Pete Hegseth and the Lord Jesus Christ
In his opening remarks at the Senate’s confirmation hearing yesterday, Pete Hegseth said something startling. Like everyone in his position, he began with a list of those he wanted to thank. It is not uncommon to thank family, mentors, or even God in such a setting, although liberal decorum tends to discourage overtly religious expressions in public life. What Pete Hegseth did, however, went beyond the customary nod to divine guidance or gratitude. He offered a doxology.
Here’s what he said: “Thank you to my incredible wife Jennifer, who has changed my life and been with me Throughout this entire process. I love you sweetheart, and I thank God for you.
And as Jenny and I pray together each morning, all glory—regardless of the outcome—belongs to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. His grace and mercy abound each day. May His will be done.”
He gave “all glory” to the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. That is very specific. A doxology is not simply a casual acknowledgment of a vague deity; it is a formal expression of praise and glory directed toward the Triune God, often accompanied by a sense of reverence and devotion. Hegseth’s choice to include such a proclamation in his opening remarks was striking for its theological depth and unapologetic nature. In a world where religious convictions are frequently relegated to private life, his words stood as a bold declaration of faith.
This raises an important question: doesn’t he know that doxologies are typically reserved for the church? To many, his action might seem out of place, even inappropriate, for the solemn and secular context of a Senate hearing. Yet perhaps this assumption reflects a misunderstanding of the role faith plays in public life. For Hegseth, it seems clear that faith is not confined to Sunday mornings or sacred spaces; it permeates all aspects of his life, including his public service. Jesus is the King of all spheres of life. Many leaders have drawn upon their faith to guide their actions and articulate their vision for the nation. Public expressions of faith, far from undermining the secular nature of governance, have often provided a moral framework for justice, liberty, and the common good. What Hegseth did was took it a step further.
Jesus is the Lord of all of life. Jesus is not merely an inspiring historical figure. He is not a moralizer who inspired some people to “do better.” Jesus very clearly claimed to be Yahweh and currently rules the nations with an iron scepter. And he does so whether a nation acknowledges it or not. He judges and disciplines the nations as his Gospel is spread to fill the whole world.
By offering a doxology, Hegseth did more than express personal gratitude. He pointed to our need for a savior and said that this savior can only be Jesus, the incarnate Son of God. He also personally placed his faith in salvation from Christ alone. His words were a public acknowledgment of God’s sovereignty and a reminder that ultimate authority belongs not to the Senate or the state but to Jesus Christ.
In doing so, Pete Hegseth not only affirmed his personal faith but also reminded everyone that they, too, must confront Jesus the Lord. In this life, each of us will be providentially ruled by the Lord through his judgment, discipline, and the grace of the Gospel. And at death, which isn’t far from any of us, we will be confronted by God and asked to give an account of ourselves. There is a great and fearful day of judgment. Hegseth reminded us to think and prepare.
In that simple phrase, Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Hegseth confessed so much. God is real, he rules the world, we have sinned against him and need a savior, the eternal Son of God became incarnate and is the Savior. He currently rules the world and will return when the earth is filled with the knowledge of the glory of God. Those are necessary truths for a good life and for a just government.
We have followed the left’s rule of not mentioning Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior, in the government for far too long. This rule has never been followed by the left. They insist on it, but they don’t follow it. They are allowed to get away with it because they redefine “religion.” To them, “religion” means Christianity or a similarly organized group. It refers to rituals and scripture. But “religion” is more than that. A definition that only focuses on those things will leave out many of the religions in the world.
What religions all have in common is the search for meaning. They attempt to give meaning by answering the “big” questions that face each and every one of us. We intuitively grasp that “religion” and “meaning” go together when we ask someone about their religious beliefs and purpose in life. The U.S. Supreme Court has had rulings that rely on this idea about religion (U.S. v. Seeger, Planned Parenthood v. Casey). Anthropologists like Clifford Geertz made the case that religion is a system of meaning. Jordan Peterson has developed an entire industry around his “Maps of Meaning.”
No institution can be neutral with respect to meaning. The very ideas of law and justice are parts of a larger system of meaning. For example, if Epicurus and Richard Dawkins are correct and there are only atoms and the void, then laws are mere human conventions that come and go. They are the attempt of the feeble human mind to grasp at a reality that is forever beyond its limited understanding. There is no ultimate justice; there are only today’s winners and losers.
Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin knew better. All of the Founders of our country knew better. The Declaration of Independence takes us step by step through how it works: God, humans, rights, laws. The important part is that the Declaration of Independence can say this without having to quote the Bible. These are truths of general revelation that all persons living at any time can and should know. They are the necessary truths for the rest of government to make any sense. For the Kantians and VanTillians out there, that means the Declaration of Independence gave a form of transcendental argument!
