Christ the King

Front matter

cine Theotogien) goes at Sey Win, 1 d

™ § PRINCETON, N. J. | |

| 1 Br 201. F7 1894. | | Poster. vino = He Christ the king | |

Preface

HERE is an article in the December number of Our Day, by Will C. Wood, of Boston, entitled, “God in the Constitution.”” We were delighted at seeing that subject taken up in the pages of sucha magazine, and began reading it with hearty good will. His sketch of the history of the relation of our civil life to Christianity manifested a familiarity with the subject that would do credit to any veteran National Reformer. His description’ of the convention that framed our National Constitution is too optimistic to account for the facts, but that can do the cause no possible harm. If the members of that convention were real Christians, it is all the more to their discredit that they framed an instrument that does not recognize the King of kings. His accounting for this fatal omission on the supposition that a secular constitution was the only one that would or could have been adopted at that time, imputes to that Christian convention a motive that does scant credit to their faith in their Redeemer. Hisstatement of the rise and growth and power of the National Reform movement is fair and comprehensive: He indicates their purpose to be to secure some such an amendment to the United States Constitution as will suitably acknowledge Almighty God as the source of all authority, the Lord Jesus Christ as the Ruler of nations and the Bible as the foundation of all law. With the first of these he is in hearty sympathy 7 and assigns good reasons for desiring its incorporation in our supreme law.

But the second he vehemently repudiates. He affirms that there is no such thing as “a Christian nation,” properly so called; that Christ is not King of the organic people, but only of individuals; that while Christ gave certain maxims that are good for the State, as stating the relation between Church and State, “Render unto Cesar the things that are Cesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,” the principle upon which divorce is to be granted, “ for adultery,” and the Divine origin of the State, “the powers that beare ordained by God,” yet these are not laws because Christ said so, but because they correspond to right reason; and that the idea of a “ Christian State’ is Covenanterism and dangerous to the Republic. The promoters of this movement, he grants, are men of high moral purposes, but they have embarked upon a river without being aware that the rapids are before them which will carry them over the precipice. Is it not surprising that a minister of the Gospel finds it necessary to warn earnest Christian men against the Lord Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peacer’ ~ But wwe are not disturbed in our faith. In calm confidence that His mediatorial authority will soon be acknowledged by this nation and by every nation, we shall continue testifying for His crown rights and royal prerogatives. Mr. Wood’s advice that the second clause of the amendment be thrown out cannot be considered fora moment. You might as well ask a man to cut out his heart and throw it away as a useless and dangerous encumbrance. The Kingly authority of Christ over the nations is the life of the National Reform movement. Take that away and Samson’s locks are shorn, his eyes are put out, and he grinds in the prison. Take that away and we cease to build upon the Rock, and lay our foundations in the sands. Take away our Saviour

King and we are left without rudder or compass, or sailing chart or Pilot. ‘ The bright and morning Star” is hidden from our view, and we are left at the mercy of the waves. Take away Christ from the movement and we court certain, inglorious and swift defeat. Never will we consent to yield Christ’s royal claims. We have the follow ing objections to Mr. Wood’s proposal:

I. It is based on false views of Christ’s Person. Our Lord is not ahuman person. From eternity to eternity Heis a Divine person. He took human nature into union with His Divine person, but the personality resides in the divine nature. What He said and did in human nature has moral character only as they are the sayings and doings ofa Divine person. A Divine person was baptized at the Jordan, preached the Sermon on the Mount and died upon the cross. The Son of God who created the worlds, by whom all things consist, who gave the Ten Commandments at Sinai, gave the laws respecting the State, during the days of His flesh, which have all the authority of the decrees of God. ‘““The people were astonished at his doctrine; for He spake as one having authority and not as the Scribes.’ [he solat system, the circulation of the blood, marriage, the Sabbath and civil government, are natural orders. They existed before the incarnation, and even before the dispensation of grace began in Eden. But they were ordained by the Son of God, and as Mediator made subject to His hand. ‘All things are put under Him.”

