Public prayer a la 1 Timothy 2:1-2

Jeri Tanner

Jeri Tanner

Administrator
Staff member
“I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, andgiving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.”

Calvin on public prayer for the magistrate:

“That we may lead a peaceful and quiet life By exhibiting the advantage, he holds out an additional inducement, for he enumerates the fruits which are yielded to us by a well regulated government. The first is a peaceful life; for magistrates are armed with the sword, in order to keep us in peace. If they did not restrain the hardihood of wicked men, every place would be full of robberies and murders. The true way of maintaining peace, therefore, is, when every one obtains what is his own, and the violence of the more powerful is kept under restraint.

With all godliness and decency The second fruit is the preservation of godliness, that is, when magistrates give themselves to promote religion, to maintain the worship of God, and to take care that sacred ordinances be observed with due reverence. The third fruit is the care of public decency; for it is also the business of magistrates to prevent men from abandoning themselves to brutal filthiness or flagitious conduct, but, on the contrary, to promote decency and moderation. If these three things are taken away, what will be the condition of human life? If, therefore, we are at all moved by solicitude about the peace of society, or godliness, or decency, let us remember that we ought also to be solicitous about those through whose agency we obtain such distinguished benefits.”

I haven’t seen this kind of due attention to public prayer for the magistrate in churches I’ve been in, although Paul so strongly exhorts the primacy of doing so. Is it because of our loss of a robust holding to the establishment principle? What losses and judgments may have come upon the church for neglecting the Holy Spirit’s command to intercede for the magistrate on the Lord’s day?
 
I had the same experience. Leadership rarely ever mentioned in public prayers. Different situation now. For myself, I didn't pray much just because I didn't think I could expect much. But if godliness hinges on our prayers for them, it's great incentive to pray.
 
We pray for such, generally, in the LORD's Day morning service, and there is typically a more focused "current events" related prayer for such in our afternoon service. We often pray, also, for such in a "big ticket" way at our Wednesday evening prayer meetings. We are exhorted weekly to pray for such in our families and secretly as well.
 
We need to pray that the churches will
pray!! And I think it would be right to respectfully ask ministers to consider Paul’s exhortation?

And the Lord richly bless those who already do. @Joshua and @RPEphesian, do your pastors have sermons on this topic? I’ll check out Rev. Ruddell’s readings on that passage.
 
We pray publicly for governments and authorities in our regular prayer meetings, though I fear some are thinking more about a certain candidate or issue or law than they are about praying about being permitted to live peaceably. Establishment has nothing to do with this command to pray--it is the duty of all christians under any sort of government. Cuban and Chinese and Russian believers have the same command to pray.
 
Ben Zartman said:
Establishment has nothing to do with this command to pray--it is the duty of all christians under any sort of government. Cuban and Chinese and Russian believers have the same command to pray.
Click to expand...
Right, my comment had to do not with the command being for all Christians and churches, but with why public prayer is not so offered... perhaps not understanding or believing in establishment weakens the expectation for a godly government.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
We need to pray that the churches will
pray!! And I think it would be right to respectfully ask ministers to consider Paul’s exhortation?

And the Lord richly bless those who already do. @Joshua and @RPEphesian, do your pastors have sermons on this topic? I’ll check out Rev. Ruddell’s readings on that passage.
Click to expand...

My pastor did preach on it, but the sermon is not available. Probably for a discretionary reason.

Jeri Tanner said:
Right, my comment had to do not with the command being for all Christians and churches, but with why public prayer is not so offered... perhaps not understanding or believing in establishment weakens the expectation for a godly government.
Click to expand...

For me the change from non-establishment to establishment had a great impact, among other things.

If your view of government is summed up as...*
- Politicians are not required to be godly to execute their offices
- Such ambitions for a government are worldly in themselves
- Such views are just trying to spread the kingdom through unlawful means
- The First Table may not be national law, the Second Table only (to a point)
- It's unbiblical to think of anything such as a Christian nation
- Persecution is better for the church anyway, so praying for easier times for the church means degeneration in holiness
- Constantine endorsed the church, and the church grew fat and worldly...

... your ambitions will be small. And because we never ask God for better, we never get better. For myself, because I couldn't expect much, why pray much?

