abstract: |

Skip Navigation

by William Einwechter

During the fight to determine the winner of the recent contested presidential election we heard numerous references to the "rule of law." Both Democrats and Republicans spoke of their commitment to the rule of law and charged each other with abandoning this principle in search of votes and election victory. Any careful observer could discern that, though both sides professed the importance of the rule of law, each had their own understanding of what the rule of law means.

Conservative and Liberal Views on the Rule of Law

Republicans generally follow the conservative understanding of the "rule of law." When conservatives speak of the rule of law they mean that properly enacted law is binding on everyone--no one is above the law--including presidents, judges, legislators, etc. Thus, the chief authorities in American politics are the written laws contained in the federal and individual state constitutions and the statutes established by duly elected legislatures.

Conservatives stress that we must respect the law as we find it and submit to it, even if we think the law is arcane or unjust. Conservatives remind us that our civil law has emerged through the crucible of experience, and, no doubt, reflects a measure of wisdom that should not be lightly set aside. If the law is to be changed, it should be done so carefully, slowly, and only by the action of those in government who are constitutionally empowered to do so. In American politics, this power is given to the legislative branch of government. The role of the executive branch is to see that the laws are carried out, while the role of the judicial branch is to make sure that the will of the legislature as reflected in the letter of the law is properly understood and applied.

To conservatives the rule of law also means that, ultimately, we are governed not by men, but by written law--a government of law, not a government of men.

Democrats generally follow the liberal understanding of the "rule of law." Liberals differ with conservatives in their conception of the purpose of law. Conservatives view the law as a deposit of wisdom, and see it as a means of restraining the evil proclivities of men and of bringing order to society. Liberals, while not denying the need for order, see the law in a different light. They take a much more utilitarian approach to law, making it a tool for social change.

Furthermore, contrary to conservatives who place law in the context of fixed principles and higher law, liberals set law in the context of evolutionary thinking. Man is changing and evolving. Law, according to liberals, finds its ultimate source in man. Hence, law is not based on fixed principles or unchanging higher law, but upon evolving man. So as man evolves and becomes more enlightened, law must reflect this and change with him. Law that suited man in an earlier stage of his development is no longer viable for modern man and his society.

But since man's evolution to higher levels of understanding is not at the same rate, it is necessary that an enlightened "elite" lead the way for the rest of us whose evolutionary clocks are slower. This "elite" have found that "law" is a very useful tool for bringing about societal change. The quickest and most effective means to accomplish this change is not through the legislature where elected representatives must take into account the views of their constituents, but through the courts where activist judges can sweep away constitutional and statutory law by their new, enlightened "rulings."

Thus for liberals, the rule of law often means no more than the rule of judges, i.e., the judge's interpretation of the law, or simply the judge's opinion on what the law should be. The rest, the executive and legislative branches of government and all citizens, are bound to submit to their decrees from the bench.

A Christian Understanding of the Rule of Law

A Christian understanding of the rule of law is akin to the conservative view (after all, the conservative view was highly influenced by Christianity), but with important qualifications.

First, the rule of law finds its basis in the law of God. The concept of the rule of law cannot mean that any duly enacted law is just and binding on men. For a law to be just and binding upon our consciences it must not violate the standard of justice revealed in God's law.

Here is where modern conservatism can falter. If the rule of law means that we are bound to the laws of properly elected legislators irrespective of any higher standard by which to judge those laws, then we have simply exchanged the will of autonomous judges for the will of autonomous lawmakers--one cruel master for another. A Christian understanding of the rule of law means that all branches of government are subject to the law of God, and must look to it as their standard. If law is to be just, then it must be based upon a "higher law"--God's law.

The concept of the rule of law necessarily requires the rule of a written law. Otherwise, there is no objective, discernible basis for obeying the law, interpreting the law, or executing the law. Thus, the Christian concept of the rule of law means that the higher law that binds magistrates and citizens is also a written law, i.e., the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. To make "natural law" the standard of higher law is to surrender the concept of the rule of law. How so? If the rule of law requires a written law that all can consult, then this must apply to both the laws of the state and the higher law upon which these laws are to be based. How is it consistent to argue that we must have written law (and constitutions) for the proper governance of the state, but then to dismiss the need for a written record of the higher law of God to which the law of the state must conform? If it is necessary for the lower, how much more for the higher.

Second, the rule of law requires the confession that Christ, not man, is King. Although under the rule of law all are subject to the law, it is still the case that the ultimate power belongs to those who make the law (either directly or through elected representatives) and not to the law itself; law is not sovereign, but, rather, law is the will of the sovereign.

According to the Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ is the sovereign of all men and nations. Because He was obedient to the will of the Father unto death, even the death of the cross, the Father highly exalted Him to the position of Lord of heaven and earth (Phil. 2:6-11; Eph. 1:20-22). This exaltation took place at His ascension when Jesus was enthroned at the right hand of God (Ps. 110:1; Acts 2:32-36) and was given dominion over all peoples and nations (Dan. 7:13-14). Therefore, Jesus Christ is now "the prince of the kings of the earth" (Rev. 1:5) and the "King of kings and Lord of lords" (Rev. 17:14; 19:16).

If law is the will of the sovereign, and Christ is the sovereign ruler of all men and nations, then all civil law should be conformable to His will. Christ has published His will in His Word so that all magistrates will know exactly what is required of them when they write the laws of their nation (cf. Deut. 17:18-20; 16:18-20). Thus, a Christian understanding of the rule of law requires the acknowledgment that Christ is King.

If Christ's sovereignty is not recognized, then it will be vested in someone else, and the law will reflect the mere will of the king, or the congress, or the people, etc. Without a recognition of the lordship of Christ as its basis, the rule of law is nothing else but the rule of autonomous man. Conservatism does not acknowledge the kingship of Christ over all nations, and, thus, its view on the rule of law is subversive to the kingdom of God.

So for Christians, a commitment to the rule of law must begin with a commitment to the rule of Christ, the sovereign lawgiver. A Christian understanding of the rule of law, requires that we confess that Christ, not man, is King.

William Einwechter is vice president of the National Reform Association and editor of The Christian Statesman. He is an ordained minister and serves as a pastor of Immanuel Free Reformed Church in Ephrata, Pennsylvania. He can be contacted at weinwech-ter@dejazzd.com.

back to top