If the word reformation is just shorthand for compliance with the revealed will of God, then I don't suppose that there are too many people reading this magazine who would deny the need for reformation of Church and society in New Zealand. We hardly need to catalogue the doctri­nal aberrations of the wider church or the moral debauchery of wider society do we?

But a question arises for us, as it did for former Christians zealous for God's glory. Can we hope for reformation in church and society without the involve­ment of the civil Government in some way?

Of course, to the modern mind, such a thought seems abhorrent. In particu­lar, the idea that the State should have a role in the reformation of religion is repugnant to many. Surely there should be a complete separation of Church and State shouldn't there? Well John Calvin and John Knox never thought so in the 16th century, and neither did the West­minster Divines in the 17th Century. They saw in their Bibles that the civil magistrate (The name they gave the Government) indeed had a responsibility to exercise when it came to reformation. The Westminster Divines, in their Larger Catechism, describing the requirement of the second petition in the Lord's Prayer includes the following, (we are praying for the church to be) "furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption, countenanced and main­tained by the civil magistrate.."

Reformation Countenanced and Maintained by the Government⤒🔗

When they said countenanced and maintained, they had in mind more than just a benign tolerance. They saw a positive role for the State creating an environment where true religion would flourish.

It is my contention that not only were they correct in their view of the role of civil Government, but that it is a part of our task in 20th Century New Zealand to work for the same involvement of our civil Government in the task of refor­mation of Church and society.

Radical as this may seem, it only appears so because we are unfamiliar with what the Bible teaches on this sub­ject. There has over ensuing centuries been a conscious suppression of the Bible's teaching on this great subject. This mentality has largely won the day; so that many Christians believe that it is wrong for Governments to legislate for private morality; let alone legislate with Biblical presuppositions.

Historically this new view that rejects one of the fundamental insights of all reformations of religion, has been some­what inaccurately called voluntaryism. William Cunningham explores this view in his Historical Theology Vol. 1 (P.390ff). He says, voluntaryism "amounts in sub­stance to this – that the only relation that ought to subsist between the State and the Church – between civil Government and religion – is that of entire separation; or in other words, its advocates maintain that nations, as such, and civil rulers in their official capacity, not only are not bound, but are not at liberty, to interfere in any religious matters, or to seek to promote the welfare of the church of Christ as such."

Cunningham, quite rightly, rejects that view and upholds the view of the classi­cal Reformers. And when you think about it, you have to acknowledge the impossi­bility of reformation of religion under such a voluntary system, where civil law is not brought to bear in some way upon the interests of the Creator and Re­deemer, whose servants or ministers, Paul says in Romans 13, the Government in fact are.

Before we look briefly at some of the arguments for this view we need to refute the false charges that have been brought against the idea of the official sanction of the true religion with the assistance of the civil Government. This does not need to imply that the State burns books, idols and heretics. 19th Century Scottish theo­logian Thomas M'Crie, speaks for the Reformed position when he says in his treatise, Statement of the difference between the profession of the Reformed Church of Scotland, as adopted by the Seceders and the profession contained in the New Testimony and other Acts, lately adopted by the General Associate Synod;

The care of religion, is in the general view of it (in which respect the considera­tion of it is previous to that of the form which it assumes in consequences of supernatural revelation and the erection of a church state), belongs to the magis­trate's (civil Government) office; and it is his duty to watch over its external inter­ests, and to exert himself in his station to preserve upon the minds of his sub­jects and impression of its obligations and sanctions and to suppress irreligion, impiety, profanity and blasphemy. It is also the duty of civil rulers, and must be their interest, to exert themselves to introduce the gospel into their domin­ions when it may be but partially enjoyed; and by salutary laws and encourage­ments to provide them with the means of instruction, and settled dispensation of ordinances; especially in poor and deso­late or in ignorant and irreligious parts of the country; – all which they may do with­out propagating Christianity by the sword, or forcing a profession of religion on their subjects by penal laws. (page 82) 

What were some of the arguments that the proponents of this idea used?

