Centennial Institute

Centennial Review
Colorado Christian University
8787 W. Alameda Ave.
Lakewood, CO 80226

Return Service Requested

Centennial Review Principled Ideas from the Centennial Institute Volume 1, Number 6 • November 2009
November 2009

Virtue, Freedom, VIRTUE, FREEDOM, POINT:

and Christian Citizenship Virtue Should Be the National Policy Priority
by Kevin Miller AND CHRISTIAN CITIZENSHIP
Face it, virtue is merely freedom exercised in a principled
■ Point: Virtue Should Be By Kevin Miller fashion. And the one thing that has truly set America apart
the National Policy Priority for a couple of hundred years is the pursuit of virtue. From
America as a virtuous society and America correcting slavery and other wrongs in their own culture, to
■ Counterpoint: Freedom Should Be
the National Policy Priority as a free society: citizens have held to these fighting Nazis and other would-be oppressors in world wars,
two ideals from our earliest days. The to rebuilding just-recent-enemies’ economies through the
Liberty’s Moral Dimension aspiration to freedom or to virtue—or to
by Gregory Schaller Marshall Plan, to meeting the needs of neighbors in periods
a confluence of both—was crucial in the of strife or natural disaster, Americans have long pursued
www.CentennialCCU.org is your online resource founding of the British colonies, including
for this and previous issues of Centennial Review, a unique virtue worldwide through action, often sacrificial
news of Institute events, and daily updates on the establishment of Rhode Island by Roger action.
faith, family, and freedom at our ’76 Blog. Williams. It can be seen in the Declaration of Independence
as well as in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. To the extent that America is not considered virtuous, for
Tax-deductible contributions from friends make pos-
sible the Institute’s outreach and all of Colorado Chris-
example by Muslim leaders who assert we are the Great
It came to white heat in the Civil War. It inspired great re- Satan for allowing businesses to freely export pornography,
tian University’s educational work. We invite your
support via our Web site at www.CentennialCCU.org form movements such as Progressivism, the New Deal, and it is not for lack of desire by Christians to historically fight
or at the above mailing address. Civil Rights. It has driven moral struggles from the anti-vice such vice. And even when such efforts fall short—as they
Comstock Laws and Prohibition in past generations to abor- often will in a free society—it is well worth the good fight
tion, affirmative action, and same-sex marriage today. in order to draw a line for standards, classic standards that
St. Augustine clearly and wisely delineated between the City THE VERDICT:
of God and the City of Man. We need to recover that wisdom. Is there a way for communal righteousness and personal every society should strive after. - See “Why Virtue” on Page 2
Our faith will only be differentiated (and successful) when WHAT’S YOUR PRIORITY, AND WHY? liberty to coexist in national policy? This is a thorny question
it does not allow the typical American to believe that the The tension between enforcing national virtue and promoting for any of us who seek to be not only good citizens, but also COUNTERPOINT:
Christian faith is synonymous with laws and rules that limit common individual freedom is certainly not new. faithful adherents to Scripture. If some Christians assume Freedom Should Be the National Policy Priority
common freedom. that the two ideals blend seamlessly into a single practical
But Christian citizens in the America of 2010 must contend Let’s be realistic. Virtue has never manifested in this country,
world view, they oversimplify. There is increasing evidence
Why are American Christian leaders bemoaning the rise of with a very different set of realities for the church, of mores or any other country, by national mandate or policy. (One must
that freedom and virtue are on a collision course in America,
a post-Christian culture? Partly because they themselves, for the nation as a whole, from those confronting believers in never mistake mere compliance for genuine virtue.) In fact,
with unpleasant consequences already here or coming soon.
following Europe, have led the “virtue 1910 or 1810. when Christians try to foster virtue via national policy, that not
Consider:
movements” that help speed the lapse Does the application of biblical principles and timeless wis- only hasn’t worked, but it also backfires in crucial ways.
