Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. — A politician from the 1950’s.
I like the quote above. It is a quote that could be applied to Christianity as well. Let me give you some thoughts. The Boston Tea Party was an emotional outburst of sentiment against unpopular British tax practices. The proto-patriotism that was expressed at the Boston Tea Party was proved in those who served in the Continental Army for several years, in those who spent the hard winter at Valley Forge, in those who supported the troops with the produce from their farms, the money from their city jobs, in other words by the sweat of their brows.
But had it been only that, it would still not have really been patriotism. The hard work of patriotism came in the building of a nation. It was quickly realized that the original Articles of Confederation were neither working nor practicable. So there came the hard work of writing a Constitution. Then there came the realization that if the United States of America was to live up to its ideals that the Bill of Rights was necessary in order to ensure those things for which those patriots had fought were not taken away again in the future. I am sure that the committee work necessary, and the debate, and the compromises, were often neither exciting nor pleasing. And yet, the forging of a nation required that all these things take place.
Even then, the work was not done. The first presidency of the United States was a key time. Everything that President George Washington did set a precedent. How future presidencies would be carried out was partially determined by how President George Washington was about to behave in his first presidency. But, let me go back to 1782, right after the revolution against Great Britain had finished. Most people do not realize that the Congress back then (under the Articles of Confederation) did not follow through and support the troops like they had promised. The military had not been paid in years. Yes, you read right, the military had not been paid in years. The troops were in a state of semi-revolt and the following proposal was made:
On May 22, 1782, one of Washington’s officers, Colonel Lewis Nicola wrote to him that the ineffectiveness of the Congress during the war had demonstrated the inadequacy of republican government. Nicola proposed that Washington become King of the United States.
Another way to put it is that the Congress of that time was not patriotic. If you notice, while we know the names of several of those who signed the Declaration of Independence, I suspect that unless one is an extreme history buff, one does not really know any names of those who served on that Congress! Our failure to remember them is proof of their lack of patriotism. As we all know, then General George Washington turned down the offer to become King. And, he could have easily become King. He not only had the full support of the people, more important he had the full support of the Continental Armed Forces. Patriotism is often found in making the difficult decisions that must be made and are best for the country. In passing, should you wish to see who in modern times might be king should George Washington had accepted, read this article from Newsweek 2008 about one possible line of succession from King George Washington. It is a rather fun and totally speculative read.
Finally, let me finish with two thoughts from President John F. Kennedy’s inaugural speech that I think you will like:
“…the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.”
“Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country”
I have frequently wondered: had I lived during the 1770s in America, would I have supported the freedom desired by the Revolutionists or would I have seen my Christian duty to support the authorities and been a Loyalist. (I have ancestors on both sides.) Thank God I am not faced with such a decision.
Some right are indeed God-given, grounded in the inherent and infinite dignity of human persons (and humanity as a whole) “created in the image and likeness of God; however, I fail to see a Divinely-granted “right to keep and bear arms”….
I doubt you would find a divine right to bear arms, other than that given to the State in Romans 13, which is directly given the right to wield a sword.
But, I will point out that the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights does mention that rebellion may be necessary! “Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.”
Interestingly enough, the story of God’s dealing with Rehoboam is that of not only permitting, but encouraging a revolution. Necessarily, revolutions do not take place without arms. And, even more interesting, there is that never-again-repeated passage in which Our Lord Jesus Christ says to the disciples to arm themselves. But, then he rebuked Saint Peter for using the sword.
So, while neither the UN nor the Bible address possessing weapons, neither do they appear to forbid it per se.
Sure. However, I think the question of revolution is a separate matter. If, God forbid, that were to become necessary, and if it were to succeed, it would require gaining access to heavy military armaments, such as tanks, APC’s, even military aircraft.
Small arms just would not be adequate.
I do not advocate outlawing the private possession of firearms. I just think that their ownership and use should be regulated and insurance required, rather like how we deal with automobile ownership and operation.