What is the morality of remaining in the EU?

During my A-levels I had to write an essay on whether membership of the European union undermined Parliamentary sovereignty in the United Kingdom. It was clear to me that time that the answer to that question was an undeniable yes. Acceptance of EEC membership and the Treaty of Rome also meant accepting that all past, present and future European legislation would supersede anything passed by the UK Parliament. 

Thus a constitutional principle was sacrificed: that no one UK parliament can bind another. The fact that the executive arm of the EU is unelected removes democratic accountability. The European Courts also take precedence over UK Courts. We have given up ultimate moral control over our country, we may be able to pass laws and make decisions in courts but they can be appealed through the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights and overturned. A nation must be able to govern itself according to the law of God. The basis of the God-appointed role of civil government (Romans 13) is to promote good and restrain evil (in accordance with God's law). Yet our nation has said that not God's law but European law is supreme.

These are simple facts however anyone wishes to spin them. They can say that we have traded sovereignty for something else but we have certainly given it away. Only recently, however, I came to see that this is not merely a political point and a matter of civil liberties but a moral question.

Our relationship with Europe has no moral basis. It is based on an oath but an oath must be true, just and righteous (Jeremiah 4:2).It must be an oath that is true and must commit us only to things that are just and righteous. It is altogether wrong for individuals to make an oath that commits them to implicit, unquestioned and automatic obedience whether the matter is right or wrong. If we are giving our word to submit to any future European legislation then this must potentially include things that will be morally wrong - it is therefore swearing falsely. If we are swearing with a mental reservation and intention that we will not keep our word if it does in the future commit us to anything morally wrong - we are also swearing falsely.

It is only acceptable to make an oath concerning something that we are able to perform and we know to be morally right to perform. When Herod made an oath to give his step-daughter anything she wanted it was not a morally acceptable oath. He ought not to have kept it when it was clear that it committed him to that which was morally wrong but he certainly also ought never to have made the oath in the first place (Matthew 14:7). [I am indebted to an address "Should We Be A Member Of The European Union? - A Biblical Assessment" by Rev. David Silversides for crystallising some of these points].

We do not have a legal basis or guaranteed opt out for picking and choosing European law if it proves to be morally wrong in the future. The time has come to release ourselves legally from an oath that has no moral basis by voting to leave the EU. It is one of the many threats to the moral security of our nation. Release from this dangerous oath will not solve our moral problems, nor will it guarantee our moral security. But in a straight choice between whether our nation ought to be ensnared in a morally false oath or not, our moral duty is clear. Vote Leave.

One put down and another set up - #Election2015

The result of the UK General Election has taken many by surprise. Political pundits made confident forecasts. Politicians made strong assertions. The outcome was, however, entirely different. Men failed to account for the sovereignty of the Most High.... read more here

How to vote?

we must esteem it not merely a duty but a privilege, to remind the people, that it is through having God glorified in the exercise of their political privileges, that they will have the nation blessed, and that the rule " whether therefore, ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God," is as applicable to the exercise of the elective franchise [i.e. voting], as it is to the discharge of any duty we may have to perform, or the enjoyment of any privilege we may possess. By the people being brought to act on this rule, they will encourage the righteousness by which a nation is exalted, and discourage the sin which is a reproach to any people, and by which they are ruined.

Synod of the United Original Secession Church, May 1885.

the decree of a most fearful parliament in heaven

Sure I am, the decree of a most fearful parliament in heaven is at the very point of coming forth, because of the sins of the land. For “we have cast away the law of the Lord, and despised the words of the Holy One of Israel” (Isa. v. 24). “Judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off; truth is fallen in the streets, and equity cannot enter” (Isa. lix. 14). Lo! the prophet, as if he had seen us and our kirk, resembleth Justice to be handled as an enemy holden out at the ports of our city [so is she banished!], and Truth to a person sickly and diseased, fallen down in a deadly swooning fit in the streets, before he can come to an house.

Samuel Rutherford, 1628

Public consultation on Bill to legalise gay marriage in Scotland

A crystal clear warning from Rev. David Campbell, Convener of the Religion and Morals Committee of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland in a video news item here.

Scotland must be rid of Scotland

"Ye that are the people of God, do not weary in maintaining the testimony of the day, in your stations and places; and whatever you do, make sure an interest in Christ, for there is a storm coming, which will try your foundations. Scotland must be rid of Scotland before the delivery come."
- Some of the last words of James Renwick on the scaffold


Robert Wodrow "I do not doubt but Mr Renwick's meaning might be, that a great many of that wicked persecuting time behoved to be so far swept off the stage as to make Scotland, as it were, a new people and nation. But I think likewise that martyrs at their death, and even ordinary believers that die under the administration of an abundant entrance, do not themselves know the full extent of their own impressions, or the expressions they make use of under them ; and many times after providences make the best commentary upon them".

