Studies & Actions
of the General Assembly of
The Presbyterian Church in America
PROTEST IN RESPONSE TO THE "SUMMARY POSITIONS" PAPER ON
CHURCH/STATE RELATIONS
[16th General Assembly (1988), 16-91, III, Item 3, p. 206-208.]
Clerk's Note: The following Protest and Answer were received
in 16-102, p. 225 but are included here for easier reference.
A Protest
In Response to the "Summary Positions" Paper on Church/State Relations
adopted by the 16th General Assembly
of the Presbyterian Church in America
by O. Palmer Robertson, Teaching Elder, Delmarva Presbytery
Friday, June 10, 1988
With full appreciation for the persons responsible for the
paper under consideration, the public circumstance now faced by Christ's
Church requires that a response be registered. It is hoped that open interchange
may aid God's people as they continue to wander as strangers and pilgrims,
never having in this present era a political entity they can call their
own.
The following points of concern may be noted:
1. It is true that civil governments derive their powers from God's covenants,
as the paper affirms. But its various statements appear to have confused
God's covenantal commitments to those who are constituted as a "holy nation,
a people for God's own possession," and his ordinances respecting the
powers granted the political entities of an unredeemed humanity. Confusion
of these two realms of covenant administration is seen in the section
on taxation. First, appeal is made to Jesus' programmatic statement that
defines the present era as one wholly different from the civic arrangement
under the covenant made with Israel: "Render unto Caesar the things that
are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Matt. 22:21). Establishing
the covenantal order for his new covenant people, the Lord of the covenant
commands his subjects to submit to the political entities of an unredeemed
humanity. His disciples must acknowledge that those who have been empowered
by the providence of God to stamp their image on coinage also have the
right to control that coinage.
But then the paper cites Ezra 7:24 and Leviticus 27:30 to establish that
"temple and church" have been exempt from taxation. The use of these verses
fails to recognize the unique merger of civic and religious powers in
the theocratic covenant established with Israel, and the distinctive separation
of civil and religious realms under the present administration of the
new covenant. As Christians in this country, we can rejoice in the favored
position granted us under the good providence of God. But appeal to an
older covenantal ordering cannot provide grounds for claiming freedom
from the obligation to pay taxes as a church in the present era.
2. The report affirms that civil governments that "break
the covenant" can properly be resisted, and in extreme cases overthrown.
But the ambiguous treatment of the nature of the covenant that binds civil
governments opens the door to misguided actions of devoted Christians
that could have serious negative repercussions on the freedom of us all.
Because no distinction is made between the responsibility of the individual
citizen and that of the lesser civil powers acting to resist or overthrow
an errant government, this report could encourage well-meaning believers
to initiate an unnecessary crises for themselves, their families and their
churches.
3. The report asserts that the civil government of this land has increasingly
intruded on the liberties of the Christian church, but cites no evidence
to that effect. While it is true that a more secular society now looks
with much less favor on the values of Christianity than it once may have,
the broad freedoms of our churches still remain intact. It could well
be argued that the politicizing of evangelical churches may be the greatest
single cause that has provoked a situation which may lead to the loss
of liberties in this country.
4. The report describes a taxation of the church in a way that is a "confiscatory,"
involving "seizing property necessary for the Church to carry out its
mission of worship, evangelism, and care for the poor." Obviously such
a circumstance would cause great concern. The characterization of taxation
as "seizing [necessary] property" arouses images of forced governmental
intervention. Yet the inherently subjective character of the criterion
"necessary"...to carry out its mission" could well encourage churches
to "resist paying" legitimate levies belonging to any social group operating
within the domain of a civil authority. Already it has been suggested
that the requirement that a church pay its portion of the FICA tax in
behalf of its employees should be regarded as intruding on the liberties
of the Christian Church.
5. The report states that "churches and presbyteries" should consider
supporting "legal efforts" to stop the censorship of facts about Christian
history and the promotion of humanistic religious values in public school
textbooks. But the involvement of the church as the church in these areas
of legitimate concern among Christians could only aggravate a confrontation
between church and state which would create a misconception among unredeemed
humanity concerning the distinctive mission of Christ's church in the
world. Indeed, as members of the kingdom of Christ that has come, is coming
and is yet to come, the Christian as an individual and in cooperation
with others should involve himself in advancing the truth of Christ in
every area of life. The Church should never shrink from applying the truth
of God's Word to every issue of life. But when the church as the church
takes on characteristics that distort its proper marks before the world
as they are expressed in the preaching of the Word, the administration
of the sacraments and the exercise of church discipline, then its distinctive
role in the world will be blurred.
6. The paper recognizes a duty on the part of the Christian to protect
the life of the unborn, and affirms that a person who out of an understanding
of this duty directly intervenes in behalf of an unborn child in a non-violent
way is worthy of the support of other Christians. This affirmation informs
Christians that they are justified in taking upon themselves the personal
enforcement of the moral law of God on others, even if it requires a violation
of a law of the state for them to accomplish this personal enforcement.
Although partially contradicted by qualified denials in the paper, the
statement may have the effect of confusing rather than clarifying a critical
issue.
As citizens who also are given broad freedoms and governing responsibilities
in this land, the Christian must do all he can do to correct the tragic
circumstances created by the legalization of abortion, for blood defiles
the land. But these deep concerns must be exercised in the context of
the proper application of the broader principles of Scripture.
ANSWER TO PROTEST
SUBMITTED BY TE PALMER ROBERTSON
[M16GA, 16-91,
III, 3., pp. 208]
The Sixteenth General Assembly of the PCA respectfully
responds to the protest submitted by TE Palmer Robertson against the judgment
of the Assembly in adopting the Summary Positions of the Church State
Subcommittee.
The Assembly recognizes the complexities of the issues addressed in the
Summary Positions, some of which are very accurately set forth in the
Protest.
Furthermore, the Assembly recognizes that any attempt to provide a brief
statement on these issues will leave many aspects arising out of these
issues unresolved.
The General Assembly would therefore encourage all interested parties
to study the Position Papers adopted by the Church State Subcommittee
and received as information by the Fifteenth General Assembly, and to
continue to engage in thorough study of the Holy Scriptures in order to
understand the will of God governing the issues addressed.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ TE Roland. S. Barnes |