Section IV of the Westminster Confession of Faith states:
"It is the duty of people to pray for the magistrates, to honour their persons, to pay them tribute and other dues, to obey their lawful commands, and to be subject to their authority, for conscience's sake. Infidelity, or difference in religion, doth not make void the magistrates' just and legal authority, nor free the people from their due obedience to them: from which ecclesiastical persons are not exempted; much less hath the Pope any power and jurisdiction over them in their dominions, or over any of their people; and, least of all, to deprive them of their dominions, or lives, if he shall judge them to be heretics, or upon any other pretense whatsoever."
First of all, what jumps out at me the most is the first part where it states that we ought to pray for, honor, pay tribute to, obey lawful commands, and be subject to the magistrate's authority. Before we start wagging the finger at the non-Christian candidate(s) lack of Christian conviction and recognition of Christ as King and speak about what a terrible president they would make, we first need to recognize that we are being terrible Christian citizens, both within the civil sphere and as citizens of Zion. When was the last time you prayed for the civil magistrates that God has placed over you? Do you hold them in honor or in contempt?
"First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Tim. 2:1-4)
Secondly, nothing within this section (or any of the other three) jump out to me as articulating clearly that a Christian cannot vote for a candidate that does not publicly recognize Christ as the supreme King of kings. However, it must be recognized that the Westminster Confession of Faith is not an American document and it was written long before the United States and Constitutional democracy were around. Therefore, I turn next to The Testimony of the RPCNA, which is an American document.
Section 23 of the Testimony states:
"The failure of a civil government, through negligence, ignorance, or rebellion, to recognize the authority of Jesus Christ does not cancel its just authority. A civil government, though guilty of many sins, still has authority in so far as it furthers some of the scriptural ends of civil government."
Section 29 states:
"When participating in political elections, the Christian should support and vote only for such men as are publicly committed to scriptural principles of civil government."
Herein, I recognize that a government is not invalidated by its failure to recognize the authority of Jesus Christ . In addition, the Testimony does not clearly suggest that Christians should only support men that publicly recognize the authority of Jesus Christ as King of kings. With that said, the Testimony does articulate that Christians should only vote for men who publicly commit to scriptural principles of civil government. Well then, what are scriptural principles of government? That could require a long, drawn-out biblical theology, but I am inclined to turn to Romans 13 first:
"Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
"Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good.
"But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.
"Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed. Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law." (Rom. 13:1-8)
Governing authorities in power, regardless of their homage to Christ as King, are said to be servants of God and an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. The scriptural principles of civil government that I observe in this passage are: 1) government is instituted by God to be a terror to bad conduct, 2) to be God's servant for the good of others, 3) to be an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer, and 4) to collect taxes because they are ministers of God. On this last point, Calvin writes:
"If it be their duty to defend and safely preserve the peace of the good, and to resist the mischievous attempts of the wicked, this they cannot do unless they are aided by sufficient force. Tributes then are justly paid to support such necessary expenses." (John Calvin's Commentary on Romans 13)
In Deuteronomy 1, Moses recollects the election and appointment of judges/commanders from the twelve tribes of Israel to command thousands, hundreds, fifties, tens, and officers throughout all the tribes. The Hebrew word used in this passage for commanders or captains is the same word used for princes, chiefs, rulers, and governors throughout the Old Testament. This is one of the few elections recorded in scripture, and the qualifications that Moses provides for these commanders is that they be, "wise, understanding, and experienced men" (v. 13, 15). In Exodus 18, Moses recollects the very same election of commanders, and the qualifications that Jethro provides for the commanders is that they be, "able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe" (v. 21). On this passage, Calvin explains:
"Jethro enumerates four qualifications which must be principally regarded in the appointment of judges, viz., ability in business, the fear of God, integrity, and the contempt of riches, not to exclude others whereof, as we shall soon see, mention is made in the first chapter of Deuteronomy, but to signify that all are not qualified, nay, that extraordinary virtues are required which, by synecdoche, he embraces in these four."
Therefore, the combination of these two passages relate that those elected as rulers/commanders/judges over the people of Israel had to be able, wise, understanding, and experienced men who were from the people, who feared God, who were trustworthy, and hated a bribe. As Calvin points out, these qualifications are merely a synecdoche, wherein Moses provides only four qualifications to represent the entirety of the righteousness and ability the men required to fill the position. In simple words, the list is not at all exhaustive.
Two qualifications that jump out to me in regards to this discussion is wisdom and the fear of God. In this passage we see a biblical election of governing officials, albeit, they are to govern the very children of God. Therefore, are these qualifications descriptive of men elected to judge the twelve tribes of Israel or are they prescriptive of all elected officials? That question, I do not have an answer to. Obviously, you would not want a judge who did not fear God to rule or judge the holy nation of Israel, but does it necessarily follow that all governing officials must fear God, and wisely recognize the Kingship of Christ as a qualification?
