Herb Titus Responds to Constitutional Challenges

by Herb Titus

Herb Titus, Christian Constitutionalist, graciously responds to questions about the U.S. Constitution's conformity to the Bible.

Q1. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why is it that the name of God is not mentioned and the appeal for governing authority is to “we the people” rather than to the God of the Bible?

The Constitution did not mark the creation of the United States of America as a nation, the Declaration did. The Declaration begins and ends with God. And the appeal to God's law and to God's providence establishes that America's founders knew that the governing authority for establishing a new nation is God, not the people. In contrast, the Constitution of the United States and the constitutions of the several states are the form of government of the American republic. While some state constitutions contains a preamble acknowledging God as the source of authority for establishing a government, there is no need for that - in that the Declaration would suffice. The Declaration states that the form of government is a matter of consent between the people and the civil rulers. That is Biblical. See I Samuel 8 and 10 and the scriptures where David does not become king by Samuel's anointing, but by consent - first of the people of Judah and then by the rest of the people in Israel.

Q2. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why is it that (apart from Franklin’s neglected prayer request) none of the delegates made any appeal to biblical principles of government, or to the Bible, or to God in the entire 4-volume “Notes From the Federal Convention” (a primary source document)?

Q3. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why do the Federalist Papers (a primary source document) contain no references to God, the Bible, or any biblical principles of government?

2 & 3 - Why should they? They were not forming a church, but a civil government. They came from diverse Christian communities, and were mindful that if scripture was relied upon, there would be divisions based upon whether denominational differences. Instead, they sought common ground, embracing Biblical principles -- such as federalism, separation of powers, limited civil government. Generally, they operated in a Christian culture shaped by the Reformation. Finally, whether a document is Christian or not does not depend upon references to the Bible. After all, Esther is part of the canon of scripture, but there is no mention of God in the book. Moreover, the very nature of their endeavor demonstrated that they were acting on a Biblical covenantal foundation. After all, why should 21st century Americans be bound by an 18th century document? The idea that an agreement struck by one's forefather binds future generations is derived from the Biblical tradition of covenantal power and responsibility from Adam, through Noah, through Abraham, through Moses, and Jesus Christ. Indeed, God -- although He has the absolute right to rule anyway that He pleases chose to rule only by covenant -- How dare civil rulers claim otherwise?

Q4. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why do the authors of the Federalist Papers never cite the nation of Israel as an example for Biblical principles of government, referring instead to Athens, Sparta and numerous other non-Christian examples?

Although the Israeli covenant reflected the law binding on all nations, its covenant was also holy, the forerunner of the church. America's founders recognized, then, that not all of God's law enforceable by the civil authorities pursuant to the holy aspect of the Israeli covenant applied to the civil governments of nations generally. Just because the civil authorities of Athens and Sparta did not acknowledge the true and living God, did not make them "non-Christian." Rather, the Bible teaches that God rules and reigns in all nations. Psalm 2. Indeed, the very idea of nationhood is from God and as Paul spoke to the Athenians, God created all nations setting their times and their boundaries. As the sovereign Lord of all nations, it should not be surprising that some nations got it right by Divine Providence.

Q5. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why does it outlaw any requirement for a public official to swear to govern according to the Bible in Article VI, Section 3?

The Bible is not a civil covenant. While it would be appropriate to apply the Bible as a church covenant, it would not be so in the formation of a civil government. There are many rules in the Bible that a civil ruler has no authority to enforce.

Q6. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why does it make itself rather than the Bible the highest law of the land in Article VI, Section 2?

The Constitution contains rules limiting the power of civil authorities. In that sense, and only in that sense, is it the supreme law of the land. In no way does the supremacy clause displace the Bible.

Q7. If the United States Constitution is a Christian document, why does it grant "all legislative power" to the Congress of the United States rather than to God?

Article I, Section 2 does not vest "all legislative power" in Congress; rather, it vest only that legislative power "granted herein." The very nature of legislative power presupposes that it is vesting only that power that conforms to God's law. If Congress enacts a bill into law that is in violation of God's law, it is not, by definition, exercising legislative power, but has become a tyranny.

Herb Titus

PS: Dennis - I have your list of questions. They are all very good. I will try to answer some of them now and the rest later.