based upon a concern for the “momentum” of the Church’s growth, but upon loving concern for the saints. Their concern is clearly recorded as concern for the Word of God and the ordained administration of the means of grace.

Luke records that the Lord was the leader of the Church and that all of the “leadership moments” were by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and NOT by the wisdom of the apostles or other men. The actions of the apostles and what they presented for the Church to do were based PURELY upon the right administration of the Word. They simply directed the people to follow what the Word declares, and the people responded in faith.

Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word. And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch: Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. (Acts 6:3-6)

This most certainly was not a decision to “keep the momentum going.”

Luke explains in verse 7: “And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.”

The Word produced the increase as the Word increased among the disciples. This increase was the work of the Lord. The Holy Spirit made this happen. This was not on account of some clever leadership tactics on the part of the apostles. The apostles merely adhered to the office entrusted to them, the office of Christ, the office of the Gospel. They continued in the words of Christ, believing that the Word rules the Church and produces whatever God wills for the Church.

And God’s will was done. In this instance great increase in the numbers of disciples was what God sent His Word to accomplish.

But this is not always what is to be, as is addressed in this week’s sermon from Jeremiah 15.

The point that St. Luke records is that the Word is to be the only provider of leadership in the Church, and those who would be true leaders under God will not forget this. Those who turn the office of Christ, the office of the Word, into applications of human decision and human wisdom, misrepresent the Word and do injury to those who turn to them for leadership.

Rather, the Collect for the Eighth Sunday after Trinity sets our hearts to observe the truth and to trust in the One who works mighty signs and miracles for His Church.

Grant to us, Lord, we beseech Thee, the Spirit to think and do always such things as are right, that we, who cannot do anything that is good without Thee; may by Thee be enabled to live according to Thy will; through Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost, ever one God, world without end. Amen.