Conciliar Post

Dialogue Across Christian Traditions

Top Posts

The Old Testament in OrderDecember 13, 2024
How the Christ Defined the ChristianAugust 15, 2025
Why I Didn't Convert to Eastern OrthodoxyAugust 8, 2016
The (Actual) Good PlaceSeptember 30, 2024
Life After Life After DeathOctober 7, 2024
The New Testament in OrderApril 14, 2021
What the Church Can Learn From Heavy MetalJune 16, 2014
Is Sola Scriptura Really a Disagreement?March 4, 2016
Reflections on UnityOctober 18, 2016
The Perpetual Virginity of Mary: Why I Changed My MindJanuary 21, 2015

A Reality Check

in

Stuart Kerr

How many of you realize that the country has changed? The state of our nation is in continual motion and experiences a constant flow of variation, but there has been a stronger shift in our society than what is typical; these are more than mere adjustments, they are changes. Governmental authority has increased and with it a startling lack of ethics. Finances, property, food, family, education, and health have all been the victims of greater control from the agencies of government, whether on the federal or state level.

The increase in regulations could be blamed on the President or Congress, or maybe it is the natural time for these to happen. I do not believe that either President Obama and the 113th Congress are the only drivers of government expansion. America has been on a negative trend for some time now and the citizens need to recognize this growing loss of morality.

Almost a century ago there was a trust in the government officials that is nearly non-existent now. The night before his first reelection in 1936, President Frederick Delano Roosevelt gave a speech in Madison Square. He addressed the attacks against the Social Security program and in particular lambasted the claim that Congress may one day misuse the allocated funds. “When they imply that the reserves thus created against both these policies will be stolen by some future Congress, diverted to some wholly foreign purpose, they attack the integrity and honor of American Government itself.”1 America now knows that the former President’s opponents were correct, that the federal government has dipped its fingers into the Social Security fund. The Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance Trust Fund does not act like a proverbial piggy bank, but as a companion to the other funds that are traditionally used towards the federal government’s costs.2 When the government stole from the OASDI Trust Fund they broke the people’s trust.

Basic distrust of our government is not the only issue facing us. Recently I came across an interview on Capitol File magazine’s website with actress Robin Wright, star of the Netflix series “House of Cards,” the story of a Congressional Majority Leader and his wife. Here’s a portion from the conversation:

RW: What else? We spoke to a senior person in the Obama Administration at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner last spring, and he said everything is accurate in this show—[except] you’d never get an education bill passed that fast.

[Interviewer] Did he think reporters sleeping with sources and members of Congress was factual?

RW: Oh yeah… DC is more corrupt than Hollywood. It really is. It’s more sleazy than Hollywood… how much infidelity goes on.3

A government official has openly admitted that the government’s moral compass is damaged and the media has compromised its position as a watchdog for the people.

It is time for a reality check. Elected officials have refused to hold themselves to a moral or ethical standard, dishonoring the commitment made to safeguard Social Security benefits. It is time to realize that the American government is in decline; it is morally, ethically and fiscally bankrupt.

[wpex more=”View Sources” less=”Hide Sources”]

1. Roosevelt, Franklin D. “Speech at Madison Square Garden” (speech, Madison, NY, October 31, 1936), Miller Center, http://millercenter.org/president/speeches/detail/3307

2. Matthews, Merrill “What Happened to the $2.6 Trillion Social Security Trust Fund?” Forbes (2011), http://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2011/07/13/what-happened-to-the-2-6-trillion-social-security-trust-fund/;
Schobel, Bruce D. “Interfund Borrowing Under the Social Security Act,” Social Security Bulletin 46, No. 9 (September 1983), http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v46n9/v46n9p13.pdf

3. Throp, Elizabeth “Robin Wright Talks ‘House of Cards’ Season 2; Working with Kevin Spacey,” Capitol File (2014) http://capitolfile-magazine.com/personalities/articles/robin-wright-on-netflix-house-of-cards-kevin-spacey-and-fiance-ben-foster

Featured Image:
“Checkmate !!!” by uckhet is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

[/wpex]

Comments

8 responses to “A Reality Check”

  1. Ben Cabe Avatar
    Ben Cabe

    Stuart, you’ve convinced me. The government is in decline. So, as Christians, what should we do about it?

