Jerusalem, April, 0AD
This morning the JPD (Jerusalem Police Department, aka, the Sanhedrin) issued a statement regarding the recent uproar and rebellion by followers of Jesus of Nazareth who are saying publicly that their leader, who was publicly crucified along with two other malefactors, has arisen from the dead and, adding insult to injury, is Israel's long awaited Messiah. The priests of the Hebrews along with the captain of the temple and the Sadducees arrested two of these rebels and apostates of Judaism, men known simply as Peter and John, for disturbing the peace at Solomon's Porch.
After bringing them before the rulers of the Jews, elders and scribes, as well as Annas the high priest, Caiaphas and many others, the decision was made that these so-called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth were to be ordered not to speak or teach in His name anymore. Peter and John continued with their rebellion against the established authorities before they were dismissed from the court. They uttered such non-sense as "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard." So when the court had further threatened them, they let them go.
Imagine that, officials offended by the name Jesus.
In today's Charlotte Observer, June 21, 2012, Observer reporter Michael Gordon reports that CMPD (Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department) "has asked its chaplains to stop including Jesus in their invocations at official department ceremonies." Sound familiar?
The purpose of this request, or, "the goal?": greater sensitivity to all religions practiced by the more than 2,000 police employees." My first question, what does the CMPD mean by sensitivity? My second question, what does "invocation" mean?
To be truly "sensitive" toward someone's religion would be to try to avoid offending them or their religion; this request does both. It offends Christians and Jews and Muslims and makes a mockery of their religions. To tell one who practices his or her religion with faith and the conviction of the truth of that particular religion not to mention the name of their deity is to render void any prayer offered. Every chaplain in the CMPD should be insulted by this request. (I would really like to see the response by the Muslim police officers in the CMPD if they are aware of the possibilites this requests opens them up to as well).
This is not an act of "greater sensitivity to all religions," it is a great insensitivity to all religions. This proposal would render all religions as the same when they are clearly not. This is insulting to all religions, it is not being sensitive. For a Christian pastor or chaplain to obey this requests is tantamount to denying Christ. For these Christian ministers to intentionally avoid using the name of Jesus because they have been told to by the powers that be would be to deny Jesus. (Acts 4:1-22)
How does CMPD define "invocation?" When a chaplain or pastor or priest or an imam invokes, they're not invoking the help of the police but rather they're invoking the help of their deity. And for Christian chaplains to be asked not to use the name of their Lord and Savior and God the Son, Jesus, is to tempt them to listen to man rather than the clear word of God. (Jn. 15:16; Acts 4. Read Jn. 15:18-25 for a real look at what's behind such requests, including those from our public schools).
It is clear that those in power at CMPD do not recognize the legitimacy of any religion if they think that their request is reasonable.
Of course, nothing is said in the Charlotte Observer about the dieites of the Jews and Muslims, just that of the Christian. That makes sense since all 6 CMPD chaplains profess to be Christian. This seems to miss the desired goal of not offending any religion. But it does say that it's ok to offend Christians.
It may be that our government needs to make an amendment to our Constitution that would eliminate such abuse of the First Amendment as we are witnessing in this requests by the CMPD. This amendment would say something like "Neither State government nor local government nor our public instituions of education shall make a law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The First Amendment prohibits Congress from such interference but not State government or city government or our public schools and places of higher education. That would eventually put an end to the rediculous laws and ordinances enacted around our nation such as forbidding praying in the name of Jesus at football games, etc., etc.