estly and openly admit this. After all,rnnone other than the Lord Jesus Christrncommands us, in Matthew 5:37: “Butrnlet your communication be, Yea, yea;rnNav, nay: for whatsoever is more thanrnthese Cometh of evil.” The last thing wernneed in our political process is more peoplernspeaking double-talk, fluent gibberish,rnabout their real goals. I mean, if yourncan’t trust a Christian to tell the truth,rnwhom can you trust?rnIndeed, Christians should welcomernthe charge that they are seeking to “impose”rntheir views, and they should usernthis accusation to educate our people torncertain forgotten facts, such as the factrnthat our country was founded by BiblebelievingrnChristian “fanatics.” One ofrnthe best books documenting how ourrnlaws are based on the Bible and Christianityrn—Law and Revolution: The Formationrnof the Western Legal Traditionrn(1983)—was written by a Jew, formerrnHarvard L.aw Professor Harold Berman.rnSo instead of running from the accusationrnthat we are trying to write our religiousrnviews into law, we should joyfullyrnplead guilty to this and explain how, historically,rnthis is not at all “radical” orrn”extremist.” If it’s true, as is charged adrnnauseam, that we are trying to ChristianizernAmerica democratically throughrnthe ballot box and through our laws, sornwhat? We’re merely trying to restorernlegally what once was.rnLast summer in the Washington Post,rna self-described member of the “Christianrnleft,” Peter M. Storm, wonderedrnhow the Christian right, which says it’srnfor “nonintrusive government,” can favorrnthe government deciding which booksrncan be in a library, the government limitingrnits citizens’ overseas travel, the governmentrnrequiring schools to set asiderntime for religious exercises, the governmentrnregulating sexual activities. ButrnChristians aren’t anarchists. And Mr.rnStorm, who says that, like Christian conservatives,rnhe also “reads and loves thernWord of God,” seems not to have readrnthe Word of God at all.rnSaint Paul tells us that our civil government,rn”the higher powers,” “the powersrnthat be,” are “ordained of God,” andrnwhoever resists them resists Cod andrn”shall receive to themselves damnation.”rnIndeed, Saint Paul says of our “rulers”rnthat they “beareth not the sword in vain”rn(capital punishment) and are “ministersrnof Cod, a revenger to execute wrath uponrnhim who doeth evil.” Thus, we mustrnbe subject to these rulers and “renderrntherefore to all their dues: tribute tornwhom tribute is due; custom to whomrncustom; fear to whom fear; honour tornwhom honour.” As Christians, we mayrndebate whether any Christian Coalitionrn”public policy” may in fact be based onrnGod’s Word, but what is not debatable isrnthat the purpose of civil government,rnand our laws, is to do God’s will on earthrnas it is done in Heaven.rnMr. Storm says that “our religionrnshould inform and prescribe our personalrnlives, but not our politics.” But doesrnhe really believe this? Is he really forrnpolitics that are Godless? Saint Augustinernobserved centuries ago that governmentrnapart from God is nothing morernthan an organized band of robbers. Isrnthis what Mr. Storm wants? I doubt it.rnAnd if he does want this, how would itrnwork in real life? How could an individualrnbe “privately” a Christian but cast hisrnfaith aside in his “public” life? This isrnimpossible. And for a Christian, thisrnwould be un-Christian. We believe thatrnJesus Christ is Lord over everything—rnincluding the civil government.rnMr. Storm snidely says that he suspectsrnGod “does not care very much”rnabout things like the tax code and thernsize of the United States budget deficit.rnBut how can a man who says he “readsrnand loves the Word of God” say this?rnOf course God cares about these things.rnThe Lord Jesus Christ indicates preciselyrnsuch a concern when He speaks ofrnthings to be rendered to Caesar andrnthings to be rendered to God (Matthewrn22:21). And even the most cursoryrnglance at a biblical concordance revealsrnthat God has a lot to say about taxes,rndebt, and economics.rnInterestingly, where Mr. Storm doesrnthink it is appropriate for “religiousrnteachings” to lead to “support for governmentrnaction,” I find no Scripture.rnFor example, he thinks it is “clearly inrnkeeping with Christian beliefs” for thernstate to provide access to health care “forrnall mankind, including illegal aliens.”rnReally? And where in the Bible does hernsee this? I ask because he cites no suchrn”Christian beliefs,” not one.rnMr. Storm says that mere mortals arernnot permitted “to prescribe for Himrnwhat His preferences must be.” Well,rnamen! But God’s “preferences” are revealedrnto us in that Word of His whichrnMr. Storm claims he “reads and loves,”rnAnd we are commanded to obey them asrn”private” citizens and as “public” officeholders.rnFinally, Mr. Storm caricatures the religiousrnright’s creed as: “What we arernfor, God must be for,” when no memberrnof this group I know or have ever heardrnquoted has said anything even remotelyrnlike this—and Mr. Storm quotes nornsuch statement. He criticizes the religiousrnright for “boxing up God and presentingrnHim in its own image,” but thisrnis exactly what he does when he says “ourrnreligion” should inform our “private”rnlives but not our “polities.”rnAll Christians of the “right” or “left”rnmust never forget that God is not a “religion.”rnGod is God. His Word is Truth.rnAnd It must govern every area of life, ineludingrnpolitics. There is no such thingrnas partial sovereignty when it comes tornGod and His unchanging Word.rn—John Loftonrn”THERE IS N O GOD, and if therernwas. She made a mistake.” That statementrncame from a colleague of minernduring a class in philosophy. That is alsornthe extent to which most public collegernstudents will hear the “G” word mentionedrnduring their years of “higher”rneducation.rnRecent polls have shown that 89 percentrnof the American people believe inrnGod. Of the 52 percent of Americanrnhigh school graduates who go to college,rna clear majority attend public two- andrnfour-year schools. Yet the faculties ofrnthese schools appear to come exclusivelyrnfrom the 11 percent of the populace thatrndoesn’t believe in God. That’s not veryrn”multicultural,” and it shows little “respectrnfor diversity.”rnStudents, faculty, and staff alike atrnpublic colleges and universities tend tornassume that the separation of churchrnand state forbids teaching about God.rnThe fact is, you can teach about God inrna public college; the Supreme Court saysrnso. Of the package of freedoms includedrnin the First Amendment, three arernrelevant here: freedom of opinion, freedomrnto teach, and freedom of religion.rnThose freedoms mean that I can stand inrnfront of a class of undergraduates andrnread chapter and verse from the Biblernand not be charged with misconduct,rnharassed, suspended, or fired from myrnjob. Not legally, at any rate. Last year, arnfederal judge upheld Leonard Jeffries’—rnDr. Hate’s—right to spew racial venomrnin his classes at New York’s City College.rnFew, however, seem aware that the samernright allows professors to teach religion.rnDECEMBER 1994/5rnrnrn