But if it's more like...
- Christ the God-Man is given authority over nations as well as the church (Mt 28, Eph 1)
- Righteousness to all Ten Commandments exalts a nation while sin against any one is a reproach
- Christ threatens judgment on the rulers and judges and nations who do not fear him or obey His laws (Psalm 2), implying He will bless the nation which does the opposite
- Kings and queens will be nursing fathers and mothers to the church
- Godliness in a leadership is indispensible to true/full peace, quiet, godliness and honesty in a nation per 1 Timothy 2
- We are to expect the conversion of whole nations...

...it brings your prayers and expectations for the Gospel to a far greater level.

One can still pray for nations while not believing the latter things, but those in the latter category have the far greater encouragements, and more things to ask for. In my pre-Establishment days such things were practically forbidden, and asking God for things which we didn't have business asking for, or expecting*. In the Establishment realm, you feel that you ask for too little, and pray too little.

*This post is not intended to sweep all non-establishment views under the same broad brush. Some will differ on what they believe they can expect from government, but this was the type of doctrine I had to move away from.
 
Last edited:
Jeri Tanner said:
We need to pray that the churches will
pray!! And I think it would be right to respectfully ask ministers to consider Paul’s exhortation?

And the Lord richly bless those who already do. @Joshua and @RPEphesian, do your pastors have sermons on this topic? I’ll check out Rev. Ruddell’s readings on that passage.
Click to expand...
I don't know of any sermons he has, particularly, on praying for magistrates. That said -and I believe Rutherford mentions it in his A Free Disputation Against Pretended Liberty of Conscience, if I'm rememberin' correctly- in order for us to live in "all godliness," we are certainly helped when a magistrate rules as one Who enforces Christ's Law (according to place and station), a la Establishmentarianism (of the True Religion).
 
Joshua said:
I don't know of any sermons he has, particularly, on praying for magistrates. That said -and I believe Rutherford mentions it in his A Free Disputation Against Pretended Liberty of Conscience, if I'm rememberin' correctly- in order for us to live in "all godliness," we are certainly helped when a magistrate rules as one Who enforces Christ's Law (according to place and station), a la Establishmentarianism (of the True Religion).
Click to expand...
I enjoyed this from Rev. Ruddell this afternoon- his last year's Scripture reading on 1 Timothy 2. Very encouraging. (I believe he does quote Mr. Rutherford.) https://www.christcovenantrpc.org/audio/scripture-readings/
 
When I was a Pastor, I found it difficult to pray for the civil magistrates (although I did) because it was hard to discern where to begin and end. Once you start, you could spend the entire church service and not even scratch the surface! All the moving parts in our civil government are exhausting.
 
Our elders pray for a public official from differing levels of government each week. The church follows up by sending a letter to that person and has received thoughtful replies.
 
Last edited:
RPEphesian said:
My pastor did preach on it, but the sermon is not available. Probably for a discretionary reason.



For me the change from non-establishment to establishment had a great impact, among other things.

If your view of government is summed up as...*
- Politicians are not required to be godly to execute their offices
- Such ambitions for a government are worldly in themselves
- Such views are just trying to spread the kingdom through unlawful means
- The First Table may not be national law, the Second Table only (to a point)
- It's unbiblical to think of anything such as a Christian nation
- Persecution is better for the church anyway, so praying for easier times for the church means degeneration in holiness
- Constantine endorsed the church, and the church grew fat and worldly...

... your ambitions will be small. And because we never ask God for better, we never get better. For myself, because I couldn't expect much, why pray much?

But if it's more like...
- Christ the God-Man is given authority over nations as well as the church (Mt 28, Eph 1)
- Righteousness to all Ten Commandments exalts a nation while sin against any one is a reproach
- Christ threatens judgment on the rulers and judges and nations who do not fear him or obey His laws (Psalm 2), implying He will bless the nation which does the opposite
- Kings and queens will be nursing fathers and mothers to the church
- Godliness in a leadership is indispensible to true/full peace, quiet, godliness and honesty in a nation per 1 Timothy 2
- We are to expect the conversion of whole nations...

...it brings your prayers and expectations for the Gospel to a far greater level.

One can still pray for nations while not believing the latter things, but those in the latter category have the far greater encouragements, and more things to ask for. In my pre-Establishment days such things were practically forbidden, and asking God for things which we didn't have business asking for, or expecting*. In the Establishment realm, you feel that you ask for too little, and pray too little.

