Systematic Theology – The State

Cities of Refuge

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Systematic Theology

Lesson: Government

Genre: Speech

Track: 13

Dictation Name: 13 Cities of Refuge

Year: 1970’s

Our subject in this third session is Cities of Refuge. Very clearly, cities of refuge are a very important part of biblical law. Cities of refuge are frequently mentioned in scripture. For instance, in Numbers 35:6 and 9-34, in Deuteronomy 4:41-43, and Deuteronomy 19:1-13, and Exodus 21:12-14, and Joshua 20:1-9, and in 21:10, 21, and 27, and in 1 Chronicles 6:57 and 67. Cities of refuge, thus, are very important to biblical law. So, it is important for us to understand what it has to say on this point, what scripture teaches, and its relationship to the doctrine of church and state.

The city of refuge was a place where a man could go, it was a Levitical city, and there find refuge from anyone who was pursuing him to kill him. If he had accidentally slain a man, let us say they had been out hunting and he killed someone accidentally, or wood chopping and his ax head flew off and killed a man, he headed immediately for the city of refuge, lest he face the wrath of the kinsmen of the slain man.

It was thus a sanctuary, but the asylum granted by the city of refuge was religious. It was tied to the life and death of the high priest and related to the altar, but this is not our concern because we are more concerned now with the relationship to doctrines of church and state. It was the final court of justice, and it was theological. It meant that, because the law came from God, God was the refuge of man, and the last court of appeal is to God, that justification is from the altar of atonement, and the God of the altar is also the source of all law, righteousness, and justice.

The cities of refuge, thus, were refuges against the justice of men. Basic to the city of justice was the belief that man’s courts and man’s justice, and man’s ways do not give us justice all the time, and justice should be basic to society. Justice should provide against man and against the state. The sanctuary applied only to a man involved in an accidental death in which there was no guilt, and the sanctuary represented God’s justice. The elders of the city of refuge exercised judicial function. There was a court of law, presided over by Levites who adjudicated all cases in terms of God’s law. Moreover, the cities of refuge were located strategically, and the roads had to be kept in repair, the Bible says, above any other road in the land, so that a man could get quickly to a city of refuge.

Now, sanctuary is a religious fact, and in many cultures, in Antiquity, there were sacred places where a man could find refuge, but the idea of sanctuary had no moral intent or content in many of these cults, and faiths. Moreover, in Antiquity, very, very often, the sanctuary belonged to the emperor and to his image or court of law, his sanctuary. For example, we read in the Theodosian Code, “This is an edict through July 3, 386 AD. Emperors Valentinian, Theodosius, and Arcadius Augustises to Sinegius{?} Praetorian Prefect. We suffer those persons who have taken refuge at the statues of the emperors, either for the purpose of avoiding danger or of creating ill will, neither to be taken away by anyone before the tenth day, nor to go away of their own accord. Provided that if they had definite reasons for which they had to flea to the statues of the emperors, they shall be protected by law and the statutes. But if they should be revealed to have wished to create ill will against their enemies by their own artifices, an avenging sentence shall be pronounced against them.”

Thus, we have here and more like legislation can be cited, the fact that in the ancient world, the emperor said they were the city of refuge, the justice against anyone who is dissatisfied with the lower courts. However, and this is a critical fact, what happened was that, whether it was the Emperor of Rome or anybody else who gave sanctuary, their justice was not always justice anymore than the federal courts or the state courts today always represent justice, and so increasingly, what began to happen was this. Because the Christians applied the law of the cities of refuge to the church, and said the church is a sanctuary, and we will, when anyone flees to us, turn to the law of God and adjudicate his case, and will defend him, men began to flee to the churches from civil authorities, and this created conflict and problem with the emperors, because these Christians were saying, and non-Christians were also saying, “There is only one place where we can get justice. It’s at the church,” and the church governed and ruled these people, adjudicated their cases in terms of biblical law. They turned to the Bible and they said, “Alright, what are the facts of your case. We therefore say, in terms of the facts of your case and the application thereto of the word of God, that we will either turn you over to the civil authorities, or we will defend you from them.” What happened?

Well, it created a lot of conflict with Rome and the church already had a battle with Rome, but it also did this. It meant that people knew, whether they were godly or ungodly, that there was one place they could go to where people would say, “Thus saith the Lord,” and they would say it to the armed men of the emperor who came there and they stood by their word. The net result was that, for six centuries, it was the churches and the bishops of the churches that were the source of justice in Rome and when Rome fell, all through Europe, because they represented the justice of God, the law of God. In fact, the city of Troy, when they were faced with Attila the Hun, went to the bishop and they said, “You defend us,” and it was the negotiations of the bishop of Troy that freed the city. This was the power a church had when it stood clearly for the righteousness, for the justice of God, in terms of the law of God, against the most fearful Barbarians, men like Attila the Hun. Now, that takes faith, but God blessed that kind of faith, and this is why, for six centuries, the church was the refuge of men.