The Lord hath removed Scotland’s crown, for we owned not His crown

The Lord hath removed Scotland’s crown, for we owned not His crown...Our gold is become dim, the visage of our Nazarites is become black, the sun is gone down on our seers; the crown is fallen from our heads; we roar like bears. Lord save us from that, “He that made them will not have mercy on them” (Isa. xxvii. 11). The heart of the scribe meditateth terror.


Samuel Rutherford

the riots and moral relativism

The most insightful analysis of the causes of the recent English riots highlights the role of moral relativism. Encouragingly, this was shared by the Prime Minister. Even though he did not acknowledge where the absolutes would be derived. Another perspective is to see something of the symptoms that engulfed the declining Roman Empire as corroding the West into collapse. If we think this is melodramatic we might consider a decent summary of Gibbon's five basic reasons, as summarised by Tieman H. Dippel in The New Legacy:

1. The sanctity and dignity of the home were undermined.
2. Taxation became higher and higher, with public money being spent for free bread and circuses for the people.
3. There was a mad craze for pleasure and violence, and sports became more exciting, brutal, and immoral as people grew increasingly desensitized.
4. Armaments were built when the real enemy was the decay of individual responsibility.  
5. Religion degenerated into mere form and lost its touch with life and no longer had the power to guide people in spiritual directions.

Gibbon speaks generally of the decline in civic virtue as much as economic collapse. It appears that factors 2 and 3 were linked with the boredom of thousands of unemployed Romans who were prone to civil unrest and rioting in the streets. They were bought off by the politicians through free bread and circuses. A rather weak argument has been made that there is a link between the English riots and taxation, because some of the rioters thought they were "getting their taxes back" (even though it will put £100m on the tax bill).  

Greed runs riot: my part in it

There have been a multitude of causes proposed for the England riots  There has been an inevitable left-wing counter-offensive against the simple assessment of the rioting and looting as feral criminality. It is a symptom of severe moral bankruptcy as a nation. It is easy and false to depersonalise the causes by blaming social and economic factors but it is also misleading and facile to isolate all of the responsibility with the individuals involved.

One of the proposed factors is the "culture of entitlement". David Wilson, professor of criminology at Birmingham City University and a former prison governor observes that:

"It's not just about a particular class, it permeates all levels of society. When we see politicians claiming for flat-screen TVs and getting jailed for fiddling their expenses, it's clear that young people of all classes aren't being given appropriate leadership."

We are speaking of a culture of greed where sin is unrestrained and breaches of the 10th commandment go happily hand in hand with the 8th - if you can get away with it.  (The Larger Catechism rightly includes covetousness as a breach of the 8th commandment). Few will in fact face the consequences of this, just as few are brought to justice for their breaches of the 8th commandment. It's about getting what you want and feel entitled to for nothing whether it be significant sums of money or trainers from JD Sports. It is simply greed without fear of restraint from impotent and discredited authority. Government and society promote greed and the breach of the 8th commandment whether through the National Lottery or a dependence upon excessive and irresponsible consumer spending.

I'm not in the habit of quoting women priests but this writer has at least discerned some of this when she says:
"And what will we do? Continue to promulgate the values that have created this deadly cocktail of haves and have-nots, faithless, hopeless people who have been taught that consumerism is a recreational right and all moral and religious education completely nonsensical? Surely that would be nonsensical."

The question is: why is this happening now? Because it is evident to all that greed can run riot without being effectively checked. Politicians and bankers have proved this. "We're showing the police and the rich that we can what we want". I wonder where they learned that?

It comes closer to home in this analysis:
"Politicians have been part of this process, and some on the left may have even encouraged our young people to riot. The liberal intelligentsia encouraged posh kids to protest and riot over student fees – and now poorer kids have joined in and we are all appalled. How can you complain when you supported such activism only a few months ago?
In a way, we are all responsible for the riots, whether directly or indirectly. We watched the previous government talk up rights for young people but with no mention of responsibilities. We have allowed our welfare system to prop up immoral lifestyles. We have not taught all our young people that an entitlement culture is morally wrong. And we have paid the price for this liberalism. Now we need to collectively grow up and take responsibility for responsibility."

It's a start but if the soul-searching is at all real we need to discover "every man the plague of his own heart". That the seeds and a degree of the symptoms are with us too. "Are there not sins with you, even with you?" Though you were restrained by God's common and/or saving grace from joining with the looters, have we not had our own covetous part in the culture of greed? "When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him" (Ps. 50:18). Are we not seeing the full unrestrained working of what is in our hearts and even in our lives in the obsession with material things? Let us examine ourselves in relation to and pray over the biblical exposition of the 8th commandment that we have in the Larger Catechism

Question 141: What are the duties required in the eighth commandment?
Answer: The duties required in the eighth commandment are, truth, faithfulness, and justice in contracts and commerce between man and man; rendering to everyone his due; restitution of goods unlawfully detained from the right owners thereof; giving and lending freely, according to our abilities, and the necessities of others; moderation of our judgments, wills, and affections concerning worldly goods; a provident care and study to get, keep, use, and dispose these things which are necessary and convenient for the sustentation of our nature, and suitable to our condition; a lawful calling, and diligence in it; frugality; avoiding unnecessary lawsuits and suretyship, or other like engagements; and an endeavor, by all just and lawful means, to procure, preserve, and further the wealth and outward estate of others, as well as our own.

