Religious Liberty (1 Peter 2:13-17)

Marc Minter

FBC Diana

Baptist Distinctives • Sermon • Submitted a month ago • Presented a month ago

0 ratings

· 16 views

Main Idea: Christians are citizens of the state and the Church, each with distinct privileges and responsibilities, which should neither be joined nor separated.

Notes

Transcript

Introduction

In an article that was published in 2022, Kevin DeYoung (who is a Presbyterian pastor and public theologian) wrote, “Christians don’t just disagree on political principles or… conclusions. Christians disagree on how Christianity and politics relate to each other in the first place.”[i] And I think he’s exactly right.

Everyone knows that social media can bring out the worst in people, but it’s not just memes and rants and blog articles. These days, Christians with very different views of civil and religious polity are creating new institutions (churches, schools, businesses, policy think-tanks, and even communities). Of course, these institutions already existed before (and some Christians want to reform or revitalizethe old ones), but many (especially younger Christians in their 20s, 30s, and 40s) have decided that the old institutions are either indifferent or hostileto their vision of faithful Christian living… in an increasingly volatile western world… and they promote their vision as an alternative to the establishment.

One of the fundamental bricks any stable society needsin its foundation (in order to build something that will last) is an understanding of the nature and structure of the relationshipbetween religion and politics (and in America, this has largely been a conversation about the relationship between church and state).

From a biblical perspective, this is a church issue firstand then a civil issue. Christians must understand themselves as Christians (citizens of the kingdom of Christ) in order to know how they might live faithfully as citizens of their nation or state. But this issue most certainly has an impact on American politics.

Do you want all of our government officials to be Christians?

I think most of us would probably say, “Yes!” But do you want legislation to prevent any non-Christian from getting into office? Now there’s a question Christians (even in America) have disagreed about; and some are debating it now.

Do you believe America was or is a “Christian Nation,” in the sense that it was founded on biblical principles?

This seems hardly debatable for anyone who knows the history of the American founding. Christian prayer, Bible citations, Christian ethics and doctrines, and even a hope of ushering in a new age (or millennium)… these are all repeated themes among the American founders.

It may surprise some to learn that for more than forty years after the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights were each ratified, the state of Massachusetts still taxed its citizens to pay minister’s salaries, build church meeting houses, and fund Christian (Protestant) education.

But (speaking of the phrase a “Christian Nation”) do you believe that Christians in America ought to make America a “Christian Nation,” in the sense that the state or national government should enforce a confession of faith?

Do you believe that government should promote one denomination as the state church? Or that government should pay pastors or fund church budgets?

This was certainly the goal of the Pilgrims who started the Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth colonies.[ii] They affirmed that civil authorities should support and protectreligion. And this meant in some cases that those Christians who separated from Congregationalist or Anglican churches in America (like Baptists or Methodists)… that these Separates were persecuted by their Christian countrymen – they were fined for missing church meetings, imprisoned for not paying taxes to support a church they didn’t attend, and generally ostracized and abused for disturbing the peace and stability of an ordered religious society.

And here's where (I think) the rubber meets the road. Do you want senators or governors, judges or policemen to be involved in deciding what is true worship and what is idolatry? Do you think they should be arresting people for heresy or blasphemy? What about a property tax to support a publicly funded local church?

Some Christians today are arguing a lot like seventeenth-century Congregationalists in New England. They say, “Yes!” Civil magistrates (i.e., politicians and judges) should both recognize and protectChristian belief and practice.[iii] While other Christians today are arguing a lot like secular students of the Enlightenment, who prize individualism above all else. These folks seem to think that religious liberty amounts to complete personal autonomy.

All of this is quite complicated, and I admit that I don’t know exactly how I might answer some of the specific questions one might ask about Christianity and civil laws. It seems to me that many Americans have (and still do) just assume that they already know what religious liberty is. Many don’t realize that religious liberty has transformed in its meaning (at least a few times) since in the beginning of the American experiment, and most Americans don’t seem to understand that religious liberty (in any meaningful sense) is the exception and not the rule in this world (it’s just a matter of practical and historical reality).

