Question about Covenanters

[Reformingstudent]

Can someone tell me or explain to me what the Covenanters believe concerning military service. Do they think it is wrong or sin for a Christian to inlist in the military and if so do they believe
that we are doing wrong being at war in Iraq.
From what I have read in another place, I get the idea that Covenanters do not vote or believe that Christians should hold to
a political office. Now I don't know much about all Covenanaters and what all groups believe but I am curious to know their view on government and our obligation to it if any.
Not saying all hold this view but from what I have seen and read else where, I get the idea that they believe themselves to be the purest church here on earth and if that is the case than
I think it would be right to see what it is they believe and why they believe it.

Thanks.

Tom

 

[SmokingFlax]

I've learning about the Covenanter position little by little. My understanding so far is that they do NOT think that it is wrong to hold a political office -unless that office forces one to deny the Lordship of Christ in all civil matters. Since the US Constitution does not acknowledge Christ as Lord then, as I understand it, it would be considered wrong to bow to (that) government. They hold that the magistrate should uphold laws that glorify God and any subverting thereof should be considered as treason to the crown rights of King Jesus.

Again, I'm pretty sure that military service is not necessarily wrong -only what government (you) are serving (one that acknowledges Christ as Lord and is therefore to be held accountable by Scriptural standards, or one that is essentially lawless- a beast).

I do not know what contemporary Covenanters believe but I would guess that they would hold that the Iraq war is wrong simply because the US government does not acknowledge Christ as Lord and is therefore inherently corrupt.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

As a former member of the Reformed Presbyterian ("Covenanter") Church of North America, I can tell you about some of the views amongst Covenanters and try to distinguish between Covenanter perspectives.

There is the RPCNA and there are "Steelite" groups such as the Reformed Presbytery of North America, both of which claim the historic Covenanter mantle. The biggest difference between these groups is that the latter believes the Scottish Covenants are still binding today, even upon the US and Canada (a view with which I do not subscribe), whereas the former does not. Additionally, both groups agreed until around the 1960's that voting (as well as jury duty, military service, etc.) within the US Constitutional framework was sinful because of the oath of loyalty to the Constitution that is required as well as the sinful failure of the Constitution to acknowledge the Kingship of Jesus Christ over this nation (and other related failures of the Constitution). In the 1960's, however, the RPCNA dropped this requirement for membership. Today, in the RPCNA, there are few who hold to the old views on political dissent. I still hold to that view myself. This view is not that of the Quakers who have historically objected to swearing oaths at all (oaths may be lawful but to swear to uphold the US Constitution, in my view, is unlawful). Nor is it the view that service in government is instrinsically wrong, since Joseph and Daniel served in ungodly governments until they ran into an issue of conscience. Nor is it the pacificistic view that all military service is unlawful and that war is inherently wrong. But when required to take an unlawful oath, as all US soldiers must, then the one who holds to the historic Covenanter view on political dissent, must conscientously object. The view I am speaking of is described further in the following two links:

James R. Willson's Prince Messiah's Claims to Dominion over all Governments : And the Disregard of his Authority by the United States, in the Federal Constitution (1832, 1848) - http://www.covenanter.org/JRWillson/princemessiah.htm

Robert Alexander's Answer to a Jury Summons (1875) - http://www.covenanter.org/CivilGovt/alexanderjurysummons.htm

Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland on The Church and State - http://www.rpc.org/beliefs/testimony/ch4.htm

Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland on Covenanting - http://www.rpc.org/beliefs/testimony/ch3.htm

 

[Reformingstudent]

Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot
As a former member of the Reformed Presbyterian ("Covenanter") Church of North America, I can tell you about some of the views amongst Covenanters and try to distinguish between Covenanter perspectives.

There is the RPCNA and there are "Steelite" groups such as the Reformed Presbytery of North America, both of which claim the historic Covenanter mantle. The biggest difference between these groups is that the latter believes the Scottish Covenants are still binding today, even upon the US and Canada (a view with which I do not subscribe), whereas the former does not. Additionally, both groups agreed until around the 1960's that voting (as well as jury duty, military service, etc.) within the US Constitutional framework was sinful because of the oath of loyalty to the Constitution that is required as well as the sinful failure of the Constitution to acknowledge the Kingship of Jesus Christ over this nation (and other related failures of the Constitution). In the 1960's, however, the RPCNA dropped this requirement for membership. Today, in the RPCNA, there are few who hold to the old views on political dissent. I still hold to that view myself. This view is not that of the Quakers who have historically objected to swearing oaths at all (oaths may be lawful but to swear to uphold the US Constitution, in my view, is unlawful). Nor is it the view that service in government is instrinsically wrong, since Joseph and Daniel served in ungodly governments until they ran into an issue of conscience. Nor is it the pacificistic view that all military service is unlawful and that war is inherently wrong. But when required to take an unlawful oath, as all US soldiers must, then the one who holds to the historic Covenanter view on political dissent, must conscientously object. The view I am speaking of is described further in the following two links:

James R. Willson's Prince Messiah's Claims to Dominion over all Governments : And the Disregard of his Authority by the United States, in the Federal Constitution (1832, 1848) - http://www.covenanter.org/JRWillson/princemessiah.htm

Robert Alexander's Answer to a Jury Summons (1875) - http://www.covenanter.org/CivilGovt/alexanderjurysummons.htm

Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland on The Church and State - http://www.rpc.org/beliefs/testimony/ch4.htm

Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland on Covenanting - http://www.rpc.org/beliefs/testimony/ch3.htm

Thanks that helps a lot.
I wasn't sure what the RPCNA and the Stelelites believed or what the difference was. I do understand now the reasons why they do not swear to unlawful oaths and though I may not agree in full with them, I do admire their stand for Christ and wanting to be pleasing to Him in all things.

Peace.


Tom