Reformed Presbyterian Minutes of Synod 1947

132 MINUTES OF THE SYNOD OF THEThough there may be flaws in the laws of the land, it may seemthat this promise of the King furnishes the necessary acknowledgmentof the sovereignty of Christ which our Covenant asks for. Suchan acknowledgment, if properly used, should serve to remove evilsfrom the laws and government of the land. If officers were requiredto swear allegiance to the King on the basis of his acknowledgmentof Christ's sovereignty over the nation, there would be no reasonwhy Covenanters could not take the oath of allegiance and exerciseall the rights of a citizen.Unfortunately the same clause that requires the King to maintainthe laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel, also requireshim to maintain the "settlement of the Church of England",a thing which we believe to be unscriptural. This has been one ofour reasons for Political Dissent in Canada. But Mr. Ollivier, thelegal official for the House of Commons in Ottawa, has said thatthe rehgious section of the Oath does not have any force in Canada.This would seem to remove one reason for Political Dissent, but it alsoremoves the whole reason for thinking Canada is Christian in herpolitics. Furthermore, Mr. Hall, the Crown Attorney at VankleekHiU, Ontario, explained that the Coronation Oath is the King's personaloath and is not binding on anyone else. The officers under himare not required to maintain anything mentioned in the CoronationOath except as they are required to by law. This is plainly shown bythe Oath of Allegiance:"I, A.B., do solemnly swear that I will be faithful andbear true allegiance to His Majesty King George VI, hisheirs and successors, according to law. So help me God."According to law! It is not on the basis of the King's acknowledgmentof the sovereignty of Christ but on the basis of the lawthat the Oath of AUegiance is taken. The word "law" includes theBritish North America Act and the laws and customs of the country.This law possesses many good quaUties and is colored by the Christiancharacter of the Canadian people, but it makes no acknowledgmentof Christ as the Ruler. If there were such an acknowledgmentwe would expect to find it in the British North America Act, whichwas adopted as the basis of law in 1867 when Canada became aDominion. But no such acknowledgment is found there nor in anyof the laws that have been passed since. We find no reason for believingthat Canada is Christian in politics. Crown Attorney Hallsaid definitely that Canada is not legally a Christian nation. He alsosaid that the Coronation Oath cannot serve as the basis for reformto remove evils from the country.In this respect the position of Canada seems to be the same asthat of North Ireland. We quote from "Case for Counsel", a pamphletpublished by the Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church ofIreland. Here we have the words of Judge S. C. Porter K. C. "TheReformed Presbyterian Church is right in their view that the Constitutionis not a Christian Constitution."If he Cornation Oath cannot make the Constitution of Ireland