of the faith into cultural Christianity, ■ When Catholic bishops officially assert that government-
dom call for the same priorities now as then, regardless of the One need only look to the decline of Europe. Where Christian
effectively eroding the authentic reality provided health care is the right of every American, is this a
era, its agreed-upon values, its aspirations, its failings? ideals have become “the culture” via government action (as
of the Christian faith. step toward making us a more virtuous society? Or does it
Or does each age call for a different priority derived from infringe upon the freedom of individuals by taxing one to pay with the welfare state), the ideology of big-G government
Christians should well take heed: Our those same biblical principles, yet with timeless wisdom has been the ultimate “winner” and the church has signifi-
for another’s “right”?
best course is to pursue individual free- adjusted in light of 200 years’ more experience in our own cantly faded in influence. This is the Catholic teaching of
dom at every opportunity with regard ■ When no-fault divorce is deemed acceptable by more and
country and many others? “solidarity” in action, an emotionally seductive idea for
to national policy, to diligently fight more churches in the United States, is this a wholesome
What ultimately best serves the body of believers as well as many that, when applied as - See “Why Freedom” on Page 3
the constant encroachment of national affirmation of individual liberty? Or is it an unwholesome
policies limiting individual freedom the body politic: pursuing virtue at a national policy level or debasement of societal virtue? FROM THE EDITOR: The teaching of citizenship, part of our mission at the
(including the “virtue mandates” of pursuing common freedom? ■ Centennial Institute, requires thinking about thinking. What does it mean
■ When two persons of the same sex are not legally free to
Christians and political correctness enter into a civil marriage, due to the opposition of many to think clearly? Centennial Fellow Kevin Miller confronted this in a CCU
alike), and to work unceasingly at seminar on August 28, 2009. The present essay, based on his talk, thinks
Christians (as well as Muslims), is this a defense of America’s
through both sides of an issue where too many people hold an unthinking
St. Augustine of Hippo applying the principle of subsidiarity, virtue as historically understood? Or is it a trap waiting to be position. Miller is a former dean of the CCU School of Business who is now
(354 - 430) is depicted in influencing every platoon where God sprung against religious believers someday soon, when secu- building a technology company and chairs the Vanguard Forum, a discus-
this vintage manuscript
engraving. has placed us. ■ larists may try to pass laws branding opposite-sex marriage as sion circle for biblical perspectives on current affairs. – John Andrews
Centennial Review, November 2009 ▪ 4 a “hate” institution? - See “Lead Article” on Page 2

CI-nov.indd 1 10/27/2009 11:27:58 AM

 Lead Article: From Page 1In other words, how well is either
the body of believers or the body politic really served by
today’s anomalous situation where so many Christians, as
citizens, declaim for “preserving marriage” and fight against
same-sex unions—even while those same Christians, as pri-
vate individuals, go with the cultural flow on cohabitation,
disposable vows, and serial marriage?
So we need to ask ourselves whether it’s really practical to
hope that biblical standards could constrain the scope of
individual liberty for everyone in our republican democracy.
Believers are enjoined to freedom-in-Christ, which allows a
wide realm of choice but disallows self-destructive behav-
ior. They live under those constraints by choice if they so
choose. For the populace at large, however, perhaps civil
law ought to be content with a broader common freedom
in which personal indulgences such as substance use and
sexual expression have more latitude. And perhaps in the
pluralistic America of 2010 it will be found wise to define
this latitude more leniently than our stern forefathers did in
1910 or 1810.
Trends and Trade-Offs
Freedom-in-Christ clearly limits the common freedom
desired and expected by millions of American citizens (in-
cluding many Christians). Maybe even now it is a majority
of Americans who want common freedom far more than
freedom-in-Christ. And perhaps even Christians should now
consider it crucial to the success of the church for common
freedom, rather than freedom-in-Christ, to be accessible in
everyday life.
When some Christians argue that requiring everyone to
practice (or at least strive for) freedom-in-Christ makes
for a more virtuous society, they may well be right. But,
whether they acknowledge it or not, virtue truly pursued
(and enforced) exacts a price on the common freedom of
someone—whether it’s the church-going husband and wife
seeking an easy (read: unbiblical) divorce, or the student
seeking a secular-humanist (read: prayerless) school to at-
tend, or the two men seeking to marry each other.
