 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Introduction:
Christian Citizenship
Derek Poole
Comment
Priscilla Reid
From
the Director
David Porter
Outside
the Camp
Donald Watts
Citizenship
From 'For God and His Glory Alone'
Love:
An attribute of Citizenship
Graham Cheesman
Memory
and Redemption
David J Montgomery
Holy
Nation
Lois Barrett
Grace
Healed Eyes
Steve Stockman
Negotiating
the Future
Deirdre Mullan
Book
Reviews
Alwyn Thomson and Dorothy McMillan
HOLY
NATION
As Holy Nation the church uses the language of peoplehood, of being a
pilgrim people, strangers and aliens in the territory in which they find
themselves, citizens of the reign of God. The church is not the reign
of God, but points to the reign of God. It is a preview of the reign of
God. The church as 'holy nation' comes from 1 Peter 2:9 , which itself
paraphrases Exodus 19:5-6. This was the Jewish self understanding, and
the early Christian church took for itself the idea of nationhood and
opened it up more radically to include Gentiles and well as Jews.
The New Testament uses a lot of political language for the church. A frequently used word is 'kingdom'. The centre of Jesus' message was the kingdom of God. This preaching of the kingdom or reign of God was continued by the early church ( Acts 8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; Heb. 1:8; 12:28; Jas. 2:5; 2 Pet. 1:11; Rev. 1:9; 12:10 ). Jesus is given the title 'King' or 'King of kings', and in Revelation, the saints are called 'kings' as well ( Rev. 1:6; 5:10 ). Even the title 'Lord', as given to Jesus, is a political title, since in the first century Roman Empire it was expected that one would call Caesar 'lord'. The word 'church' has a political connotation. The Greek word for church often meant an assembly gathered for decision-making, a town meeting. Thus the church is that gathering of the reign of God assembled to be a sign of the reign of God, to proclaim the word of God in word and deed to make decision, and to give allegiance to their Ruler.
The New Testament also claims that, in Jesus' death and resurrection, Christ has defeated the 'principalities and powers', translated 'rulers and authorities' in the NRSV. Colossians 2:9-15 claims that Christ has disarmed these and made a public example of them, leading them hostage in triumphal victory procession. In fact, Christ is now not only head of the church, but also head of every ruler and authority (see Eph 1:20-23 ). Part of the task of the church is to make known the wisdom of God to the rulers and authorities (Eph 3:10).
Such language is a dramatic challenge to the powers, governments, authorities, and institutions of the world. These political claims for Christ and for the church as the people of God demand that people make a choice of allegiance. The 'holy' people will be those who have been set apart for Christ's service. They are a people different from those around them, different because they have given their ultimate allegiance to God through Jesus as Lord.
In every cultural context, no matter how benevolent or hostile the governments and societies around it, the church is called to demonstrate an alternative culture and an alternative politics, an alternative ethics, in dialogue with the surrounding cultures. The Letter to Diognetus (c. 2nd C) describes the early church:
For Christians are not differentiated from other people by country, language, or customs; you see, they do not live in cities of their own, or speak some strange dialect, or have some peculiar lifestyle.... They live in both Greek and foreign cities, wherever chance has put them. They follow local customs in clothing, food, and the other aspects of life. But at the same time, they demonstrate to us the wonderful and certainly unusual form of their own citizenship. They live in their own native lands, but as aliens; as citizens, they share all things with others, but like aliens suffer all things. Every foreign country is to them as their native country, and every native land as a foreign country. In the Anabaptist tradition this model has often been associated with the concept of separation from the world, or more precisely separation from the evil of the world. This does not mean geographical isolation from the world, or ignoring the world. It means nonconformity to the ways of the world. It means that Christians are supposed to behave differently from the standards of the dominant culture. In and of itself, this nonconformity does not mean disengagement. It simply means a different set of rules, a different way of life. In this peoplehood model of the church, the primary verb is 'to be'. We are the church.
No one model of the church requires Christians to withdraw completely from the political life of the state. But each model of the church does make a difference in how the church relates to government.
Constantinian models of the church and government
Some say the church should stay out of politics, or not attempt to influence the political process. Or the church should just ignore government. But often this is simply a philosophy of separation of spheres. In other words, the church as an organisation should stay out of politics, but Christians individually should participate in government. And somehow, Christians working from this understanding of church and state usually end up supporting the status quo.
The word most used with regard to Christians and government is 'responsibility'. Responsibility often becomes the justification for compromising Christian faithfulness in relation to government. The argument usually is that our responsibility to government and neighbour has such priority that it is inevitable that one will have to get dirty and do some things that are in conflict with following Jesus. Virtually every Christian public ethic that justifies behaviour that runs counter to the example and teaching of Jesus does it on the grounds of 'responsibility'. In many cases, the critics admit that following Jesus would mean something quite different from what they are proposing. But Jesus' example is deemed irrelevant or irresponsible. And if an action is not 'responsible' then, these critics imply, one must of course not do it.
The best rejoinder to such arguments is, "Responsible to whom?" Is a Christians' primary responsibility to the dominant society or to the government? Or is a Christians' primary responsibility to God and to understandings of life among the people of God? If one's primary commitment and allegiance is to God, then responsibility is defined by the covenant between God and the people of God. Allegiance to God as Ruler and a commitment to following Jesus may at times require Christians to act according to understandings of responsibility that are different from those of the surrounding society. If the church does not let itself be held captive to the state, it will take most seriously its responsibilities to the reign of God, present and future.