Christians too (as I hear them talk and read their statements, articles, and books) they often sound ignorant of the history and/or self-contradictory on this topic. Many of us are prone to think of religious liberty (primarily) as a political issue rather than beginning with a doctrinalor theological view of it. And because of this confusion, we’ve (at FBC Diana) decided to address the matter head-on today… as part of our Baptist Distinctives series.

It is my goal to offer a basic argument and explanation according to what Baptists generally believe regarding religious liberty. This sermon will be basic (not comprehensive), and it will present what Baptists have and do generally believe about religious liberty (not their various and subtly different views).

As I said, all of this is complicated… and it hasn’t only justbecome complicated in the last several years. Good Christians have disagreed in the past, and many good Christians today are disagreeing about how to understandand to practically apply the doctrine of religious liberty.

I’m going to stay close to the fundamentals (in other words, I’m not going to answer all the questions). But hopefully, I’ll help us all feel a good foundation beneath us when we leave today. And I’m going to make a historically representative and biblical case for a Baptist view of religious liberty (in other words, I’m not just arguing as a Christian, but as a certain kind of Christian… a Baptist).

In short, I will argue that Christians are citizens of both the state and the Church, each with distinct privileges and responsibilities, which should neither be joined nor separated. And I hope that this sermon today will be a help to all of us as we aim to live as faithful Christians in a real world.

Scripture Reading

1 Peter 2:13–17 (ESV)

13 Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.

15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people.

16 Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God.

17 Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.

Main Idea:

Christians are citizens of the state and the Church, each with distinct privileges and responsibilities, which should neither be joined nor separated.

Sermon

1. Citizens of the Church

This short passage we’ve read today is from a letter which was written from the Apostle Peter to “those who are elect exiles” among various states or regions in the first-century Roman empire (1 Pet. 1:1). By calling the recipients “elect exiles,” Peter was saying that he was writing to Christians(i.e., the “elect” or chosen of God in Christ). This is a common way of referring to Christians in the NT.

But with this phrase (“elect exiles”), Peter was also drawing a connection between NT Christians and the OT people of Israel. Abraham and his descendants were God’s chosen people under the old covenant. God rescued them from slavery in Egypt, He gave them the special revelation of His word and law, and He brought them into the Promised Land (You can read about this in Exodus and Joshua).

Just before the Israelites went into the Promised Land, God gave them a second telling of His law (You can read about that in Deuteronomy). He reminded them of all that He’d done to preserve and bless them from Egypt to Canaan. And He also gave them yet another warning: “Now this is the commandment – the statutes and the rules – that the LORD your God commanded… that you may do them in the land to which you are going over, to possess it… Hear therefore, O Israel, and be careful to do them, that it may go well with you…” (Deut. 6:1-3).

“For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth… not because you were [better] than any other peoples… but it is because the LORD loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers” (Deut. 7:6-8).

But “beware… You shall remember the LORD your God… And if you forgetthe LORD your God… I solemnly warn you today that you shall surely perish… because you would not obey the voice of the LORD” (Deut. 8:17-20).

And, of course, most of us know the story… The people of Israel did not obey God’s voice (or His word). They sinned against God in every way. They broke all of the Ten Commandments. They lived as citizens of their own kingdom and acted the same as those citizens of other kingdoms in the world.

And God made good on His promise of judgment. He sent pagan kings from pagan nations with pagan armies to conquer the people of Israel and send them into exile. For hundreds of years, the people of Israel lived as a nation without a land. And they lived under the rule of the pagan nations who had conquered them.

During their rebellion and exile, God sent His people prophets to tell them that God had notforgotten His promise to bless. But it became increasingly clear that the way God would bless His people would not be an exact restorationof the kingdom they’d lost. No, God would send a better king with a better covenant, and this king would establish a better kingdomthat would never end.

And (most of you know what happened)… When Jesus came, He preached the gospel of the kingdom of God. Jesus was and is the better king. The covenant He established with sinners is not based on ethnicity or geography; the New Covenant in Christ is based wholly or completely on the grace of God in Christ.

And just like the disobedient Israelites, we have all sinned against God; and we all deserve His judgment. But in the person and work of Christ, God condemned sin and forgave sinners… He poured out His wrath upon Christ, and He offers mercy and peace to all who would turn from their sin and trust in Him.