Many Christians seem to have convinced themselves that no
tension exists in this worldview. They believe national policy
in 2010 can still pursue both virtue and freedom, under the
theory that the community is willing to give up some free-
doms on behalf of achieving some meaningful measure of
(a traditional understanding of) virtue. But whether they are
right or wrong, their children (and perhaps even they) will
not likely enjoy the luxury of that fading construct, since
traditional virtues have already been eclipsed in many areas
CENTENNIAL REVIEW is published monthly by the Centennial Institute at Colorado Christian University. Publisher, William L. Armstrong. Editor, John Andrews. Designer, Danielle Hull. Illustrator,
Benjamin Hummel. Subscriptions free upon request. Write to: Centennial Institute, 8787 W. Alameda, Lakewood, CO 80226. Call 800.44.FAITH. Or visit us online at www.CentennialCCU.org. Centennial
Institute sponsors research, events, and publications to enhance public understanding of the most important issues facing our state and nation. By proclaiming Truth, we aim to foster faith, family, and
freedom, teach citizenship, and renew the spirit of 1776. Tax-deductible contributions from friends make possible the Institute’s outreach and all of Colorado Christian University’s educational work.
We invite your support at the above mailing address, or via our Web site at www.CentennialCCU.org.
Centennial Review, November 2009 ▪ 2
CI-nov.indd 2
Why Virtue: From Page 1For better or worse, the dominant play-
ing field for establishing virtue is now at the national policy
level. Therefore, Christian citizens must work diligently on
every significant social issue that promotes virtue (or at least
helps retard the decline of virtue). To not do so in the name
of preserving some individual freedoms, freedoms that in
truth actually decay society, is an abdication of responsibil-
ity. Liberty—absent the boundaries of classic, important
virtues—is indeed merely license.
Christians are called to be “salt and light” to the surrounding
culture. To vacate the arena of national-policy social issues
—just as power continues to inexorably accumulate at the
national level in a very powerful country—is folly at the
highest level. Just as the Apostle Paul knew, Rome is where
the determinative action often is, and Christians who delib-
erately decline to play at such an important level have fallen
vitally short of the fullness of what “salt and light” means.
A final note. Mark Twain, speaking through the actions of
his fictional Tom Sawyer, understood well one of the most
sophisticated approaches to being effective. Young Tom, you
will recall, persuaded his friends that it was in their personal
interests to do his work of whitewashing the fence. Similarly,
Christians impact the culture by convincing atheists, agnos-
tics, and every other non-Christian that, indeed, America’s
job is to meet the needs of all their neighbors—a uniquely
Christian worldview and action. Now, (look at ’em!) the
convinced non-Christians (who wouldn’t get caught dead
doing anything else Christianly) assume leadership and meet
those needs with the treasure of all Americans. As a result,
Christians’ time and treasure are freed up for the freshly pri-
oritized investment: evangelization and material assistance
worldwide.
Hence we can see that from every perspective, pursuing
virtue is the right strategic priority for exercising astute
Christian citizenship. ■
by progressive ideas of virtue. And in
End Lead Article, from left
either case, an enforced national virtue, whether “traditional”
or “progressive,” that goes beyond the core enforcement of
crimes against property (e.g., theft) and persons (e.g., mur-
der, rape, abortion) will end up in unpleasant—and probably
unsustainable—tension with common freedom in both the
economic and religious dimensions. As power vests ever-
increasingly in government at the national level, Christians
along with other interested citizens naturally have gravitated
toward working for their policy goals at that level. But
should virtue or freedom be the priority? Decide for yourself
from the accompanying case statements. ■
Why Freedom: From Page 1 national government initiative (which
of course consistently becomes deeply entrenched), is gravely
flawed. One’s second look should be at the results of “national
policy” virtue-initiatives here at home. For decades, centuries
even, Christians have fought prostitution (Comstock and
later efforts), pornography (again, Comstock and later efforts),
imbibing of alcohol (Prohibition), gambling, etc. from the top
down via national policy.
But, “by their fruits you shall know them.” How effective have
these efforts truly been? Ineffective for certain, by virtually any
measure, and many people have turned against the Christian
faith because their resulting street-level perception of Christ is
as a “social-issues naysayer” rather than as the grace-offering
Savior of the World. Meanwhile, individual freedoms, hard-
won and all too uncommon around the world, steadily erode.