Question 142: What are the sins forbidden in the eighth commandment?
Answer: The sins forbidden in the eighth commandment, besides the neglect of the duties required, are, theft, robbery, man_stealing, and receiving anything that is stolen; fraudulent dealing, false weights and measures, removing land marks, injustice and unfaithfulness in contracts between man and man, or in matters of trust; oppression, extortion, usury, bribery, vexatious lawsuits, unjust enclosures and depopulations; engrossing commodities to enhance the price; unlawful callings, and all other unjust or sinful ways of taking or withholding from our neighbor: What belongs to him, or of enriching ourselves; covetousness; inordinate prizing and affecting worldly goods; distrustful and distracting cares and studies in getting, keeping, and using them; envying at the prosperity of others; as likewise idleness, prodigality, wasteful gaming; and all other ways whereby we do unduly prejudice our own outward estate, and defrauding ourselves of the due use and comfort of that estate which God has given us.

the pulling down of strongholds

On 5th July 1910 the Synod of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland opened in Inverness with a sermon by the Moderator, Rev. Alex Macrae on the text.
“For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds” – 2 Corinthians 10:4. Closing his sermon Macrae said the following which is very relevant to the situation today.

We are in extreme danger. It is, however, with the weapons that the Gospel supplies that Christ will yet, through His mighty power, pull them all down. He shall consume the man of sin “with the spirit of his mouth and shall destroy him with the brightness of his coming.” He shall yet completely demolish the strongholds of error that are spread all over Christendom in the present day...The weapons furnished in the Gospel alone will do it, through the forthputting of the almighty power of God. When His time comes, the light of the Gospel will flash throughout all lands. In spite of all opposition, Christ will have the heathen for His inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for His possession.

In conclusion, we have reason to bewail many shortcomings. We see little of the Lord’s work anywhere in our Land. The Holy Spirit is grieved. There is a general falling away from the faith once for all delivered to the saints. There is a process of retrogression persistently going on from purity of doctrine and practice. There is a growing indifference to true religion and undefiled. There is a wide-spread apathy to the inroads of the Papacy that aims at depriving us of our civil and religious liberties. There is a false charity that is more careful of not offending the protagonists of error and falsehood than the God of truth and righteousness. Our duty, however, is clear. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever. His truth is the same. Let us, therefore, value more and more the weapons that are mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds, and unflaggingly conduct the warfare to which the Lord has called us, in the strength of His grace, and with a single eye to His glory. “Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.” Amen.

For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof

Is weak government a judgement from God upon our sins?

Prov. 28:2 For the transgression of a land many are the princes thereof: but by a man of understanding and knowledge the state thereof shall be prolonged.

Note, 1. National sins bring national disorders and the disturbance of the public repose: For the transgression of a land, and a general defection from God and religion to idolatry, profaneness, or immorality, many are the princes thereof, many at the same time pretending to the sovereignty and contending for it, by which the people are crumbled into parties and factions, biting and devouring one another, or many successively, in a little time, one cutting off another, as 1 Kings xvi. 8, &c., or soon cut off by the hand of God or of a foreign enemy, as 2 Kings xxiv. 5, &c.

2. Wisdom will prevent or redress these grievances: By a man, that is, by a people, of understanding, that come again to themselves and their right mind, things are kept in a good order, or, if disturbed, brought back to the old channel again. Or, By a prince of understanding and knowledge, a privy-counsellor, or minister of state, that will restrain or suppress the transgression of the land, and take the right methods of healing the state thereof, the good estate of it will be prolonged. We cannot imagine what a great deal of service one wise man may do to a nation in a critical juncture.

- Matthew Henry Commentary

The National Debt and our debt of sin

As fears rage over the national deficit in Greece (here)and its implications in other countries not least Britain - you may benefit from reading an article here that considers not only the National Debt but the reality of our debt of sin of which we ought to be reminded.

Voting and the Bible

Bigger turnouts. Tactical voting. Evidence-based voting.
By now you will have voted, spoilt your ballot paper or not voted.

The Christian Institute produced a video encouraging Christians to vote with the question "How should Christians think biblically when considering ‘how’ or even ‘whether’ to vote?" The video was entitled "Voting and the Bible in 210 seconds". Their election briefing is invaluable but I'm not sure about the video. It refers to lots of bible passages but almost none directly relevant to voting. They are about praying for governments instead. The link above also links to a Southern Baptist document "Why Should Christians Vote?". This document does not do much better. One can be salt and light in society without casting a secret vote. It seems as if they are saying that these are the best passages it is possible to find in the bible with the closest fit with the issue.

