President's Day

Something tugged at Ronald Reagan on that August weekend in 1982. The President noted in his diary: “More of Saturdays work plus a long letter I have to write to Loyal. I’m afraid for him. His health is failing badly.” Loyal Davis, Reagan’s father-in-law and a neurosurgeon, was just days away from death.

Something else worried Reagan: The dying man was an atheist. Davis once wrote, “I have never been able to subscribe to the divinity of Jesus Christ nor his virgin birth. I don’t believe in his resurrection, or a heaven or hell as places.”

Reagan, on the other hand, believed everyone would face a day of judgment, and that Davis’ was near. So the most powerful man in the world put everything else aside, took pen in hand and set out on an urgent mission—to rescue one soul.

This letter was found in the Reagan Library as part of Nancy Reagan’s personal effects:

Dear Loyal, I hope you’ll forgive me for this, but I’ve been wanting to write you ever since we talked on the phone. I’m aware of the strain you are under and believe with all my heart there is help for that. . . .

It was a miracle that a young man of 30 yrs. without credentials as a scholar or priest had more impact on the world than all the teachers, scientists, emperors, generals, and admirals who ever lived, all put together. Either he was who he said he was or he was the greatest faker & charlatan who ever lived. But would a liar & faker suffer the death he did?

Reagan wrote out John 3:16 for his father-in-law and then added:

We have been promised that all we have to do is ask God in Jesus name to help when we have done all we can—when we’ve come to the end of our strength and abilities and we’ll have that help. We only have to trust and have faith in his infinite goodness and mercy.

Did the letter have any impact? Nancy Reagan, who was with Loyal Davis when he died, and who saved the letter he received from his son-in-law, would later claim that her father did turn to God at the end of his life.

Possible Preaching Angle: Regardless of our political views, we can appreciate Mr. Reagan’s heartfelt concern and his clear presentation of the gospel.

Robert Morgan writes that as President William McKinley lay dying from an assassin's bullet in Buffalo, New York, in 1901, the Lord's Prayer was on his lips. Prayer had been a lifelong practice that guided McKinley through his political career and into the presidency. McKinley had been born into a devout Christian home fifty-eight years before, and born again at age fourteen. According to his pastor, A. D. Morton, young McKinley stood up during a youth meeting and said, "I have sinned; I want to be a Christian ... I give myself to the Savior who has done so much for me."

McKinley's mother, a woman of deep prayer, taught him to pray by example and encouragement, but his greatest lessons in prayer were forged under the pressures of his duties as President of the United States. One of his heaviest decisions arose in 1898 regarding the status of the Philippines after the Spanish-American War. One day, a delegation of church leaders came to the White House, and McKinley told them how he had decided to resolve the crisis in the Philippines.

"The truth is, I didn't want the Philippines," he said. "I did not know what to do. … I sought counsel from all sides—Democrats as well as Republicans—but got little help. … I walked the floor of the White House night after night until midnight, and I am not ashamed to tell you, gentlemen, that I went down on my knees and prayed Almighty God for light and guidance more than one night. And one night late it came to me this way."

McKinley relayed the strategy that developed in his mind as he prayed: that the Philippines should be taken seriously and helped, that the United States should "by God's grace do the very best we could by them as our fellow-men for whom Christ died." McKinley added, "And then I went to bed, and went to sleep and slept soundly."

"The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state and never its tool."

In May of 2010, Indiana congressman Mark Souder resigned his position after confessing to an affair with a part-time staffer. In more than a dozen emails to WORLD magazine, Souder reflected on his downfall. In one email, he shares how difficult it is to keep people in power in check. "Politicians and any top professionals are skilled manipulators and smooth with words," he wrote. "Holding us accountable is hard." Another email reveals the agony he feels over his failure. He writes: "My sin, while forgiven, is greater in that God put me in a position of public trust, so I deserve whatever criticism I receive." He goes on to write about what he did and how he felt in the midst of his affair: "I prayed multiple times a day, sang hymns with emotions and tears, felt each time that it wouldn't happen again, read the Bible every morning …. So how in the world did I have a torrid—which is an accurate word—many-year affair? How could I compartmentalize it so much?" In yet another email, Souder adds: "Bottom line, however, is that the problem is sin …. The problem is getting the will subordinate to the Holy Spirit early enough that the Spirit is not quenched."

In Fiji, singing hymns can get you in trouble. About one million Methodists live in the south Pacific island country, and each summer 20,000 to 50,000 of them gather for a conference. Before the conference begins, they have a massive choral contest. About 10,000 people participate. They sing hymns. That's it. Hymns. But in July 2009, the government shut them down. "No choral contest this year," the government said. There is a lot of turmoil in Fiji, and the government feared that the big crowd might get out of hand. According to news reports, "Church officials said the government fears the conference and singing contest will lead to further political instability." Nothing like singing Methodists to make a government nervous!

They are on to something there, though. Christians worshiping the Lord really are dangerous—although perhaps not as those officials feared. Worshiping God in Christ upsets world systems. It is revolutionary, subversive. It brings another kingdom into view.