The Light of Nature←⤒🔗

The light of nature, itself teaches that the maintenance of the true religion is a responsibility of the civil Government. If we accept that we live in a moral universe where all are accountable to the creator, then it is inconceivable that a human Government should not so order society in a way that honoured the Moral Gover­nor of the universe. After all, none is without excuse. All men everywhere are accountable to God and owe Him wor­ship and will be judged by their response to the knowledge of the true God that they all have (Romans 1:18).

Scripture Demands It←⤒🔗

The Word of God demands that the civil Government promote the reforma­tion of religion and Christian social eth­ics. In Ephesians 1:22, speaking of our Lord's mediatorial reign, He is said to be "head over all things to the church." Nations are included in these "all things."

In view of this it seems totally im­proper that a Government should govern without reference to the honour of Christ and His church. William Symington, an important Scottish Reformed theologian, says of this verse,

To us it appears that, although there were not another pas­sage on the subject in the whole Bible, that which we have now in view should be sufficient to prevent us from giving our assent to the proposition that the na­tions have nothing to do with religion.(Messiah the Prince, p.266)

In Romans 13:17, we have the teach­ing on the civil Ruler that requires him to be a minister (servant) of God for good and to be a terror not to good works, but to evil. The scope of this surely requires a positive endorsement and encourage­ment of true morality and religion. In view of the claim of Christ upon all men and over nations, this is a most reasonable conclusion.

Old Testament Predictions←⤒🔗

Many passages in the Old Testament can be appealed to in this regard. Psalm 2 is well known,

Now therefore be wise, O kings; Be instructed, you judges of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, And rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son lest he be angry and you perish in the way...Psalm 2:10-12

They are to submit to Christ, The Son, in their public capacity as kings and not merely as private persons. Psalm 72, prophesies that what is required of rulers in the New Testament will come to pass; "Yes all kings shall fall down before Him; all nations shall serve Him (v.11)."

We have a graphic and irrefutable exposition of this idea in Isaiah 49:23. Speaking of the New Testament Church, Isaiah prophesies, "Kings shall be your foster fathers, and their queens your nursing mothers; they shall bow down to you with their faces to the earth; And lick up the dust of your feet. Then you will know that I am the Lord, for they shall not be ashamed who wait on me." Calvin's commentary on this verse would seem radical to many in our day.

This took place when the Lord revealed Himself to the whole world by the gospel; for mighty Kings and princes not only submitted to the yoke of Christ, but likewise contributed their riches to raise up and maintain the Church of Christ so as to be her guardians and defenders." He goes on to show what is said here, is "...about removing superstitions and putting an end to all wicked idolatry, about advancing the kingdom of Christ and maintaining purity of doctrine, about purging scandals and cleansing from the filth that corrupts piety and impairs the lustre of the Divine majesty." This raises eyebrows in our own day does it not? But he further adds, "undoubtedly, while kings bestow careful attention on these things, they at the same time supply the pastors and ministers of the Word with all that is necessary for food and maintenance, provide for the poor and guard the Church against the disgrace of pauperism; erect schools; and appoint salaries for the teachers and board for the students; build poor-houses and hospitals and make every other arrangement that belongs to the protection and defence of the Church. (Chapter 23:3 of the West­minster Confession, revised by the Or­thodox Presbyterian Church in the USA and adopted by our churches, alludes to this passage also)

