In Defense of the Faith

The Essence of the Law

But Mr. Canright has found that the law had an “essence.” This essence was something inside of the outer shell called the law, and was the real thing that mattered-the kernel of the wheat, so to speak. We read: DOF 48.1

“‘Yet not one jot or one tittle of the essence of the moral law is abated. When Paul, referring to the abolishment of the law dispensation, said: “For if that which was done away was glorious, much more that which remains is glorious,” he indicated the correct status of the law. The essence of the moral law “remains.”’ This is exactly what I believe.”—Ibid., p. 333. DOF 48.2

Now here is something quite new. The Jews had only the letter of the law, but we have the essence! Mr. Canright as a Baptist has already stated on page 330 of his book that “the letter of the law is not binding upon Christians,” but now he informs us that we do have the essence. Seems a bit hard on the Jews, doesn’t it? They had to deal with a law, even in the letter, but according to this we Christians have no code, no letter of the law, no set rule of conduct, but just an essence. It may perhaps be felt that codes are a bit difficult to manage; they say such definite things, demand certain measures of obedience, and thereby become, in the estimation of some, a yoke of bondage! But a mere essence is different! With an essence only, one cannot be pinned down to any definite measure of service or standard of life. Almost any form may be right. One man’s interpretation of the standard of morality is as good as another’s, where there is no letter of the law to guide them, but only an essence. DOF 48.3

What would we say of a nation which decided to abolish all its laws and destroy its statute books, leaving it entirely with its citizens to obey what they considered to be the essence of morality? Such a nation could abolish its lawmaking assemblies, disband its police force, tear down its jails, and proclaim absolute liberty of action to ‘its citizens. Where no law is, there could be no proof of guilt, and therefore no infliction of punishment. Every man would determine for himself what was right or wrong, land would live under no restraint whatsoever from the pirate. But who would want to live in such a country? What protection would there be of life or property? None whatever. Such a nation could not possibly survive. DOF 49.1