By Rev. M. MacSween, M.A., Oban
(The following paper was read at the Theological Conference held at Inverness on Tuesday 5th September, 1967).
The establishment Principle may be defined as follows: That nations, as such, and civil rulers in their official capacity, are entitled and bound to aim at the promotion of the interests of true religion, and the welfare of the Church of Christ; and that thus a connection may be legitimately formed between Church and State.” (Principal William Cunningham’s “Historical Theology,” Vol. I, P. 391). That an obligation lies upon nations and their rulers to have respect in the regulation of their national affairs, and in the application of national resources, to the authority of God’s Word, to the welfare of the Church of Christ, and the interests of true religion, is a portion of divine truth fully sanctioned by the Word of God, and therefore never to be abandoned or denied. This obligation—or the Establishment Principle — has, of course been denied and abandoned by many. Various specious arguments — such as the unlawfulness of intolerance and persecution; the unlawfulness of the assumption of jurisdiction by civil authorities in religious and ecclesiastical matters; and the fact that various abuses have been but too often shown in the practical application of the Principle — have been used, and are still being used against it. None of these objections, however, can prove either the unscripturalness of the non-existence of the Principle itself. The Church, therefore ought to hold forth this Principle as a portion of Scriptural truth, and nations and their rulers ought to act upon it, for every question of truth and duty is to be decided not by the opinion of men, but by the written Word of God.
In this Word we see that under the terms of the Covenant of Works man was bound to obey God in all things. Had man remained in the state in which he was created, then all the sacred and civil relationships in the world would have been in entire harmony with the will of God. But man sinned, and consequently all these relationships ceased to be for the honour of God; the Creator. It is very important to remember this. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God,” Romans 3:23. We must also remember, however, that God did not abrogate His own law, and that the obligation to obey Him is still in force over all nations and individuals on the earth. This being so, they are bound to obey God, even if they are unable to do so. Nations and individuals would never grudge God the honour due unto Him were it not for sin. Sin is inexcusable before God, and therefore the refusal to acknowledge Him as King and Lawgiver is inexcusable. It is an offence to God even under the terms of a Covenant of Works, that nations should deny Him the glory due unto His Name.
As we look out on the world today, we can hardly fail to see that one great problem which confronts us is that of authority and obedience. This problem faces us at every level — personal, domestic, social, religious. Is man a responsible being, and, if responsible, to whom is he responsible? The Bible answer is that man was created by God and in the image of God: and that the duty which God requires of man is “obedience to His revealed will.” The authority of God, implied in His Creatorship, has as its correlate the obedience of man: and God’s will is revealed in the Bible. This is the constant declaration of the Bible itself. It is plainly set forth in the account of the creation of man. Five imperatives are at once laid upon man in Genesis, Chapter 1, verse 28:— “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” In addition to this, the word “commanded” is three times used in God’s dealings with Adam and Eve in Genesis, Chapters 2 and 3. God commanded: Adam and Eve disobeyed: the penalty attached to the command was invoked, and the guilty pair, under sentence of death, were driven forth from Eden. The Covenant of Works was made with Adam in a state of innocence, and almost his first recorded act was the breaking of it. Human history from that day to this is a tragic record of man’s failure to keep it. The first Adam by his sin ceased to hold the right of heirship under the Covenant of Works, but Christ, the Son of God, who made all things, was appointed Heir of all things in the eternal plan and purpose of God. Thus we find that the Covenant of Works was immediately followed by the Covenant of Grace, first revealed in the proto-evangel, or first promise in Genesis, 3:15:— “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” The Gospel was thus announced in Eden to those who had by their sins, lost their inheritance. They must now turn for life to another Covenant, the Covenant of Grace, the everlasting Covenant, ordered in all things, and sure. All the subsequent history of the Church revolves around the first promise.