It’s really Christianity 101: The New Testament teaches that
even biblical law doesn’t create righteousness; only Christ can.
If biblical law cannot create righteousness, how much more
powerless is civil law to create it?
But the really critical fact is this: Whenever emphasizing vir-
tue as a legitimate pursuit for national policy, virtue-focused
Christians have simply opened the door for the politically cor-
rect mandates now creeping into our national way of life and
for the kinds of Islamic practices and prohibitions that more
and more of Europe is acquiescing to.
Such Christians who insist on national requirements for virtue
and then later lose the battles for just what virtues are enforced…
well, they are following in the strategic footsteps of Haman and
will be hung on their own gallows.
No, the overriding purposes of national government are to
defend the country and protect individual freedoms.
Where’s Our Trust?
Many Christians who think themselves believers in freedom
are caught in a paradox of their own making: They believe in
free markets for economic liberty but apparently do not believe
in free markets when it comes to religious liberty. of such totalitarian ideologies as Communism or radical
These Christians should reorient toward the primacy of sharing Islam). Thus, the Christian foundationally should work for
the faith; nothing will defeat the power of the Gospel (as long the common freedom of all: economic liberty and religious
as the laborers are not too few). liberty for everyone—the Buddhist, the Christian, the mod-
Of all people, Christians should be willing to have a truly level erate Muslim, the secularist, the agnostic.
playing field (of religious freedom for everyone) on which to
then demonstrate the power of the Gospel; hundreds of millions
of Christians worldwide would covet such a level playing field
for sharing their faith.
The Catholic teaching of subsidiarity is the ideal application for
freedom here. Or if you will, Edmund Burke’s “little platoons,”
where local groups (families, places of worship, local schools,
neighborhoods, local communities) have self-directed latitude
to forge their groups as they see fit, as long as the foundations
of the country are not threatened (as they are by the stated goals
Vo ic e s o f C C U
LIBERTY’S MORAL DIMENSION
By Gregory Schaller
“The right to define one’s own concept of
existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of
the mystery of human life.” That’s what lib-
erty means, according to Planned Parenthood
v. Casey, the 1992 Supreme Court decision
that upheld Roe v. Wade. This suggests that,
in the area of political morality, there are no
transcending universal truths and we are each
free to determine what is right for ourselves.
Yet such a view is far from the Founders’ understanding as ex-
pressed in the Declaration of Independence. There our source
of liberty is declared, and the limits and ordering of liberty are
defined, on the basis of self-evident truths that we are able to
recognize through human reason.
The Declaration affirms these fundamentals: 1) God is the source
of our rights; 2) all men are created equal; 3) based on the Creator
and our equality, we have certain inalienable rights which our civil
society is obliged to protect. When these concepts are properly
understood, we see that liberty is not the freedom for each of us
to define our own concept of existence. Rather, liberty is ordered
by the Creator and limited by our shared common nature.
According to the order and limits, we have a duty to respect the
rights of others. Our Founders rejected the idea that one was
born in a position to rule over others. The authority of govern-
ment rests in the consent of the equal members of society.
We can see through the lens of equality, which demands a respect
for the rights of others, that liberty is in fact limited and ordered.
This morally rigorous conception of liberty leads to a very dif-
ferent way of thinking about the free society from that of the
Supreme Court’s solipsistic interpretation in Casey. ■
Gregory Schaller is assistant professor
of political science at Colorado Christian
University. He is completing his Ph.D. at Centennial
Temple University, having earned an M.A. at Institute
Villanova University and a B.A. at Eastern
Colorado Christian University
University.
But there is no free lunch here: The Christian then must
work very hard for real freedom via subsidiarity—securing
common-freedom vehicles, such as school vouchers, and
then robustly exercising those common freedoms.
This vision of freedom was what the Founders forged and
secured. But it is increasingly difficult to hold on to because
this is not a passive libertarianism—rather, it is a daily, never-
ceasing fight to stop national policy which would erode or
eradicate precious everyday, common freedoms exercised at
the local level.
