Casting a Vote, Part Two
[W]hilst we are using the means in our power, let us humbly commit our righteous cause to the great Lord of the universe, Who loveth righteousness and hateth iniquity. And having secured the approbation of our hearts by a faithful and unwearied discharge of our duty to our country, let us joyfully leave our concerns in the hands of Him Who raiseth up and pulleth down the empires and kingdoms of the world as He pleases.
The man who is conscientiously doing his duty will ever be protected by that righteous and all powerful Being, and when he has finished his work he will receive an ample reward.
The sum of the whole is that the blessing of God is only to be looked for by those who are not wanting in the discharge of their own duty.
Biblical voters can find a particularly excellent model of this virtue in John Quincy Adams. Historians who later studied and wrote about his life and numerous accomplishments (including his lifelong and relentless but largely unsuccessful fight to abolish slavery) observed that Adams’ life was guided by one simple principle:
Duty is ours; results are God’s.
It is vital that Biblical voters develop an attitude of resolute steadfastness and unswervable duty. In recent years, too many believers have manifested a short-term mentality toward the civic arena – they get involved in an election or two and if they don’t see a complete turnaround, they throw up their hands, declare that they tried and that it didn’t make any difference, and then scurry off to their next inspiration. Biblical voters must realize that it took almost three quarters-of-a-century to arrive at the situation in which we find ourselves today, and that situation will not be reversed in just one election or two. And even if the recovery turns out to be just as lengthy as was the illness, a recovery will come – if we faithfully persist (Galatians 6:9).
The principle of retaking lost ground slowly, one election at a time, is neither appealing nor gratifying to our natural impatience but it is a well-articulated Biblical principle; therefore, arm yourself with the mentality of a marathon runner, not a sprinter: be willing to stay and compete until you win. This attitude is much easier to adopt once we accept the truth that voting is an obligatory duty we owe not only to our country but also to God. As Samuel Adams explained:
Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual – or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country. He may then reflect, each one on his own integrity, and appeal to the Monitor within his breast that he has not trifled with the sacred trust reposed in him by God and his country.
Founder Peter Muhlenberg articulated the same conviction. (Peter was a minister of the Gospel who left his pulpit during the American Revolution to defend the liberties he enjoyed and to which he had become accustomed; three hundred men from his congregation followed him into military service. He became a Major General and then a Member of Congress, where he helped frame the Bill of Rights.) Once, when criticized for being a minister involved in the civic arena, he pointedly responded:
I am convinced it is my duty so to do – and duty I owe to God and my Country.
The viewpoint expressed by these and other early leaders simply reflected their understanding of Jesus’ command in Matthew 22:21 (a command frequently turned on its head today). In that verse, Jesus told His followers:
Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.
Today, too many mistakenly think that the conjunction in Jesus’ command is “or” – that is, “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, or unto God the things that are God’s,” but that is not what the verse says. To the contrary, it deliberately uses the conjunction “and” – that is, “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” People of faith are clearly commanded to do their duty in both the spiritual and the civil arenas.
The Founders believed that this dual responsibility was so self-evident we would never neglect it. As George Washington explained:
No country upon earth ever had it more in its power to attain these blessings than United America. Wondrously strange, then, and much to be regretted indeed would it be, were we to neglect the means and to depart from the road which Providence has pointed us to so plainly; I cannot believe it will ever come to pass.
Yet in recent years, far too many God-fearing individuals have neglected their responsibilities as national voting stewards, and the impact of that neglect is now measureable. Consider the area of abortion.
Over the four elections from 1992-2002, Christian voter turnout declined by almost forty percent, but in 2002, that trend reversed and there was a 2 percent increase above the 2000 turnout numbers (which was actually a sizeable increase since 2002 was a non-presidential year when voter turnout is traditionally much lower). Exit polling in 2002 showed that 41 percent of voters in that election identified abortion as an important issue affecting their vote: 23 percent said they voted a pro-life ticket, and 16 percent voted a pro-abortion ticket, thus giving a 7 percent advantage to those running as a pro-life candidate. The result was evident: of the 54 freshmen elected to the U. S. House in 2002, 36 were pro-life (67 percent), and of the 10 freshmen elected to the U. S. Senate, eight (80 percent) were pro-life.
In 2004, Christian voter turnout increased 93 percent over the 2002 numbers (part of this surge was due to the fact that it was a presidential year when turnout typically rises and part to the fact that the percentage of Christian voters actually increased). In that election, 42 percent of voters identified abortion as an important issue: 25 percent voted pro-life, and 13 percent pro-abortion, resulting in a 12 percent advantage for pro-life candidates. The 2004 elections sent 40 new freshmen to the U. S. House, of whom 25 were pro-life (63 percent), and nine new freshmen to the U. S. Senate, of whom seven (77 percent) were pro-life.