This is the central message of the gospel – by grace alone through faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ alone, sinners like you and me can be welcomed into God’s blessing… not based on anything in us, but based entirely on what Christ has done on our behalf.

Friend, if you want to understand this better or discuss this more, then let’s talk after the service. Just come ask me about it, and I will be glad to tell you.

But this means that believers in Christ are not just individuals who now live isolatedlives, trusting in Christ all by themselves. No, Christians are citizensunder the rule and blessing of King Jesus. He is the King, and we are welcomed into His gracious kingdom to live under His good and generous authority.

This is why Peter says, in ch. 2, “you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession” (1 Pet. 2:9). Do you hear the echo of those same words spoken to the people of Israel just outside the Promised Land!? It’s not the people of Israelanymore who are the chosen, holy, and treasured possession of God… It’s all those who repent and believe in Christ!

Some might say that what I’m teaching here is “replacement theology,” as though the people of Christ in the NT “replace” the people of God from the OT. I don’t particularly like that term, but I believe this is what the Bible teaches – not “replacement,” but fulfillment. The NT teaches us that Christ and His peopleare the fulfillment of all that God has promised in the OT… including the promises of a nation and a priesthood… a kingdom and a citizenship.

Thus, NT Christians are what God always intended His people to be… “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession” (1 Pet. 2:9). And just like the people of OT Israel, Christians are not chosen by God because they are better than anyone else. No, they are chosen on the basis of God’s gracious love – He has decided to love all those He saves or redeems in Christ.

And, like the people of Israel, Christians now live “as sojourners and exiles” in the world (1 Pet. 2:11). But Christians live this way, not because God is punishing them for sin. Instead, Christians live as exiles in the world so that they “may proclaimthe excellencies of him who called [them] out of darkness into his marvelous light” (1 Pet. 2:9). Christians are exiles who bear witness to the King! When we live with honesty, humility, self-control, love, joy, and faithfulness, we bear witness to our King. And when we open our mouths to tell others about King Jesus, we not only tell them how they too can become citizens or “servants” of our King (1 Pet. 2:16), but we urge them to do it… while His grace may still be found.

Brothers and sisters, this is where we must begin. We will never understand how to live as good citizens of any nation in this world until we firstunderstand that our most basic and our most supreme citizenship is a participation in the kingdom of Christ… which both transcends and invadesthis world.

As our passage this morning commands, we who love and trust and follow Jesus… we ought to “live as people who are free” in this world (1 Pet. 2:16). But “not using [our] freedom as a cover-up for evil.” Instead, “living as servants of God” (1 Pet. 2:16). Thus, we “fear God” (1 Pet. 2:17), we “do good” (1 Pet. 2:15), and we live in “subjection” (or “submission”) “for the Lord’s sake toevery human institution” of authority that God (in His providence) places over us (1 Pet. 2:13)… And if the authority over us is not Christian, then we demonstrate (with our lives and words) what faithful Christianity looks like… as a testimony.

In other words, we have privileges as citizens of Christ’s kingdom, and we also have obligations. This is especially true of our lives together as a church, and this is also true of our lives out in the world as individual Christians.

2. Citizens of the State

This passage we’ve read today is one of the common places Christians often turn in their Bible’s to try to make sense of our obligations as citizens of the state. Every Christian has lived or does live today as a citizen of some nation or state or tribe or village. And the Bible is not silent about the reality that there are geographical and institutional boundaries for people in this world.

Sometimes Christians can talk like all government of any kind (monarchy, aristocracy, republic, etc.) is an effect of the Fall. They seem to think that if Adam and Eve had not sinned there would be no need for any societal rules or administrators to facilitate them. But I don’t think that’s right. For one, even in the resurrection, Christ will reign as King, and all believers will live in happy submission to His right rule. And, indeed, in this world, I think that even sinless people would need traffic lights and public utilities… and people to manage them.

So too, this naïve view of institutions and authority does not take into account that government is not the only institutional structure we have in society. Our passage today begins with government (specifically, “the emperor” and “governors… sent by him” [1 Pet. 2:13-14]), but the passage goes on to address “servants” and “masters” (1 Pet. 2:18), and “wives” and “husbands” (1 Pet. 3:1-7).

