“Failure to look these facts straight in the eye will tend, inexorably, to transform the claims of theocracy into ecclesiocracy, and from that into a separated ecclesiocracy. And when our separated ecclesial community gets out to the woods of Montana, we will not practice homosexual marriage among ourselves out there. But we will have absolutely nothing to say to the infidels in San Francisco, and if anybody suggests that we send them a prophet to declare their wicked ways to them, we will find our theological tool chest to be empty of tools and full of excuses. You see, we don’t believe in natural law and nature/grace dualisms” (Rules for Reformers, p. 146).
Have 'Em Delivered
Write to the Editor
A question I’ve been pondering (which this seems to hint at) is how can theonomy or theocratic libertarianism maintain the separation of church and state (to avoid ecclesiocracy)? Which church’s god is Lord? Why can you go to San Francisco and say (legislate) what’s what about marriage, but you can’t go to Southern Alabama (though you might not have to go so far) and say (legislate) what’s what about baptism? How can areas of denominational liberty be determined?
Good question. If we grant that there are separate governmental spheres between parental authority, pastoral authority, and presidential authority, we still have to learn where the boundaries are. We don’t want the king disciplining our children, and we don’t want the pastor raising a military. The first thing is to recognize that all authority is derived. It is derived and delegated from God’s authority. The second thing is that God will judge all authorities for the manner in which they judged and ruled. God must be honored from each respective office. The third thing is that it is impossible to… Read more »