Centennial Review, November 2009 ▪ 3
10/27/2009 11:27:59 AM
 Lead Article: From Page 1In other words, how well is either
the body of believers or the body politic really served by
today’s anomalous situation where so many Christians, as
citizens, declaim for “preserving marriage” and fight against
same-sex unions—even while those same Christians, as pri-
vate individuals, go with the cultural flow on cohabitation,
disposable vows, and serial marriage?
So we need to ask ourselves whether it’s really practical to
hope that biblical standards could constrain the scope of
individual liberty for everyone in our republican democracy.
Believers are enjoined to freedom-in-Christ, which allows a
wide realm of choice but disallows self-destructive behav-
ior. They live under those constraints by choice if they so
choose. For the populace at large, however, perhaps civil
law ought to be content with a broader common freedom
in which personal indulgences such as substance use and
sexual expression have more latitude. And perhaps in the
pluralistic America of 2010 it will be found wise to define
this latitude more leniently than our stern forefathers did in
1910 or 1810.
Trends and Trade-Offs
Freedom-in-Christ clearly limits the common freedom
desired and expected by millions of American citizens (in-
cluding many Christians). Maybe even now it is a majority
of Americans who want common freedom far more than
freedom-in-Christ. And perhaps even Christians should now
consider it crucial to the success of the church for common
freedom, rather than freedom-in-Christ, to be accessible in
everyday life.
When some Christians argue that requiring everyone to
practice (or at least strive for) freedom-in-Christ makes
for a more virtuous society, they may well be right. But,
whether they acknowledge it or not, virtue truly pursued
(and enforced) exacts a price on the common freedom of
someone—whether it’s the church-going husband and wife
seeking an easy (read: unbiblical) divorce, or the student
seeking a secular-humanist (read: prayerless) school to at-
tend, or the two men seeking to marry each other.
Many Christians seem to have convinced themselves that no
tension exists in this worldview. They believe national policy
in 2010 can still pursue both virtue and freedom, under the
theory that the community is willing to give up some free-
doms on behalf of achieving some meaningful measure of
(a traditional understanding of) virtue. But whether they are
right or wrong, their children (and perhaps even they) will
not likely enjoy the luxury of that fading construct, since
traditional virtues have already been eclipsed in many areas
CENTENNIAL REVIEW is published monthly by the Centennial Institute at Colorado Christian University. Publisher, William L. Armstrong. Editor, John Andrews. Designer, Danielle Hull. Illustrator,
Benjamin Hummel. Subscriptions free upon request. Write to: Centennial Institute, 8787 W. Alameda, Lakewood, CO 80226. Call 800.44.FAITH. Or visit us online at www.CentennialCCU.org. Centennial
Institute sponsors research, events, and publications to enhance public understanding of the most important issues facing our state and nation. By proclaiming Truth, we aim to foster faith, family, and
freedom, teach citizenship, and renew the spirit of 1776. Tax-deductible contributions from friends make possible the Institute’s outreach and all of Colorado Christian University’s educational work.
We invite your support at the above mailing address, or via our Web site at www.CentennialCCU.org.
Centennial Review, November 2009 ▪ 2
CI-nov.indd 2
Why Virtue: From Page 1For better or worse, the dominant play-
ing field for establishing virtue is now at the national policy
level. Therefore, Christian citizens must work diligently on
every significant social issue that promotes virtue (or at least
helps retard the decline of virtue). To not do so in the name
of preserving some individual freedoms, freedoms that in
truth actually decay society, is an abdication of responsibil-
ity. Liberty—absent the boundaries of classic, important
virtues—is indeed merely license.
Christians are called to be “salt and light” to the surrounding
culture. To vacate the arena of national-policy social issues
—just as power continues to inexorably accumulate at the
national level in a very powerful country—is folly at the
highest level. Just as the Apostle Paul knew, Rome is where
the determinative action often is, and Christians who delib-
erately decline to play at such an important level have fallen
vitally short of the fullness of what “salt and light” means.
