Samuel Rutheford in the 17th century was a Scottish Presbyterian minister who penned this idea that proper governance is predicated on the rule of Law, rather than on absolute power residing in one individual ("the Law is King"). History is replete with countless leaders who have disregarded the Law to advance their own political agenda. Some do it more skillfully than others and in varying degrees. After all, the mark of a skilled politician in modern democracies is one who "gets things done" by using the law to his/her advantage, and by enlisting the help of others to carry out their agenda.
Theological liberalism, with its situational interpretation of Biblical Law provides a fitting counterpart to the secular political realm. The norming norm of Scripture resides within the flux of the human experience, which means that normative ideals shift accordingly. What the text might have meant in the past may not necessarily be what it means today. Here also, a cursory survey of History will serve abundant helpings of the idea that Lex, Rex is easily bullied and trampled upon.
The immigration debate in America has taken a sudden turn these past few days with the President taking the notion of Executive Order to brand new levels (which until very recently he didn't think were actually legal). However, it is argued, now the situation has changed and we need to act on a situation that every one agrees needs fixing, i.e., the status of millions of undocumented residents in the US [BTW, not all come from our southern borders. Many undocumented foreign-born residents simply overstay their visa]. So the need for immediate action overrides the sense that we should have laws in place before action can be taken. But this is the post-modern, post-foundational world we now live in. Expediency must prevails over Lex, Rex.
The implication of this action are profound for the Church as well. If the chief executive in the land feels he can disrupt the (fragile) equilibrium between the three branches of our government and pretty much disregard existing laws, what would prevent other leaders to feel the need at some point to override by-laws, elder boards, boards of directors, trustees, governance documents, etc. to carry out their own purpose? In the world of higher education, where grading, student handbooks, faculty handbooks, governance documents are our "Lex, Rex," what if we disregarded our own standards based on expediency? Any university that would engage in shifting standards (F last year is now a B this year) simply won't survive, we know that. However, with this new precedent being set, I wonder how long it's going to take before we see the implementation of blatant instances of post-modern shifting standards beyond the Beltway. Am I sounding too alarmist? I sure hope so.
The Lord Jesus Himself upheld the constancy and perennial nature of Law when he re-affirmed OT Law by fulfilling it. Compassion to the poor and needy in the OT becomes love for enemies in the NT. The prohibition against bearing false witness in the NT takes a much simpler, but equally profound dimension: speak the truth because He is the Truth. So, in this confused age, the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7 becomes again a magisterial and powerful counter to a deceived culture, which wants to compromise and undermine Lex, Rex at every turn. Let's make sure we as followers of Jesus, those who continue in His Word (His Law), don't fall for expediency and compromise in our own lives and in the institutions we serve.