    Reply
    1. Stuart Kerr Avatar
      Stuart Kerr

      That, I suppose, ought to be the subject of a future article; but for now, here are some thoughts:

      “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”
      – Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

      If Christians want to restore goodness back to their country they must speak out against what is wrong. They cannot ignore it and hope that it will disappear, because darkness will not leave without those who are in the light bringing force against it.

      “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
      – Ephesians 6:12, KJV

      This is not a battle against brothers and sisters, but against those iniquities of rebellion, greed, pride, jealously, and hate. The Body of Christ must reject sinfulness and demand of herself, and of others, a higher standard.

      Reply
  2. Michael R. Shelton Avatar
    Michael R. Shelton

    Thanks for the interesting read, Stuart! However, I’m still not sure if I’m convinced that there’s less trust today than there used to be. Honestly, has it changed? I know you were speaking in absolutes regarding the general moral health of our country, but the only supporting example of public trust that you gave was in reference to social security.

    Let me ask you this: if citizens trusted their government more a century ago, why would F.D.R. have to defend the integrity of future generations against the corruption of their newly expanded powers in the first place? If there was more trust then, why would it even be a question?

    Even if I take you at your word that F.D.R.’s generation trusted their government more than we do today, how does that make them morally healthier? (You said we were in decline, so I inferred this to be your meaning.) Would you not agree that our Founders regarded distrust of government as a sign of health? Do you accept that premise? If you’ve ever read the Federalist Papers, many of them were certainly distrustful, especially Jefferson and Madison. And if that was the case, and we trust our government less today than we did in F.D.R.’s time, wouldn’t we, by your logic, be at an incline as opposed to a decline? I suspect F.D.R. was defending his baby, and it was implemented, not because of an inherent trust, but because it was a desperate time.

    Follow-up question. Have you ever done in reading about the development of the various national banking systems in the U.S.? I think it reveals, to an extent, some of the issues you discussed.

    Reply
    1. Stuart Kerr Avatar
      Stuart Kerr

      First, you have asked a fairly large number of questions, and a statement that warrants a response, so I will address them in order:

      1. “… I’m still not sure if I’m convinced that there’s less trust today than there used to be. Honestly, has it changed?”

      When writing this article, I chose to focus on President Roosevelt’s speech because of how it struck me that, at that time, there were many who had faith in the Social Security system, yet in our present time there is a continual conversation over how long the program will last and how the government can maintain it. Even more revealing are the last ten words of the quotation I pulled from the speech, “they attack the integrity and honor of American Government itself.” In our time, whether you ask the political left, right, or center, you are not likely to hear the words “integrity” or “honor” in relation to the government. Take a look at the Presidential debates of the last two elections and you will, more than likely, not hear a Presidential candidate speak about the “integrity” of American government.

      2. “… the only supporting example of public trust that you gave was in reference to social security.”

      Yes, because trust was not the only issue. The broader issues were morality and ethics, and trust falls within this discussion because it is impacted when morality and ethics are absent.

      3. “If there was more trust then, why would it even be a question?”

      You are assuming that when I wrote about “more trust” I meant “complete trust,” something that has almost never existed in American governance. Also, take a look at the full transcript of the speech and you will see that it was only a specific segment of the public who was being said to question Social Security; they were, “employers and politicians and publishers,” were inferred in other parts of the transcript to be the upper class.

      4. “Even if I take you at your word that F.D.R.’s generation trusted their government more than we do today, how does that make them morally healthier?”

      I believe that you have misunderstood my intent. When I wrote about the decline of trust in government I meant it as an indictment against our government, not against the citizens.

      5. “Would you not agree that our Founders regarded distrust of government as a sign of health? Do you accept this premise?”