Romans 13 shows that government is not a Christian institution but that it is, nevertheless, instituted by God. In Romans 13, Paul seems to allude to a clear separation between the role of the church and the role of the state. Both are institutions of God, but they serve different purposes by different means. The church is to make disciples of all nations by preaching the Word, administering the sacraments, and teaching all that Christ commanded. The state is to carry out God's wrath on the wrongdoer, uphold the moral law with truth and justice, defend the defenseless, and collect taxes in order to fulfill its God-given function. Remembering the historical context of Romans 13, Paul is telling the Romans that Rome and Caesar are servants and ministers of God, and although they are not under the rule and authority of a Christian state with Christian rulers, they are to submit to the authorities God has placed over them. Therefore, no matter what the outcome of the election, we are to submit to the authorities placed over us and pray for them as well.
In conclusion, Romans 13 seems to demonstrate a distinction between the role of a governing authority within civil government and the role of a governing authority within the church. It seems to me that a civil magistrate is to natural revelation what ruling elders are to special revelation. As pastors and elders oversee, judge, and discipline, by Christ's authority, citizens of the church within God's saving grace who have attested their belief in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, the only infallible rule for faith and life, civil authorities oversee citizens outside the church within God's common grace who have the law written (natural revelation) on their hearts and are held accountable to God for their wicked deeds (Rom. 1-3). Therefore, civil authorities must be committed to biblical principles of civil government in order to earn our vote. They must know the law written upon their hearts, they must recognize the need for discipline and punishment of those who break the Law, they must seek to defend their citizens from domestic and foreign enemies, but their primary duty is not to proclaim Christ as Lord and Savior, unlike pastors and elders.
I am not yet persuaded that Christians should not vote for a civil leader that is not a Christian and does not recognize the Kingship of Christ. I challenge those who would seek to persuade me otherwise to consider their consistency upon this matter. Will you not vote for a city council member, county sheriff, mayor, judges, representatives, congressmen, and the like without requiring them to publicly proclaim Christ as King first? If you will not, and you can honestly attest to your consistency to do so, then I applaud you for your Christian convictions and fidelity to them. With that said, I think we should be very careful about this subject, especially during presidential elections, lest we cause our weaker brothers in Christ to stumble. Are we being careful about how we articulate our positions? Is voting for a non-Christian president a matter of Christian liberty or a matter of fidelity to God? Those who vote for the "lesser of two evils" are not seeking to be unfaithful with the vote that God has given them, they are not seeking to tear down the Kingdom of God with their vote for a non-believer, but they believe that voting for a Mormon with scriptural principles of civil government and the law revealed in natural revelation is better than voting for a man that has demonstrated support for principles of civil government that are against scripture and the Law. Therefore, I close with Romans 14 in its entirety and urge you to consider whether the kingdom of God is a matter of voting or of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit?
"As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
"One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
"Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; for it is written,
'As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.'
So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. "Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother. I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.
"Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin." (Rom 14:1-23)
Matthew,
ReplyDeleteI would recommend considering a couple other sections from the Testimony (chapter 23), which might have more bearing on this issue.
“4. Every nation ought to recognize the Divine institution of civil government, the sovereignty of God exercised by Jesus Christ, and its duty to rule the civil affairs of men in accordance with the will of God. It should enter into covenant with Christ and serve to advance His Kingdom on earth. The negligence of civil government in any of these particulars is sinful, makes the nation liable to the wrath of God, and threatens the continued existence of the government and nation.”
“5. We reject the view that nations have no corporate responsibility for acknowledging and obeying Christ.”
“6. It is the duty of every Christian citizen to labor and pray for his nation’s official and explicit recognition of the authority and law of Jesus Christ, Preserver and Ruler of nations, and for the conduct of all governmental affairs in harmony with the written Word of God.”
“8. We reject the teaching that Christians should not seek the establishment of Christian civil government.”
“15. The Christian, when such action involves no disloyalty to Christ, ought to be involved in the selection of and to vote for civil rulers who fear God, love truth and justice, hate evil, and are publicly committed to scriptural principles of civil government.”
And one of the sections you quoted, in full:
“29. When participating in political elections, the Christian should support and vote only for such men as are publicly committed to scriptural principles of civil government. Should the Christian seek civil office by political election, he must openly inform those whose support he seeks of his adherence to Christian principles of civil government.”
