Premise 1: Civil power is ordained of God. Premise 2: Everything that God ordains is good. Conclusion: Civil power is good.
Thus goes Stephen Wolfe’s syllogism, presented in a recent video in response to Brian Zahnd’s Christian Voter Guide. (You can watch Wolfe’s video here and you can check out my video response here.)
As far as it goes, Wolfe’s syllogism is valid. Furthermore, I largely agree with Wolfe in his critique of Zahnd’s piece. I agree with Wolfe when it comes to arguing for the application of Christianity to the public square. I affirm Wolfe’s defense of the private person-public person distinction. And I concur that love is not contrary to power in the civil realm (or, to use the term I prefer, love is not opposed to justice). To those things, and many more, I say, “Amen.”
However, I believe Wolfe’s definition of civil power is not consistent with the Scriptures, and therefore “civil power” as he defines it is not “ordained” by God.
Let’s step back for a moment. A syllogism is a form of reasoning consisting of three propositions. The first two are called the premises, and the third proposition is the conclusion. In a syllogism, the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises; if the two first propositions are true, the conclusion must be true. If Wolfe’s premises are true, then his conclusion follows.
The question, then, is this: did God ordain “civil power” in the sense that Wolfe is positing? If God did not ordain civil power in the sense that Wolfe uses the term, then his first premise is flawed. But how do we know what Wolfe means by civil power? He gives hints at a definition in his video, but a fuller definition can be gleaned from his book, The Case for Christian Nationalism.
Wolfe believes that the civil government exists not only to punish evildoers (cf. Rom. 13:5; 1 Pet. 2:14), but also to order and regulate society. For example, Wolfe writes, “The ordering agent of civil society, even in a prelapsarian world, is civil government…Its purpose is positive: it reconciles the diverse interests of families and vocations in order to establish and maintain civil peace” (p. 72). Wolfe affirms that civil power can be wielded to punish people for non-evil acts, so long as it is for the “common good.”
It is true that Wolfe provides a caveat: “[A]ny law that does not conduce to the common good is unjust” (p. 272). However, this supposed limitation of civil power is arbitrary in Wolfe’s works. Wolfe previously posited that “the reason for any law is the ground of its legitimacy.” So, what if the prince’s reason for the law was to conduce to the common good, but his law did not indeed conduce to the common good? But who makes that judgment? Obviously, the prince believes his law conduces to the common good, and perhaps even the state agents enforcing the law. But what about the Amish farmer who loses his business? I suppose he can find consolation in knowing his loss is society’s gain.
In Wolfe’s system, we are left without a sufficient mechanism to determine if any man-made law is just or unjust. This problem is amplified when Wolfe writes that it is difficult to determine if a law is unjust: “[W]e should recognize the inherent difficulty in determining whether a law is unjust” (p. 274). Contrast that claim with the claim of Psalm 119:100: “I understand more than the aged, for I keep your precepts.” Or, Micah 6:8: “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” It is not difficult to understand righteousness and justice if we follow God’s Law-Word in the civil realm. This is because we know God’s laws are just, as the psalmist wrote, “Your testimonies are righteous forever” (Psalm 119:144). The same cannot be said for man-made laws created for the “common good.”
It is hard to understand how Wolfe could argue against a plethora of man-made laws that are still being used in this nation to punish and oppress righteous people: milk laws, gun laws, vehicle registration laws, and homeschooling laws. In all these cases (plus many more) a sound argument could be made from philosophy or “natural law” that it is in the best interest of the people (“common good”) for the civil government to preemptively punish people absent an evil act.
But is this the civil power that God ordained? When a politician pursues the office of a legislator, is he pursuing a good thing? Is he pursuing what God ordained when he seeks to regulate our lives by making new laws every legislative session? Wolfe says, “Yes.” I say, “No.”
God has indeed ordained civil power, but God also defines what civil power means. Wolfe cannot create his own definition of civil power (ripe with man-made laws, forced taxation, and penalties for non-evil acts) and then force that definition onto the Bible. It would be like me saying, “God ordained ecclesiastical power. Everything God ordains is good. Therefore your pastor has the authority to execute you if you don’t read the Bible.” That is not ecclesiastical power as God defines it.
Now, Wolfe did not put his application in his conclusion, but it is assumed based on Wolfe’s running definition of civil power in his book, lectures, and videos. Wolfe’s meaning of civil power is married to his commitment to natural law legislation. He rejects a non-legislative approach to justice in society and endorses what ultimately amounts to some version of our current statist regulatory state. He affirms the notion that those in civil government are better equipped to order our lives than we are: “Civil authorities are typically in a better position than private persons to make judgments about what serves the common good” (p. 274).
Contrary to notions of regulatory oversight and man-made legislation, civil power is defined in Scripture as carrying out “God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (Rom. 13:4). Civil power is not defined as regulating man’s dominion-taking, forcefully confiscating money from the righteous (cf. Prov. 17:26), or punishing non-evil actions.
Consider Job. He wielded (true/justified/legitimate) civil power. Listen to how he describes his exercise of civil power: “When I went out to the gate of the city, when I prepared my seat in the square, the young men saw me and withdrew, and the aged rose and stood; the princes refrained from talking and laid their hand on their mouth; the voice of the nobles was hushed, and their tongue stuck to the roof of their mouth. When the ear heard, it called me blessed, and when the eye saw, it approved, because I delivered the poor who cried for help, and the fatherless who had none to help him. The blessing of him who was about to perish came upon me, and I caused the widow’s heart to sing for joy…Men listened to me and waited and kept silence for my counsel. After I spoke they did not speak again, and my word dropped upon them” (Job 29:7-13, 21-22).
This is the civil power that is ordained of God and, therefore, good. It is the power to hear a case, search out a matter, and dispense justice. This is the power that God has ordained. God did not ordain a civil power to “exact taxes” (cf. Amos 5:11) or create new laws (cf. Deut. 4:2).
Wolfe’s flaw lies in his assumption of statism and man-made law in his first premise. There is much I agree with in Wolfe’s works, but I do want to encourage him to cleanse out the old leaven that remains and embrace God’s Law-Word as the standard for justice in society. Semper Reformanda.