      Yes, they saw public distrust as a necessary element for the maintenance of good government. Madison, remembered as the Father of the Constitution, is reported to have said during the Constitutional Convention, “All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree.” Furthermore, he was so intent on making certain that there would not be too much law-making that he desired that the Congress would be divided along party lines so as that only the legislation that had strong approval from all sides would ever be enacted into law.

      6. “If you’ve ever read the Federalist Papers, many of them were certainly distrustful, especially Jefferson and Madison.”

      I have read several of the Federalist Papers (ironically, as I write this a copy of The Federalist is sitting right beside me), but I am curious, why did you mention Jefferson in the same sentence as Madison and the Federalist Papers? It is true that he was distrustful of government, but the Federalist Papers would not back this, Jefferson did not contribute to them.

      7. “… if that was the case, and we trust our government less today than we did in F.D.R.’s time, wouldn’t we, by your logic, be at an incline as opposed to a decline?”

      Once again, this article was not about the citizens’ integrity or quality. Also, your question supposes that the greater distrust the better, but this was not reflected in either my writing or, for that matter, in the Founding Fathers. Recall the quote I cited from James Madison, “All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree” [emphasis added]. Apparently Madison believed that there was a limit to how much trust people should withhold from governing officers and institutions. A government without some measure of trust could not operate; thus greater distrust would not necessarily yield better people.

      8. “Have you ever done in [sic] [any] reading about the development of the various national banking systems in the U.S.?”

      No, I have not read much about the development of the banking system of the United States, but I have heard disturbing things about the Federal Reserve. Monetary policy and its history are not my strong suits.

      Thank you for your reply. I hope that I was able to answer your questions in a satisfactory manner.
      Stuart Kerr

      Reply
      1. Michael R. Shelton Avatar
        Michael R. Shelton

        You did. You answered me respectfully and completely. I won’t get argumentative, but I will thank you for correcting me about Jefferson and the F.P. (I’m not sure why I put him in the sentence.)

        “When I wrote about the decline of trust in government I meant it as an indictment against our government, not against the citizens.”

        That is a very interesting statement.

      2. Stuart Kerr Avatar
        Stuart Kerr

        I need to apologize. While my response was respectful it was not gracious. Instead of going into detail on each of the questions and statements and correcting you, I should have answered your questions briefly and asked you what you thought about the people’s trust in government. My reply was too much like a defense of my article and not a continuation of the discussion.
        So let me ask, how do you perceive the trust of the people in government, has it changed, and, if so, how has it changed?

  3. George Aldhizer Avatar
    George Aldhizer

    Stuart, clearly it seems you wrote your first blog post intentionally, wanting to set the stage before you write more posts on politics, which is clearly your passion.

    Can you sort of explain your thought process on the transition from your first article to the this one? In other words, how are Christians supposed to navigate Paul in Romans 13 in which the rulers are “ordained” as Paul says, and “respected” as you say. Can you explain your thoughts on how Christians are to engage and critique the powers of the world (as you did above, and which I see in Paul and other NT writers), and believe in Romans 13?

    Reply
    1. Stuart Kerr Avatar
      Stuart Kerr

      Great question; I also struggled with how exactly I related the two, whether or not “A Reality Check” contradicted the points I had made in “Before Christians Talk Politics…” Part of the answer to this can be found in the Gospels:
      “But Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for Herodias his brother Philip’s wife, and for all the evils which Herod had done, Added yet this above all, that he shut up John in prison.”
      – Luke 3:19-20, KJV
      John the Baptist confronted Herod and his brother, both political figures, about their immorality and, it would seem, that it was the right thing to do. How he did this is uncertain, as the details of the conversation are not included in the Scriptures, but it may be assumed that he conducted his actions with respect for the offices they held, obeying the commands that the Apostle Paul would later write about in Romans 13.
      I seek to do the same as John, to tell the truth with respect for others for the sake of righteousness. While my own writing is not as powerful as the words of John the Baptist, I hope that it is done in the same spirit.
      If anyone has thoughts on what it means to be respectful toward our elected officials, or any other part of this thread, please feel free to share.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Conciliar Post

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading