Saturday, July 4, 2020

day no. 15,230 continued... down with the house of hanover

"The Fourth of July is next week, and a number of us are going to set off fireworks — and, if the past is to be trusted, we will set off some really good ones. But what are we celebrating? One of the things my grandchildren have been put up to during the fireworks are cries like, 'Down with the House of Hanover!' But what was wrong with George III and his house? Was our War for Independence just an arbitrary rebellion? Or was it principled and scriptural? We tend to believe that the early American resistance to Parliament’s rebellion against the constitution of Great Britain was pragmatic and not principled. We tend to think this way because we have drifted into postmodern relativism and we don’t understand such principles. We don’t speak that language anymore, and in our ignorance we assume that no one ever spoke that language.

'Now these be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said, The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God' (2 Sam. 23:1-3).

These are the words of God, spoken under inspiration. The man who rules over men must be just, and he must do what he does in the fear of God. If he does not fear God, he is actually aspiring to be God. To resist such hubris (by the appointed scriptural means only) is simply avoiding idolatry.

Some men rule. This is necessary. We as Christians are not hostile to the idea of rule (Rom. 13); indeed, we have to embrace it, and love it. The Scripture says that we are to honor the king, and this would include George III. But he was not resisted by our fathers because he was a king, but, considering our text, because he was not. A man resisting a tyrant is not the same kind of person as a scofflaw chafing under legitimate authority. The fact that we no longer grasp this important distinction is a central part of our indictment. The more we say, 'But I just don’t see the difference between George Washington and Robespierre,' the more we prove ourselves worthy of being ruled the way we are.

So those who rule must be just, as the Bible defines and establishes that term. The king does not define justice, but he is called upon to embody it. Those who rule must fear God, that their rule be tempered. When God establishes a man over his brothers (Rom. 13), to the extent he is lifted up, to that same extent, his duties proportionately increase. He is responsible to God, and serves, as St. Paul argues, as God’s deacon of justice.

This leads us to something that our fathers understood, but which we have forgotten. Submission to lawful authority (even when you differ with that authority) is a Christian virtue. And at the same time, resistance to tyrants is submission to God.

Our fathers understood this distinction between lawful resistance and unlawful rebellion. We do not, and we therefore cannot praise and defend our founding fathers, without condemning ourselves. We cannot defend ourselves without condemning them." -- Douglas Wilson, King David on the Fourth of July

No comments:

Post a Comment