*This post is not intended to sweep all non-establishment views under the same broad brush. Some will differ on what they believe they can expect from government, but this was the type of doctrine I had to move away from.
Click to expand...
The problem with the big ambitions of the establishmentarian is that he's praying for things that God has not vouchsafed. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and nowhere does the Bible say that there will be a geographical "Christian Nation." If in God's providence the occasional civil magistrate has sprung up that endorses and enforces Christianity, what of it? Seeing the end of those places--look at Geneva today, or Scotland, or England--perhaps the lesson we learn is to NOT look for an earthly kingdom, but to trust God for what He has actually promised: the salvation of all His elect. And we pray with huge ambition, and we pray knowing that God will answer our prayer, because He has promised to redeem Himself a people out of every kindred, tribe and tongue to be His holy nation, without the constraints of physical, political borders.
Surely it is good when a magistrate fears God; surely it is good for the temporal well-being of Christians if righteous decrees are made--but hoping for an earthly theocracy is hoping for the wrong thing, when we are supposed to have our affections and our treasure in Heaven. Pray then, that the magistrate will suffer you to live peaceably, to worship according to conscience (hmm, can we think of a time when the establishment persecuted other Christians because they wouldn't have their consciences wrongfully bound? Where would baptists be today if establishment presbyterians had their way?); pray that unrighteous laws would be suppressed; pray for the salvation of all God's elect. But don't hope for something that God has not promised, and that never worked out in the past anyway.
 
Ben Zartman said:
The problem with the big ambitions of the establishmentarian is that he's praying for things that God has not vouchsafed. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and nowhere does the Bible say that there will be a geographical "Christian Nation." If in God's providence the occasional civil magistrate has sprung up that endorses and enforces Christianity, what of it? Seeing the end of those places--look at Geneva today, or Scotland, or England--perhaps the lesson we learn is to NOT look for an earthly kingdom, but to trust God for what He has actually promised: the salvation of all His elect. And we pray with huge ambition, and we pray knowing that God will answer our prayer, because He has promised to redeem Himself a people out of every kindred, tribe and tongue to be His holy nation, without the constraints of physical, political borders.
Surely it is good when a magistrate fears God; surely it is good for the temporal well-being of Christians if righteous decrees are made--but hoping for an earthly theocracy is hoping for the wrong thing, when we are supposed to have our affections and our treasure in Heaven. Pray then, that the magistrate will suffer you to live peaceably, to worship according to conscience (hmm, can we think of a time when the establishment persecuted other Christians because they wouldn't have their consciences wrongfully bound? Where would baptists be today if establishment presbyterians had their way?); pray that unrighteous laws would be suppressed; pray for the salvation of all God's elect. But don't hope for something that God has not promised, and that never worked out in the past anyway.
Click to expand...

It'd be too long to untangle the multitude of things you've put in here, but I don't think this is a thread meant for a discussion on the validity of the principles anyway. Suffice it to say that I am convinced of the biblical warrant for the petitions I mentioned, of which the end is not an earthly kingdom, but the heavenly one, of which governments are one jurisdiction and tool under Christ to use to such an end. And are to be used to that end.

And I can say that before and after, there has been a vast difference in my prayer life concerning America, missions, etc. Which is the central idea of this thread.

But even so, the extraordinary goodness of God and value of the blood of Christ would still be great grounds on which to ask for such things.

This from a former Baptist, who objected to the establishment principle on the grounds you mentioned.
 
Last edited:
Ben Zartman said:
The problem with the big ambitions of the establishmentarian is that he's praying for things that God has not vouchsafed.
Click to expand...
An establishmentarian minister in public prayer is praying for the things revealed (i.e. God saves all kinds of men, including kings) to come to fruition, in accordance with 1 Timothy 2:1-2; I would say the difference is likely that a non-establishmentarian doesn’t believe the Christian magistrate is bound to make and uphold laws in accord with the first table of the Law.

I don’t mind some discussion of this, since I did bring it up in the OP, but would like to limit it to how establishmentarianism may or may not influence the mindfulness to pray publicly, accordingly.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
An establishmentarian minister in public prayer is praying for the things revealed (i.e. God saves all kinds of men, including kings) to come to fruition, in accordance with 1 Timothy 2:1-2; I would say the difference is likely that a non-establishmentarian doesn’t believe the Christian magistrate is bound to make and uphold laws in accord with the first table of the Law.

I don’t mind some discussion of this, since I did bring it up in the OP, but would like to limit it to how establishmentarianism may or may not influence the mindfulness to pray publicly, accordingly.
Click to expand...

I was gonna delete my “off-topic” rejoinder. After all I took time to reply to your reply.

I think I am also conflating in with it my postmillennial style optimism too.
 
I’ve never attended a church where there wasn’t weekly prayer for the magistrate. I thought it was normal. So you are saying that there are Reformed churches that don’t?
 
Since @Jeri Tanner has invited some level of discussion, a few thoughts on government involvement, and why past historical events encourage us to pray for our government to do more in regards to religion than just keep the peace and deliver the mail.

If you believe in Christ as being "God of God, light of light, very God of very God, begotten, not created, one essence with the Father", or the Spirit being "Lord and giver of life, proceeding from the Father (original did not contain "And the Son")... who is equally to be adored and glorified with the Father and the Son", and you reject Arianism or any idea that Christ is less than fully God, or Christ as man was deified, or had a beginning, you owe your thanks to Constantine. He called the Nicene Council.

If you believe in Christ having two natures, fully God and fully man, in no way confused, compounded, commingled, diminished, both natures remaining fully intact and separate, all the while not making Christ to be two different persons, you owe your thanks to Emperor Marcion, who called the Chalcedonian Council.

Are you a five-point Calvinist, and do you love the Canons of Dort? You owe your thanks to the General Assembly of the Netherlands, who called the Synod of Dort.

Do you subscribe to the Westminster Confession, or some modification of it? Do you love the Shorter Catechism? Are you thankful to have your heart fully searched to the last degree by the Larger Catechisms on the Ten Commandments? You owe thanks to the English Parliament.

Even if you are a Baptist, the core orthodoxy of the 2LBC is from the Westminster Assembly, called by the English Parliament. Although there was a prior Baptist Confession, the Westminster-based has become the standard. One of my previous RB churches subscribes to the 2LBC as well as Three Forms of Unity, with slight modification.

The effect of these events are (understatedly) not immaterial. You cannot deny the Nicene Creed or Chalcedon Definition without being a heretic, or gross error. It has been so for 1,500 years. And the Westminster Confession and Catechisms (and 2LBC based on them) are the standard for evaluation of orthodoxy nowadays universally across Reformed/Confessional/Covenantal churches, and have been for over 350 years. We have not only sucked the breasts of kings and rulers, but we have feasted because of them.

History is so far from repudiating cooperation between church and state, but the rule of Christ has confirmed how needful it really is. The proof: if you are reading this, you are one of those who has enjoyed the fruits of these past governors either encouraging or calling church councils, and chances are your pastor(s) have studied and borne marvelous fruits from the Standards and Creeds, and preach orthodox sermons weekly because of them—which means you in part owe your godliness to them.

And have not these events been an answer to prayer in 1 Timothy 2, that magistrates would rule in such a way as to promote godliness and humility? Isn't that exactly what these creeds and confessions do? It cannot be denied: It is what they do.

History rather confirms, the church has received some of its most significant helps from the supporting and countenancing by magistrates. It'd be a mistake to think that it is needless or immaterial now.

———————

Clarification: my denomination rejects that governments have authority to call synods, as that belongs exclusively to the church, so our testimony holds an exception to Ch 32 of the Westminster. Also, Ch. 23 Sec III where it begins, "Yet he hath authority..." However, it is in accordance with WLC 191 to cite these incidents as reasons why the government should at least encourage even if not mandate the church to deal with doctrinal and practical issues, and even put their money towards it. Thanks @kodos for pointing out WLC 191.
 
Last edited:
Consider the Larger Catechism, even as adopted by the PCA - which is not known for being an establishmentarian denomination! Which is why I will use their copy of the Larger Catechism.

According to their website, "Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America take a vow to 'sincerely receive and adopt' these confessional documents “as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures."

And so, we have their version of LC Q. 191 (https://www.pcaac.org/bco/westminster-confession/):

Q. 191. What do we pray for in the second petition? A. In the second petition, (which is, Thy kingdom come,) acknowledging ourselves and all mankind to be by nature under the dominion of sin and Satan, we pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the fullness of the Gentiles brought in; the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption, countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate:

Right here, we have instruction on how to pray - and the Scripture proofs provided are what you might expect:
1 Tim. 2:1–2. I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
Isa. 49:23. And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.

