This essay by Pence is the second of two parts:
While the nation as a form of masculine military agreement is as old as the biblical Israelites, the worldwide organization of men into nation states -- including present day Israel -- is a development of the last several centuries. This is not so with the other sacred institution which the Christian nation is sworn to protect. Monogamous and consensual marriage is written in the natural law of human nature and predates all known political communities. However, precisely because it is such a deep radiating source of Light illuminating the spiritual character of human nature, marriage has always been a sacred bond attacked and in need of defense. It is the usual triad that attacks: the world, the flesh, and the Devil. Satan triumphed in desecrating the matrimonial bond of Adam and Eve as they lost the purity of their sacral union by turning against the Will of God. For men today, the flesh and world did most of the damage quite handily. The attempt to sacralize homosexuality, however, betrays an author beyond the weakness of the flesh and the workings of this fallen world.
Marriage has shaped the structure of domestic life, familial loyalty, and the private property of homestead. Traditional legal strictures against sexual activity have been drawn to fence in the sacral and reproductive nature of sexual intimacy reserved for the matrimonial bond. Tearing down those fences in thought, word, image, and legal deed now threatens the temple of intimacy itself.
This bond is necessary for the maturation and education of the extended dependency of human offspring. It is the basis of trans-generational work, capital accumulation, and wealth creation (Economy = ”oikos nomos” = "ordering the household"). Marriage is fitted to natural necessity, but its real origin and purpose as taught by Christ reveals the spiritual dimension of our human nature, which was “present from the beginning.” There is a unique human capacity for an intimate form of love in which a man and woman become one flesh. This sexual union reflects the spiritual capacity of man for unity, and the context in which God creates the human soul. It portends our final communal destination incorporated in the Body of Christ. No matter how diluted the civic or cultural definitions, that generative oneness of physical and spiritual being known by man and woman in the married covenant of love cannot be counterfeited in the eyes of God or men of faith. It is a sacral covenant worth fighting for in 1860 -- and worth fighting for today.
A Christian Nation to Defend the Sacred
We are a Christian nation because our loves are Christian and our protective customs are Christian. If we relinquish these forms of protection or substitute abortion and homosexuality as the “sacred” goods we promote to the world, then our Christian character will be fundamentally compromised. We fight for God, the liberty of our worship communities, the flag of our nation, the homesteads of married love, and the lives of all our children. Our worship of God is our most sacred duty, our marriages are sacred covenants, and human life is a gift from God. All these sacred goods must be protected.
We are engaged in a battle against Princes, Powers, and Principalities. The structure of our public and private bonds reflect this continual state of war. We are not clamoring for more rights. We are assuming our stations for duty. Our mothers love and protect their babies, and we men bind as one man to defend the nation. Christian personalities accept the gender-determined protective duties which are the received customs of a Christian nation. Not all Americans are Christians, but the forms of our agreements emit from the Light of the World: Jesus Christ. Like our Blessed Lord, Christian nations allow men the freedom to follow Him, and thus our national union requires no profession of faith. But the nation does entail a kind of religious oath—the adult men are bound in protective union to sacrifice our lives for the goods we hold sacred. Our sacred goods of marriage, public worship, and God’s Name are being desecrated. The protective bonds of our male groups are being polluted by a very different kind of agreement. But the fog of war is clearing and the lines of contest are made more clear. Shall we be worthy of our tradition and accept our duties as God-fearing men and women? Or shall we sing the atheist anthem of autonomy and become a genderless people deserving a different fate?