A final note. Mark Twain, speaking through the actions of
his fictional Tom Sawyer, understood well one of the most
sophisticated approaches to being effective. Young Tom, you
will recall, persuaded his friends that it was in their personal
interests to do his work of whitewashing the fence. Similarly,
Christians impact the culture by convincing atheists, agnos-
tics, and every other non-Christian that, indeed, America’s
job is to meet the needs of all their neighbors—a uniquely
Christian worldview and action. Now, (look at ’em!) the
convinced non-Christians (who wouldn’t get caught dead
doing anything else Christianly) assume leadership and meet
those needs with the treasure of all Americans. As a result,
Christians’ time and treasure are freed up for the freshly pri-
oritized investment: evangelization and material assistance
worldwide.
Hence we can see that from every perspective, pursuing
virtue is the right strategic priority for exercising astute
Christian citizenship. ■
by progressive ideas of virtue. And in
End Lead Article, from left
either case, an enforced national virtue, whether “traditional”
or “progressive,” that goes beyond the core enforcement of
crimes against property (e.g., theft) and persons (e.g., mur-
der, rape, abortion) will end up in unpleasant—and probably
unsustainable—tension with common freedom in both the
economic and religious dimensions. As power vests ever-
increasingly in government at the national level, Christians
along with other interested citizens naturally have gravitated
toward working for their policy goals at that level. But
should virtue or freedom be the priority? Decide for yourself
from the accompanying case statements. ■
Why Freedom: From Page 1 national government initiative (which
of course consistently becomes deeply entrenched), is gravely
flawed. One’s second look should be at the results of “national
policy” virtue-initiatives here at home. For decades, centuries
even, Christians have fought prostitution (Comstock and
later efforts), pornography (again, Comstock and later efforts),
imbibing of alcohol (Prohibition), gambling, etc. from the top
down via national policy.
But, “by their fruits you shall know them.” How effective have
these efforts truly been? Ineffective for certain, by virtually any
measure, and many people have turned against the Christian
faith because their resulting street-level perception of Christ is
as a “social-issues naysayer” rather than as the grace-offering
Savior of the World. Meanwhile, individual freedoms, hard-
won and all too uncommon around the world, steadily erode.
It’s really Christianity 101: The New Testament teaches that
even biblical law doesn’t create righteousness; only Christ can.
If biblical law cannot create righteousness, how much more
powerless is civil law to create it?
But the really critical fact is this: Whenever emphasizing vir-
tue as a legitimate pursuit for national policy, virtue-focused
Christians have simply opened the door for the politically cor-
rect mandates now creeping into our national way of life and
for the kinds of Islamic practices and prohibitions that more
and more of Europe is acquiescing to.
Such Christians who insist on national requirements for virtue
and then later lose the battles for just what virtues are enforced…
well, they are following in the strategic footsteps of Haman and
will be hung on their own gallows.
No, the overriding purposes of national government are to
defend the country and protect individual freedoms.
Where’s Our Trust?
Many Christians who think themselves believers in freedom
are caught in a paradox of their own making: They believe in
free markets for economic liberty but apparently do not believe
in free markets when it comes to religious liberty. of such totalitarian ideologies as Communism or radical
These Christians should reorient toward the primacy of sharing Islam). Thus, the Christian foundationally should work for
the faith; nothing will defeat the power of the Gospel (as long the common freedom of all: economic liberty and religious
as the laborers are not too few). liberty for everyone—the Buddhist, the Christian, the mod-
Of all people, Christians should be willing to have a truly level erate Muslim, the secularist, the agnostic.
playing field (of religious freedom for everyone) on which to
then demonstrate the power of the Gospel; hundreds of millions
of Christians worldwide would covet such a level playing field
for sharing their faith.
The Catholic teaching of subsidiarity is the ideal application for
freedom here. Or if you will, Edmund Burke’s “little platoons,”
where local groups (families, places of worship, local schools,
neighborhoods, local communities) have self-directed latitude
to forge their groups as they see fit, as long as the foundations
of the country are not threatened (as they are by the stated goals
Vo ic e s o f C C U
LIBERTY’S MORAL DIMENSION
By Gregory Schaller
“The right to define one’s own concept of
existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of
the mystery of human life.” That’s what lib-
erty means, according to Planned Parenthood
v. Casey, the 1992 Supreme Court decision
that upheld Roe v. Wade. This suggests that,
in the area of political morality, there are no
transcending universal truths and we are each
free to determine what is right for ourselves.