It is the work of Satan to mar every relation by sin, but on the other hand the work of Christ implies in it the restoration of all these relations — such as that which should subsist between the Church of Christ and the State — into harmony with the mind and will of God. This intention we can only know through a revelation from God. In that revelation — the Word of God — we find the gradual unfolding of the hidden mystery of a purpose to constitute Christ, the last Adam, the Heir of all things until “the Kingdoms of this world are become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ: and He shall reign for ever and ever.” Book of Revelation, 11:15. But until that time we may expect to find the powers of heaven and those of hell contending for the possession of the Kingdoms and of the relation in which the Kingdoms should stand to Christ, the Heir of all things, and His Bride, the Church. We have in Scripture clear proof of the Church in union with the State in the history of Israel, along with a clear distinction of offices in Church and State. The exclusive right of those in the Church to manage all things spiritual is as solemnly and prominently kept before the Church in the Old Testament Scripture as in those of the New. Numbers 1:50,51; Numbers 3:5-13. Thus we find the reforming Kings of Judah such as Hezekiah and Josiah proceeding after this order. Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 29:4-11) did not undertake the cleansing of the house of God by civil authority, but by encouraging the Levites and the priests to perform a duty with which they alone had been entrusted. We notice this distinction during the time of Moses with Israel in the wilderness and in the time of David. David could give commands respecting the Ark of God, but he could not do the work of the Levites (1 Chronicles 15:12-16). When King Uzziah of Judah with all his reforming zeal invaded the spiritual province of the priests he was resisted and smitten (2 Chronicles 26:16-21). A very good example of the Establishment Principle is given to us in the arrangements made when Ezra and Nehemiah rebuilt the Temple at Jerusalem. Nehemiah obtained permission from a heathen King to rebuild the Temple. He also obtained an order for the necessary material and military protection was given him on his journey to Jerusalem. Nehemiah was the Civil governor: Ezra, with the priests and Levites preached and expounded the law, and both parties together entered into a solemn Covenant. (Nehemiah 9:38).
But again, all the promises of God are Yea and Amen in Christ Jesus. Do many of the promises not indicate that the Kingdoms of this world, as such, shall be subject to Christ’s rule? Do they not tell us that the Messiah shall subdue all things to Himself? Do they not show that Christ is crowned King of Kings quite as truly as He is crowned King of Zion? The declaration of the Eternal Sonship in the Second Psalm is joined to a promise on the part of the Father to the Son of the uttermost parts of the earth for His possession. Kings and judges are called to serve the Lord with fear, to rejoice with trembling, and to kiss the Son. They cannot possibly do this except by embracing Christ by faith in the Gospel in all their regal and judicial capacities. If they refuse they must perish. In Acts 4:25-27, we are told that the Second Psalm predicts the rejection of Christ by “Herod and Pontus Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel”: yet, in spite of all their opposition that Christ shall yet be honoured by Kings, princes and churches, according to God’s eternal purpose. “Yet have I set my King upon my holy hill of Zion.” The references made in the 1st and 2nd chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews to certain Psalms show the relation in which Christ is to stand under the New Testament dispensation to the Kingdoms of this world as such, as He wields the sceptre of righteousness until all His enemies are put in subjection to Him. In Isaiah, chapter 49, we are told that kings should be nursing fathers to the Church and Queens her nursing mothers. Then follows the terrible intimation:—”For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish: Yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.”
The New Testament is full of the Establishment Principle — the Principle that should regulate the relation of the Church to the State. Thus in Romans, chapter 13, we read that “The powers that be are ordained of God.” (Verse 1). A heathen Emperor ruled the Roman Empire when these words were written by Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. This declaration, therefore, was given without respect of nations or whether the ruler reverenced God or did not know Him. It is added in verse 4 “He is the minister of God” — the minister, or servant, of God. Caesar was, therefore, the servant of God: and though Caesar had an earthly kingdom to rule, yet he was servant to “the King of Kings.” Doubtless, but for his heathen ignorance, he would have given his allegiance to the God of heaven, as he gave, with all the authority of his regal power, to the established idolatrous worship of the Empire. If heathen rulers were thus held bound to be the servants of God, how much more the rulers of Christian nations. And, is the servant of God not bound to glorify God in his official capacity as well as by his individual life and character? But the same passage proceeds to declare, verses 2-4:—”Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shall have praise of the same: for he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” Here we have a plain intimation that the civil ordinance is an ordinance of God, which has been designed for the service of Christ, as Head above all things, and which, when regulated by His laws, is unspeakably serviceable to Him in guarding against every invasion of His Headship within the domain of the spiritual sphere in the ordinance of His own house. Christ is the “Head of all principality and power.” (Colossians 2:10). “For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him.” (Colossians 1:16). All this is closely connected with the redemption of His Church, the setting up of His Kingdom in opposition to the Kingdom of darkness, and His Headship over His body, the Church, that in all things He might have the pre-eminence.
(To be continued)