Lex Rex in the Church and State

I serve on our denomination's Theological and Social Concerns committee. As the name suggests, our task is to consider and recommend to Synod how our denominational should respond to various issues arising when the Church abuts an increasingly godless and secular culture. Last year's Synod asked us to consider the connection between the Civil Government's role in restricting gatherings for. public worship during a pandemic or other national emergency. As part of our remit, the committee also considered when and if a local Church may suspend or cancel public worship. The committee tasked me to write this report, and I include it below. I hope it illustrates the broad principles that must guide right reason as we consider how the ecclesiastical authority of church courts interface with the civil authority of the Federal, State, and Local magistrate.

The Priority of Public Worship

Worship is the verb of Christianity (Luke 4:8). We owe God worship as it is He who saved us (1 Peter 2:9). Worship is what the Christian does (Phil. 3:3). According to John 4:23 and the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church’s Form of Government (FOG) 3:1, being a true worshipper lies at the core of our identity as Christians. Organizing and participating in such worship lies at the heart of our role in fulfilling Christ’s Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-19; FOG 1:7) and forms the dynamo of a congregation’s life, ministry, and schedule (FOG 3:2).  The willful, unwarranted, and continued neglect of public worship is a serious sin, threatening not only the spiritual health of a professing Christian but also the very reality of his claim to be a sinner saved by grace  (Heb. 10:23-31).

The Organization of Public Worship

While attending public worship is the duty of every individual Christian, God more specially directs the charge for organizing and attending this worship (Westminster Larger Catechism, 118) to those in authority in the church (Matt. 28:18-19), in the home (Gen. 18:19), and also in the state (1 Tim. 2:1-4). Paul’s argument here seems to be that one of the God-given duties of the civil magistrate is to create a safe, civil environment in which godliness can prosper without the fear or hindrance of man, and through which men may worship God according to the liberty of a conscience ruled by God through the light of Scripture.

Reformed theologians distinguish between the elements and the circumstances of public worship. The elements denote the actual activities of public worship (reading the Word, preaching the Word, praying the Word, singing the Word, and watching the Word). By circumstances of worship, we mean those attendant details that make worship possible (time, place, environment, the presence or absence of musical accompaniment, length of service, dress code, health and hygiene practices, etc.).

While Scripture tightly regulates the former, the latter permit some innovation and are more loosely controlled. Such circumstances are the proper and primary jurisdiction of the local church session (in consultation with the higher courts of the church). 

The Postponement and Cancellation of Public Worship

Judiciously weighing the principles of necessity, mercy, and piety, in times of emergency, the local church session may abbreviate, postpone, or even cancel a worship service altogether. The most common example of this kind of emergency might be the threat of severe weather. Due to the central importance of public worship in the life and ministry of the church, local church sessions (and higher church courts) should handle such decisions with special care and prudence.

Although the state has no authority to influence, impinge, or hinder the church or her members directly in their public and private expressions of religion, the state does have a duty to care for the general welfare of the citizens under its charge. In times of exceptional public emergency or imminent disaster, therefore, such welfare may include prohibiting or limiting the movement of her citizens. Such prohibition obviously impacts the ability to gather for public worship and should normally be obeyed by the church.  Without question, all civil, ecclesiastical, and familial authorities can and certainly do err (Heb. 12:10; 1 Peter 3:1ff), but the Bible clearly suggests that an imperfect government is very much to be preferred to no government whatsoever (Rom. 13:1-6; 1 Peter 2:13-17). Apart from extreme cases, when obedience to the state would necessitate disobedience to God (Acts 4:19-20), the Scripture does not permit individuals liberty of conscience to decide which civic laws they do and do not obey.

Since the obvious, adverse  consequences of unnecessarily prolonging such seasons of curfew, the civil magistrate should handle such decisions with special care and prudence, ensuring that such restrictions are only as rigorous as absolutely necessary, as brief and as limited as possible, and never unjustly prejudicial to the free and public exercise of religion. 

The Principle of Lex Rex and the Duty To Resist Tyranny

In 1644, the Scottish Presbyterian Samuel Rutherford codified the biblical principle of lex rex (The law is king). Up to that time, the British monarch falsely believed (and were allowed to believe) that they were the law of the land (Rex Lex).  This principle laid the foundation of tyranny. Rutherford reminded the church that the monarch is himself a servant of the law of God, and were he to become a tyrant, it would be the duty (and not just the right) of lawfully ordained lower magistrates (not individuals acting by autonomous whim) to hold the king accountable. On the church’s part, she must always obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29). Hence, when faced with a potentially tyrannical overreach, it is the church’s duty to resist such tyranny in a spirit of respectful and lawful disobedience. 

The corruption of man makes him apt to study reasons to cast aside the inconvenient strictures of an unwanted external authority, so the decision to take such a momentous step is best left in the hands of the gathered wisdom of lawfully ordained lower magistrates in both the church and the state. Therefore, individual church members should pay close attention to their local session, who in turn should consult closely with the higher courts at both a presbytery and synod level.

It is much easier to remove an imperfect government than it is to replace it with something better, and because the civil government does not bear the sword in vain, the church should exercise special care and prudence in determining when and if to invoke the principles of lex rex and cast off the shackles of a civil magistrate run amok.