ChristianGovernment.ca – December 11, 2009
Scottish Presbyterianism and the Dominion of Christ Over Canada
By Tim Bloedow
“… We have only to look into the volume of revelation itself, to have these reasonings confirmed. The people of Israel were instructed to regulate their national concerns by a revealed standard, and were taught to regard the possession of God’s revealed statutes and judgments as a national distinction for which they were bound to be grateful. Nor is there anything said, which would warrant us to conclude that this was to be regarded as peculiar to that people.”
Any Christian well-versed in today’s theological “camps” on Christian political theory would probably read that statement and think it came from the pen of a modern “Reconstructionist” or “Theonomist” and, therefore, part of what would even be considered a fringe branch of Reformed thought. And judging by some limited conversation with people from the British Isles, others may see, in those words, an Americanized expression of Christianity.
Actually, you’ll find that quote in “Messiah the Prince,” a book on “The Mediatorial Dominion of Jesus Christ,” by Dr. William Symington (1795-1862), a powerful preacher and esteemed Professor of Theology with the Reformed Presbyterian Church in Scotland, whose very successful ministry in the 1800s included the pastoral charge of the Glasgow RPCS congregation. Dr. Symington’s teaching was mainstream Calvinist and Reformed thought, certainly as it was mediated through people like John Knox and the Scottish Covenanters. It is basic Scottish Presbyterianism, even if most of us Scottish Presbyterians today aren’t aware of this rich doctrinal history. As a Reformed Presbyterian, I pray that God would restore this knowledge and vision to us in the near future.
Using the same simple arguments that are used today to, Dr. Symington continues to make his case that “it is the duty of nations, as the subjects of Christ, to take his law as their rule”:
“’Behold,’ says Moses, ‘I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the Lord my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it: keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations. And what nation is so great that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law which I set before you this day?’ [Deut. 4:5, 6, 8] In strict conformity with this, the chief magistrate was to have a copy of the law, according to which he should act in the discharge of his official duties. … [Deut. 17:18-20] The same principle is illustrated in the instructions given to the rulers, judges and kings of Israel. To Joshua it was said, ‘This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt mediate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.’ [Josh. 1:8] When the days of David drew nigh that he should die, he charged Solomon, his successor on the throne, thus: … [1 Kings 2:1-3]
“We wait not to quote those passages, in which nations and their rulers are encouraged to obey the law of God by the promise of suitable rewards; are cautioned against disobedience by appropriate threat; and are spoken of as actually punished for their transgression of this rule. What has been already adduced is sufficient to shew that the Jews, at least, were bound to regulate their national concerns by the revealed will of Jehovah: and the inference from this is neither obscure nor illegitimate, that nations, like them in possession of revealed truth, are still bound to take it as their supreme rule, standard, and guide, in all their civil affairs. Neither do we wait to inquire what parts of the judicial law given to the Jews, are binding upon Christian states. We build at present upon the broad and undeniable fact that nations as such, and civil magistrates in their official capacity, when the matter of revelation was less extensive than it is now, were bound to make it their rule of duty; and from this we deduce the natural and reasonable inference, that civil communities blessed by God with the perfect revelation of his will, are under obligation, at all times, to shape and model their political conduct by the dictates of this infallible standard. The principle on which they were at any time bound to do so being a moral principle, they must be held bound to do the same at all times: what is moral is neither of local nor of temporary obligation. If nations are not bound by the Word of God, they are not responsible or punishable for acting contrary to it, but may, at pleasure, revel with impunity in the violation of every branch of revealed truth: -a degree of licentious indulgence which, however agreeable to the taste of the infidel, cannot fail to shock the mind of every Christian.
“When we look into the New Testament, we find even in it many things respecting the nature, origin, and ends of civil government; the qualifications, duties, and claims of civil rulers; and the obligations of subjects towards magistrates, both supreme and subordinate. For what purpose, we ask, are these placed in the sacred volume? Surely not to be overlooked, but to be read, pondered and obeyed. They are certainly designed to be of use; but this they cannot be, if nations as such, and men in their civil capacity, are not under their authority as parts of revealed truth. When, therefore, we find civil rulers, king and judges, commanded to be wise and to be instructed, must we not understand them as required to go to the Bible for the instruction they need, and to extract from this sacred repository their lessons of political wisdom? It thus appears satisfactorily established, that nations are under the obligation of the revealed will of Christ in general, and bound to regulate their transactions by it, in as far as it contains what is applicable to such, whether in the form or principle, precept, or example.
“And if this is the case with regard to revelation as a whole, it will not be denied to be so with regard to the moral law in particular. Nations, as such, are under the obligation of the moral law; they are bound to regulate their affairs by the principles and precepts of the Decalogue. Every precept of that law they are bound to obey. …”
And Dr. Symington’s text continues in this same vein.
A few pages earlier in his presentation of this topic, however, he makes a foundational argument using the same straight-forward logic and language that some such as myself use today. I was kind of hoping for more sophisticated argumentation from an esteemed professor and pastor, thinking that maybe there was something lacking in the elementary arguments with which I was familiar since they seem to impact the thinking of so few people. But it seems that today’s “theonomic” arguments are the same old, tried and true defences that were used generations ago. There’s nothing new under the sun. And the arguments are simple enough to be understood by most people. There’s a relief and a contentment in that discovery alone.
“If the Mediator is the King of nations, nations are the subjects of the Mediator, and all the duties which subjects owe to their prince must be due by them to him. It is vain to plead exemption from moral responsibility for bodies politic, or civil office-bearers, as such. Associations, composed of such as are individually, morally responsible, must be morally responsible collectively. An aggregate of moral subjects must itself possess a moral character. Every society of moral beings is itself a moral being or subject. That a nation is not a responsible moral subject, is a sentiment monstrously inconsistent in itself, and fraught with consequences of the most hideous description. By means of its laws and its rulers, a nation is capable of putting forth acts as strictly of a moral character as those of any individual. This view of the matter is not more consonant with sound reason than with Scripture: for we there read, in express terms. Of ‘an ungodly nation;’ ‘an hypocritical nation;’ ‘a rebellious nation.’ [Ps. 113:1; Isa. 10:6; Ezek. 2:3] The same principle is admitted in the common language of mankind. We are accustomed every day to speak of national virtue, national honour, national faith, national sin; -phraseology which distinctly recognises the moral character and obligation of nations, as such. Nor is at all difficult to conceive, how every precept of the Decalogue may be as expressly kept or violated by a body politic as by a private individual. Such being the case, we can be at no loss to perceive, either that nations are under moral obligations to Christ, or what are the specific duties owed to him.”
Some today may find Dr. Symington’s sentiment a tad optimistic, and his writings certainly indicate that he was. His writing strongly suggests a postmillennial bent, which, I have been told, would have put him within the mainstream of earlier Scottish Presbyterian thought. In “Messiah the Prince,” Dr. Symington expresses great confidence that God intends to work out these purposes in history among all people before Christ returns.
- 30 -
You can reach ChristianGovernment at timothy@christiangovernment.ca
Public date: December 11th, 2009