As @RPEphesian says, we inherit the fruit of this doctrine. We are the recipients of many great blessings - both in Creeds and in Confessions due to the Civil Magistrate acting as nursing fathers and mothers.

This really ought to be non-controversial in Reformed churches. The "Magisterial Reformation" came about due to it. That said, this is how we pray at Dallas RPC and so do many other Reformed Churches - RP or not.
 
Simply because God has brought some good out of the civil establishment of religion is no reason to say that it is either required or desirable. When we pray that God's kingdom will come, we are not praying that a political earthly kingdom will be established--leave that to the Dispensationalists. We are praying that God would bring salvation to the hearts of men: a kingdom that is not meat or drink or earthly things, but is a piety worked in the heart by sanctification rather than legislated outwardly. No amount of legislated morality will effect a change in the hearts of men.
I'm astonished that so many people who should know that we seek a city not made with men's hands, eternal in the heavens, are so hung up on seeking one here.
 
In post #13 you said, "Seeing the end of those places--look at Geneva today, or Scotland, or England--perhaps the lesson we learn is to NOT look for an earthly kingdom". And you brought up the Baptists. The sum of your agument is that the deemed failures are an argument against the establishment principle, or endorsement of the church by the government.

Then in post #16 I showed from history that the endorsement of the church by magistrates has produced some of the very best, most enduring good that the New Covenant church has ever seen. More than just being "some good" as you've called it, it has been incalculable good among many nations over centuries and millennia, which will serve the church thousands more years if Christ tarries.

Now you are turning around and saying, "Simply because God has brought some good out of the civil establishment of religion is no reason to say that it is either required or desirable." It cannot be both ways. If the bad is an argument against it, the good is an argument for it.

As for the assertion that this is worldly-minded, meaning to establish earthly kingdoms rather than a heavenly, spiritual one... it was put in perspective in post #14 that the end of the governments countenancing and endorsing the church is to be a means of advancing the heavenly one.

The Westminster documents, in which the establishment principle is espoused, climax in certain parts in the coming of final glory. The Shorter and Larger both crescendo in their doctrinal sections (WCS 38 and 90) on the glorified state, which statements I have a hard time believing that worldly-minded men would write such things. Such a spirit was not characteristic of the Puritans, but quite the opposite. I still remember how enthralled I was about heaven and about Christ when I read WLC 87-90.

Also, the full text of the WLC on the second petition "thy kingdom comes" makes it plain that the supporting and countenancing of the church by the government is a means to the bringing in of the spiritual kingdom, and not an end in itself:

Q. 191. What do we pray for in the second petition?
A. In the second petition, (which is, Thy kingdom come,) acknowledging ourselves and all mankind to be by nature under the dominion of sin and Satan, we pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the fulness of the Gentiles brought in; the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption, countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate: that the ordinances of Christ may be purely dispensed, and made effectual to the converting of those that are yet in their sins, and the confirming, comforting, and building up of those that are already converted: that Christ would rule in our hearts here, and hasten the time of his second coming, and our reigning with him for ever: and that he would be pleased so to exercise the kingdom of his power in all the world, as may best conduce to these ends.

The last refers to Christ's rule in heaven and earth, and on the earth through governments. My own consultation of JG Vos confirms this, to which he adds in his exposition of the Larger Catechism, "Note that the kingdom of power is not an end in itself, but a means to the furtherance of the kingdom of grace and the hastening of the kingdom of glory. In this statement of the matter the catechism is eminently scriptural."

So, I do not believe an earthly kingdom is the end, the Westminster does not believe an earthly kingdom is the end, the RPCNA does not believe an earthly kingdom is the end. The heavenly kingdom is the end, of which all resources and powers in the world are responsible to work to promote according to gifts, places, opportunities, however that looks like.

But since becoming an RP, I can say looking at my own spiritual life over the past three years I have become much more heavenly-minded than I've ever been, with a much clearer sight of what makes heaven glorious, and I've been determined to keep heaven much more in my thoughts. I owe that, in no small measure, to a God-enthralled pastor fully subscribed to the Westminster (including the Establishment principle), and serious ponderings on the Westminster standards themselves. So if the Westminster is promoting a worldly theology, it's had, ironically and understatedly, a heavenly result.