The net result was the church, very early, had said that no one could violate the sanctuary of the church to seize any man and take him without being under excommunication, and even though he were not a believer, no man could have any dealing with him. He would be treated as the living dead and they made it stand. Then, they began to extend the right of sanctuary to the church grounds, if the man, the refugee made it to the grounds of the church, the yard. In fact, in England under King Ethelbert, 600 AD, it was extended in some places beyond the grounds. For example, at Beverly and Hexsom{?}, it was extended a mile in any direction of the church, and in that mile there were stone markers to say, “Here the sanctuary begins. Grab a hold of this marker if you can’t make it into the church, and we will defend you,” and they did. In fact, they made it stand so that even when William the Conqueror conquered England, he had to respect the right of sanctuary, and give the right of anyone who fled from his wrath and rightly so, into a sanctuary, into a church, safe conduct out of the realm if the church said he deserved it. It was only in the late 18th century that the right of sanctuary ended in England. In Scotland, it was banished soon after the Reformation.

The fact of cities of refuge have reference to the fallen world and to the need for justice from other men and from the state, the cities of refuge were Levitical cities, and the Levites were the teachers of Israel, the teachers of the law, and they made the cities of refuge a law city, that the law might be a refuge.

Now, biblical law is case law. While the scripture specifies accidental death as the ground of refuge, in terms of case law, this meant that any case where injustice was involved, the man could go to the city of refuge. In other words, it was a place of refuge from injustice and as a result, very early, anyone who was fleeing injustice in any form went to the city of refuge, and subsequently in the Christian era, went to the church. The church was seen as a sanctuary because it was to represent God’s law on earth.

Now, the sad fact is that in the modern world, there is only tyranny because there is no sanctuary, no place of refuge against the state. If a man is mistreated and given injustice, he cannot fly to a church today and say, “Look, hear my case. Let your men who are trained in the word of God examine the evidence and see if I have not received injustice. Let there be a review,” and in the cities of refuge, the Levites were trained for this, and in the church when it had sanctuary, men were trained precisely in this. There were courts with pastors who were trained in law, all kinds of law, to adjudicate such cases, and so, modern man has no refuge against injustice. Our Supreme Court has made it clear there is no law above itself. What refuge is there against its injustice? And it is clear that it is often unjust, and so one of the interesting things of our time is that books are being written and selling very well with names like Safe Places. Where can you go in the world, in what country, and in what city or state, of province where there is a safe city, or a safe county, where there is a low crime rate, or great safety from this or that potentiality?

An amusing sidelight on that fact is one well-to-do man in Canada who, about a year ago, researched a great many things. He was ready to retire and he wanted a safe place. He was fed up with the high crime rate, and all kinds of problems. So he finally found a place which was war-free, crime-free, and virtually tax-free, and he went there to find what he believed the safest place on earth. The Falkland Islands.

The modern state is failing today. Peter Drucker of Claremont, said recently, “I see government as obese and muscle-bound, and having lost its capacity to perform. It is senile to the point of becoming incontinent, and it ought to be in diapers.” The modern state has no future because it has abandoned God, and mankind has no hope unless the church again makes itself into a city of refuge in every sense of the word. Unless it proclaims the righteousness, the justice of God, and says to the world, “We represent the law of God and the justice of God.”

This is one reason why we at Chalcedon feel so strongly about these trials. It has, over the past five years, cost us a great deal of money. I would estimate $75-100,000. Contributions we have made to the various legal fees, my travel expense, and more in going to these trials, and so on, but it’s been worth it, and it’s only the beginning, and this is why we have been dealing with the theology of the state, and why Dr. Douglas Kelly is dealing with the matter of church and state, too, and will be working on a book, and why Bill Kellogg is dealing with the Tudor laws, and the Stewart laws that have been invoked by our courts in this area, going back to ancient tyrannies to justify their present day tyrannies. As Christians, we have a duty. We have a duty to make the Christian faith again a place of refuge against injustice, where the law of God resounds to the freedom of man.

Are there any questions now? Yes?

