All right, so go ahead and open your confession up to chapter 23 of the Civil Magistrate. If you're using the Creeds and Confessions Bible, it's on page 1322. I don't know where it is in other copies, but 1322 if you're using the Creeds and Confessions Bible. We're studying chapter 23 of the Civil Magistrate. Two weeks ago, Mr. Hawes went through paragraphs one and two. Tonight we'll be studying paragraphs three and four, but because it was two weeks ago, we're gonna review a little bit about what Mr. Hawes talked about a few weeks ago. Paragraph one of this chapter of the civil magistrate, first of all, just that term off the bat is an odd one that we don't commonly use, but you're smart kids. What is a civil magistrate? If you were to take this and translate it into contemporary speak, what word would you use for civil magistrate? Stephen, you've said too much. Ponder. An authority. An authority, okay. A specific kind of authority. That's right. The government. The government, right. Civil magistrate, the legal authorities, the governing authorities. And so, paragraph one is, giving us really the origin of all authority. Where does all authority come from? All authority originates from God himself. He is the source, he is the origin of all authority, and he has instituted both ecclesiastical authorities, that's church authorities, and he's also instituted, whether they acknowledge it or not, civil authorities, governing authorities. And this is not something that we believe just because the Westminster Confession of Faith says it, But it's something that the Bible says explicitly. They're just plucking language right out of Paul's letter to the Romans, and I'll read the opening verses of Romans chapter 13 for us. Paul writes, let every person be subject to the governing authorities. for, because, since, in light of the fact that there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore, whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment." And Paul goes on from there. It's an interesting thing I don't know how closely you all follow politics, but a year ago, maybe a year and a half ago, when Mike Johnson became Speaker of the House, he said publicly that he knew that he had this role because God had given it to him. He's right. That's true. And then people on the other side of the aisle freaked out saying that he's got some kind of ego complex, thinking that he's God's chosen man above all others. No, God put him in that position. And conservatives rejoice to hear an elected official talking about God. And he's right. The thing that we forget, though, is also when we have politicians that we don't agree with, that are in positions of authority, God put them there, too. Because there is no authority apart from God. I think often about the context in which Paul is writing. He is writing telling people to honor the governing authorities. Romans is written somewhere around 64 AD. Does anybody know when the Apostle Paul dies? Give or take a year or two. 67, 69, 80, somewhere in there. He's writing about the government that's going to kill him for the crime of preaching the gospel. He's saying, give them honor because they were put in their position of authority by God. And we'll talk more about that later, but that's the origin of all authority. All authority that exists comes from God. Secondly, the confession says in paragraph two, that Christians are able to serve in civil government, even in non-Christian governments. There are some denominations of Christians. There are some denominations of Presbyterians that hold Some version of the Westminster Standards, obviously they would have to make a revision here, although I don't know how they would do it, that say that unless a government acknowledges Jesus Christ as Lord, you can have nothing to do with it. Including, but not limited to, you can't even vote. You don't want to give any credibility to it. The Confession of Faith, Chapter 23, Paragraph 2, says very plainly that Christians can serve in elected capacity. And again, it's not just true because the confession says it's the Bible says it can anybody think of examples of Christians Old or New Testament that served in civil government that would not have been a god-honoring government I've got at least three in my notes. Nope Spread the wealth Andrew Okay, we're gonna try Evelyn Constantine all right He was he was a Christian government official but he would have been pretty significantly post biblical times, but he did he He actually legalized Christianity in Rome for the first time. So very significant Christian government leader. I'm looking for specifically Bible examples. Joseph under Pharaoh, right? This is a polytheistic religion that is in total opposition to God and to his purposes. And yet Joseph served him. Daniel. I was wondering how long it was going to take to get to the book that we're studying with Dr. Phillips in the morning sermon series. But yeah, Daniel serving Nebuchadnezzar, the picture of Satan in the old Testament and the kingdom of the world in terms of Babylon. Daniel serves at his right hand. He's his right hand guy. And then the last one's a little bit more obscure. I'll just give it to you. Nehemiah also serving as a Christian, as a believer under a pagan, And so I say that to say that you are able to serve a non-christian government as a Christian, but notice what all three of these guys, Joseph, Daniel, and Nehemiah, what they all have in common is that they did not in any way deny or hide their faith while in that office. And they did not act in any way contrary to their faith in that office. In fact, when Daniel is told, Remember, and we'll get to this at this rate in a couple months, Chapter 6, when Daniel's political enemies want to get rid of him, they say the only way we're going to get rid of him is if we get some kind of legal challenge against his faith, because he won't cave on that. And he didn't, and that's why he went to the lion's den. But that's beside the point. The point, broadly, Chapter 23, Paragraph 2, Christians can serve in elected government. Broadly speaking, Paragraphs one and two deal with permission, things that are able to happen. Civil authorities are permitted to rule. Private Christians are permitted to serve. Broadly speaking, paragraphs three and four deal with duty, what they're required to do. I would make the distinction this way. Paragraphs one and two deal with what they may do, what they're allowed to do. Paragraphs three and four deal