Per 1 Timothy 2, godliness and humility has been an indisputable result of the supporting and countenancing of the church. Such is tremendous reason to pray earnestly that God would convert our magistrates, bring them to fear Christ, and support and countenance the church, that such wondrous work by the church in councils and assemblies may again occur again at such scales as needed, to the further salvation and edification of many more ages of believers.
 
Last edited:
kodos said:
Consider the Larger Catechism, even as adopted by the PCA - which is not known for being an establishmentarian denomination! Which is why I will use their copy of the Larger Catechism.

According to their website, "Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America take a vow to 'sincerely receive and adopt' these confessional documents “as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures."

And so, we have their version of LC Q. 191 (https://www.pcaac.org/bco/westminster-confession/):

Q. 191. What do we pray for in the second petition? A. In the second petition, (which is, Thy kingdom come,) acknowledging ourselves and all mankind to be by nature under the dominion of sin and Satan, we pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the fullness of the Gentiles brought in; the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption, countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate:

Right here, we have instruction on how to pray - and the Scripture proofs provided are what you might expect:
1 Tim. 2:1–2. I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
Isa. 49:23. And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.

As @RPEphesian says, we inherit the fruit of this doctrine. We are the recipients of many great blessings - both in Creeds and in Confessions due to the Civil Magistrate acting as nursing fathers and mothers.

This really ought to be non-controversial in Reformed churches. The "Magisterial Reformation" came about due to it. That said, this is how we pray at Dallas RPC and so do many other Reformed Churches - RP or not.
Click to expand...
@kodos Thanks for this Pastor Rom. Firstly, I agree with the Establishmentarian position. Secondly, do you think this was an oversight by the American Revision OR do this think the American Revision was NOT intended to remove the Establishmentarian position from the original standards on this subject?
 
Last edited:
Regardless of what you think of the establishment principle, the argument that it is contrary to being heavenly-minded is clearly nonsense. Is anyone here seriously claiming to be more heavenly minded than the Puritans and many others who argued for it? Also, is it contrary to being heavenly-minded to ensure that your nuclear family is governed on Christian principles? If not, then how can if be contrary to heavenly-mindedness to want your national family to be governed by like principles?
 
Last edited:
RPEphesian said:
In post #13 you said, "Seeing the end of those places--look at Geneva today, or Scotland, or England--perhaps the lesson we learn is to NOT look for an earthly kingdom". And you brought up the Baptists. The sum of your agument is that the deemed failures are an argument against the establishment principle, or endorsement of the church by the government.

Then in post #16 I showed from history that the endorsement of the church by magistrates has produced some of the very best, most enduring good that the New Covenant church has ever seen. More than just being "some good" as you've called it, it has been incalculable good among many nations over centuries and millennia, which will serve the church thousands more years if Christ tarries.

Now you are turning around and saying, "Simply because God has brought some good out of the civil establishment of religion is no reason to say that it is either required or desirable." It cannot be both ways. If the bad is an argument against it, the good is an argument for it.

As for the assertion that this is worldly-minded, meaning to establish earthly kingdoms rather than a heavenly, spiritual one... it was put in perspective in post #14 that the end of the governments countenancing and endorsing the church is to be a means of advancing the heavenly one.

The Westminster documents, in which the establishment principle is espoused, climax in certain parts in the coming of final glory. The Shorter and Larger both crescendo in their doctrinal sections (WCS 38 and 90) on the glorified state, which statements I have a hard time believing that worldly-minded men would write such things. Such a spirit was not characteristic of the Puritans, but quite the opposite. I still remember how enthralled I was about heaven and about Christ when I read WLC 87-90.

Also, the full text of the WLC on the second petition "thy kingdom comes" makes it plain that the supporting and countenancing of the church by the government is a means to the bringing in of the spiritual kingdom, and not an end in itself:

Q. 191. What do we pray for in the second petition?
A. In the second petition, (which is, Thy kingdom come,) acknowledging ourselves and all mankind to be by nature under the dominion of sin and Satan, we pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the fulness of the Gentiles brought in; the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption, countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate: that the ordinances of Christ may be purely dispensed, and made effectual to the converting of those that are yet in their sins, and the confirming, comforting, and building up of those that are already converted: that Christ would rule in our hearts here, and hasten the time of his second coming, and our reigning with him for ever: and that he would be pleased so to exercise the kingdom of his power in all the world, as may best conduce to these ends.