Historically, Christians have understood at least three basic societal institutions – the family, the church, and the state. And one might argue that the economy itself is a kind of institution mentioned here (“servants” and “masters”), with a necessary structure and rules for regulation.

At any rate, the point is that societal institutions are not evil or sinful in themselves. There are good husbands and bad ones, good wives and bad ones… There are good and bad pastors, and kings and judges can be good or bad as well.

And the primary command of our main passage today is not to overthrow the government (as though all kings or judges are evil, and Christians should always establish better governments). The primary command isn’t even to evaluate the goodness or badness of the magistrate. No, the primary command here is to live in “subjection” or “be subject” to those with civil authority (1 Pet. 2:13).

In first-century Rome, the highest or “supreme” government official was the “emperor” (1 Pet. 2:13), and he had “governors” or “rulers” or “magistrates” in service underneath him (1 Pet. 2:14). Their responsibility, as ordained or designed or authorized by God (Rom. 13:1; cf. Gen. 9:5-6), is to “punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good” (1 Pet. 2:14).

Now this might raise all sorts of questions about what to do when the civil authorities turn this responsibility on its head. What are Christians to do when politicians make laws that punish good and praise evil? Should we rebel? Should we publicly condemn wicked laws and evil politicians? Should we take up arms against rulers who set themselves against God and Christ?

I think there’s an implicit answer in our text here. Look at v17. The Apostle Peter sets two commands side-by-side – “fear God” and “honor the emperor” (1 Pet. 2:17). This passage alone seems to strongly imply (and the whole of Scripture certainly makes the point) that Christians are never to disobeyGod in order to obey civil authorities. Just as a child is not obligated to obey a command to sin, even though it may come from his father… so too, a citizen of the state is not obligated to obey a command to sin, though it may come from a government official or law.

The Apostle Peter himself provides us an example of this. He was warned by the civil and religious authority in Jerusalem “not to teach” anymore about Jesus as the Messiah who died for sinners and was raised to life again (Acts 5:27-28). But Peter answered, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). He was commissioned by Christ Himself to preach the gospel, and no worldly king or magistrate was authorized to overturn Christ’s commission.

Now hearing this example probably feels good to our independent, American ears. We like the idea of standing up against the tyranny of oppressive rulers (“Give me liberty, or give me death,” said Patrick Henry in 1775). And there’s a sense in which this impulse is not wrong. But let’s keep in mind that God has not promised that rebellion against tyrants will always lead to a revolution. In this world (until Christ returns in the end to save and judge), rebellion may well lead to death. Powerful tyrants often get their way (at least for a time).

In point of fact, Peter and the rest of the Apostles were imprisoned, abused, and ultimately killed by the civil authorities of their day. Doing the right thing doesn’t mean you won’t have to face real-world consequences. So, we’d better count the cost and know what we’re fighting for… not just what we’re against.

And let’s also remember that the first-century Roman “emperor” and “governors” (the ones Peter was commanding Christians to obey here!) they were civil authorities who were committed to idolatry, ethnic slavery, taxation without representation, and (at times) the eradication of Christianity. And yet, here we see the Scripture commanding Christians to live as obedient citizens of the state.

In twenty-first-century America, we have the ability to engage in the political system in ways that first-century Christians could have never dreamed. And I think it’s worthwhile for us to do what we can to influence our political system for the better. As citizens of our nation and our state (and as members of our communities), it is right for us to care and to act for the good of our earthly societies. But I also think that we might do well to temper our expectations a bit.

I confess that I am not optimistic (at least in one sense) about what Christians should expect from the American government (or any other government in the world). I read a lot of history, and I know that the freedoms we’ve enjoyed in the west (especially in America) are not the norm. In fact, freedoms like ours are the incredibly rare exception (even now and a lot more rare in the past).

But I am optimistic(in another sense). I am optimistic that Christ will build His Church. I am optimistic that God’s plan to save sinners and bring all His loved ones to glory will not fail. And I am optimistic that even if we face hardship and tribulation all the days of our lives, it is not in vain… if our lives are lived in service to Christ and in service to others… Even in defeat Christians are victorious.

The Scripture beckons us to consider, “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? …No, in all these tings we are more than conquerors through him who loved us” (Rom. 8:35-37). Or as we recently read in 1 Corinthians, “my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain” (1 Cor. 15:58).

