Tackling Tradition 34: “Limited (CONSEVATIVE! Government”

 Pastor Adam Dooley writes, 

For instance, both apostles promoted a limited government that exists primarily for the punishment of evildoers (Rom. 13:1-6, 1 Peter 2:13-14). 

Neither of these texts state that Government exists primarily to punish evildoers.

“For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.” (Romans 13:3, ESV) is merely a statement of fact, not a manifesto for limiting government to law enforcement. 13:4 speaks of an approval of good via Government & Romans 12 alludes to the 3fold use of the Law & Gospel in the Sermon On the Mount, which speaks of Government’s role in providing the necessities of life (like school lunches) that Kirk denied.

I Peter 2 also speaks of governors as those who approve of good, not merely those who punish evil. His mishandling of the Bible says a lot about the priorities of Dr. Dooley.

While appearing before the Sanhedrin, Paul admonished that the council judges rule according to settled, external law outside of themselves (Acts 23:3). Judicial activism of any kind runs contrary to the established standards of written legalities.

This text isn’t about judicial activism. It’s about the bigoted, abusive vengeance being meted out by Ananias the high priest. That’s a strike against spiritually abusive ecclesiastical justice that verges on usurping the civil keys, which @ the time laid with the mediatorial lawyers among the Sanhedrin & the local & imperial civil authorities.

Notions of government handouts or wealth redistribution were also foreign to Paul and Peter. 

It’s as if Dr. Dooley has never heard of the 3fold use of the Law & Gospel.   

Here is the text commanding us to feed children via Moral Governance. 

Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? 26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27 Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life[e]?

28 “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. 29 Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? 31 So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

The Bible teaches the 3 uses of the  Law & Gospel— Individual, Ecclesiastical, & Civil.   The Sermon on the Mount is written in the form of a suzerain covenant, which is the same form in which the Bible delivers every covenant that comes to us from God.   

God, our Creator & Deliverer is here speaking to us about our individual, ecclesiastical & CIVIL obligations to relieve social anxiety related to food, drink, & clothing.   Clothing is a species of shelter.   These 3 items are representative of the necessities of life on Earth.    

Romans 13 also teaches we should “ For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing.  Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.”

One of the purposes of the local church in the Classical Apostolic Era was to model righteousness & goodness to & for the World.  They worked collaboratively to, among other things, feed each other.    They were known to pool their resources in order to do this, even to their own detriment.    Yes, Dr. Dooley, through the 3fold use of the Law & Gospel, their example applies to the civil sphere as well as the ecclesiastical.  

He also continues, “ they also insisted that those who refuse to work should not eat because rewarding laziness is foolish (2 Thess. 3:10-11). Being sensitive to real needs was hardly an endorsement of equity outcomes for all.”

The breaking of bread here refers to the weekly or biweekly fellowship meal.  Those not contributing to the work of the Thessalonian church were to be sanctioned as a matter of church discipline.   That would be a day’s worth of food at the fellowship meal.  During the intervening days, they were not to be treated as enemies or deprived of food.  Rather, their fellow members were to do good, & doing good in Pauline theology includes the bearing of one another’s burdens (Galatians), admonish the idol, help the weak, & be patient with all.    The writer’s words about not eating are applied to the willfully idle.   They aren’t to be taken to mean we ought to be stingy with the social safety net — especially in an age characterized by gluttony.  

Regarding race, what fundamentally mattered to these leaders of the early church was not the color of a person’s skin but their identity in Christ (Gal. 3:28). For them, creating winners and losers, victims and oppressors, contradicted the unity found in the family of God. 

The Classical Apostolic Age was not an age characterized by distinctly racial divisions that are directly analogous to our own.  Rather, there were ethnically, economically, & religiously diverse.   Their concern was with drawing the people in the churches together & paracleting people who are different than one another.   Rather than pretending like diversity is an issue only solved via finding one’s identity in Christ, they also reminded us that people are diverse and that diversity should be acknowledged & paracleted.  

You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[i] and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?  And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.  (Matthew 5:43 - 48)

If we have historically failed them, we are replicate & restore.  If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.  (Matthew 5:41 - 42)

Dr. Dooley continues, “ The Apostle Peter likewise maintained that what makes us distinct is not our skin color but who we are in Christ Jesus (1 Peter 2:10).” 

The selected text isn’t about racial distinctions per se.  It’s about our moral status without Christ vs our moral status in Christ.  It also reminds us that all of humanity is, in a real sense, a species of aristocrats, a royal nation made up of many tribes, tongues, peoples, & nations, entrusted with the governance of the cosmos.  

He writes, “ Fellowship came across socioeconomic and cultural lines, not through obliterating them. In other words, the Gospel is more powerful than what the world says should divide us.”    That much is true on its face, but it strikes me as tone deaf insofar as what comes before makes him sound like a stereotypical white Christian male who doesn’t understand that he is heir to a tradition within American Christianity that has problems with holding unity & diversity in harmony & refusing to replicate & restore to many diverse communities. 

When speaking about gender and marriage, Paul and Peter acknowledged that only a man and woman can become one flesh through holy matrimony and that both, as a picture of the gospel, have unique assignments in the home (Eph. 5:22-31; Col. 3:18-19; 1 Peter 3:1-7). Echoing the words of Jesus, Paul taught that divorce was never permissible except for reasons of adultery and desertion (Matt. 5:31-32; Matt. 19:1-12; 1 Cor. 7:10-16).

Additionally, Paul declared homosexuality in all its forms to be unnatural and idolatrous (Rom. 1:26-27), incompatible with sound teaching and Christianity itself (1 Cor. 6:9-11; 1 Tim. 1:9-10).

Yeah, he’s wrong about that too.  The Church is failing women (Part 1) (Part 2).

The tradition bound view on homosexuality is at variance with what the Bible actually teaches as to it grammar & syntax & the laws of sound reasoning. 

That’s what you get when a pastor is more beholden to Ecclesiastical Tradition & Liturgical Philosophy than he is the Bible.   

O LORD, Hear our prayer(s)!