Recently Newt Gingrich launched a platform on his website dedicated to defending himself against the attacks of his political opponents. On the site, he compares himself against Bill Clinton, stating, "I'm no Bill Clinton." Newt never committed perjury being the difference. So Newt never lied under oath. Really? When he promised to love his wife until death; was this not an oath? Clinton, for however much a sham his marriage may be, is still married to his first wife. Newt has been married three times...I think. Hard to keep track of these things.
The social mores of the post-modern world frown upon this type of infidelity, but accept it. It is assumed that his current state has reached some type of resolve. Christians assume the same, but should they? Christians do not, or at least should not, determine what is righteousness according to the world, for that is our own righteousness, but what is righteousness to God. So accepting this premise, and accepting that God has spoken to us through the prophets of antiquity, we look to the Scriptures to view God's standard of righteousness. From Scriptures we know that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." We will never attain the righteousness God requires for us to be with Him. This is why Jesus Christ died as an atonement for our sins in order to place us in right standing with Him. And this Jesus, whom Christians claim to follow, said, "Repent and believe for the kingdom of God is at hand." Why must we repent if God has died for our sins? "Shall we take God's grace as a license to sin," Paul asks the Romans. "By no means," is the answer. We are to turn away from our sins, to hate what is evil and to cling to what is good. So we look at what God calls good in marriage. Jesus points to the proper form of marriage by recalling the beginning in Matthew 19 - Adam and Eve. One man and one woman for life is the model form of marriage. Anything that deviates from this is not a marriage, but a form of adultery against the original partner.
Accepting this to be true, it can be deduced that Gingrich is currently committing open adultery, not a third marriage. The woman he is with now is not his wife, but his mistress, whom Christians everywhere accept as his wife. How did we come to this dull resignation? This right standing before the world, and unfortunately before fellow Christians, is made possible through the auspices of a divorce and then remarriage, which is clearly defined as adultery in the Scriptures. But we are beyond the protection of cultural norms, are we not? And our goal is not right standing before the mass of men, but before God alone. Christians are held to a standard of righteousness that God has called His followers to, well, follow.
Clinton apologized and acknowledged what he did as wrong. And, yes, I doubt the sincerity of his repentance. I believe more in the sincerity of his regret for getting caught. Nonetheless, Clinton is a lesser fraud than Newt. Newt displays his sin like Sodom. He does not even try to conceal it, as Clinton had. The prophet Isaiah warns that those who sin in such a manner, bring evil on themselves. And Paul says that those who sin in such a manner bring evil upon the community. I think Gingrich to be a prime candidate for the GOP according to worldly standards. But in this case, I am a single issue voter who will not be supporting this particular principle of darkness. For it wraps itself in comfortable warm blankets of Truth, but usually never in cold shrouds of Falsity. Which makes it difficult to see, but I see it and refuse to partner in it.
Let me be clear in saying that Gingrich should not be branded with Hawthorne's scarlet letter. To do so would make his sin permanent and unforgivable. I am saying that Gingrich willingly wears the letter and we do not acknowledge it. Though we should acknowledge it as long as he wears it. The sin is indefinite as long as Gingrich does not repent. As such, he should be treated like Hester and worse than Clinton.