Brothers and sisters, because we are citizens of the Church (citizens of Christ’s kingdom), we are to live faithfully in this world for Him. But we are also citizens of the state, and this means we are dually obligated to live in subjection to the officials and the laws of our nation… as long as we are neither forbidden from doing what God commands, nor commanded to do what God forbids.

We have both privileges and responsibilities under our present form and system of government, and we would do well to participate in it… as much as we have the opportunity, the aptitude, and the ambition to do it.

But we should neither join nor separate our dual citizenships.

3. Neither Joined, Nor Separated

Christians are citizens of the state and of the church, and participation in each of these institutions has its own distinct privileges and responsibilities. Theologians often refer to this as two jurisdictions – the state has a certain kind of authorized authority, and the church another. Biblically speaking, the state has the authority of the sword, and the church has the authority of the keys.

In our main passage, we see that the state has the authority to “punish” and to “praise” the deeds of the people (1 Pet. 3:14). And in Romans 13, we see the imagery of “the sword” as the authority to “punish.” Romans 13 says a ruler “is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain” (Rom. 13:4). And this language of the sword is grounded in God’s covenant with Noah. God said, “whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image” (Gen. 9:6). This is the biblical foundation for the God-authorized authority of the state.

In short, God has authorized the state or civil government to protect human life and to punish those who do injury to it. There are many implications that may be drawn here, but this is the fundamental authorization. The state has the authority or jurisdiction of the sword, and therefore the state is authorized by God to uphold the order, dignity, and value of human life. And Christ will judge on the last day all those who neglect or abuse this authority.

Brothers and sisters, this means we should vote for politicians and seek to promote legislation that will engage government in fulfilling its God-given duty. Some of us may even seek political office or learn how we can influence the political system so as to aim it toward fulfilling this duty. We should pray that those in office will not neglect or abuse their authority. And when they do, we should call them to repent and to recommit themselves to good and right rule.

That is the jurisdiction of the state, and the church has the authority or jurisdiction of the keys. We see this image of the keys in Matthew 16, and it’s explained and exemplified in Matthew18, John 20, 1 Corinthians 5, and various other passages. I’ve preached and taught on this on other occasions, so come and ask me if you’d like to study this further.

But, in short, the keys are what Jesus initially gave to Peter and the other disciples when Peter made the good confession about Jesus – “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16). And Jesus made plain His authorization for the whole church to bear the authority of the keys in Matthew 18.

There, Jesus taught His disciples what they are to do with one who says he is a believer, but who lives in ongoing, clear-cut, and unrepentant sin. Such a one is to be removed from the church (i.e., the door of the blessings of Christ is to be closed… and he is to be “locked out” by the keys). And the whole congregation is authorized to speak with the authority of Jesus – or in His “name” (Matt. 18:20).

If I might summarize all of this… the keys (or the jurisdiction of the church) belong to the gathered or assembled congregation in the name of Christ… and that assembly is authorized (by Christ) to decide on matters of doctrine (what is a good confession?) and membership (who are our members?). Local churches possess the authority to decide the what and the who of the gospel – “What is the gospel?” and “Who are the gospel people?”

Thus, the keys of the church and the sword of the state are distinct jurisdictions. The two are not ever (at least not until Christ returns) to be joined. And this is what many Christians (especially Baptists) have argued is the definition of Religious Liberty… a real distinction between the keys and the sword.

The most practical application of this distinction between the church and the state is the necessity for the church to be free (from state oversight) to decide their own membership and beliefs apart from civil laws or coercion. The state is not authorized to tell the church who they must or must not receive as members, and it has no business telling the church what they must affirm or deny in their beliefs.

Government officials can certainly be members of a church (How wonderful would it be if more Christians would give themselves to public service as government officials!). But being a governor or a judge or a mayor or a president doesn’t make a church member any more authoritative as a church member. Government officials are not authorized to enforce civil demands on our membership or doctrine… and they don’t have the jurisdiction to write laws that define, prohibit, or coerce our beliefs or practices.

Keep in mind, I’m making a biblical argument, not a constitution alone. As an American, I could certainly argue the constitutionality of what I’m saying in the public square. But that’s not my aim today. I’m drawing from the text of the Bible to show you how Christians ought to think about the authority of the church… and this is true in Brazil, in the Congo, in China, and in America.