Some may say that Christians should get into government and do it right or at least, do it better than non-Christians would. Here there is very little separation of church and state, and one expects that the two will generally support each other.
Church as holy nation in relation with the nations
Let me now outline what I see as five tasks for the church as holy nation in relationship with government.
1. We need to discern the nature of the principalities and powers in our context. The powers (spiritual and material, abstract in institutions and represented by particular individuals) are not evil in and of themselves. Sometimes the powers act for good and sometimes for evil. They have been ordered by God for the purpose of doing good. But the powers tend to become idolatrous, to set themselves up as gods.
One of the tasks of the church is to discern the nature of the powers in each context. The context in which the church receives nonprofit tax status or is consulted by governments is quite different from a context in which people are being killed for their faith. The sharp black and white divisions between church and government which some of the sixteenth-century Anabaptists experienced is going to be different from the experience of most Western Christians in the twentieth century.
However, we should not be too quick to think that persecution of the church is far from our experience. Government is not always on the side of the church.
2. We need to discern the critical points of dissent from government and the culture that supports it. No state can be wholly Christian, because modern nation-states are defined by their territory, and all territorial governments are based on coercion. Most people don't have much choice about their citizenship. When you have citizens who are not voluntary, governments have to use violence to maintain order, at least as a last resort. It is only a community following Jesus that can be completely non-violent. The only Christian nation is the church of Jesus Christ.
So there will always be points of dissent. The task of the church is to discern the points of dissent. You don't have to dissent from everything in order to make a witness. In fact, it is necessary to dissent only at a few key points in order to make a significant impact.
The clearest point on which Mennonites over the centuries have chosen to dissent is the refusal of military service. The restorative justice movement also represents a dissent from the mainstream of the justice system. All of the justice systems of the Western world are based on Aristotle's definition of justice that each person will get what he or she deserves. Biblical justice, on the other hand, means restoring right relationships and caring for both victims and offenders.
This is why we have to keep on doing theology over and over, why we can't just settle it once and for all. Theology is the task of discerning our situation in the light of the gospel. The gospel doesn't change, but our situation changes. The church's task is to know the gospel very well and to know its context very well, and in the light of those, to discern the key issues.
3. The third task of the church is to be a model of peoplehood under the rule of God, to be that preview of the age to come. If we believe that peace is the way, then our ways should be ways of peace within the church. If we believe in justice that restores relationships, then discipline in the church should be restorative. It is not necessary for the government to approve or to adopt Christlike ways in order for the church to begin living that way now. Neither does the church need to turn over all peace and justice and social welfare concerns to the state. If the church is a holy nation, it will be doing many of those things itself. There will always be a place for church-run agencies that model peace and justice in ways that the government is not ready to do.
4. The church is not only called to be it, but to say it, and to say it publicly. A New Testament image of the church's public witness is that of 'ambassadors of reconciliation' (2 Cor 5). The church is an embassy sent to the other nations with a message. It is possible to speak to government without operating on the government's terms. Menno Simons in the sixteenth century unapologetically wrote to rulers trying to persuade them not to practice capital punishment on people they thought were heretics.
This kind of public witness is really what the New Testament means by 'preaching. Preaching is actually a rather political word. It means to announce or to proclaim publicly. It was sometimes used in a political context, as with the official runner who comes into town ahead of the rule with the message, "The king is coming!" To preach, then, is to announce good news, public good news for the community.
This preaching in public is far more than attempting to influence governments to enact the right legislation. The real centre of power is in the reign of God and in the church as its representative. Ephesians 3:10 claims that it is through the church that the wisdom of God will be made known to the rulers and authorities. The task of announcing the reign of God will mean getting out of the four walls of the church building, out of the safe group of people who know and love each other, into the public square.
What standard of behaviour do we have a right to expect of government? First, God does not have one set of rules for governments and another set of rules for everybody else. God has one will for all people. God wills that all people come to salvation, peace, and justice and enter the reign of God. At the same time, we should not expect that territorial states are going to be able to act in Christian ways, ultimately. But we can speak to government in the hope that it can move from where it is now one step closer to the will of God. Our job as a church is to be ambassadors, to carry God's message to the other nations, and to do this with integrity and clear loyalty to God's nation.
5. Finally, we are called not only to be it and to say it, but also to do it. What can we do together with secular governments? Where can we work together with integrity? This depends on our context and the critical points of dissent that we have discerned. The church will need to discern where it can co-operate with government faithfully, without letting the church get absorbed into government. The church will need to practice being different from the state and staying connected. Or there may be times when one has to disconnect particular projects or to suffer for righteousness' sake.
All that the church is, says and does in the public arena is to be done out of the conviction that one day the whole world will acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord, and even the rebellious powers will bow before Christ. So, every way in which justice and reconciliation happen in the world becomes a sign of the complete justice and reconciliation in the age to come.
Lois Barrett - executive secretary of the Commission on Home Ministries, General Conference Mennonite Church, Newton, Kansas, USA. She is an ordained minister and author of six books, the most recent of which she co-authored is Missional Church: 'A Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America' (Eerdmans, 1998).
This article is an edited version of a paper (Thinking Theologically about Church and State - http://www.fresno.edu/pacs/docs/barrett.html) first given at the 4th Annual Restorative Justice Conference, Fresno Pacific College, California and is reprinted with permission of the author.
 |
||
 |
 |
|