Emma Daniel Gray died on June 8, 2009, at the age of 95. There was a big story about her in the Washington Post because for 24 years she was the woman who cleaned the office of the President of the United States. She served six presidents till she retired in 1979. Her official title? Charwoman.

What made the story even more interesting was that Mrs. Gray was a devout Christian. She would stand and pray over the President's chair each time she dusted it—her cleaning supplies in one hand, the other on the chair. She'd pray for blessings, wisdom, and safety.

While reflecting on the way she lived life, her pastor said, "She saw life through the eyes of promise is the way I'd put it. You can always look around and find reasons to be [unhappy]…but you couldn't be around her and not know what she believed."

That is exactly what God's people do: see life through the eyes of promise—and pray accordingly.

In his book The Jesus Revolution, pastor and author Leith Anderson shares a story about the tension that sometimes comes between obeying God and obeying the law of the land. A number of years ago, he and three others were traveling to a Communist country where Christians were regularly being persecuted. They did not have a direct flight to their destination, so they had to stay in a neighboring country for one evening. That night, while having dinner with a few fellow Christians in that country, Anderson and his companions were approached about smuggling in some Bibles for the underground church. Anderson immediately refused to do so, pointing out that it was illegal. The Christians in that country would not take no for an answer, though. They told Anderson they would return in the morning with the Bibles and that Anderson's group should "ask God what they should do." Anderson writes about the tough decisions that would follow:

Overnight, I made a decision. A Bible or two might be risky, but not impossible. However, I wasn't prepared for the following morning's delivery. It was a small library of Bibles, books about Christianity, study tools, and videos.

I truly can't explain why we did what we did. We divided up the Bibles, books, and videos among the four of us and loaded up every available space in our suitcases, carry-on bags, and purses. It was not a comfortable experience. When nearing our destination, the flight attendants distributed customs forms representing our names, passport numbers, and the answers to pointed questions. Were we bringing guns, narcotics, or literature into the country? The four of us sat paralyzed over what to write. If we said we were not bringing literature, we were lying. If we checked that we were bringing books and Bibles, we were in serious trouble. …

It was one of those moments when the Holy Spirit gave a simple solution that we would not have thought about ourselves. We didn't answer the question. We left it blank. I can't say that we were confident in our choice, but that's what we did. As we passed through immigration surrounded by armed guards and immigration officers, our forms were carefully scrutinized and all four of us were waved through.

What I next remember is the secret night meeting when we turned over the Bibles and literature to Christians from the underground church. Their faces still remain with me all my life.

You may want to criticize my lack of courage or condemn my actions as dishonest. For me, I was suddenly in the sandals of Peter and John who said, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard."

A Christian writer named Mike Barrett got interested in the idea of connecting with and learning from those who live a more radical faith. In an article for Christianity Today, he writes about a lesson he discovered along the way:

I began randomly interviewing strangers. Pity those like the woman in her mid-50s who sat on an airplane next to me between Portland and Denver. "What do you think about Christian radicals?" I asked her.

She was not a fan. Modern radical Christians, she complained, have hijacked their faith traditions and changed the original intents. She mentioned people who picket abortion clinics as the perfect example. "They don't seem very smart to me, because they don't understand the teaching of their own faith. They shove it down people's throats."

"Those people," she concluded, "are on the fringe to me." And she had no respect for anyone who was on the fringe.

Before returning to her Sudoku game, she paused thoughtfully, removed her glasses, and leaned over to say, "Actually, the anti-war protestors of the Vietnam era were a good kind of radical."

So for this random sample of one, carrying signs and marching can make you a radical. But [whether or not you're a good or a bad radical] depends on where you are marching and what's on your sign.

Leaders, especially those who are elected through a democratic process, usually reflect the spiritual and moral character of a nation. Those who obtain power through deception often come from cultures built on lies. The same holds true for materialistic or violent leaders.

Other times, God puts people in power to carry out his judgment. God referred to the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar as "my deputy" (Jeremiah 25:9; 27:6) and "my servant" (43:10), whom he used to punish the people of Judah for their disobedience. Habakkuk acknowledged the same reality.

When the Ottoman Empire threatened Europe, Martin Luther declared, "The Turk is the rod of God's anger against the apostate church, so opposition to it must begin with repentance, prayer, and preaching God's Word." If a political leader's behavior or stance on issues contradicts what we believe the Bible teaches, we need to step back humbly and ask, "Is God showing us something about our spiritual state?"—and then repent of any sin he reveals.

As many in Britain have reflected on the life and leadership of Tony Blair, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (1997–2007), stories have emerged concerning his faith. A 2008 issue of Time magazine featured one particularly moving story from Blair's past:

Blair is deeply religious—the most openly devout political leader of Britain since William Ewart Gladstone more than 100 years ago. He handles questions about religion deftly. He doesn't back down. His longtime press secretary and consigliere, Alastair Campbell, remembers Blair in 1996 at a school in Scotland where a gunman had killed 16 children and a teacher. In a bloodstained classroom, Campbell asked Blair, "What does your God make of this?" Blair, says Campbell, stopped and replied, "Just because man is bad, it does not mean that God is not good."