II. Itis based on false views of the Constitution of the mediatorial government. The dominion of Christ is twofold, absolute and official. As God, He always possessed unlimited power. This power ‘isinherent, necessary and underived. It cannot be increased, diminished or -nullified. But as God-man His authority is official and delegated. Inthe economy of redemption the Father sits as the Representative of the Triune God. He is sovereign. This sovereignty isnot an attribute of His nature, but a prerogative of His person. It is universal, absolute and immutable. He appoints, commands, requires, supports, accepts, and rewards. The Son voluntarily became the official subordinate of the Father. He is the “ righteous servant” of Jehovah. As the reward for His humiliation the Father appointed Him universal Ruler. This official or delegated power is His mediatorial dominion. It originated in the councils of eternity. When the covenant of grace was made He was appointed King. “ I was set up, appointed, from everlasting.” All through eternity past He was mediatorial King. As mediatorial King He created this world that it might be the theatre upon which the Son of God should die. As mediatorial King He directs the stars in their courses, for “ by Him all things consist.” As mediatorial King He directs the movements of the wheels of Providence, guides the history of all nations and tongues and people and causes ‘‘all things to work together for good to them that love’ God.” As mediatorialy Kinga gave the law at Sinai, preached the Sermon on the Mount, announced the laws of His Kingdom, com-. missioned His embassadors to “ teach all nations,” and inspired His apostles to apply His law to the Divine institutions of the family, the State and the Churcher’

III. It is based on false rules of the relation of Church and State. They are two mutually separate, independent institutions, each subject to the Mediator in its sphere. The Church must not dominate the State, as in Papal lands; nor the State lord it over the Church, asin Prelatic Establishments. They cannot be divorced, as the United States Constitution contemplates; but must co-exist on terms of mutual co-operation _under their Head and King. The administration of the moral law has been committed to Christ. It is our rule of individual, domestic, social, political, national and ecclesiastical life, “in the hands of our Mediator.” This law is both a civil code and a spiritual rule of life. In the former sense the State is its keeper; in the latter the Church. It is the State’s duty to suppress all open idolatry, whether it be the endowment-house of the Mormons, the Joss-houses of the Chinamen, or the Roman Catholic Cathedral ; it. is the Church’s privilege to enforce the worship of the true God within her pale. It belongs to the State to punish blasphemy, to the Church to sanctify God’s holy name. It belongs tothe State to prohibit all public Sabbath desecration ; itis obligatory upon the Church to consecrate the day to God. The State must crush polygamy, and banish speedy and easy divorce, and prohibit the “ social evil.” The Church teaches husbands to love their wives, and wives to obey their husbands. The State punishes the external act of covetousness; the Church strikes down the principle of it inthe heart with the sword of the Spirit. The Church and State are mutually separate and independent provinces of the mediatorial dominion of Christ, each subject in its sphere to the reigning King.

IV. It is based on false views of the moral personality of the nation. ‘There is no fact in philosophy more firmly established than this: thata nation isa moral being, capable of rights and obligations. It hasreason, will, and conscience. It has a character for good or evil, as distinct as the individual. A nation cannot exist without a religion, and its religion determines its moral character. Wespeak of a Pagan nation, a Mohammedan nation, a Christian nation. A nation commits sin, and may repent and be forgiven, as Nineveh. But sin cannot be forgiven except through Christ. Hence Christ is the Mediator between God and disobedient nations. Our nation is Christian in her origin, history and life. In the late war God had a controversy with this nation on account of slavery. In the hour of the nation’s trial, in 1863, the Senate of the United States honored Christ. That body asked President Lincoln to appoint a day for national confession of sin against God, “encouraged,” as they expressed it, “in this day of trouble by the assurances of His Word to seek Him for succor, according to His appointed way, through Jesus Christ.” The nation should give thanks “according to His appointed way through Jesus Christ,” and hence our Presidents and Governors should recognize Christ in their Thanksgiving proclamations. This nation stops the whole machinery of government on the Lord’s day, an act of national homage to “the Son of Man,” who is “ Lord:also of the Sabbath day.) “In 16240 Supreme Court of Pennsylvania declared that “Christianity—general Christianity—is and _always has been a part of the common law cf Pennsylvania; not Christianity founded on any particular tenets, nor an established Church with tithes and spiritual courts; but Christianity with liberty of ‘conscience to all men.” (The Supreme) @omios of the United States, in February, 1892, declared that “this is a Christian nation.”

The sun, moon and stars are subject to Christ, and they bow to the New Testament Joseph. The circulation of the blood is subject to Him and starts and stops at Hiscommand. But nations are His moral subjects, existing, prospering or decaying by His mediatorial providence. And for our Christian nation to adopt a constitution that ignores His authority and law isan act of rebellion which makes us obnoxious to His displeasure and wrath.