Much more could be said from the Old Testament, but M'Crie (p.140) summa­rises much of the data for us. "We might have urged here that the whole tenor of the declarations, promises and predic­tions of the Old Testament, lead to the conclusion that Christianity should be owned, countenanced, and supported, in a national way. God addresses the nations in a collective capacity, reproves them for their idolatry, and calls them to his worship, Isaiah 34:1, 40:1, 21-29. He proposes Christ, as His anointed serv­ant, to them, Ch. 42:1; declares that He has given Him the nations for His inher­itance, and that He shall direct them all. Psalm 2:8; 82:8, Isaiah 52:15; 55:5. Christ addresses Himself not only to individu­als, but to whole Islands, Isaiah 49:1; nations join themselves to Him, own and worship Him, Isaiah 2:2, Micah 4:1,2, Zechariah 2:11, 8:20-22, bless themselves and glory in Him, Jeremiah 4:2; all nations and dominions serve Him, Daniel 7:14, 27. They consecrate all things in them and employ them in His service, Isaiah 60:6-12, Zechariah 14:20, 21. He owns these nations as His and blesses them, while He breaks in pieces and wastes others, Psalm 33:12; 145:15, Isaiah 19:25, Psalm 2:9, 12; Isaiah 60:12... (page 140).

Objections←⤒🔗

I am well aware of the many and varied objections to this standard Reformed understanding of the role of civil Govern­ment in religion, but each objection raised has long ago been adequately answered. And as we have already seen from M'Crie, this does not mean the establishment of true religion by the sword or coercion of the conscience. Calvin, Knox and the Westminster Divines strenuously op­posed the intrusion of the State or its interference in Church matters. Our own confessional statements, revised as they are from the original, correctly set the boundaries or limitations of the State in matters of religion. Article 35 of the Belgic confession, for example, gives the Government the task of protecting, "…the sacred ministry, that the kingdom of Christ may be thus promoted." When the Westminster Divines addressed this is­sue, they had in mind that these things were only possible if the Government was indeed Christian- in other words that the Ruler was "born again." And a part of their task was "to maintain piety, justice and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each commonwealth. (Chapter 23:2)" Piety, justice and peace are terms that the Divines could not divorce from their source, the revealed will of God. The maintenance of public piety was enhanced by the imposition of ap­propriate laws- for example laws against blasphemy or the upholding of the sanc­tity of the Sabbath Day. They had no doubt that the Government, in its respon­sibility, was to be concerned with both tables of the law and not just the final six commandments. I doubt whether it could be maintained that they understood the "wholesome laws of each common­wealth" in terms of modern Theonomic ideas, particularly when it came to the punishment of crime, but it would be equally difficult to maintain that they understood these wholesome laws to be based on a standard other than the Word of God.

Implications←⤒🔗

What then are the implications for New Zealand, in this view? Firstly we will not see true and thorough reformation of church and society without the involve­ment of the civil Government taking up its responsibilities. Where we stand at the present time, it seems inconceivable that we would ever have a Government in the foreseeable future who would even accept some of what the Scripture im­plies about their role in reformation. But this is to limit God. In His wonderful grace, He has wrought reformation with the civil Government playing its proper role in past history. He may do so again at any time and ultimately will do so, according to the prophecies of Scripture.

But is He likely to do so when His church is agnostic on this issue and has willingly handed over the civil Govern­ment to the authority of the Devil him­self? We doubt it. Surely then we have a great responsibility to do two things at the very least. Firstly we must pray, as Nehemiah prayed, that the civil powers that be, will see this great truth also and comply as they did in Calvin's Geneva and Knox's Scotland. Secondly, we have an obligation – we who possess the ora­cles of God, to declare to our Govern­ment their responsibility in this. Yes, we would be fools in men's eyes, but we would be fools for Christ. And who knows what God may do with a people in our own time who take Him at His Word and who lay the responsibility for reformation with all those to whom it belongs; the Church, the civil Government and the individual believers. Modern writers in this area have pointed out that, properly speaking, the kings of Psalm 2 include the general voting public in a democratic nation. Ultimate power rests with them, in our scheme of Government. We have, then, an educative responsibility for the whole of our society. It is also our understand­ing that these glorious days of gospel victory will only come about in the context of widespread revival, where the majority come to receive Christ. Evangelism is then a pre-requisite to any hope of refor­mation. What keeps us from this glorious kingdom task? God hasten the day that kings will be nursing fathers to the Church.