The fourth way is maybe a work in progress, something that has to emerge and defend itself, but it is God’s way. Let me explain. I explored the primary socio-economic models of socialism (which has many flaws, but is still making an unavoidable comeback) and capitalism (which has its merits but is too threatening to social and environmental order). The third way was socio-capitalism, a blend of the best of both worlds. But humans are not too good at preserving order, so don’t go looking for solutions in social models.The original Mosaic model was the first act of constitutional government or rule of law. It satisfies all the requirements of a constitutional framework. The ten commandments were foundational principles - a constitution is otherwise expressed as a ground rule, so it satisfies that principle. A constitution is also a set of principles that informs law making as the Mosaic law also did in guiding and empowering oral traditions.
So what Moses introduced was a framework that removed the subjectivity of near-east political models. It bound all, from the least to the greatest, to one set of guiding principles, thus ensuring that if a slave was killed by a rich man he would get the same justice as a rich man killed by a slave. What a profound step forward in human history.
The Magna Carta, signed by King John in 1215, albeit reluctantly, was intended to do the same for Britain, but only three of its principles remain in law. Thankfully, Britain is held together by something stronger. Its traditions are so deeply ingrained that the institution has stood the tests of time to emerge as an envious and hallowed model of social order.
When William Penn left for the new world as a Church of England dissenter, he did so against the background of a British state that was far from ordered or fair. So he introduced a charter that limited his own power and the power of the state, recognized all men as equal before God and defined the rights and responsibilities of all Pennsylvanians. Even Voltaire approved of that. The state was not bound or enclosed inside walls, it was held together by its internal compass, just as Moses once foresaw.
So part of ensuring what I dare to call a Theocratic model, is not to have God rule amongst us, per se, though that would be good and indeed the government shall ultimately rest of Christ’s shoulders. I discount that option because it is not currently available to us, for all the idealistic clamor for such a state.
Rather, a theocratic state is one that is bound to the laws of God, but not by way of austere and oppressive religious decrees, because that merely replaces physical walls with symbolic walls. Rather, we need a state of existence that is founded on heart-felt agreement on the principles of God’s covenant with men, held together not by rule or even by tradition, but by a covenant of hearts.
To be continued …
(c) Peter Eleazar @ www.4u2live.net
No comments:
Post a Comment