Theologically Sound. Culturally Relevant.

Russell Moore ERLC

ERLC feigns support for religious liberty as Supreme Court tide shifts.

The death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg was perhaps the greatest mercy America has received in 2020. With the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, we have witnessed the single greatest shift in an individual seat in history. And now we are seeing the fruit of this monumental shift. The Bush liberal John Roberts is no longer the tie-breaking vote which could usher in an era of protections for religious liberty. The Supreme Court granted an injunction against Andrew Cuomo’s executive order.

In a break from reticence on the issue, Russell Moore and the ERLC congratulated the court on their ruling.

It’s worth noting that the Russell Moore has been silent when the Supreme Court has ruled against religious liberty twice in the year 2020 on the grounds of COVID restrictions. But with Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court, one vote on this issue is now flipped. So the ERLC filed an amicus brief for this case on the current case in New York. Phil Johnson points this out well.

Even when Russell Moore is right and finally defending religious liberty, which is his job as President of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, he’s right for the wrong reasons. Phil Johnson rightly points out that the ERLC is cravenly adjusting their actions to be on the winning side. In my on initial reaction, I point out that Russell Moore utterly neglects the core argument which is that the government does not have the right to regulate the free exercise of religion, let alone the freedom to peacefully assemble. When you abandon the principle to debate the procedure at which an offense is committed, the argument for religious liberty loses. Just like how the Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling did nothing for religious liberty, so too will Russell Moore’s ideal case.

Christ is head of the church, not some governor. The US Constitution protects the free exercise of religion. These are the core arguments a competent ERLC would be making. But they are not interested in defending religious liberty as they are craven opportunism.

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest

3 Responses

  1. My parents from New York let me know Cuomo said in a press conference that the ruling doesn’t really apply to him so his restrictions on churches and synagogues stand. There’s something seriously wrong with the guy and I’m afraid the Supreme Court isn’t going to do too much for us. I hate to say that but if governors can just ignore the court at their whim without repricution (as it appears now) than it appears we simply just cannot look to government to help us. We have to change more minds and win more souls to Christ. I’ll be keeping my eye on this one.

    1. It’s not a bad precedent to defy the Supreme Court, one that dates back to the founding fathers. However churches, sheriffs, should be emboldened by the ruling to defy the governor.

Leave a Reply to Ray Fava Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Join The Evangelical Dark Web

Join 2,771 other followers