There is no neutrality on these issues, any more than there is neutrality in any area of truth. The mathematics professor is not biased because he marks a student’s answer “wrong.” He is attempting to teach the student that there are mind-independent truths, and the student can learn how to identify and understand these truths. Any good government must do that as well.
The First Amendment does not teach neutrality. About religion, it simply says that the government cannot establish a religion or interfere in its practice. This is a clear reference to what the English and the rest of Europe did. They all had a state church and they punished those who did not attend that church and use its prayer book. The United States can’t, and shouldn’t, do that. The United States is a step further along in understanding the Gospel and the human condition than the Medieval or Early Modern worlds. The Gospel is an offer, not coercion. The United States more closely follows the Book of Acts on this point than did England.
But the United States can build on a foundation of “self-evident” truths about God and human nature. And the government can remind people to put their trust in God, to have days of thanksgiving and prayer, and even to observe the Lord’s Day. In our weak age, words are considered triggering and cause PTSD. But if a government official telling you that he loves the Lord Jesus Christ causes you misery, then perhaps you have bigger problems.
A government official can tell us about how they love Jesus their Lord, why they like their church, and encourage us to love Jesus and attend church. They can and should do this. They can lead by example and tell us why they love the Lord, how he has changed their lives, why the church is important, and why they choose the church they attend. They can tell us about their appreciation for the Bible and the joy they derive from personal and family devotions.
But let’s consider two objections. One is barely worth mentioning, but it was used against Hegseth. Isn’t he a notorious sinner? I’m not sure what that objection is meant to do except reveal a fundamental misunderstanding about Christianity. He has confessed his sins and puts his faith for salvation in the Lord Jesus Christ and not in the therapeutic fads of our day.
Now, imagine the college professor sneering as she says, “What would you do if a Hindu had said ‘the Lord Krishna,’ you fundies would melt down.” No, we’d be just fine. And if a Hindu is in such an office, I would expect him to say just that. It would be good to be honest about what Hinduism teaches and clarify that it is not monotheistic and Krishna is not a parallel for Jesus. We need to bring such debates into the open public square. It would be a very good thing for the United States to have those debates (beyond “discussions”) about who is God and what is our chief end. So no, pluralism is not scary to us, unless it is the everlasting imposed pluralism that is used by Marxists to manipulate the masses.
Finally, it is also worth noting that he thanked his father and mother and then also his kids. It might be easy to just quickly pass over that. But in our day, this is actually a radical statement. We can contrast the two Petes. Pete Hegseth reminds us that we all come from a father and mother. In a day where we pretend two men had a baby when what they did was purchased a child or rented a woman’s womb, here we have a fundamental truth of human existence spoken proudly at a Senate confirmation hearing. Two men can buy a baby, but both of those men, and the baby, had a father and a mother just as God determined it. One day, that baby will grow up and wonder about his mother.
Pete Hegseth reminded us of a fundamental truth central to the United States: all glory to Jesus, our Lord and Savior. We should expect our government officials to live that truth.
Image Credit: Unsplash
I do love how a wingnut can get all the forgiveness in the world for being a disgusting drunk, incompetent, possible rapist, and definitely a repeat adulterer if Donald Trump — also a serial adulterer and adjudicated sexual assaulter — likes him.
30 years ago Bill Clinton deserved removal from office for having a sleazy affair, and now you all think being 50 times as bad as Clinton is just proof that a man is a REAL MAN.
“Such were some of you….”
Sorry, Dylan, that is a very poorly hung quip. The Bible is very well hung and commands that we discern wise and able leaders from greedy, lying abusers of power. ‘Such were some of you …’ is not a mandate to welcome in leadership persons who have demonstrated repeatedly poor leadership. That is STUPID in the real world, and DISALLOWED in the Body of Christ where leadership is required to be “If anyone wants to provide leadership in the church, good! But there are preconditions: A leader must be well-thought-of, committed to his wife, cool and collected, accessible, and hospitable. He must know what he’s talking about, not be overfond of wine, not pushy but gentle, not thin-skinned, not money-hungry.” 1 Timothy 3. CLEARLY, by these standards both Hegseth and Trump … and certainly Gaetz, Patel, RFK Jr, and others are DISALLOWED in leadership of God’s People. Why then would Christian Nationalists support leaders of the ‘nation’ who are not authorized to leaders of ‘Christians’? Quite a puzzle, aye? Well the likely answer is that Christian Nationalists are heinous idolators of power, money, greed, ambition, vain glory … and many have more than a bit of other ancient idolatries: racism, hatred and abuse of women, antisemitism, etc. Trump, Hegseth, Gaetz, etc are poorly hung according to Biblical standards. God did not DESIGN/EMPOWER/COMMAND/PROTECT for them to be leaders. God does not design/empower/command/protect wicked leaders. God did GRACIOUSLY GUIDE the piously wise Founders who framed our Constitution. And Christians who love our nation should follow the Bible not their idolatries.