V. It is based upon false views of the Covenanters. The Covenanters are loyal citizens.

They never had a slaveholder in their communion. There was not a rebel in their membership during the war. They pray and labor for the welfare of their country. And there is no church that makes greater sacrifices of time, energy and money for the reformation of this nation than the Covenanters. They are dissenting citizens. They entered their political dissent and separated themselves from the “ voting society’ when that body accepted of authority under the immoral Constitution of the United States. They did this:

1. Because that instrument does not recognize Christ as King and Lawgiver. They hold that the nation hasan organic life, as well as the Church; that the nation’s sins are forgiven through Christ just as the Church’s are; that the nation can fast, give thanks, and keep the Sabbath just as the Church; and that the nation’s constitution should acknowledge Christ as her King, as the Churcn’s creed should recognize Christ as her Head.

A man living in the South during ‘the war,” and professing loyalty to the North, would have stultified his claims by voting and holding office under the constitution of the Southern Confederacy. A Christian inthe United States, professing loyalty to Christ’s crown and covenant, vitiates his claims by striking hands with a compact that ignores His authority.

2. Because that instrument contains provisions that are at variance with Christ's Law. We specify-the President’s oath, without God’s name, and no religious test as a qualification for office.

3. Because dissent is our only refuge from responsibility.

4. Because dissent is the most powerful remedy. It isa protest in action. It is a rebuke that demands consideration. It is a condemnation that reaches the conscience and calls forth hatred and abuses, until the cause is confessed and removed.

VI. At the request of the editor of Our Day, Joseph Cook, LL.D., an article was prepared by the writer, on “The Principles of the Covenanters,’ which appeared in the March and April numbers of 1894. In it the proposition was maintained, that the great distinctive principle of the Covenanters is: The Mediatorial Dominion of the Lord Jesus Christ over the Nations. This doctrine was developed ina series of articles which appeared in The Christian Statesman,the organ of the National Reform movement, during the present year. In them the fact of Christ’s mediatorial authority over the nations is set forth as a cosmopolitan doctrine underlying all true Christian statesmanship, and which is to be the redemption of all kindreds, and nations, and tongues, and people. The kind reception accorded our former book, ‘‘ Reformation Principles, Stated and Applied,” a copy of which was placed in the hands of each of the members of President Cleveland’s cabinet, of each of the Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, of each of the Senators and Representatives of the Fifty-second Congress, of each of the one hundred members of the Constitutional Convention of Kentucky, and of the Governor and Senators, and Judges of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, together with the libraries of one hundred colleges, in sixteen different states, and the public libraries of ascore of cities, from all of which institutions and many of the public men, splendid testimonials were received, encourages us to offer these essays as a humble tribute to the King of Nations. The introduction was prepared in the form of an address to the theological students of the United Presbyterian Seminary of Allegheny.

J. M. FOSTER. 56 PIncKNEY St., Boston.

we r Bee :

‘aa ee eee ed ac ees; see, para ets Goat Kaan noe hos . eae ened + SOS AO : A 4 1 s i 4 s a 24 ; c a ee : ’ A - ite 7 ; ey . ' ; ; | | a ‘ ' cw ‘ ‘ys “ | | wir ee * : ; D2 | <i > om | | jee min | | » + ra y ; | a 7 i | ae U ) | oy Y | , A . i } | Ps é U ¢ | | Y | | Hota Tk | + P | aan aes ; e ita ys | a Ae | .” 4 : : | ’ ae ' | aval s 3 i ; | A» ‘ ‘ | | | 7 f bad | gf); t r * ve ; | ; —_— a * § . | ge oe | / i ; hey ~ n } alas ; . : ; 2 are er i.

SH : on ey pale pi , } ie | ae ) Secs r : + : ; | my . tisk | Ps y d y, . | ? f ; 1 cr | : ry | | | : : 1 id AS aes ately ny ' A oes aes v . | | Ae f ae BEY a a es *" Ve ners i . | | 7 7 : | y y - ‘ | ce re k : - ' ’ zy a | | : | | con 4 ! 7 g ih | he aa ‘ . ; a ’ ¥ | 7 i ri H : i fe | es ; Gk : } ; . \ ih ‘ 7 > ih put 7 . oy, AL 7 : fhe ei . P bye i