RESPECTING RELIGION...

Speech at Mayor Healy's Latino/Clergy Leadership Meeting at Hard Grove Café - Delivered on March 26 by Rev. Mario González 

The Constitution of the United States - Article VI, Section 3.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

"AMERICA is an experiment in democracy. For hundreds of years now, people from all over the world have migrated to this country with an ideal about what had come to be known as the American dream.

It was a dream that led us to believe that the whole could be greater than the sum of its parts; that we could find greater strength, by virtue of our diversity. That people possessing different philosophical paradigms could somehow set aside their differences for the common good.

For hundreds of years we have been relatively successful at finding common ground and moving forward because, notwithstanding our differences, we learned to engage each other with due deference, with civility, and with respect.

This forward momentum, and our democratic experiment itself, is now challenged by a contrary ideal. Many now embrace a visceral political philosophy that values the use of ad hominem political strategies – strategies founded on appealing to people's base fears, emotions and prejudices rather than their intellect or reason.

The Bill of Rights places a constraint upon government's involvement in religion in the very first Amendment to the Constitution for a reason - because our founding founders valued the concept of religious liberty as a whole, and respect for the individual's right to practice their religion unencumbered and without having to worry about bearing the stigma of governmental intervention or criticism in particular,

The Fulop campaign now appears to believe that when it comes to conducting a campaign, "all bets are off," as regarding our First Amendment. That they, through a sitting Assemblyman, can explicitly criticize and exploit a candidate's alleged personal religious beliefs for their own political gain; that they can criticize the deeply held beliefs a large number of our constituents, particularly seniors among us with conservative views, with critical immunity. They have made a mistake.

We take this opportunity to thank the mayor for his stand on the First Amendment and the right of all people to worship according to their conscience, and the separation of a person's religion or creed from political discourse. He is to be applauded for taking the high road in this campaign and standing for ALL THE PEOPLE OF JERSEY CITY.

We are here joined together across denominational lines to tell Steve Fulop and his campaign that when it comes to religion, we demand respect across the board. This isn't just about Christians. We speak for all conservative religious groups in saying that this behavior will not be tolerated within political campaigns in our great city. A candidate's religious beliefs, whatever they are, must be respected." 

Standing For Your Rights | A Christian Obligation

A Biblical Legal Analysis of Citizen's Rights

There are two instances in Scripture where the Apostle Paul exercises his rights as a Roman citizen, but he does so for different reasons. He does so in Philippi (Acts 16) to protest to the Government's misuse of power over its citizenry. We must make sure that Government appropriately uses the power with which they have been entrusted. He insists that those who harmed and humiliated him personally address the situation and make amends to him publically (apologize). The second instance is in Jerusalem found in Acts 21. In this case, an issue concerning the Gospel is at stake. He demands his rights be observed so that ultimately God's will for his life could be accomplished, having been told by God that he was to "bear witness in Rome." Demanding justice of our leadership ultimately benefits the people and helps them to reach their divine destiny. By doing so, we often speak for those who do not have a voice.

Background

In Acts 16, and then again in Acts 21-23, we see a part of the apostle Paul that might, at first glance, seem contradictory to the philosophy he espouses in Romans 13 concerning the divine appointment of governmental authority and the Christian's obligation to submit to it.

In these chapters we see Paul exercising his right of provocatio, or 'appeal' as a Roman citizen. This was a right rooted in the Roman right to appeal to the sovereign people, provocatio ad populum. The Lex Iulia de vi codified the rights of cives (Roman citizens – generally members of high Roman society of which Paul was a part) as opposed to the very limited rights of the perergrinus (the ordinary provincial). The Lex Iulia protected the Roman citizen who invoked the right of provocatio from "from summary punishment, execution or torture without trial, from private or public arrest, and from actual trial by magistrates outside Italy. They (the provisions of the law) are to be understood in connection with the ordo system, which had been created for the protection of Roman citizens - a method of trial by jury at Rome for statutory offences."

When Paul and Silas were dragged in before the magistrates in Acts 16, the procedure followed initially comported with that expected for "extra ordinem" charges by a party with standing. However, the magistrates departed from legal procedure when they ordered Paul and Silas to be flogged and thrown in jail, in direct violation of their rights as cives Romani. God of course miraculously intervened and dramatically set them free that evening, after which it could be said that they voluntarily submitted to their illegal detention. After discovering their incompetence and gross error the following morning, the magistrates sent word that Paul and Silas should immediately be set free. Paul, however, refused to leave demanding instead that the magistrates themselves come to get them, apologize, and personally escort them out of jail for all to see. He made it a point to publicly display his indignation over the fact that he, a Roman citizen, had been so mistreated by "government officials" who had abused their sacred trust (power - Romans 13) in violation of his rights.

There are many amongst us for whom we act as surrogates - legal residents as well as undocumented people groups. We are their only voice. Standing for the rights of the people in the face of governmental abuse and neglect is not only correct biblically, it is arguably our Christian duty.