On the issue of legalizing same-sex marriage, even Christians who agree that it is wrong differ about whether Christians should make it a political issue. Whether legalizing same-sex marriage is an important political issue to you or not, the beliefs that are used to argue for it should matter deeply to you. No matter what our society decides on this and other issues, when an unbiblical belief works its way into the foundation of your personal morality, it can lay the groundwork for wrong living in many ways.

In September of 2008, Brad Pitt put into words the arguments that many use to justify legalizing same-sex marriage. He was explaining why he had just donated $100,000 to fight California's November ballot initiative that would overturn the state Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage. On first hearing, Pitt's three reasons for legalizing same-sex marriage sound completely fair and right. Here is what he said:

Because no one has the right to deny another their life, even though they disagree with it, because everyone has the right to live the life they so desire if it doesn't harm another, and because discrimination has no place in America, my vote will be for equality and against Proposition 8.

Again, we should be concerned about the laws of our society and the effect they have on everyone directly and indirectly, but we should be just as concerned about the beliefs that we may unwittingly adopt. Are Brad Pitt's beliefs true without any qualification? Is he partly right and partly wrong? And what does the Bible say about these beliefs?

I doubt if there is a problem—political or economic—that will not melt before the fire of a spiritual awakening.

—President Franklin Roosevelt, former U.S. president (1882–1945)

The sentence still jumps out at me from the middle of an editorial in The Wall Street Journal. It's been a long time since I read it, but it was one of those electric expressions that you can't forget: "People want to be lightly governed," the writer said, "by strong governments."

That's what you've wanted since you were a small child. You wanted your dad to be big and strong and able to do anything you could think of—except that, when he dealt with you, it had to be with gentleness and tenderness. You wanted a policeman on the corner tough enough to handle any neighborhood bully, but who would also hoist you to his shoulders and help you find your parents when you got lost in the crowd.

Lots of muscle; lots of restraint. There's an innate yearning in almost all of us for that rare combination. When evil people rise up, we want a government with the clout to back them down. Yet we never want that clout turned on us.

In the final analysis, people want to be lightly governed by strong governments because that's how God governs. The omnipotent ruler of the universe is also the one who invites us tenderly: "Come unto me, all you who are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."

In their book Freakonomics, Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner explain how a simple change to U. S. tax rules in 1987 exposed the depth of the public's willingness to deceive for financial gain:

In the 1980s, an I.R.S. research officer in Washington named John Szilagyi had seen enough random audits to know that some taxpayers were incorrectly claiming dependants for the sake of exemption. Sometimes it was a genuine mistake (a divorced wife and husband making duplicate claims on their children), and sometimes the claims were comically fraudulent (Szilagyi recalls at least one dependent's name listed as Fluffy, who was quite obviously a pet rather than a child).

Szilagyi decided that the most efficient way to clean up this mess was to simply require taxpayers to list their children's Social Security numbers… The idea never made its way out of the agency.

A few years later, however, with Congress clamoring for more tax revenue, Szilagyi's idea was dug up, rushed forward, and put into law for tax year 1986. When the returns started coming in the following April, Szilagyi recalls, he and his bosses were shocked: seven million dependents had suddenly vanished from the tax rolls, some incalculable combination of real pets and phantom children. Szilagyi's clever twist generated nearly $3 billion in revenues in a single year.

The 20th century was the bloodiest in human history. In Humanity: A Moral History of the 20th Century, Jonathan Glover estimates that 86,000,000 people died in wars fought from 1900 to 1989. That means 2,500 people every day, or 100 people every hour, for 90 years.

In addition to those killed in war, government-sponsored genocide and mass murder killed approximately 120,000,000 people in the 20th century—perhaps more than 80,000,000 in the two Communist countries of China and the Soviet Union alone, according to R. J. Rummel's Statistics of Democide.

Many Christians, like most of the populace, believe the political structures can cure all our ills. The fact is, however, that government, by its very nature, is limited in what it can accomplish. What it does best is perpetuate its own power and bolster its own bureaucracies.

—Charles (Chuck) Colson, advisor to President Nixon, writer, and founder of Prison Fellowship

The film Amazing Grace chronicles the efforts of William Wilberforce (Ioan Gruffedd) to end the British Transatlantic slave trade in the 19th century. In this scene, Wilberforce attempts to awaken the consciousness of the public to the horrible practice of the slave trade by arranging for a ship carrying members of Parliament and their wives to stop alongside a slave ship.

As Wilberforce appears, one man asks, "What's he doing up there?"

"Ladies and gentlemen," Wilberforce greets them, "this is a slave ship—the Madagascar. It has just returned from the Indies, were it delivered 200 men, women, and children to Jamaica. When it left Africa, there were 600 on board. The rest died of disease and despair."

By now, some people are raising handkerchiefs to their noses to block the stench.

Wilberforce continues, "That smell is the smell of death—slow painful death." A few people begin to cry. "Breathe it in; breathe it deeply. Take those handkerchiefs away from your noses. There now, remember that smell. Remember the Madagascar. Remember that God made man equal."

Rated - PG

Elapsed time: Chapter 12; this scene begins at 00:55:42 and ends at 00:56:52