The Bible does not use the words vote or voting. There is, however, a lot about government and national duty. Romans 13:1-14 doesn't really prescribe voting as a duty or active citizenship, more a subjection to the just authority of governments. One can render these duties unto Caesar without voting. It's hard to think that if Christians had the vote at this time they would have voted for the persecuting regime of Nero.

It would be an entire mistake to think that the Bible has nothing to say about choosing rulers simply because it does not refer to ballot by universal suffrage. It speaks frequently about the choice of rulers by a people and nation. Part of the difficulty is that people don't want to go to the Old Testament and find it. Deut 1:13 says "Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you". Exodus 18:21 "thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens". We also read "he that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God"(2 Sam. 23:3). Psalm 82 further describes the duties of rulers. The qualifications for a ruler could not be clearer and even if we allow for the fact of a changed situation from the nation-state of Israel as constituted by the Mosaic covenant, there are definite principles of general equity to apply here. Why do we have covetous and unjust rulers? Because they are neither men of truth nor men that fear God. In other words we cannot separate the Bible's mandate for voting from the Bible's requirements as to whom we can give a mandate for government.

Democracy means that power is invested in the people and that they loan out that power or delegate it to rulers. They give them the authority to implement their manifesto. That includes everything that they disagree with as well as everything they can support. It includes everything that they have said that they will leave untouched as well as all their explicit commitments.

If a party reneges on their manifesto commitments I can justly complain. If, however, they do what they have committed to and leave untouched that which they have left unaddressed, how can I complain? It goes further than this, however, because if I have given them the power to do that which is evil or to ignore existing evils they are doing that in my name and authority. I have become partaker in other men's sins. I have become involved in national sins. I can no longer point the finger at those who commit such things as Scripture condemns or at the government which fails to restrain them because I have a critical role in ensuring that this state of affairs is maintained (Exodus 23:2).

The default position of many Christians appears to be that of the tactical vote. Tactical voting has been described recently as voting with your head and not your heart. Choosing the best of the worst because you want to prevent those who would be worse from getting into power. Laying aside one's principles to vote for someone that you would not usually vote for and do not agree with entirely. This may work well in the expediency that discounts truth but the Christian is under an absolute duty not to do evil that good may come.

The duty of nations as nations and the duty of their governments is abundantly clear in Psalm 2. Are we giving power to those who are fighting against Christ as well as his law? In voting I am entering into a moral contract with the party voted for. It is entirely disallowed and condemned in Scripture that we should make a covenant of unity (as opposed to a peace treaty) with the enemies of God and his laws in this way (2 Chron. 16.1-10; 2 Kings 16.7,10; 2 Chron. 28.16-23; 2 Chron. 18.3; 2 Chron. 19.2; 2 Chron. 20.35). 2 Chron. 19:2, "Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?" What happens in voting is that we help politicians to do evil, but not to do good: while they help us do evil, and hinder us from doing good. Isaiah 8:12, 13: 'Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid. Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself, and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread'. Will we not be joined to them in the temporal judgement that they receive if we are joined with them in this moral contract (Is. 13:15)? We cannot have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness in this but rather reprove them.

To give a position of honour to a rejecter of God's law is not only not seemly (Prov. 26:1), it is like putting a dangerous weapon into their hand (Prov. 26:6&8) with which they can only injure or kill. Such rulers may be set up by "not by me" says the Lord (Hosea 8:4 and Ps. 94:20). They may be valid rulers but not lawful. We are not promoting Christian political parties as such but we are promoting a careful examination of conscience as well as policies and manifestos. Let us hope that some Christians across the country have been able to vote for candidates that are fit as well as willing to promote God's law. We fear that this will not have been universally the case, however. It is not just hung parliaments that create unholy alliances.

the exclusion of conviction

Kenneth Clarke was on Radio 4's Any Questions last Friday stridently contemning all forms of extremism whether atheistic, islamist or those "way-out extreme evangelicals" (is that a description of all or only some evangelicals?). The idea was to make any kind of firmly held conviction a species of extremism, to exclude and marginalise it. Much better not to care about conviction and especially not about whatever convictions anybody else has. The absurdity of this position is of course not apparent to those who presuppose that you shouldn't have firmly held convictions but its circularity is reassuring to them. It's the conviction-rejecting politics of Gallio who "cared for none of these things" (Acts 18:17). Matthew Henry comments: "it was wrong to speak slightly of a law and religion which he might have known to be of God, and which he ought to have acquainted himself with. In what way God is to be worshipped, whether Jesus be the Messiah, and whether the gospel be a Divine revelation, are not questions of words and names, they are questions of vast importance. Gallio spoke as if he boasted of his ignorance of the Scriptures, as if the law of God was beneath his notice. Gallio cared for none of these things. If he cared not for the affronts of bad men, it was commendable; but if he concerned not himself for the abuses done to good men, his indifference was carried too far. And those who see and hear of the sufferings of God's people, and have no feeling with them, or care for them, who do not pity and pray for them, are of the same spirit as Gallio, who cared for none of these things."