There have been times in America (and certainly in other nations of the world) when civil rulers and judges have overstepped their jurisdiction, making unauthorized demands upon churches. But this is not as it ought to be. And when Christians speak and write and argue and fight for religious liberty, this is the central ground we must defend. The church is ruled by Christ, and citizens of Christ’s kingdom will not bow the knee to any authority in those areas where He has given us clear commands… nor will we ask for the help of the state in enforcing Christ’s rule. His power and word are sufficient.

Brothers and sisters, the state and the church are not to be joined, and as Christians we are the ones responsible to remind the state that the church neither needs nor wants its help in carrying out our Christian mission. But… we are also not to separate the church and the state. And if there is any confusion today about the joining of church and state, there is a lot more on the topic of separating them.

R.C. Sproul used to say that the most important distinction is the distinction between a separation and a distinction. I can make a distinction between my soul and my body, and thus do myself no harm. But if I separate my soul and my body, I am dead. And in the relationship between church and state (or religion and government), we want to distinguish, but we do not want to separate.

What I’ve been doing this morning is trying to describe the distinction between the kingdom of Christ (the church) and the kingdoms of this world (the state, the nation, the local municipality, etc.). But I have not been arguing for a separation between the two. It may seem strange to some of us, but we all know this intuitively, and we all practice it everyday.

We don’t stop being Christians when we scatter throughout the week, but we also don’t stop being Americans and Texans when we gather as a church. As a church, we obey county, state, and federal laws regarding tax filing, building insurance, and fire-code. And as church members out in the world, we obey the laws of Christ regarding marriage, honesty, and human dignity… even if the state or federal laws don’t require it. We carry our dual citizenship wherever we go.

Indeed, as Christians, we want our communities, our state, and our nation to be ordered according to those laws that will produce the greatest human flourishing, and so we vote, we advocate, and we participate in the public square… and we do so as Christians.

As both Christians and as Americans, we want to encourage our society to embrace Christian morals and ethics. We do not separate our Christianity from our civic lives, nor can we ever truly do such a thing. Everyone brings their gods and their religious beliefs to the public square. And even those who claim to have no god… they still have a moral standard they are trying to live by… and they want others to do the same.

Conclusion

Friends, I’ve covered a lot of ground this morning, but the bottom line is that Christians are dual citizens – of the church and of the state. We have responsibilities as participants in each of these institutions, and we also have obligations. We cannot wall-off our spiritual lives and our civil or public lives, and we want to embrace the fact that we can neither join nor separate our dual citizenships.

We should guard and defend the authority of the church. We are Christ’s kingdom visible in the world, and we have a mission (to make disciples) and a jurisdiction (to guard the who and the what of the gospel). And we don’t need the state to help us accomplish our mission or enforce our jurisdiction.

And we should also recognize the authority of the state. Order (even dysfunctional and ungodly as it may be sometimes) is better than chaos. And as we have the opportunity, we ought to seek (in whatever ways we can) to testify to the goodness and rightness of biblical Christianity.

May God give us wisdom as we aim to apply these principles and commands in our daily decisions… and may God help us to be patient with one another as we all try to live faithfully as citizens of both the church and the state.

Endnotes

[i] https://clearlyreformed.org/does-christianity-transcend-all-our-political-disagreements/ [ii] You can read the Cambridge Platform of 1648 and the Saybrook Platform of 1708, which were both the law of the land in Massachusetts and Connecticut (respectively) until after the American Revolution. Both of these constitutions affirmed that “idolatry, blasphemy, heresy… [and] [violating] the Lord’s day” are to be “restrained and punished by civil authority.” The Cambridge and Saybrook Platforms of Church Discipline, with the Confession of Faith of the New England Churches, Adopted in 1680; and the Heads of Agreement Assented to by the Presbyterians and Congregationalists in England in 1690 (Boston, MA: Thoephilus R. Marvin, 1829). 66. [iii] See the Statement on Christian Nationalism and the Gospel, written and edited by some of the most vigorous proponents today of a robust Christian engagement with politics. https://www.statementonchristiannationalism.com

Related Media

Related Sermons