On Legacies

I am reading much today about Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s “legacy.” Truly, why do secularists concern themselves over how future ugly bags of mostly water will fizz about now defunct ugly bags of mostly water and what they did during their brief period of fizzing? Stardust is stardust, there is no judgment, there is no transcendent meaning, there is no future, just the final heat-death of stardust, right? The very fact that devotees of the SRoD (Secular Religion of Death) even invest some of their very limited time of fizzing on the idea of a legacy is glowing proof they are more than their religion allows.

What is RBG’s legacy? I am seriously listening to Christian leaders lauding her for her “courage” and “consistency.” There is no questioning her intelligence. She had a formidable mind. And yes, she was consistent. Very much so. But here’s my point: so was Jezebel.

Jezebel was a formidable opponent. A woman of purpose and drive. She was consistent in the worship of her gods. She stood up against even the likes of a clearly anointed prophet of God, Elijah. She made plans, and followed through with them. She perverted justice for the sake of her cause. She was the consummate politician.

We hardly need to recount Jezebel’s end, as prophesied by Elijah, do we? If you need a refresher, read 2 King 9:30-37. She was not mourned. She was not lauded, even though, as Jehu said, she was a king’s daughter. Jehu correctly identified her character. He called her “the cursed woman.” Even Jehu ordered that she be buried—but God had other plans, in fulfillment of Elijah’s prophecy.

It seems that when one dies in old age the current cultural belief is that this death purges and cleanses one from all that was done in life. All is well now, all that sin is covered. By what, we are not told, but given our culture has no concept of the glory of God, let alone His holiness, it is understandable how simply “dying” is atonement enough. The long-term impact of RGB’s actions—purposeful, chosen, planned, willful actions—is no longer relevant. She was so brave in her pursuit of…what?

We are told she loved her husband. That is wonderful. I am glad for this. But it is an inconsistency for one who promoted the worldview she did which has no grounds for such inconsistent faithfulness. We are told she and Antonin Scalia were close friends, and doesn’t this prove that all this worldview stuff is just an aside, less important than all the feel-good Hallmark stories? We can be thankful for every example of common grace, but we are not told Jezebel was unfaithful to Ahab, either, are we? What if Jezebel was very kind and generous to her attendants? Would this have made any difference to the final judgment upon Jezebel’s life?

Here are the facts: Jezebel rebelled against the light she possessed at that time. She promoted syncretism and false worship. She subverted the law and acted unjustly. By her actions in the Naboth incident she caused innocent blood to be spilled. When she did, no one lauded her. No one mourned her. She was an example of ungodly leadership, and was seen as one who was cursed.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg purposefully stayed in her position of power so as to advance the worldview to which she was so consistently committed. She could have retired when Obama was President so that another, much younger, much longer-lasting, ultra-leftist would have been put in her place on the Supreme Court. She did not, evidently so that a woman President could appoint her successor! When that did not work out, she set herself to one task: survival. She forced the Court to pander to her illnesses, all in the vain attempt to “make it to 2021.” Even in the face of death itself she remained absolutely committed to her worldview. A worldview that included unfettered murder of the unborn, profanation of marriage, homosexuality, and transgenderism. A worldview that has destroyed not only millions of innocent pre-born lives, but untold millions of born lives through the promotion of soul-destroying and life-destroying policies and laws. The tragic, childish, absurd Obergefell decision stands with her signature on it. Name any decision that helped to promote and advance the end of the moral life of the United States for the past quarter century and you will find Ruth Bader Ginsburg standing there in support of it. This is her legacy.

But even within the church today there are few who are willing to identify issues of worldview as “evil” any longer. Yes, surely, the firebrands who would never sully themselves by even reading the Obergefell decision will rail and scream about wickedness and evil, but when it comes to those who actually seek to engage the reasoning of the secular worldview, the identification of real, living, enfleshed “evil” has become a rare thing indeed. Instead, what we hear today is that we “firmly disagreed” with RBG’s “judicial philosophies.” This is like Elijah saying he “firmly disagreed” with Jezebel’s “stated public positions.” Why must we refrain from stating the necessary and obvious reality that Ruth Bader Ginsburg promoted clear, definable, delineable evil? For over fifty years? In a position of great power, and hence responsibility before God? With all her strength, purposefully? With her last breath? And can we step back long enough to realize that if we allow the cultural pressure to “be nice to the dead” to control our speech at this time, that the result is the fundamental denial that true moral evil actually exists, that the secular worldview is truly morally evil, and that the deaths of the born and unborn that will be laid at the feet of Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the judgment were not as important as our cultural comfort?