Channel Four’s “Bible: A History” series contained a programme presented by Howard Jacobson. What he said about Richard Dawkins was similar:

“I don’t practise any religion nor worship any God, and fear all fanaticism and that’s bred by faith so I ought really to be sympathetic to Dawkins’ book ‘The God Delusion’. But it moves me – to be frank – to fury. Partly because it assumes that men were stupid until science rescued them. Partly because its ignorance sees no reason not to remain ignorant of what belief is like for those who do believe. Partly because of its certainty, Where’s the point of attacking religion for thinking it has all the answers, when you think you have all the answers yourself? Blind faith is fatuous, but so is blind doubt. This is where I find myself: unable to share the faith of the religious, but unable to share the mockery of the atheists. The big question for me is how to believe, and not to believe, at the same time. Let’s confront the absolutists: those who absolutely believe and those who absolutely don’t.”

Though men think that they have found a position of safety, the no-man’s land between faith and unbelief is in truth a mirage.

An open letter to Gordon Brown

To the Right Honourable Gordon Brown Prime Minister MP.

Dear Prime Minister,

I was most encouraged to learn that you had a "presbyterian conscience", one indeed which is capable of being offended. It is indeed a solemn matter to have a properly informed conscience, when we consider the danger of having what the Bible calls a "defiled" or even a "seared conscience". As the Scottish presbyterian Samuel Rutherford said, "We take nothing to the grave with us, but a good or evil conscience". He also warned that if you "break your conscience in twain...who then can mend it, and cast a knot on it?" If our conscience is properly informed by what God requires we will realise that we can never hope in ourselves to fulfil his righteous requirements. The Bible instructs us that nothing we can do but only the application of the atonement of Christ can "purge our conscience from dead works to serve the living God" (Hebrews 9:14). The reforming presbyterian Robert Bruce said "There is no man nor woman that is able to purge their conscience, to take away the guiltiness of sin off their conscience; it is only God who, by virtue of the blood of his Son, doth purge the conscience; therefore, they address them to God only."

In order to best inform your presbyterian conscience we would commend to you the close study of the Bible, together with the Sum of Saving Knowledge, the Westminster Larger Catechism (especially on the Ten Commandments) and the Westminster Confession of Faith.

As you study these matters your presbyterian conscience ought to smite you when you think of the evil of abortion as legalised murder that is carried out in the nation that you govern. It ought also to make you reconsider the legislation on embryological research and creating animal-human hybrid embryos that you have sponsored as you recover the Bible's teaching on the sanctity of all human life. Your voting record on moral matters is very alarming. It will be a solemn matter to have this record brought into view on the day of judgement with the condemning voice of a conscience now fully informed as well as the condemnation of the judge.

The Bible will also speak loudly to your presbyterian conscience about the fact that homosexuality is clearly against the law of God. This will make you look again at the Equality Bill with its ideological coercion and other legislation. As you look at the breadth and length of the law of God in the Ten Commandments it must be clear to a rightly informed conscience that your government and that of your predecessor have gone much further than all previous governments in passing legislation that positively undermines each one of the 10 commandments. It is a fearful thing to be using God-given power to encourage sin and restrain those who seek to do right.

Your presbyterian conscience rightly informed by Scripture and the Westminster Confession would make you reconsider the place that you have given to Roman Catholicism in visiting the Pope and seeking to amend the Act of Settlement.

There are many other matters that we could mention right down to the long-overdue required repeal of the Acts Recissory. The essence of it all is this the prayer that the Biblical and presbyterian principle that Christ alone is King in State and Church would sound loudly in your conscience and that you would follow it and implement it faithfully and sincerely. This would be by far the best for you, best for us and best for this nation and its future.

Yours sincerely,

MAV

Perilous Times

An extremely topical article on the moral state of the nation is to be found here under the above title. Here is an excerpt: 'John Owen affirms that one of the dangers of such times is that we are apt to have light thoughts of great sins and to countenance ourselves in lesser evils, seeing the greater abominations of other men. The spirit of the age can almost imperceptibly affect the Church of God and result in increasing conformity to the world, which in turn helps confirm the world in its ungodliness.'

These sentiments are found with other puritans. The New England Puritan Samuel Willard gives as a mark of perilous times, the appearance of sin in those with a profession of religion which goes without rebuke, but such men are in credit with the best. What sort of sins is Willard thinking of? He gives a few.
Sabbath breaking - 'where the strict observation of the Sabbath is lost, there the power of godliness is gone'. Contention and slander among the people of God. Frequenting public houses and the company of lewd and loose people. In brief not living soberly, righteously and godly in this present evil world.