Yet such a view is far from the Founders’ understanding as ex-
pressed in the Declaration of Independence. There our source
of liberty is declared, and the limits and ordering of liberty are
defined, on the basis of self-evident truths that we are able to
recognize through human reason.
The Declaration affirms these fundamentals: 1) God is the source
of our rights; 2) all men are created equal; 3) based on the Creator
and our equality, we have certain inalienable rights which our civil
society is obliged to protect. When these concepts are properly
understood, we see that liberty is not the freedom for each of us
to define our own concept of existence. Rather, liberty is ordered
by the Creator and limited by our shared common nature.
According to the order and limits, we have a duty to respect the
rights of others. Our Founders rejected the idea that one was
born in a position to rule over others. The authority of govern-
ment rests in the consent of the equal members of society.
We can see through the lens of equality, which demands a respect
for the rights of others, that liberty is in fact limited and ordered.
This morally rigorous conception of liberty leads to a very dif-
ferent way of thinking about the free society from that of the
Supreme Court’s solipsistic interpretation in Casey. ■
Gregory Schaller is assistant professor
of political science at Colorado Christian
University. He is completing his Ph.D. at Centennial
Temple University, having earned an M.A. at Institute
Villanova University and a B.A. at Eastern
Colorado Christian University
University.
But there is no free lunch here: The Christian then must
work very hard for real freedom via subsidiarity—securing
common-freedom vehicles, such as school vouchers, and
then robustly exercising those common freedoms.
This vision of freedom was what the Founders forged and
secured. But it is increasingly difficult to hold on to because
this is not a passive libertarianism—rather, it is a daily, never-
ceasing fight to stop national policy which would erode or
eradicate precious everyday, common freedoms exercised at
the local level.
Centennial Review, November 2009 ▪ 3
10/27/2009 11:27:59 AM
 Centennial Institute

Centennial Review
Colorado Christian University
8787 W. Alameda Ave.
Lakewood, CO 80226

Return Service Requested

Centennial Review Principled Ideas from the Centennial Institute Volume 1, Number 6 • November 2009
November 2009

Virtue, Freedom, VIRTUE, FREEDOM, POINT:

and Christian Citizenship Virtue Should Be the National Policy Priority
by Kevin Miller AND CHRISTIAN CITIZENSHIP
Face it, virtue is merely freedom exercised in a principled
■ Point: Virtue Should Be By Kevin Miller fashion. And the one thing that has truly set America apart
the National Policy Priority for a couple of hundred years is the pursuit of virtue. From
America as a virtuous society and America correcting slavery and other wrongs in their own culture, to
■ Counterpoint: Freedom Should Be
the National Policy Priority as a free society: citizens have held to these fighting Nazis and other would-be oppressors in world wars,
two ideals from our earliest days. The to rebuilding just-recent-enemies’ economies through the
Liberty’s Moral Dimension aspiration to freedom or to virtue—or to
by Gregory Schaller Marshall Plan, to meeting the needs of neighbors in periods
a confluence of both—was crucial in the of strife or natural disaster, Americans have long pursued
www.CentennialCCU.org is your online resource founding of the British colonies, including
for this and previous issues of Centennial Review, a unique virtue worldwide through action, often sacrificial
news of Institute events, and daily updates on the establishment of Rhode Island by Roger action.
