Politics and Persuasion
Rev. Ben Glaser
The American political scene is fractured. Questions surround the fitness of candidates and whether or not they should be supported by the voters at -large. Some ministers are even out and about on social media questioning if it is a good idea to allow a man to run for office who has such a problematic grasp of the Christian faith, whose positions on matters of real moral seriousness in themselves so obviously, in their eyes, that is should disqualify him from higher office or to even be a part of the proceedings.
Yet others are dismissing such concerns, that it should not really matter what the man thinks, or even says. Look only at his accomplishments! We need to see the opportunity which is presenting itself to bring into the Presidency someone who can really fix the problems the former vice president has brought on America.
What are we to do in such a time as this?
Strolling to the podium with an idea is John Mitchell Mason, pastor of an Associate Reformed Presbyterian congregation in New York City. He has been heard saying things like, “. . . from the Constitution of the United States, it is impossible to ascertain what God we worship; or whether we own a God at all.“. Which seems to be quite controversial in these days, and at length has made known his concern about the state of the nation as a whole:
Should the citizens of America be as irreligious as her Constitution, we will have reason to tremble, lest the Governor of the Universe, who will not be treated with indignity by a people, any more than by individuals, overturn, from its foundation, the fabric we have been rearing, and crush us to atoms in the wreck.
In fact he has this to say of one of the candidates, “While I admire his talents, and feel grateful for his services; my objection to his being promoted to the Presidency is founded singly upon his disbelief of the Holy Scriptures and his open rejection of the Christian religion." Now, what leads him to make such an accusation? Thankfully Rev. Mason has written a long blog post giving us a number of ways to know this. As he begins to recount his reasons, he does warn us that he has completed much research to ensure that he does not fall into the trap of relying on misinformation. He notes, “When the spirit of party is so violent as we have seen it in this country, and vilest calumnies have been propagated respecting the best characters, it is not surprising that the reports which are circulated should be received with caution . . .”. Wise counsel indeed. Mason instead decides to rely on what the man himself has said in print in his own words, to collect evidence of his, “ . . . principles as to religion, and show why such a man ought not to be honored and entrusted with the office of chief magistrate.”.
Mason’s dislike, of course, of the candidate with a big bully pulpit is not based just on what he has read, but also what he has witnessed of the personal life of the candidate. He writes, “The world is seldom mistaken as to a man’s talents and moral principles; and we safely rely upon respectable testimony”. You can learn a lot about a person by focusing less upon what they say, and more on what they do with the rules they apply to themselves. Do as I say, not as I do is not an excusable defect when you are thinking about the person who will have as his main duty the implementation and execution of the laws passed and on the books. While oral acuity is central to a public-facing leader at the end of the day it’s a result-oriented business. For Mason that means a candidate who not only is confessing Christ as King, but as Lord of his life as well. You can’t really have the one without the other.
As Mason lays out his case he reports these comments from the subject on his idea on why the Christian truth should not find itself in the public schools, “Instead of putting the Bible and Testament into the hands of children, at an age when their judgments are not sufficiently matured for religious inquiries, their memories here may be stored with the most useful facts from Grecian, Roman, and European and American history.” Imagine thinking that. The Bible is too much, but the siege of Troy or the destruction of Carthage is available to the minds of young ones. Not to outdone Mason’s real problem comes out of his revulsion at the candidate’s embrace of libertarian ideals like the non-aggression principle. The latter has the temerity to say, “. . . the legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as injurious to others.” However, it gets worse in Mason’s mind. Not only does he limit the extent of the concerns of the civil authorities, but he says, “. . .wish to see a government in which no religious opinions were held.”
Well, at this point you might have guessed that none of these quotations come from anyone who has lived in the last 175 years. I mean, could you imagine Donald Trump even knowing what the word Grecian was let alone think it important enough for the youth to know it themselves? Likewise, consider the cognitive dissonance you would have to embrace in order to confess with a straight face Joe Biden believing Washington should only legislate for personal crimes. John Mitchell Mason’s foil in his work is Thomas Jefferson. Though, in a day where some of the loudest voices claim John Witherspoon and other founders brought into the world a secular, pluralist political realm it may be that Mason’s difficulties with Jefferson’s atheism seem out of place in America. I mean, hasn’t Mason read the First Amendment? Doesn’t he know there is no establishment in our nation?
This little exercise has been for the purpose of reminding you that the ARP’s of the early Republic were far more concerned with the Biblical values of its candidates than some would lead you to believe, or that we are often now. Mason was an ARP, and therefore under our 1799 Westminster Confession of Faith of his and our particular denominational communion. Our WCF chapters 20, 23, and 31 call for a Christian Magistrate to rule according to Christian principles, and still does in the ARP of 2024. We ain’t in favor of the secular State like the 1789 confession of the mainline Presbyterian Church (today’s OPC/PCA). We would be wise to consider the case that Mason makes against Thomas Jefferson and apply it to the men running for office today.
He was hoping to persuade with his Serious Considerations on the Election of a President folks of myriads of religious backgrounds, hence why the subtitle is Addressed to the Citizens of the United States. But as ARP’s it’s especially worth asking in the election year of 2024 some of the same questions as our interlocutor. What do the candidates for office think about Jesus? Do they worship the God of the Bible in their own life, like for real, not show?
Desiring to know if their walk of faith is one of a saving nature is not prying into matters that are not a part of our civil responsibility. Much the opposite. It is central to ensuring that we have a nation at all.
Rev. Benjamin Glaser
Pastor, Bethany ARP Church