That’s been pretty much agreed with, right? Not only that it’s true for our nation but that it would be wrong to force it. Have you gotten the sense that that’s the consensus of those of us who hold to establishments? We’re saying that establishments and the upholding in a society of the first table came about and would come about in the future as a result of massive awakenings.
Yes and no. I fully believe that's the only option but for anyone who doesn't side that way, my questions still stand. And review Jacob's comments, they pretty much distil what I'm getting at. Although it is more complicated than that. Not everyone sees it as you. I'll say most see it your way but not all.
I went back through the thread and read Jacob’s comments as well as others’ replies to him, and do understand his view and therefore yours better while at the same time scratching my head and puzzled even more as to how this thread has gone. I can only think you’re talking to/asking for a response from a different audience than is here on the PB (or at least who has yet responded).
Ok, so all establishmentarianism-holding folks on this thread and I’d think on the PB agree with this, and what’s more do not believe forced establishmentarianism/the magistrate’s forced upholding of the 1st table against the will of the populace is biblical. Am I right fellow establishmentarians?
Part of the problem here is that we are a Democratic Republic. A Monarchy could react differently. You are looking for solutions that may or may not be quick or necessary. Education has played a big part in the degeneration, debauchery, and reprobation of the mind in our society. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. A movement toward the appreciation of God's Law will take a movement of God upon the heart of men along with educating the public how good the commandments of God are. That is not going to be a quick process. It is possible if we start to see the ramifications of sin and the benefits of living in a Society that acknowledges the goodness of the Law of God. Maybe the hearts of men will desire goodness because it is hard to kick against the thorns.
Some main points:
I am not sure.
So Baptists can remain Baptists in their hearts but they must baptize their children? Jews can remain, but not have synagogues - or at least not publicly? Papists can still celebrate private masses with their family but their churches will be taken from them? The latter is certainly not the establishment principle that the Westminster divines had in view.
Anyway, yes thanks @PuritanCovenanter, I almost posted that same section from Turretin the other day. I guess I'll leave alone my desire to narrow down Jacob's and James' concerns of the thread. I think it's safe to say that those who hold to an established church, and the magistrate upholding the first table, have in mind that a society will desire this, and could not be biblically imposed on a society that did not. It doesn't have to be a final golden age of the church for a biblical establishment to happen and it can and has happened before Christ's return. Scotland in the first but especially second Reformation gives a good picture of how this would look, even though their peace and enjoyment of it only lasted a relatively short time. Everyone who is interested in the topic should thoroughly know and understand that history.
I think the answer, Rev. Duguid, is that God will work, it will be the Holy Spirit's influence on a nation and its people and the scenario we have now will not be the scenario that is present then. As we see happened in the past. Zillions of problems with establishment can be thought of. But if establishment is biblical, we must trust the Lord with all these things.
Well, sure, we can pray for a movement toward such a society. But if society needs to become, and forever remain, with a solid majority that are RPCNA (exclusive psalmody, strict Sabbatarian) - and apologies to our Baptist brethren but you will be extinct or will have to baptize your children - in order for the establishment principle to be workable, then surely the new heaven will have arrived by then? Is it possible that establishmentarianism is actually trying to impose a purity on society that belongs to the church (as the new Israel)?
It's not punting down the road. It's looking first to the Bible for God's will for magistrates and societies, and praying to that end. You can't solve problems until they arise. And nothing will be perfect until Christ does come- then the mistakes and missteps of man will come to an end. R. Martin posted a good excerpt from Turretin with some thoughts to get you going.
No sir, I don't think so. Establishmentarianism is arrived at by good and necessary inference from the Bible, so it is a doctrine. It's not a movement and doesn't impose anything on anyone. It does belong to the church, and the magistrate and society are moved upon by the Spirit of God to be a friend and a nursing father to the church (doesn't mean everyobdy is happy with it). It's a time of refreshing sent by God so that the church may have peace, and times of establishment have historically been times in which the church has been given the opportunity to write, teach, and develop important doctrinal truths, and we are the beneficiaries of them.
But Jeri, what you are describing happens at the Eschaton, not in our present fallen condition.
But some here advocate forced church attendance I recall.
It has happened in history. It could, or may not ever, happen again in those ways. But you did understand what I was saying about how God brought establishment and godly government about, and how he used it? We look for Christ's coming as our great hope. But in the meantime, he has a plan for his church in this age which sometimes includes times of great refreshment, relative peace in which to think and refine doctrinal issues, times in which the visible church can synod together with the physical protection and encouragement, indeed even the needed direction of the magistrate.
I will leave it to the wise men of that future time and place, if God pleases to bring such a time again, to work these things out. It would have to be worked out according to the circumstances of the time and place, which we can't predict. Read R. Martin's post from Turretin above to see how the thinking could go.
I'm not sure what you mean that it has happened. It has been reading Scottish Covenanter history without rose colored glasses (spec. w.r.t. the Protester-Resolutioner schism) which cured me from holding up establishment under the Covenanters as some golden era model.
By "it has happened' I meant (and it's been a while since I read McCrie's history, so going on memory) that the Scottish church enjoyed the freedom through an establishment of the church to develop much of Presbyterian polity and to get Westminster done, and after that about 5 or 6 years of relative peace existed in their land between church and magistrate before their major troubles began, which ended in all the terrible schisms, including the Protester-Resolutioner schism. I haven't meant to say that all was or ever will be rosy if a similar time of establishment should ever come. Or that any future establishment could last. Similar reforms happened in the OT under the good kings, and they didn't last either.
There were Independents, who tried their best to monopolize the time at the podium and wear down the other attendees. I've posted this quote before concerning the unlikeliness of Westminster turning out as it did, from a human point of view. It's such a great quote I'll post it again:
I should get the book you recommend since I am mostly ignorant about the history of the Scottish church. But my concerns are broader than that particular chapter of history. There truly are seasons of peace and refreshment that God grants his people but I don’t see the Establishment principle being a prerequisite for that. My concerns are that, given our fallenness, we, or our progeny will eventually use the power of the magistrate in a way that God never intended except for the nation of Israel. I do think history demonstrates this scenario much more frequently. Also, I wonder how unregenerate men can be compelled to keep the First Table. It is an impossibility, a contradiction.