The Credit Crunch viewed from the right perspective

Terrible is the crisis through which the commercial world is passing. Fearful are the throes of mental anxiety now visible on the countenances of its ardent votaries. Next to the tnmnlt of the craftsmen at Ephesus is the commotion around the doors of some Banking Establishments. And there are faces not a few which vividly call up the visage of Micah, when he cried to the relentless spoilers — "Ye have taken away my gods which I have made, and what have I more?"

In regard to temporal things, commercial men are thrown into the deepest alarm by a monetary panic, which may affect their social position for the present or for life; and yet the same individuals can hear of eternal death without a passing emotion, or of eternal life without having the currents of thought changed for a single hour! How shall we account for such a difference of feeling, unless on the ground that Mammon occupies the chief place, and that those things which are seen and temporal lie nearer the heart than those things which are unseen and eternal! Such callous indifference could never be, were not the glory of man placed above the glory of God.

The present crisis must be ranged in the category of divine judgments. It is altogether out of the ordinary course of human experience. It bears the impress of offended Deity. It proclaims the wrath of the "Governor among the nations." The present calamity is not local, neither is it confined to any one class of the community. In this dread crisis, the rich and poor meet together. It is thus that the panic is transferred from the marts of merchandise to the hearths and homes of every family. It is this especially that marks the footsteps of national judgment.

We have no intention of showing what legislative or commercial wisdom might have done to avert the calamity; nor by what expedients the effects of this crisis may be most efficiently met. There is enough of this elsewhere — yea, so much, that the minds of men seldom rise above the instruments, forgetful that the God of Nations is the Author. “Shall there be evil in the city, and the Lord hath not done it?" There are three patent facts, and to these we solicit attention. There is national judgment. National judgment is the consequence of national sin. Escape from national judgment can only be realised by national repentance.

In tracing some of the more prominent causes of the present crisis, commercial immorality holds a distinguished place. By this, we mean the violation of those principles of right and wrong which ought to regulate the business intercourse of man with man, firm with firm, and nation with nation. In the world which God has made so good, there is enough for all. In the development of trade and commerce, there ¡s labour and remuneration for all. In the social relations there are channels opened up by which the bounties of Divine Providence may be distributed to all. It is man's perversion — and man's perversion alone — that deranges the moral machinery, and stops the wheels of social progress. It is thus, as in the present case, that a period of prosperity abused, hastens on the gloomy season of adversity. Prosperity tends to excite pride ; pride produces the desire for display and luxury; extravagance exhausts legitimate resources; while exhausted resources, with pride unsubdued, tempt to rash speculation on the one hand, or fraudulent transactions on the other. All these, with their accompanying evils, are the characteristics of the present age.


Is not the God of all the earth now saying, as of old — "Hear this, O ye that swallow up the poor and the needy, even to make the poor of the land fail. Saying, when will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? and the sabbath, that we may set forth wheat, making the ephah small and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by deceit ? that we may buy the poor for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes ; yea, and sell the refuse of the wheat." These things are not uncommon, and are lightly esteemed; but the least of them escapes not the eyes of the moral Governor; hence he adds — " The Lord hath sworn by the excellency of Jacob, surely I will never forget their works. Shall not the land tremble for this, and every one that dwelleth therein? ... I will darken the earth in a clear day. And I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation, and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head, and I will make it as the mourning of an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day."

The bitter day has come.

The penalty of extravagance is ultimate penury. The old proverb holds true, that “wilful waste brings woeful want." It is unnecessary to expatiate on the effects of extravagance in maturing the corruptions of the heart — in widening and deepening the streams of human depravity ! These are fearfully manifest in the immorality of our most prosperous cities. These seem of old to have brought the destruction of Sodom. “Behold this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters." Similar causes produce similar results, and the nation is now reaping the bitter fruits.

There is still another cause of divine judgment, which, though generally overlooked, is by no means the least in the bill of indictment — the robbery of God ! — the repudiation of the claims of Jehovah ! This seems to all beyond the pale of the Church, and, to the majority within her, a light crime; but viewed in the light of Revelation, it appears the heaviest of all. In the cases previously noticed, the frauds practised are between man and man. In this latter case, it is the defrauding of the Universal Proprietor. If sin is represented as of infinite demerit, because committed against an infinitely holy God, it must be apparent that the sin of robbing God is one of the most heinous, as committed against His infinite justice.

