Retired neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson is no stranger to controversy. He’s not afraid to speak up about his faith in God or to be deemed politically incorrect. In light of his boldness, I expected him to respond differently to a question posed by a Facebook user on NBC’s “Meet The Press.”
Host Chuck Todd asked him the question: “Does the Bible have authority over the Constitution?”
The Republican presidential candidate responded, “I think probably what you have to do is ask a very specific question about a specific passage of the Bible and a specific portion of the Constitution. I don’t think you can answer that question other than out of very specific contexts.”
I don’t know very specifically what I expected him to say, but it was not that. His answer seemed to deviate from the Carson style by vaguely answering a controversial subject.
To give a fair evaluation, this was obviously a “gotcha” question. To answer it fully would require extensive explanation, therefore a greater number of statements to potentially be taken out of context later. Carson was wise to defend against someone taking a specific portion of the Bible out of context and using it against him, but that’s essentially all he did. I was hoping to hear something meaningful about his perspective on the relationship between his morals, society’s ethics, the Constitution and public policy.
In retrospect, I suppose such a complex question condensed into an oversimplified question deserves an oversimplified answer. However, at the end of the day, what’s important is not Carson’s answer, but yours.
So, how might a Christian go about answering this question? Let’s break it down. The three subjects that must be addressed are the Bible, the Constitution and authority.
I’m addressing the biblical text first because I think this portion of my argument is the firmest. Some verses that come to mind are 1 Peter 2:13-17, Romans 13:1-7 and Acts 5:29. What is their consensus? We are to be subject to every human institution for the Lord’s sake, there is no authority except by God’s appointment and we must obey God rather than men. This is how we might translate these passages in the discussion: We are subject to the Constitution for the Lord’s sake. The Constitution has authority because God allows it to have authority. If obeying God means disobeying the Constitution, then we must do so. Arguing that the Constitution has authority over the Bible because we are supposed to follow its rules is similar to saying that your professor has authority over Harding because you have to follow his or her rules in class.
I would imagine that most members of Carson’s voter base are not thrilled with the idea of violating the Constitution. His staunchly conservative constituents are likely to be strict constructionists who think themselves followers in the footsteps of Thomas Jefferson — who would never support violating the Constitution (except he did). On Sept. 20, 1810, Jefferson wrote in response to a question about the duties of presidents in extraordinary circumstances:
“A strict observance of the written laws is doubt-less one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation …”
If a deist could think of a circumstance where morality demanded violation of the Constitution, then certainly we can as Christians.
Finally, we have to deal with the word authority. It’s defined as the power or right to give orders, make decisions and enforce obedience. Whether you believe that rights are God-given, natural (a product of nature — which God created) or nonexistent human constructs (ruling out the Constitution), God holds all the rights and he clearly holds more power.
While I can sympathize with the reasoning behind Carson’s careful answer, I must disagree with it. The Bible — unequivocally — has authority over the Constitution.
