Conscience Above the Magistrate by K. C. R.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Aug 3, 1911

Conscience Above the Magistrate

By K. C. R.

THERE is a growing conception on the part of many good people that because a thing is religious in character, regardless of what it is, it should be promoted by civil enactment. This commingling of religious and civil things is becoming very common in these times on the part of both statesmen and churchmen. They seem to have forgotten the fundamental principle of this question, which was enunciated by Jesus Christ when he said, “Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” This scripture plainly teaches that the church and the state should be distinctly separate; in other words, those things which are of a civil character, and which embrace our personal rights (of life, property, reputation, and the chastity of one’s family), the state can rightfully legislate upon; but with those things that pertain to one’s conscience, our relation to God, the state can not of right have anything to do. This principle was recognized by the founders of Protestantism, as voiced by D’Aubigne in his “History of the Reformation,” as follows:—

“The principles contained in this celebrated protest of the nineteenth of April, 1529, constitute the very essence of Protestantism. Now this protest opposes two abuses of man in matters of faith: the first is the intrusion of the civil magistrate, and the second the arbitrary authority of the church. Instead of these abuses, it sets the power of conscience above the magistrate, and the authority of the Word of God above the visible church. In the first place it rejects the civil power in divine things, and says with the prophets and apostles, We must obey God rather than man.”

The history of the past is a terrible commentary upon a program that seeks to enforce upon the consciences of men any religious dogma. No one who attended the Christian Endeavor convention, and listened to the addresses which were given and the resolutions which were passed, could fail to observe that the most hearty applause was given when the various speakers emphasized the importance of making the religious influence felt in political life. One speaker said that the most dangerous citizen is one who professes indifference to politics; and another said that every citizen who fails to vote at two successive elections should be disfranchised.

Let the reader pause, and contrast with these statements the words of Christ when he said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” And, when asked to divide an inheritance between two brothers, he said, “Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you?” These texts plainly demonstrate the attitude of Jesus toward the question of one’s becoming engrossed with matters of a political character. Imagine the Saviour of mankind becoming entangled with the political affairs of the Roman government in the times in which he moved among men! The very suggestion is sufficient to show that such a thing would be in flagrant contradiction to the principle and spirit that actuated the One who left us an example, that we should follow in his steps.

K. C. R.