faith, family, and freedom at our ’76 Blog. Williams. It can be seen in the Declaration of Independence
as well as in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. To the extent that America is not considered virtuous, for
Tax-deductible contributions from friends make pos-
sible the Institute’s outreach and all of Colorado Chris-
example by Muslim leaders who assert we are the Great
It came to white heat in the Civil War. It inspired great re- Satan for allowing businesses to freely export pornography,
tian University’s educational work. We invite your
support via our Web site at www.CentennialCCU.org form movements such as Progressivism, the New Deal, and it is not for lack of desire by Christians to historically fight
or at the above mailing address. Civil Rights. It has driven moral struggles from the anti-vice such vice. And even when such efforts fall short—as they
Comstock Laws and Prohibition in past generations to abor- often will in a free society—it is well worth the good fight
tion, affirmative action, and same-sex marriage today. in order to draw a line for standards, classic standards that
St. Augustine clearly and wisely delineated between the City THE VERDICT:
of God and the City of Man. We need to recover that wisdom. Is there a way for communal righteousness and personal every society should strive after. - See “Why Virtue” on Page 2
Our faith will only be differentiated (and successful) when WHAT’S YOUR PRIORITY, AND WHY? liberty to coexist in national policy? This is a thorny question
it does not allow the typical American to believe that the The tension between enforcing national virtue and promoting for any of us who seek to be not only good citizens, but also COUNTERPOINT:
Christian faith is synonymous with laws and rules that limit common individual freedom is certainly not new. faithful adherents to Scripture. If some Christians assume Freedom Should Be the National Policy Priority
common freedom. that the two ideals blend seamlessly into a single practical
But Christian citizens in the America of 2010 must contend Let’s be realistic. Virtue has never manifested in this country,
world view, they oversimplify. There is increasing evidence
Why are American Christian leaders bemoaning the rise of with a very different set of realities for the church, of mores or any other country, by national mandate or policy. (One must
that freedom and virtue are on a collision course in America,
a post-Christian culture? Partly because they themselves, for the nation as a whole, from those confronting believers in never mistake mere compliance for genuine virtue.) In fact,
with unpleasant consequences already here or coming soon.
following Europe, have led the “virtue 1910 or 1810. when Christians try to foster virtue via national policy, that not
Consider:
movements” that help speed the lapse Does the application of biblical principles and timeless wis- only hasn’t worked, but it also backfires in crucial ways.
of the faith into cultural Christianity, ■ When Catholic bishops officially assert that government-
dom call for the same priorities now as then, regardless of the One need only look to the decline of Europe. Where Christian
effectively eroding the authentic reality provided health care is the right of every American, is this a
era, its agreed-upon values, its aspirations, its failings? ideals have become “the culture” via government action (as
of the Christian faith. step toward making us a more virtuous society? Or does it
Or does each age call for a different priority derived from infringe upon the freedom of individuals by taxing one to pay with the welfare state), the ideology of big-G government
Christians should well take heed: Our those same biblical principles, yet with timeless wisdom has been the ultimate “winner” and the church has signifi-
for another’s “right”?
best course is to pursue individual free- adjusted in light of 200 years’ more experience in our own cantly faded in influence. This is the Catholic teaching of
dom at every opportunity with regard ■ When no-fault divorce is deemed acceptable by more and
country and many others? “solidarity” in action, an emotionally seductive idea for
to national policy, to diligently fight more churches in the United States, is this a wholesome
What ultimately best serves the body of believers as well as many that, when applied as - See “Why Freedom” on Page 3
the constant encroachment of national affirmation of individual liberty? Or is it an unwholesome
policies limiting individual freedom the body politic: pursuing virtue at a national policy level or debasement of societal virtue? FROM THE EDITOR: The teaching of citizenship, part of our mission at the
(including the “virtue mandates” of pursuing common freedom? ■ Centennial Institute, requires thinking about thinking. What does it mean
■ When two persons of the same sex are not legally free to
Christians and political correctness enter into a civil marriage, due to the opposition of many to think clearly? Centennial Fellow Kevin Miller confronted this in a CCU
alike), and to work unceasingly at seminar on August 28, 2009. The present essay, based on his talk, thinks
Christians (as well as Muslims), is this a defense of America’s
through both sides of an issue where too many people hold an unthinking
St. Augustine of Hippo applying the principle of subsidiarity, virtue as historically understood? Or is it a trap waiting to be position. Miller is a former dean of the CCU School of Business who is now
(354 - 430) is depicted in influencing every platoon where God sprung against religious believers someday soon, when secu- building a technology company and chairs the Vanguard Forum, a discus-
this vintage manuscript
engraving. has placed us. ■ larists may try to pass laws branding opposite-sex marriage as sion circle for biblical perspectives on current affairs. – John Andrews
Centennial Review, November 2009 ▪ 4 a “hate” institution? - See “Lead Article” on Page 2

CI-nov.indd 1 10/27/2009 11:27:58 AM