[Audience] Don’t we have a lot of Fascism in the country now? For example, real estate. The first claim is the rent or tax you pay to the government. Without that payment of rent, you lose title, so in effect, we’re holding title, but the government, I think, is claiming that they really own the property.

[Rushdoony] Yes. Jonathan R. T. Hughes, in two books which have been published by the, I believe, University of Virginia Press, has gone into our property law, and how actually now, legally, we only have title to the use of a property, subject at any time to the prior ownership of the state which can, with or without payment, exercise its eminent domain. Eminent domain means its prior ownership. So, they’ve already communized everything through the concept of Eminent domain.

[Audience] They’re stretching it in the whole case with the Oakland Raiders to even a football team.

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Audience] And even Rose Durd{?} couldn’t swallow this. She said this was going too far, the modern state going too far in exercising its authority.

[Rushdoony] Yes, I thought that was an amusing and dramatic example, eminent domain over the Raiders. Yes?

[Audience] Just a comment. A lot of moderates have objected to conservatism because they say that, “While Nazism and Fascism are conservative, and therefore, we’re against conservatism in other forms.”

[Rushdoony] Yes, the idea has always been promoted that Fascism is really a right-wing thing when, in reality, Fascism is Marxism in sheep’s clothing. It’s the left masquerading. Mussolini, who did not believe an iota of religion, talked like the most devout and enthusiastic Catholic, and declared he was a Catholic by conviction as well as upbringing, although he never went to church. He was the one who made the Concordat with the church while doing everything to destroy, through his Fascist regime, Christianity in Italy, and doing a good job of it. So, it was friendliness to religion, but behind that, anti-Christianity. Protection of private property while destroying it, and so on. Regulations as the key, that’s the essence of Fascism. So, when you look at Washington, you have to say we are Fascist. Any other questions or comments? Yes?

[Audience] Did I understand you correctly to say that church sanctuary ended in the 18th century in England and then did you say shortly after the Reformation in Scotland?

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Audience] I think I understand why it might have ended during that period in England, but I don’t understand why would it have ended earlier? What’s shortly after the Reformation? Because Reformation’s what, 16th century?

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Audience] Well, were the Puritans against it, or something?

[Rushdoony] In Scotland, they were so hostile to everything that represented the Catholic church that they threw out the baby with the bathtub and the bathwater. And as a result, they made a clean sweep of everything except one thing. They allowed sanctuary at one place in Edinburgh for debtors. They wanted sanctuary from debt, so that they made a legal provision for that for a time. However, no sanctuary was ever given for debt to the state, and to this day, of course, that’s the one thing in bankruptcy you cannot get rid of, debt in the form of taxes.

In England, they weren’t much concerned with doing anything about it, so it really became a dead letter very early, and it was formally abolished late in the 18th century. It was claimed here in this country in the late 60’s by the Barrigans{?} during the demonstrations. Yes?

[Audience] How would the average Christian in the Street, so to speak, contribute to reconstructionism?

[Rushdoony] First of all, he has to believe that the law of God applies to him. Second, he has to start applying it in his home. Tithing is one obvious way, because when you tithe and you administer your tithe and you give it to the church and to various agencies, you are helping to reconstruct society. Now, one of the things that we’re going to see in the next generation is taking back a great many areas. We are seeing something that, for example, Dr. Lester Oloff started, taking back the care of delinquent children. This is an important ministry. There are about 100 such ministries at least, in the United States today, and taking back the care of the aged, the family, and the church. Healthcare, we’re going to see that. The next issue of the Journal of Christian Reconstruction will deal with what’s happening in many places. One Christian school in a poor neighborhood, and very modest parents, financially, in the Bay Area, started at the first of January, a food program for the needy people in the neighborhood, and by mid-February, they had taken care of 6,000 families. Now, that is not limited to that particular Christian school. It’s beginning to happen all over the country.

Well, when Christians begin to tithe, and when they begin to act, they can do great things. Dr. Kelly has just about gotten this issue of the Journal ready to send to the printer, and it will be out in a couple of months, and it will give you a look at what’s happening in this area. The issue after that, which will appear in the winter, will tell what’s happening in the business world in this sort of thing. Any other questions or comments?

Well, if not, let us close with prayer.

Our Lord and our God, we thank thee that, as we face these problems of our time, we face them knowing that we have been called to victory in Jesus Christ. Give us joy, therefore, in the battle, joy in our Lord, joy in our so-great salvation, and joy in the victory that shall be ours. Dismiss us with thy blessing. Give us traveling journeys on our homeward way, a quiet night’s rest, and faithfulness to thee day by day. In Jesus name. Amen.

End of tape