The League and Theocracy
By Dr. J. Michael Hill
Our organization from the beginning has been a champion of the traditional Biblical Christianity so beloved by our godly Confederate ancestors of all denominational persuasions. We do not push any particular denomination over another; in fact, since the League is not the Church, we do not require even that members be Christians to join our organization. Nevertheless, we do hold to the historic Christian position that all human laws and the institutions regulated by them, to be legitimate, must conform themselves to the law of God as expressed in the Bible. This is something, we believe, that ought not offend any Christian holding any particular sectarian viewpoint.
Some of our detractors accuse us of being theocrats and of desiring to turn the League into a theocracy. Therefore, the first thing we must determine is the correct definition of a "theocracy." By a theocracy, we do not mean a government run by pastors and priests, and thank God for that! Rather, a theocracy is a government ruled by the triune God of the Bible: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. More precisely, it is a government whose code of law is firmly grounded in the law of the Bible. As Romans 13 tells us, all civil rulers are required to be God's ministers to do good for the people they serve. If they rule unfaithfully, and thus tyrannically, they are illegitimate and their decrees have no authority. They are covenant breakers and will face the judgment reserved for all covenant breakers. According to God's Holy Word, the laws, commandments, and statutes of the Bible are the best laws that men and nations can have. There can be no improvement on them. (Deut. 4:5-8)
All law is ultimately "religious" in nature. Some ultimate standard of morality and ethics is the basis of all law. In fact, there can be no principled action of any sort without an objective standard of truth. Every system of law is grounded on the ultimate value found in that system, and that ultimate value is indeed the god of that particular system. All other values and systems are banished from the public square and, if Christian, can be held safely only between one's ears or within the four walls of the church building. There, they are rendered harmless and of little value to the furtherance of Christ's kingdom. This apparently sets well with the Empire.
Simply put, locate the source of law for a society and you have found its god. In a democracy, for instance, the people serve as god - the ultimate source of sovereignty. This means that in government, no matter what sort it is, a theocracy, as it were, is inevitable. All societies are theocracies, whether they realize it or not. But there is a major difference in what traditional Christians (regardless of denomination), on the one hand, and pagans, on the other, have believed and that is this: a society that is not explicitly Christian is a theocracy under the sway of a false god. The false god of the modern American Empire is the god who demands tolerance and pluralism, and his name is Caesar.
There is really only the choice between pagan law and Christian law and nothing else. There is no neutral position where one can comfortably sit. The God of the Bible specifically forbids pluralism ("Thou shalt have no other gods before me," Ex 20:3) He is not one bit interested in sharing dominion over this Creation with the ungodly. The god of Lee, Jackson, Davis, and other of our confederate heroes requires us to honor Him, and Him alone, individually, within our families, churches, and nations. In fact, we are told in quite straightforward and simple terms in Proverbs 14:34: "Righteousness exalteth a nation; but sin is a reproach to any people."
But according to the Humanist creed, civilizations, nations, and peoples rise and fall through power politics or other necessarily naturalistic, evolutionary mechanisms. But historic Christians have always known (because the Bible says) that the key to the rise and fall of all things is the judgment of God. On the one hand, if a civilization, nation, or people keep covenant with God, they can expect His blessings; on the other, if they break covenant they are afflicted with covenant curses. Surely, the history of ancient Israel serves as a warning for all nations at all times. The simple choice that lies before nations is either pluralism or faithful obedience to God's word, and the two are mutually exclusive.
Many Christians in the League of the South see obedience to the revealed and infallible word of God as the basis for our future liberty and prosperity. If for this reason some detractors still insist on calling us theocrats, then so be it. We think we fall into some mighty good company, historically speaking. In fact, I have often wondered what a Lee or Jackson would have to say to someone who advocated the Southern cause minus the Christian element. It is my guess that these gentlemen would have no regard for it at all.
By insisting that we take a pluralistic approach to religion in the League, our detractors are in reality arguing for the status quo. We have in abundance today the watered-down, emasculated, wimpy, liberal-sotted "Christianity-lite" that is no threat at all to Caesar, and that is why Caesar is quick to tolerate, even to encourage, it among "believers." All that Caesar requires in return is that he be worshipped as the source of true salvation (Oh! Give us this day our daily bread, father Welfare State"). Of course, traditional Christians, from the Martyrs forward, have understood that we have no King but King Jesus, and to acknowledge Caesar's claims is to deny the true Lord and Savior, Christ Jesus. Our detractor's pluralistic course will not bring peace and harmony to the Southern movement by healing the so-called "religious divide;" on the contrary, it will bring only judgment and shameful defeat.