They are blind who cannot see that the sin of Israel in the time of Haggai is the sin of Britain and America at the present day, and the punishment then inflicted the penalty now required of both. “Is it a time for you, 0 ye, to dwell in your ceiled houses, and this house lie waste ? Now therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts: Consider your ways. Ye have sown much, and bring in little; ye eat, but ye have not enough; ye drink, but ye are not filled with drink ; ye clothe you, but there is none warm ; and he that earneth wages, earneth wages to put it into a bag with holes." Could anything be more descriptive of our present position? Vast speculations and bitter disappointments ; extensive schemes of ambition and sudden bankruptcy ; good wages and wasting immorality ; wealth acquired, but even the Banks have become as bags with holes ! “Ye looked for much, and, lo, it came to little ; and when ye brought it home, I did blow upon it, saith the Lord of hosts." And why? "Because of mine house that is waste, and ye did run every man to his own house. Therefore the heaven over you is stayed from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit. And I called for drought upon the land, and upon the mountains, and upon the corn, and upon the wine, and upon the oil, and upon that which the ground bringeth forth, and upon men, and upon cattle, and upon all the labour of the hands." Is not this a moral portrait of the nation's guilt, and also of her punishment? Here, also, we have the germs of the punishment nursed in the corresponding transgression. Withholding from God His due, the mind becomes more and more estranged, and communities, like individuals, become “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God." If men are unjust to God in regard to service, or the dedication of offerings, how can they be just to their fellow-men?

If righteous claims on the part of God are disregarded, where is the security that any man will regard the claims of his neighbour? The violation of the Sabbath, the neglect of ordinances, and the pursuit of carnal pleasure, have mined the foundations of our social morality; and hence nothing more is requisite than a general panic to cause the destruction of the channels of national sustenance!

Such we esteem the present crisis! Human foresight could not prevent it, and human sagacity cannot avert its consequences. It is the work of God; yea, the "strange work” of righteous retribution! The cause is moral, and so must the remedy also be. Space will not permit its full development, but we shall simply at present indicate some of its leading characteristics. If fraud is the parent of distrust, then all fraudulent maxims and practices must be abandoned. If reckless speculation is the ruin of commerce, it must be completely checked. If encouragement to bold speculators is unjust to the legitimate trader, then all facilities for the false-credit system must be explicitly discarded by our banking establishments. If pride and extravagance tend directly to ruin domestic comfort and arrest social progress, the former must be humbled, and the latter rigidly restrained. If disregard of the precepts of the first table of the moral law is the cause of such flagrant violations of the precepts of the second, all relations and enterprises and transactions must be conducted with a regard to the glory of God.

Finally, if the robbery of God is declared in His Word to be the cause of national judgments, these cannot be removed until the claims of Jehovah are fully recognised and honoured. These are His own terms in dealing with nations; and "woe be to those who coveting an evil covetousness," disregard them!"

This is as true now as when it was published 150 years ago in the ORIGINAL SECESSION MAGAZINE. JANUARY, 1858.

The offence of blasphemy

On 8 May 2008, the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales, with effect from 8 July 2008. Parliament cannot abolish the 3rd Commandment so easily as they would think, however, and as 'the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain' so will he not hold guiltless those that have abused their delegated power to protect and reward the evil doer in this way.

The Blasphemy Act 1698 declared it illegal for any person, educated in or having made profession of the Christian religion, by writing, preaching, teaching or advised speaking, to state the following:

- a denial that the members of the Holy Trinity were God.
- an assertion that there is more than one god.
- a denial of the truth of the Christian religion to be true.
- a denial of the Holy Scriptures to be of divine authority.

Those denying the Trinity were already deprived of the benefit of the Act of Toleration by an act of 1688. The first offence resulted in being rendered incapable of holding any office or place of trust. The second offense resulted in being rendered incapable of bringing any action, of being guardian or executor, or of taking a legacy or deed of gift, and three years imprisonment without bail.

It was rarely applied: an excessively short statute of limitations allowed for a very short time after the offense for lodging a formal complaint; a similar limitation applied to bringing the case to trial. It followed from February 1698 when a committee of the house of Commons requested William III to suppress 'all pernicious books and pamphlets which contain in them impious doctrines'. By the law of Scotland, as it originally stood, the punishment of blasphemy was death, a penalty imposed on Thomas Aikenhead in Edinburgh in 1697. By an act of 1825, amended in 1837, blasphemy was made punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. The last prosecution for blasphemy in Scotland was in 1843 but technically the law remains in force in Scotland.

The English act (exactly 310 years old) was directed against apostates at the beginning of the deist movement in England, particularly after the 1696 publication of John Toland's book, "Christianity Not Mysterious." "The reasonableness of Christianity" by John Locke was also in view. Both books were burnt by the public hangman. It was said that Toland's book took out all the mystery and left no Christianity at all. Momentum for action had been building since the 'Proposals for a National Reformation of Manners in 1694 'All men agree that atheism and prophaneness never got such an high ascendant as at this day. A thick gloominess hath overspread our horizon, and our light looks like the everining of the world.'

Daniel Defoe commented on the climate of skepticism: 'No age since the founding and forming of the Christian Church was ever like, in open avowed Atheism, blasphemies and heresies to the age we now live in'. One deist wrote that if Jesus Christ was responsible for founding churches 'I think the old Romans did him right in punishing him with the death of a slave'.

