Volume 7, Issue 46
At the decisive Battle of Edington in 878, Alfred won a great victory halting the Viking advance. He became the first Anglo-Saxon King of England and established the royal bloodline of the English monarchy.
He was a devout Christian. He believed that God had a covenant with mankind for government on earth to rule in righteousness. The king was God’s representative on earth. Therefore, the king was accountable for God’s laws of righteousness implemented.
Throughout the Book of Genesis, God makes multiple agreements, or covenants, with various people. Sometimes these were two-sided agreements, meaning that both God and humankind promised to do or not to do something. Sometimes the covenants were one-sided, such as God’s promise to Abraham.
The idea that God makes promises to humans and can be held accountable for those promises is important political theory to many. If God is accountable for his actions, they would say, how can any king or ruler enjoy unlimited authority?
This crucial concept led to the development of a federal government. The word federal comes from the Latin "foedus" meaning “covenant.” In this form of government, both the ruler and the ruled have certain rights and obligations, which are usually written down in a legal document.
Former professors Charles S. McCoy (University of California Berkeley) and J. Wayne Baker (University of Akron) explain the power of this biblical concept: the relation of God with the creation and with humanity is depicted in covenantal terms. God makes a covenant with Noah, all humanity and nature after the flood, with Abraham and his descendants, and with the Hebrew people after the deliverance from bondage in Egypt.
The elements of voluntary participation, of the rights and responsibilities of membership, of commitment to the group and its patterns of governance, and of holding leaders to their covenant obligations are central to a federal order whether ecclesiastical, economic, or political.
Museum of the Bible Grand Opening Bible p. 20
This chronicle began the ancient protocol of self-government.
There were events in the late 9th century wherein certain kings were deposed and princes were actually denied their succession rights to a throne. They, by their statements and actions against the rights of the people, had denied God’s covenant with Abraham. By this, bloodlines of authority were altered. Roy F. Nichols, in his book The Invention of the American Political Parties, states that this movement of monks became the first recorded political party.
Ben Merkle in The White Horse King describes Alfred as “the young king of Wessex…this is the story of the Anglo-Saxons’ greatest king, young man who, though driven from his throne and hunted everywhere by his savage enemies, refused to give up his fight for his nation.” Like King David of the Old Testament, he cared more about his people than his crown.
The concept of self-rule and accountability between God, leaders, and His people were established with the covenant relationship between God and Abraham. This covenant relationship was codified in secular government by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and recognized by King Alfred the Great. This doctrine of self-rule and the people’s rights was ingrained in the societal culture of England. In 1215, when King John refused to yield to the covenant authority, the barons penned the Magna Carta. In 1776, the colonists of America, in opposition to what they termed grievous disrespect from the king, reasserted and reclaimed their “unalienable rights” in the Declaration of Independence. These rights came full circle in the secular government codification of the covenant relationship in the Constitution of the United States of America.
So, what does this have to do with America today, and in particular, the impeachment of President Donald Trump?
Every action taken by the people to hold government leaders accountable must be based on and tied to a covenant relationship of eternal principles. Otherwise, such action is diminished to the emotion of the current events. Current events, in and of themselves, are not foundational to the future. They are transient to eternal principles. The action to depose a rightful leader from office must be based on the same covenant outlined by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
What’s missing in the debate and justification of impeachment of President Trump is the second question. The first question is whether he is guilty of a crime. That is a perfectly justifiable question. However, the second question now asked universally, by all elected officials and the national press, is how will this affect his reelection?
The correct second question to ask is, how does this offense relate to the covenant relationship with the people, and in this arrangement, define or jeopardize the American character. It is the answer to this question that determines whether this offense reaches the level of a high crime or misdemeanor. It should have nothing to do in importance of whether he will be reelected. Reelection is an absolute right and decision of the people, not government.
This impeachment inquiry is unique in that previous presidents facing impeachment, Presidents Johnson, Nixon and Clinton, were not seeking reelection. Giving emphasis to the impact of impeachment on the President’s chances for reelection can appear to be evidence of political motivation for impeachment rather than accountability for the rule of law and the people’s rights. Such appearances generate suspicion of government and further division among the people. Only in defending, by word and action, the principles of the covenant relationship can all citizens feel unified in the process.
God’s covenant with mankind established in the Old Testament was fulfilled, completed and finished by Jesus Christ, establishing the order of Christianity and its moral influence on government.
Atheists and secularists claim that King Alfred and the Founding Fathers were duped by Christian philosophy. They argue that Christian doctrine was a crutch that didn’t really have any foundational value or any eternal meaning.
But they cannot deny that King Alfred’s acceptance of accountability, and the Founding Fathers’ treatises on unalienable rights, were Christian in origin. There is no dispute that these leaders claimed Christianity as the basis of their philosophy for government. The concept of self-rule and an eternal covenant with God in principles, rendering righteousness in government, has been advanced and protected by Christian doctrine.
Merkle further opines that… “this is the story of the only English king to be known as “the Great.” He was a seasoned warrior, a scholar, a poet, a law-giver, and an architect of towns and ships, and a zealous Christian. Alfred was great because Alfred was a great king.” Likewise, Alex de Tocqueville described America the same way.
As citizens, it is our right and obligation, under the philosophy of self-rule, to hold our leaders accountable for their actions in reference to eternal principles. And our leaders deserve to be held to a consistent standard.
If these unalienable rights did not come from God, then from whom or what? The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is prima facia evidence that God has established a righteous order and rules in the affairs of men.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?