Sometimes we learn by analyzing an idea or phenomenon according to its smallest discrete parts. My daughter Nora recently dissected a frog in biology class with the aim of separating its various organs out from the whole in order to identify them individually and, thus, better understand how they work together to produce the form of frogginess.
At other times, we learn better by identifying the unifying, animating principle—the telos towards which all the other parts of something, whether an organism, a machine or an idea, are oriented. In trying to understand what a violin is, only someone with no understanding of the concept of music would think it fitting to disassemble one and examine each individual part. Instead, the most essential knowledge of what a violin is can only be ascertained by first understanding its telos in the production of beautiful, soul-enriching music.
In King of Kings, James Baird, a minister in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), follows the latter method in his approach to the science of politics by first inquiring about the end of government before working backward. I’ll begin my review of his book looking at the syllogism upon which Baird bases much of his argument, and particularly its second premise. Then, by comparing Eric Patterson’s A Basic Guide to the Just War Tradition, I will raise important theoretical and practical questions.
The Heart of the Book
If Baird was a stonemason, then the blocks with which he builds are from Westminster Confession of Faith 23.1-2. They read as follows.
Article 1: “God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, hath ordained civil magistrates to be under him, over the people, for his own glory, and the public good; and, to this end, hath armed them with the power of the sword, for the defence and encouragement of them that are good, and for the punishment of evil-doers.”
Article 2: “It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of a magistrate, when called thereunto: in the managing whereof, as they ought especially to maintain piety, justice, and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each commonwealth; so, for that end, they may lawfully, now under the New Testament, wage war upon just and necessary occasions.
He mortars these into place as a simple syllogism.
First Premise: Government must promote the public good.
Second Premise: As the only true religion, Christianity is part of the public good.
Conclusion: Government must promote Christianity as the only true religion.
It would perhaps be more clearly put this way:
P1: Government should promote the public good.
P2: If there is a religion that is essential to (and uniquely capable of) promoting the public good, the government should promote that religion.
P3: Christianity meets that definition.
C: Therefore government should promote Christianity.
Baird’s first premise is easily assented to. We all acknowledge that “The idea of the public good has been a permanent fixture in the Western legal and political tradition” (King of Kings, 24). This gives us no heartburn.
The second premise, however, is an apple off another tree. If I handed you a sheet of paper and said, “Please make a list of all that is to be promoted by the government for the sake of the public good,” when you handed the list back, I would not find “Christian religion.” You’d enumerate public safety, public health, morality, peace and quiet, law and order (Baird lists these, too. p.25). You would not list Christian piety (Pietas, practical devotion to God).
Nevertheless, the second premise is the heart of Baird’s argument.
He cites many sources in his favor: Calvin; classic studies of Greek and Roman civilization; the constitution of Massachusetts ratified in 1780; and Joseph Story, an early supreme court justice who wrote, “piety, religion, and morality are intimately connected with the well being of the state.” (King of Kings, 26).
Arguments from those authorities have a place. As a Presbyterian minister myself, however, Baird’s references to the Old Testament are the most interesting. One could imagine King of Kings, chapter 4, The Evidence, as a scene from a courtroom. Baird summons both Israelite and Gentile kings to the stand. They testify to the timeless God-given duties of government officials. They attest not only to justice for the public good, but also bear witness to the duty of governors, kings to walk in the way of David—to rule in the fear of God. Importantly, that meant to establish true piety or religion among the people:
“Each king is evaluated on how well he follows the way of David. But what is the way of David? We find the answer in his farewell speech, where he describes a good king as one who “rules justly over men” and rules “in the fear of God” (2 Sam. 23:3–4). These are the two essential elements of good civil governance. First, justice refers to promoting the love of neighbor, as summarized in commandments 5–10 (e.g., “you shall not murder”). Second, fear of God refers to promoting true religion, as summarized in commandments 1–4 (e.g., “you shall have no other gods before me”). So if a king walks in the way of David, then he rules in the fear of God and promotes true religion. That’s a key component of kingship.”(King of Kings 50-51).
Hezekiah, Josiah, King of Nineveh, Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, and Cyrus all take the stand. They all confess the same. So says Baird.
An Important Theoretical Question
To better understand the strengths and weaknesses of Baird’s argument, let’s consider another argument from the Old Testament. Eric Patterson, in A Basic Guide to The Just War Tradition, builds the intellectual foundation of Just War theory, national security, and statecraft from the life of Nehemiah (an Old Testament Israelite governor).
Patterson writes, “[Nehemiah]…exemplifies the basic Just War criteria of sophisticated planning and execution by legitimate political authorities acting on just causes with right intention. All of Nehemiah’s work had a goal in mind, which was the peace and security of his fellow Jews living at home in Jerusalem and Judea.”
Patterson goes on to write that: “The Old Testament provides a general set of principles about citizenship, law, and justice and is replete with examples of political and military leaders, such as Joseph, Moses, Joshua, David, Hezekiah, Nehemiah, and Daniel.” Given Patterson’s arguments, it seems reasonable to conclude that he partially grounds Just War in normative principles from the example of Old Testament government officials, a line of reasoning he shares with Baird.
Remaining Questions
This all having been said, many would be justified in asking the following questions:
- If the Government must promote Christianity as the only true religion, then what does religious liberty look like for Jews and other religious minorities?
- Which version of Christianity? Specifically Presbyterianism? What about Roman Catholicism?
- How does the book account for covenantal progression from Old to New Testament, where Israel’s theocracy dissolves in Christ—should “nursing fathers” imagery (Isaiah 49) apply to modern states or primarily to the church and apostles? This is a critique posed by Southern Baptist Theological Seminary ethics professor Andrew Walker.
- Why ignore the historical consequences of church-state establishments, such as wars of religion, inquisitions, and intra-Christian persecution—didn’t America’s voluntary separation of church and state (per Tocqueville) actually preserve Christianity’s influence better than European models? Per James Madison in “Memorial and Remonstrance,” direct state-support for a particular religion or sect may in fact be self-defeating by trading spiritual vitality for government patronage.
Obviously, King of Kings is not the final word on Christian political theology. It is a political primer. Yet it also reflects important conversation on political theology currently unfolding in the United States. Whether you read King of Kings or not, it is time to take responsibility for the foundations of our nation. From the pulpit, Christians are often called to take their vocation to family and church seriously. Let us not forget that we all have a God-ordained calling to civic responsibility as well. May God bless the United States of America.