Francis Atterbury gave a similarly gloomy assessment:
'Heresies of all kinds, scepticisim, deism ahd atheism itself over-run us like a deluge...the Triinity has been...openly denied...a,ll mysteries in religion have been decried as impositions on men's understandings, and nothing is admitted as an article of faith but what we can fully and perfectly comprehend'

Another assessment shows the similarity of our age to the latter end of the 17th century 'we are fallen into those dregs of time wherein atheism and irreligion,seidition and debauchery seem to divide the world between them'. How much more is this the case now, and how much more proportionately do we need a blasphemy act to be retained.

The Criminal Law Act 1967 abolished the offences of the Blasphemy Act 1698,
and blasphemy became a purely common law matter. Lord Denning said 'we
all thought it was obsolescent'. In 1976 Mary Whitehouse, started a private prosecution of a blasphemous homosexual poem. During the House of Lords appeal Lord Scarman said that "I do not subscribe to the view that the common law offence of blasphemous libel serves no useful purpose in modern law. (...) The offence belongs to a group of criminal offences designed to safeguard the internal tranquillity of the kingdom." The conviction was followed by a endeavours to abolish the crime of blasphemy.

We ought to take special note of the reasons that are annexed to the third commandment. The Larger Catechism identifies these as:
'these words, The Lord thy God, and, For the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain, are, because he is the Lord and our God, therefore his name is not to be profaned, or any way abused by us; especially because he will be so far from acquitting and sparing the transgressors of this commandment, as that he will not suffer them to escape his righteous judgment; albeit many such escape the censures and punishments of men'. The last two clauses should be clearly emphasised in the light of current events.

The Decline of Order, Justice and Liberty in England

A Brief History of Crime: The Decline of Order, Justice and Liberty in England
Peter Hitchens Atlantic Books 2003 ISBN 1 84354 148 3 hbk pp. 315

Against a background of a rumoured election, an epidemic of violent crime and a crisis in the prison system one does not have to look for reasons to think about the state of law and order in the UK. Add to this the fear that Christians will soon find that some of their beliefs are outlawed. Those that are concerned, as all ought to be, that the civil powers should be 'a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil' and that 'we may live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty' will share a concern similar to the author of this book. It is written 'to show that much of the public debate on crime and punishment in modern England is based on mistaken beliefs, misunderstood figures and cheap slogans – especially on the death penalty, imprisonment, drugs, policing and the right to bear arms.' Hitchens shows a keen insight into these failures describing the unchecked slide into disorder: 'England is rapidly becoming a place where the good are afraid of the bad and the bad are not afraid of anything'. 'A society that clearly and decisively punishes wicked actions will have no need to document, restrict or spy on the millions who do not do such actions...the more generously and considerately we create safeguards for transgressors, the fewer freedoms will remain for those who behave themselves'.

Crime is seen by those in power as an endemic social and economic disease 'produced by poverty, bad housing, poor schools and all the other ills that socialism claims to be able to cure'. Their response is only therefore to try and contain it. The bureaucratic repression that is mobilised to deal with this has more restrictive effect upon the law-abiding than the criminal. The danger of this solution is that it will ultimately 'create a social and legal system so stifling and intrusive as to be uncomfortably close to dictatorship'. The measures implemented under Blair pose 'the gravest threat to English liberty since the 17th century'.

Hitchens traces the dramatic post-war descent of Britain, in terms of law and order. He blames a political establishment that has systematically dismantled all the supports of effective punishment of crime. Policing has abandoned any attempt at prevention by removing the patrolling officer. 'The machinery and structure of the English police have been designed since 1966 to react to crime instead of prevent it before it happens'. The policy of responding to incidents after they have happened 'has given evildoers a new feeling of freedom from fear and so made streets less pleasant and less safe'. Police officers are now the servants of political correctness instead of the ordinary citizen. Hitchens supports capital punishment by recalling the days when murder, a 'crime of unique horror', was punishable by a unique punishment, society's most civilised response to murder. The book concludes with a postscript which reviews the case of the elderly street preacher Harry Hammond who was assaulted, arrested and then convicted and fined for holding a simple placard of protest. We do not necessarily commend every way in which the author expresses his case but it is a sober and well-researched treatment of the subject. The book concludes: 'One major purpose of this book is to warn that there is now a real threat to liberty, thought and speech in this country, a threat which cannot be lightly dismissed by any observant or alert citizen'.

A paperback version has been issued under the title 'The Abolition of Liberty'.

A Solemn and accurate observation

'...if British freedom is to be subverted, the process will be begun by Sabbath desecration; will proceed by the consequent degradation of the people through the inevitable loss of faith and holiness, and will end in the assumption of despotic power by those who degrade in order to enslave; who not fearing God, neither regard man.'

William Hetherington 1844

160 years later we know the truth of this by experience.