The last refers to Christ's rule in heaven and earth, and on the earth through governments. My own consultation of JG Vos confirms this, to which he adds in his exposition of the Larger Catechism, "Note that the kingdom of power is not an end in itself, but a means to the furtherance of the kingdom of grace and the hastening of the kingdom of glory. In this statement of the matter the catechism is eminently scriptural."

So, I do not believe an earthly kingdom is the end, the Westminster does not believe an earthly kingdom is the end, the RPCNA does not believe an earthly kingdom is the end. The heavenly kingdom is the end, of which all resources and powers in the world are responsible to work to promote according to gifts, places, opportunities, however that looks like.

But since becoming an RP, I can say looking at my own spiritual life over the past three years I have become much more heavenly-minded than I've ever been, with a much clearer sight of what makes heaven glorious, and I've been determined to keep heaven much more in my thoughts. I owe that, in no small measure, to a God-enthralled pastor fully subscribed to the Westminster (including the Establishment principle), and serious ponderings on the Westminster standards themselves. So if the Westminster is promoting a worldly theology, it's had, ironically and understatedly, a heavenly result.

Per 1 Timothy 2, godliness and humility has been an indisputable result of the supporting and countenancing of the church. Such is tremendous reason to pray earnestly that God would convert our magistrates, bring them to fear Christ, and support and countenance the church, that such wondrous work by the church in councils and assemblies may again occur again at such scales as needed, to the further salvation and edification of many more ages of believers.
Click to expand...
The successes and failures of established religion are not the primary reasons for or against--rather, it is whether we find it in God's word. While we owe much to the Westminster ministers and the puritans of that time, there are places where they went astray: in this subject, for one; in others that we've debated in other places and need not derail this thread with. So their infatuation with establishmentarianism is no good reason to go after it. We must find the establishment principle in God's Word if we are to desire it: it is not there. Christ did not come to establish an earthly political realm; His kingdom is spiritual, His law is written in the hearts of His people.
If you find that longing for established religion on earth makes you more heavenly-minded, I congratulate you. It would not do so for me.
To the point of the OP: we pray for the political leaders not so that they would establish our sort of religion, but that we would have liberty to freely worship according to conscience--without persecution or hindrance. Kings are nursing fathers in that they foster a climate where conscience is free--for some, to baptize their infants and form denominations, for others, to baptize only believers and organize local churches according to their Confession.
 
Reformed Covenanter said:
Regardless of what you think of the establishment principle, the argument that it is contrary to being heavenly-minded is clearly nonsense. Is anyone here seriously claiming to be more heavenly minded than the Puritans and many others who argued for it? Also, is it contrary to being earthly-minded to ensure that your nuclear family is governed on Christian principles? If not, then how can if be contrary to heavenly-mindedness to want your national family to be governed by like principles?
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is claiming that. I regret to say that I'm more earthly-minded not only than all the puritans, but than everyone else on this board, and than most of the people at my church. But perhaps that's because my own heart is the only one I can see. Nevertheless, establishmentarianism is less a matter of the heart and the affections, than of wrongly dividing the word of truth. Just because they made some mistakes doesn't mean the Puritans weren't heavenly minded, though.
 
As someone who has been moderately friendly to establishmentarianism in the past, there are still hard questions that establishmentarians have to answer and it won't do to simply say, "Oh the power of the gospel will take care of that." For example:

1. Will you establish a denomination, and if so which Covenanter microdenomination will it be?
2. Will it rather be a broadly Reformed establishment, and if so, given the spectrum of Reformed in the PCA, how will that work?

Or to be practical, the only way this will really work is to get what Gary North called

3. Athanasian Pluralism
 
BayouHuguenot said:
As someone who has been moderately friendly to establishmentarianism in the past, there are still hard questions that establishmentarians have to answer and it won't do to simply say, "Oh the power of the gospel will take care of that." For example:

1. Will you establish a denomination, and if so which Covenanter microdenomination will it be?
2. Will it rather be a broadly Reformed establishment, and if so, given the spectrum of Reformed in the PCA, how will that work?

Or to be practical, the only way this will really work is to get what Gary North called

3. Athanasian Pluralism
Click to expand...
I'm not really dealing with the specifics of how it would or would not work. I am mainly dealing with the assertion on this thread that those who hold to the confessional position are seeking some sort of Dispensationalist earthly kingdom, which is frankly one of the most asinine and uncharitable things I've read on the Puritan Board in quite a long while.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top