(Continued)
ReplyDeleteI think it is quite manifest that the “scriptural/Christian principles of civil government” referred to in sections 15 and 29 are those covered throughout chapter 23 of the Confession and Testimony, and particularly those summarized in section 4: (1) that civil government is the moral ordinance of God; (2) that it is placed under the mediatorial rule of Jesus Christ; (3) that nations are to submit to the Word of God, and conduct all civil legislation in accordance with it; (4) that they are to covenant with God in Christ; and (5) that they are to promote the interests of His Kingdom, the Church. I would therefore suggest that your reference to “a Mormon with scriptural principles of civil government” does not have in view what the Testimony means when it speaks of “scriptural principles of civil government.”
Civil officers should be “such as fear God” (Exod. 18:21), which would exclude Mormons, who fear a god of their own imagination, rather than the God of Scripture, the Triune Jehovah. But they should also be “ruling in the fear of God” (2 Sam. 23:3); that is, they should not only be professing believers, but those that act like it when serving in civil office. Just as we should act like Christians in the voting booth, they should act like Christians when serving as legislators, judges, etc. They should “rule the civil affairs of men in accordance with the will of God,” consistently with “scriptural principles of civil government.” They should “kiss the Son” (Ps. 2:12); which indicates that they should submit to Him not only individually and personally (they should do that, too!), but also officially and as civil officers.
As the Testimony indicates, we should not vote for men who do not fulfill these qualifications. If you were to have an election for church office in your congregation, and every single man who was put up for election did not fulfill the qualifications laid down in the Word of God for that office, you should vote for none of them. I know that people will say that is not the same thing; we are discussing officers for civil government, and I am bringing in church officers. But we confess that both church and state are institutions of God, under the mediatorial rule of King Jesus, and are both to be governed according to His Word. Just as God has laid down qualifications for church officers, so He has also laid down qualifications for civil officers. If they don’t meet those qualifications, we should not vote for them. To do so involves us in a rejection of God’s authority over civil government, and over civil officers.
I say these things, not to condemn you, but to challenge you to think about these things in the light of Scripture (as well as in the light of the Confession and Testimony, which I think are accurately setting forth the teaching of Scripture, so far as they go). God bless. ---Sean McDonald
BTW, for a good old RP exposition of Romans 13, read “Civil Government” by James M. Willson, here: http://books.google.com/books?id=Hw9AAAAAYAAJ
Sean,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your well thought out and clear reply. I do not know how, but I seemed to have missed section 15 of the Testimony, and that is a huge section to miss upon this subject!
Section 15.
The Christian, when such action involves no disloyalty to Christ, ought to be involved in the selection of and to vote for civil rulers who fear God, love truth and justice, hate evil, and are publicly committed to scriptural principles of civil government. Ex. 18:21; Deut. 16:18; 2 Sam. 23:3; Rom. 13:3.
This section clearly articulates that fearing God is part of being "publicly committed to scriptural principles of civil government." This section also clarifies that the official position of the RPCNA is that Ex. 18 and Deut. 1 do not merely describe the qualifications of civil leaders within the holy nation of Israel but prescribes them as requirements of all men who seek civil office. Therefore, all civil leaders must necessarily fear the One, true, Triune God. Such fear, therefore, requires them to bow the knee and Kiss the Son. This is the hinge on which the whole "voting door" swings, and given Romney's Mormon beliefs, it is impossible for him to kiss the Son. Therefore, a vote for Romney is illegitimate because he does not meet the scriptural qualifications of a civil leader.
Abraham Kuyper writes:
"The question how those persons (magistrates), who by divine authority are to be clothed with power, are indicated, cannot, according to Calvin, be answered alike for all peoples and for all time. And yet he (Calvin) does not hesitate to state, in an ideal sense, that the most desirable conditions exist, where the people itself chooses it own magistrates. Where such a condition exists he thinks that the people should gratefully recognize therein a favor of God, precisely as it has been expressed in the preamble of more than one of your constitutions;-'Grateful to almighty God that He gave us the power to choose our own magistrates.' In his Commentary on Samuel, Calvin therefore admonishes such people:-'And ye, O peoples, to whom God gave the liberty to choose your own magistrates, see to it, that ye do not forfeit this favor, by electing to the positions of highest honor, rascals and enemies of God.'"
As you mentioned, and as I am always inclined, we must think about these things in the light of Scripture as well as the Confession and Testimony's position on what Scripture has to say about these things. Seeing that the Testimony clearly defines what a public commitment to scriptural principles of civil government requires, I am now persuaded that a Christian, who recognizes the Kingship of Christ, must only use the God-given power to choose our magistrates by remaining loyal to Christ and voting only for men who meet the biblical qualifications for the office, namely men who fear God, love truth and justice, hate evil, and are publicly committed to scriptural principles of civil government.
Thank you again for your persuasive and gracious response.
In Christ our King,
Matt