The founders of the United States deemed moral citizens essential to the perpetuation of the republic, yet they created a secular national government that lacked any power to regulate morality. Ensuring a virtuous population became primarily the responsibility of the churches and reform groups that relied not on coercion but on moral suasion. Some states did regulate various forms of personal morality, but only on very rare occasions before the Civil War did Congress pass moral legislation.

Gaines M. Foster, Moral Reconstruction: Christian Lobbyists and the Federal Legislation of Morality, 1865-1920 (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2002), 6.

As the inspired New Testament authors look back over the course of redemptive history, they do not see Calvary as a break in God’s ongoing covenantal work. Rather, they see Calvary as the fount through which the cleansing blood of Christ enters and then flows out to fill all of God’s eternal covenantal work

STEPHEN G. MYERS, GOD TO US: COVENANT THEOLOGY IN SCRIPTURE, 375.

The Christian church survives because Jesus rules all things for its sake, not because of its wisdom, goodness, or strength.

William J. Edgar, History of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America – 1871-1920, 155.

“Biblical evangelism is simply getting the gospel to the lost. Nothing cute or clever.”

Ryan Denton and Scott Smith, A Certain Sound, 29

Much power is granted by the Reformed Churches and orthodox writers to the political magistrate in reference to church affairs. Take it in these particulars.

1. A defensive protecting, patronizing power to the church and all the members thereof. “Kings shall be thy nursing fathers” (cf. Isa. 49:23); “The magistrate is the minister of God for good to well-doers, as well as the avenger, executing wrath upon evil-doers; a terror not to good works, but to the evil (Rom. 13:3-4). He is called “an heir, or, possessor of restraint, to put men to shame” (Judg. 18:7). and as [such] the church ought to “pray for kings and all in authority” (so consequently all in authority should endeavor it) tha the church and people of God should lead a quiet and peaceable life (under the wing of their protection) in all godliness and honesty (1 Tim. 2:2). And this is evident from the end and scope of these prayers here prescribed by interpreters unanimously agree. And hereupon are those promises to the church: “The sons of strangers shall build up they walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee” (Isa. 60:10); and “thou shall suck the breast of kings” (Isa. 60:16). Now, this nursing protecting care of magistrates toward the church puts forth itself in these or like acts, viz., he: (1) Removes all external impediments of true religion, worship of God, etc., by his civil power, whether persons or things, whether persecution, profaneness, heresy, idolatry, superstition, etc., that truth and godliness may purely flourish; as did Jehoshaphat, Asa, Hezekiah, Josiah. And hereupon it is that God so oft condemns the not removing and demolishing of high-places and monuments of idolatry (1 Kings 15:14 with 2 Chron. 15:17; 1 Kings 22:44; 2 Kings 12:3); and highly commends the contrary in Asa (2 Chron. 15:8, 16), in Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. 17:3-4, 6-10), in Hezekiah (2 Chron. 31:1; 2 Kings 18:4), in Manassas (2 Chron. 33:15), in Josiah (2 Kings 23:8, 13, 19, 20, 24), whereupon the Holy Ghost gives him that superlative commendations above all kings before and after him (vs. 25). (2) [Patronizes], countenances, advances, encourages by his authority and example the public exercise of all God’s ordinances and duties of religion within his dominions, whether in matter of divine worship, discipline, and government — maintaining for the church the fullness of spiritual liberties and privileges communicated to her from Christ: as did ASa (2 Chron.15:9-16); Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. 20:7-9); Hezekiah (2 Chron. 29-31 and throughout); Josiah (2 Chron. 34 and 35). and to this end God prescribed in the Law that the king should still have a copy of the law of God by him, therein to read continually (Deut. 17:18-20), because he was to be not only a practicer, but also a protector thereof, custos tabularum, i.e., a keeper of both tables. (3) Supplies the church with all external necessities, provisions, means, and worldly helps in matters of religion: as, convenient public places to worship in, sufficient maintenance fo ministers, as the Scripture requires (1 Tim. 5:17-18; 1 Cor. 9:6-15; Gal. 6:6), schools and colleges for promoting of literature, as nurseries to the prophets, etc., together with the peaceable and effectual enjoyment of all these . . . or worldly utensils, for comfortable carrying on of all public ordinances of Christ. Thus, David prepared materials, but Solomon built the Temple (1 Chron. 22); Hezekiah caused the vessels of the Temple to brought in (2 Chron. 29:19) and commanded the people that dwelt in Jerusalem to give the portion of the Priests and the Levites that they might be encouraged in the Law of the Lord. And Hezekiah himself and his princes came, and saw it performed (2 Chron. 31:4, etc.); Josiah repaired the House of God (2 Chron. 34). Nor need the magistrate think scorn — but rather count it his honor — to be an earthly protector of the church, which is the body of Christ, the Lamb’s wife, for redeeming of which Christ died, and for gathering and perfecting the very world is continued.
2. A diatactic ordering regulating power is also allowed to the magistrate about ecclesiastical matters in a political way. So that he warrantably: (1) Reforms the church when corrupted in divine worship, discipline, or government: as did Moses (Exod. 32); Joshua (Joshua 24); Asa (2 Chron. 15); Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. 17); Hezekiah (2 Kings 18); Josiah (2 Kings 23; 2 Chron. 34). (2) Convenes or convocates synods and councils made up of ecclesiastical persons, to consult, advise, and conclude determinatively according to the Word, how the church is to be reformed and refined from corruptions, and how to be guided and governed when reformed, etc. For: [1] Pious magistrates under the Old Testament called the church together, convened councils: David, about bringing back the Ark (1 Chron. 13:1-2) and another council when he was old (1 Chron. 23:1); Solomon (1 Kings 8:1); Hezekiah (2 Chron. 29:4); and Josiah (2 Kings 23:1-2). [2] All ought to be subject ot superior powers, who ought to procure the public peace and prosperity of the church (Rom. 13:1-2, etc.; 1 Pet. 2:13, etc., 17; 1 tim. 2:2). Therefore, superior powers may convocate councils. [3] Christian magistrates called the four general councils: Constantine, the first Nicene Council; Theodosius Senior, the first Council of Constantinople; Theodosius junior, the first Ephesian Council; Marian Emperor, the Chalcedon Council. And [4] Hereunto antiquity subscribes [as Dr. Whitaker observes].
3. Backs the laws of God with his secular authority, as custos t, enjoining and commanding, under civil penalties, all under his dominion strictly and inviolably to observe the same: as, Josiah made all that were present in Israel to swear to serve the Lord their God (2 Chron. 34:33); Nehemiah made the Sabbath to be sanctified, and strange wives to be put away (Neh. 12:13, etc.); indeed, Nebuchadnezzar an heathen king decreed that whosoever should speak amiss of the God of Shadrach, etc., should be cut in pieces, and their bones made a dung-hill (Dan. 3:28-29); and Darius decreed, “That in every dominion of his kingdom, men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel,” etc. (Dan. 6:26-27). And as he strengthens the laws and ordinances of God by his civil authority, so he ratifies and establishes within his dominions the just and necessary decrees of the church in synods and councils (which are agreeable to God’s Word) by his civil sanction.

Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici, 121-124.

Furthermore, although this essence applies to God in an absolute way so that there is not one thing and another thing in God, but all what He is, is his essence, we nevertheless rightly assign to Him various properties or attributes, which are classified under the title of divinity (Rom 1:20), suggesting that there is a difference between essence and properties and between the properties themselves. Yet this is not a real distinction, but a relational or rational distinction, in so far as they differ in creatures and in our perception. WIth these properties God himself grants to us the knowledge of who God is and what He is like, and through these attributes we can distinguish the one true God from the false ones and from all other things.

Synopsis of a Purer Theology, Disputation 6 Paragraph 21.

Taking the word in the proper sense of denoting Him, we shall describe God — who cannot be defined, inasmuch as He “surpasses every essence and is incomprehensible” — from the various descriptions of Him apparent throughout Scripture and collected together (Exod 34:6, etc.; Deut 10:17; Rev 4:8; Acts 17:24, etc.; 1 Cor 8:4,5,6; 1 Tim 1:17, and 6:15,16): He is a spiritual essence, entirely simple and infinite, that is eternal and immeasurable, and immutable; living and immortal, understanding, wise and all-knowing. He is goodness itself, love, kindness, mercy, forbearance, righteousness, and holiness, etc. He is one in essence, but three in persons: the Father who has brought forth the Son from eternity; the Son who is born of the Father; the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who even proceeds from the Father through the Son. He is the Creator, the Preserver, and the Ruler of the universe, the Redeemer, Savior and the Glorifier of his elect.

This description of God comprises three parts: the revelation of the one Essence by means of various attributes; the enumeration of the divine Persons; and the revelation of his deeds.

Synopsis of a Purer Theology, Disputation 6 Paragraphs 17 & 18.

We should observe further that the papal teachers claim the apostles did not share with their listeners everything God had revealed to them, but that they entrusted some things to everyone and publicly and other things to only a few and privately. Tertullian in his book Against the Heretics, rightly calls that claim insane.

Synopsis of a Purer Theology, Disputation 4 Paragraph 34.

The reasons why we should consider none of these writings [i.e., Apocrypha] sacred are: In the first place, that they were not produced by the Spirit of prophecy, since they were written after the time of Artaxerxes, in which no succession of prophets was found (Rom 16:26), Josephus, Against Appian, 2). Second, because they were not placed in the ark, as the tables of the Law were, or beside the ark, as the books of Moses were (Deut 31, Epiphanius, On Measures and Weights). Third, because they were not written or preserved in the Hebrew language, nor did the Jewish church, to whom the divine oracles had been entrusted, ever acknowledge them as such (Josephus, Against Appian, 4). Fourth, because neither Christ, nor the apostles, nor the early Church acknowledges them as such, but they considered them not genuine (Amphilochius and Gregory of Nazianzus, both in Balsamon), and were admitted by the later Church with considerable variance and dispute, and then only as ecclesiastical (Synod of Carthage, 3; Augustine, On Christian Doctrine; Rufinus, On the Creeds, 5). Fifth, and finally, because they contain nonsensical, mainly fictitious things, and things that are not in harmony with the sacred writings — which it would take too long to review here.

Synopsis of a Purer Theology, Disputation 3 Paragraph 38.

So then this Scripture alone is the fundamental principle by which, and the material from which, every saving truth must be drawn. It is the rule and standard by which every true and also very false teaching about the things of God must be determined (Isa 8:20; Luke 16:29; Acts 17:10, 11). In sum, it is a self-convincing and irrefutable witness and Judge, namely by virtue of its own demonstrated proof by which every controversy which arises over divine matters must be judged (John 5:39, 45).

Moreover, the criterion or norm for judging is comprised of these axioms: 1. Whatever Scripture contains, or whatever agrees with it either explicitly or by a necessary consequence from it, is true doctrine. 2. That which disagrees with it must be false. 3. Whatever is not contained in it, although it may not be openly opposed to it, is a teaching not necessary for salvation.

Synopsis of a Purer Theology, Disputation 3 Paragraphs 18 & 19.