with what they must do, right? So paragraph three is going to deal with what duties civil government is required to do on behalf of the church. And then paragraph four, who wants to just take a wild guess what paragraph four is gonna deal with? If three deals with the government's duty to the church, what do we think four might say? Mary? Very good. No trick questions here. Never trick questions, except for when they're trick questions. All right. So paragraph three, dealing with the civil government's duty to the church. I'm just going to read this and then we'll talk about it. Civil magistrates may not assume to themselves the administration of the word and sacraments or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven or in the least interfere in matters of faith. And we're going to pause. Right there, so this first thing is actually dealing with duty in a negative sense. This is what they must not do, what they are not allowed to do. And the first thing is they're not allowed to assume to themselves the ministry of the word of God, the sacraments, by implication I would say. It says they're not allowed to interfere in matters of faith, so that would incorporate prayer as well. And they're not allowed to Take hold of or administer the keys of the kingdom of heaven in other words hold on The state doesn't get to dictate how the church is run or run the church question They didn't tell them what to determine though they asked the question Yeah. So like the example, like Constantine with Nicaea, there's this big dispute about the divinity of Jesus and Constantine gets together with the churches theologians and says, can you please give a coherent answer to this? Right. So they're not saying the government has no right to say what the doctrine is. I would personally love to get a phone call from the governor or the president and say, can you help explain this doctrine of Christianity to me? But that's a different context. All right. So, The government is not allowed to interfere in matters of the faith. Now, this might also just seem really obvious in our context as Americans, but it would have been less so in theirs because there's state churches, and the state and the church in many cases were melded into one, right? Lutherans in Germany, Roman Catholics in Italy, and so on and so forth. Anglicans in England, right? But the confession is making plain that while God has instituted church authority and state authority, he didn't give the state authority over the church, and we're going to see in a minute that he doesn't give the church authority over the state. They're distinct spheres, okay? And this also, again, comes up much more in state context. To exercise the keys of the kingdom. What's that phrase mean? Andrew? They don't get to decide who goes to heaven. Okay. Yeah. And that's the ultimate function of that phrase. But in the earthly context, they don't get to decide who's in and out of the church. Ideally, if you've got a credible profession of faith and you've been received into communing membership, you're going to heaven. Not because of that, but we're recognizing that. Does that make sense? So they're saying the state doesn't get to decide who's part of the church. Why? in the person of Christ and his earthly ministry gave that authority to the apostles, the disciples who gave it down to the elders down to this day. So that's something that's been commissioned to them. Now we'll move on and see what they must do yet. As nursing fathers, it is the duty of civil magistrates, so this is what they must positively do, to protect the Church of our common Lord without giving preference to any denomination of Christians above the rest, in such a manner that all ecclesiastical persons, whatever, shall enjoy the full, free, and unquestioned liberty of discharging every part of their sacred functions without violence or danger. And, as Jesus Christ hath appointed a regular government and discipline in his church, no law of any commonwealth should interfere with, let, or hinder the due exercise thereof among the voluntary members of any denomination of Christians according to their own profession or belief." In other words, the government is supposed to provide an environment wherein Christianity is able to flourish. It's really nice that our government gives us tax-exempt status as a church and things like that. I would call that, technically speaking, above and beyond what they need to do. Grateful for it. Don't want to give it back. But what they're required to do is to create an environment wherein the church can be the church. That's what they're expected to do. That's what they must do. It is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the person and good name of all their people. So they're giving the justification, the rationalization for this. It is the duty of the civil magistrates to protect the person and good name of all their people in such an effectual manner as that no person be suffered that is allowed, permitted, either upon pretense of religion or of infidelity, to offer any indignity, violence, abuse, or injury to any other person whatsoever, and to take order that all religious and ecclesiastical assemblies be held without molestation or disturbance. It's a really complex sentence, but the gist of it, if I could distill it down, is this. It's the state's job to provide a good life for their people. It's the state's job to protect their people. The best thing possible for the people of any government is that they be permitted to worship God according to his word. And so that's where the Westminster divines are arguing. The most important thing for a human being to do is to worship God and freedom of conscience, according to his word. Therefore, the state whose job is to provide for a good life for their people must provide that. Now, this is a good segue into the duties that the church has in regard to the states. Notice what is not said in paragraph three, or paragraph four, whether it begins, it is the duty of the people pray for the magistrates, to honor their persons, to pay them tribute or other dues. And I just want to pause there for a moment and say, what it does not say is that all these things that we just said are the duty of the state and the church. It's the church's job to make the state stay in line. Right? It is not our job, it is not our role to say, to tell the state how to do the state's job. They will be accountable to God should they persecute his church. And in many