FIRST PRINCIPLES: GOOD GOVERNANCE & THE RULE OF LAW
In the beginning God… – Genesis 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. – John 1:1-5 (NIV)
I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds. – Hebrews 10:16
… the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them. – Romans 2:15
Jesus specifically says:
I am the way and the truth and the life, no one comes to the father except through me… – John 14:6
For this reason I was born: for this reason I came into the world – to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me. – John 18:33-38
This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. – 1 Timothy 2:3-4
Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. – Proverbs 14:34
First Principles are moral absolutes God reveals in His Word and places on the human heart. Present at the creation of the world, these self-evident truths correspond to reality and remain constant through time. Rooted in divine, natural, and common law traditions, First Principles form the fundamental foundation for preserving liberty, as well as for constitutional good governance under the rule of law. Written on each of our hearts, these self-evident Truths provide a moral compass with which to guide personal and institutional decision-making; Endowed by our Creator, they provide moral points of reference against which a culture measures right from wrong. First Principles serve, therefore, as reliable objective standards by which to measure whether a government action is good or bad, just or unjust.
Thus, governments, informed by First Principles:
1) often enact statutes prohibiting and punishing inherently wrong or dangerous immoral conduct; and
2) always recognize unalienable liberty as a limit the exercise of its governmental power.
The early American experience illustrates how a government recognizes and relies on First Principles. Most of the Framers of the American Constitution viewed God as the source of life and liberty rights. The Declaration of Independence clearly reflects such a view:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all … are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty. … That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
The core of the Framers’ understanding is revealed in Noah Webster’s seminal dictionary, published in the infancy of the republic. Webster defined unalienable as something ‘that cannot be legally or justly alienated’ and right as accordant to the standard of truth and justice or the will of God. That alone is right in the sight of God, which is consonant to his will or law; this being the only perfect standard of truth and justice … that is right which is consonant to the laws and customs of a country, provided these laws and customs are not repugnant to the laws of God ….
We see the promise of the Declaration embodied in the structure and text of the American Constitution. That document’s Framers make clear that we the people delegate power to the government with which to secure our freedom, while expressly limiting government’s exercise of power in ways that deprive citizens of their unalienable life and liberty interests. Thus, it is humans who grant limited powers to the institution of government, not government that grants liberties to individuals.
Moreover, unalienable life and liberty interests further limit exercise of government power. Here the drafters of the American Constitution chose simple language to express this vision of good governance under the rule of law. By enumerating and separating power, and listing liberties as a limit on the exercise of such power, we see their design of limited government. Thus, before exercising power, government must plug into a valid constitutional power source, authorizing the exercise of its power. The American Congress, for example, often relies on the Article I Commerce Power when enacting legislation regulating commerce. Likewise, the President of the United States relies upon the Article II Appointment Power when appointing the Cabinet. Legislators and executive officials exercising governmental power must always act within the scope of the constitutional power source. Just as constitutionally significant, legislators and executive branch officials, when exercising governmental power, must not substantially interfere with constitutionally protected liberty.
Chipping away at a nation’s unalienable moral foundations, government and academic authorities increasingly forbid objective moral principles from informing the policy-making process or even being part of the constitutional marketplace of ideas. Ironically, as government prohibits moral truth from informing its governance, the desperate needs of the hungry, homeless, widows, orphans, and others continue to exponentially expand. To address these growing needs and to change the current character of constitutional institutions, we must awaken the hearts of the faithful.
The blessings of liberty and prosperity come with responsibility. To whom much is given, much is required. Each generation inherits a special trust and calling to ensure the preservation of liberty and the moral administration of justice. Scripture increases the degree of this calling and responsibility by commanding the Christian to shine the light of Truth into the darkness and to resist conforming to the world. As government increasingly acts without constitutional authority, and infringes upon God-given unalienable liberty, it is essential for the Church to create an educated, equipped, and engaged citizenry that will protect constitutional good governance and the ability for freedom to endure.
The following resources are provided for informational use only and are not necessarily endorsed by the Great Lakes Justice Center. They should always be examined against Scripture, our primary resource. If you would like to add resources to this list, please contact us.
Books, Articles, & Journals
- Ellis Washington Report
- Works of Vishal Mangalwadi
- Christian Citizenship Guide, Michael Wagner
- The Christian Philosophy of Law, Politics and the State, E.L. Hebden Taylor
- God & Government, Charles Colson
- God & Government: Biblical Principles for Today, Cornelis Van Dam
- God and Government, Vol.1: A Biblical and Historical Study, Gary DeMar
- God and Government, Vol. 2: Issues in Biblical Perspective, Gary DeMar
- The Law, Frederic Bastiat
- The Law above the Law, John Montgomery
- Natural Law for Lawyers, J. Budziszewski
- Politics According to the Bible, Wayne Grudem
- The Progressive Revolution: Liberal Fascism through the Ages, Ellis Washington
- Wall of Misconception: Does the Separation of Church & State mean the Separation of God and Government?, Peter Lillback
- Why Government Can’t Save You: An Alternative to Political Activism, John McArthur
Ministries, Organizations & Events
- Advocates International
- Alliance Defending Freedom
- American Center for Law & Justice
- ARPA Canada
- The Becket Fund
- The Christian Institute
- Christian Law Institute
- Christian Legal Society
- Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview
- Cross & Gavel
- The Federalist Society
- The Heritage Foundation
- Jubilee Campaign
- Manhattan Declaration
- The National Center for Public Policy Research
- The Rutherford Institute
- Thomas More Law Center
- The Witherspoon Institute
 See C E Rice, ‘Rights and the Need for Objective Moral Limits’ (2005) 3 Ave Maria Law Review 259; D Barton, Original Intent, 3rd ed, WallBuilder Press, Aledo, TX, 2002; I will not here enter the fray regarding intentions or understandings attributable to the Framers versus the ratifiers in discussing the Constitution’s meaning. There might or might not be a meaningful distinction there. I will simply refer to the Framers as a matter of convenience, while recognizing the ratifiers ultimately were responsible for the document’s legal effectiveness.  The Declaration of Independence (1776) Paragraph 2.  See definitions of ‘unalienable’ and ‘right’ in Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language, 1828.  See John 1:1-5; John 3:18; Romans 12:2.
GOOD GOVERNANCE PUBLICATIONS