cases, they are held accountable to God and are judged by him, either in this life or they certainly will be in the one to come, for how they govern, how they exercise, how they facilitate the worship of the living and true God. So I say that to say that while it is good, right, just, and appropriate that the government provide for such things, it is not our job as the church to make them do it. You guys see the distinction I'm making there? Okay. It's not the church's responsibility to make sure the state lives up to their responsibility. But this is what is, positively speaking, our responsibility. It's our responsibility to pray for the magistrates, to honor their persons, to pay them tribute or other dues, taxes, and to obey their lawful commands. I think these are all pretty self-explanatory, but I do always like to point out, it does not say, and by the way, there again, just they're quoting the Bible here. They're quoting from 1 Timothy 2, where it talks about praying for the magistrates. It does not say pray about them, pray for them, right? When Joe Biden was the president of this country, despite the fact that we have many strong disagreements with him, It is our duty to pray for him, to pray for his good, to pray that he would be safe, to pray that he would be wise, to pray that he would come to know the Lord, to pray all of these things for him. Why? Because he's the guy that God put in charge of us. Now he's no longer that guy. Now we need to pray those same things for President Trump and that the Lord would save him, that the Lord would give him wisdom, that the Lord would do these things for him because we're honoring God who put him there. Questions on that before I get to the last little section here? Yeah, Afton. So, would you say that it's wrong when, like, in Nazi Germany, people are trying to kill Hitler by Christians? Yeah, so that's a very... I would have to think about that more clearly, more time. I don't want to say that a blanket statement that rebellion against evil is always wrong. And so my knee-jerk reaction is to say, no, I would not call that wrong. But I would want to qualify that and say, they're really extreme cases, and that would be one of them. Does that make sense? So like, anyway, Chase? So are revolutions simple, or is it like the same idea? That's a thing of a lot of debate in the reformed world that I don't have a firm stance on. A lot of people would say, that the American Revolution of over taxes would not have been biblical? I don't know. I can definitely see the argument. I'm sympathetic to it. I don't know what I think about it, though. That's a good question. And sometimes we have these things that we can say, this is the principle. I don't always know the direct application to it in every scenario. Others? All right, so there are two things that they want to make clear are not exceptions here. The first is infidelity, that is lack of faithfulness or difference in religion, doth not make void the magistrate's just and legal authority, nor free the people from the due obedience to them. In other words, you can't say, Well, so-and-so governor such-and-such or president such-and-such is not a Christian. Therefore, I don't have to listen to him. That doesn't fly. I don't know who would make that argument, but I suppose some would. Confession says that doesn't fly. And again, you know, you point to the example of, you point to the example of the exiles in Babylon and Jeremiah writes to the exiles in Babylon and says, seek the good of this city. take wives, take husbands, have children, do good to the community, even though they're total pagans. And the same would be true of the governing officials as well. And then secondly, much, excuse me, do obedience to them from which ecclesiastical persons are not exempted, much less have the Pope any power and jurisdiction over them in their dominions or over any other people. I love that. and least of all to deprive them of their dominions or lives, if he shall judge them to be heretics or upon any other pretense whatsoever." In other words, not only do individual Christians not get to disobey the government because they're non-Christians, also church leaders, in this case, particularly the Pope, but really any church leader, doesn't get to exercise authority over the state in their sphere of sovereignty. In other words, I can't say, listen officer, I know that I was speeding, and that's against your law, but I serve the Lord Jesus, and therefore this law doesn't apply to me because I'm on a higher plane. I don't get to do that. Nobody gets to do that. The laws of the land are the laws of the land, and insofar as they're not commanding us to sin, we do well to obey them. So that gets to your question then about Nazi Germany, where laws were passed that were commanding sin. you know, giving up of Jews for the sake of the Holocaust and things like that. And so that's why I really have to think more, but I'm inclined to say that wouldn't be a conflict of conscience to rebel against. Whereas tea taxes, though I hate them in principle, not quite the same thing, right? And so we got to recognize tiers here. Other questions on this before I close us in clear? Yeah, Chase. What about like states that require like, States that require Islam. Right. So that would be that would be a violation of conscience. That would be a requirement to sin. And so what you do as a Christian in that context is you either leave or you rebel. Right. But you can't you can't worship a false god. You're not allowed. That's a higher tier. OK. Good stuff. Let me pray for us. And we'll pick it up next week with Chapter 24 of Marriage and divorce, nothing controversial there. God in heaven, we give thanks to you for your goodness and your kindness in giving us civil government. And Lord, we thank you that we live in a day and a time where we, in this nation, in this state, are able to worship you freely. And Lord, we pray that that would always be the case. I pray that that would always be the case for my young friends gathered here and for their children and their children's children. that they would always live in a land that's able to worship you as you have revealed in your word. And Lord, I do pray that we would do our best to honor and pray and remember your commands for how we are to reverence those who are in authority over us. And I pray, Lord, that you would give us men and women that would be worthy of such authority and honor. We pray in Christ's name, amen.