I just finished an essay called "A Vision of Reality: The Redemptive Task of the Church amidst Earthly Authorities." I set out to research and write about how a Christian should view the War in Iraq, and after I began my research I realized 1) There is so much theological grounding on the role of government that I need before I can have something helpful to say about the war, and 2) The political complexities in Iraq are way out of my league. So I decided to do some further research on the role of the government and its use of force in the Bible and write a paper about that. I think this was an important thing to realize - if Christians do not have their theological convictions in place before talking about politics, they can end up making either careless theological misjudgments or ignorant political statements. I've been quite guilty of both.
After looking at the role of government in the Biblical story, and reading books and articles by some of the major just war theorists and pacifists, it seems to me that Christian engagement in warfare detracts from the redemptive task of the Church, which is to witness in word and deed to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Governments are instituted by God as ministers and servants to preserve peace and administer wrath to everyone. As such, the purpose of government is to grant common grace to everyone in the same way that God allows all people to taste chocolate chip cookies and bask in the sun. The most fundamental response for the Christian is to submit to these authorities. Most just war theorists say in one way or another that since governments are ordained by God, Christians are permitted - and in some cases are morally obligated - to take up arms. But the Bible in no way indicates this next step. And in fact, when a Christian uses force - even in war - he or she fails to demonstrate the submissive nature of Christ. Force and submission cannot happen at the same time. The Church's number one purpose is to witness to the redemption that happened when Christ chose not to raise the sword and submitted to the cross. And this has a power far beyond armies, which the world doesn't understand. If we fail to do bear this witness in both word and deed, the hope of eternal peace will remain an illusion to the world.
This is nothing new - it is essentially what people like Yoder and Hauerwas say. But distinguishing between the common grace function of government and special redemptive task for the Church is a helpful way for me to understand how they fit together.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
hey Ren... tell me more about what you discovered on the role of government in the Bible...
ReplyDelete"After looking at the role of government in the Biblical story..."
I have a talk to give on said subject, and I'd love your thoughts!
--Kristen
Hey Reynolds,
ReplyDeleteAdmittedly I have not finished reading your entire post here, but am intrigued by your ideas here! Here's my question: It seemed Jesus didn't talk a whole lot about earthly government ("My Kingdom is not of this world..."). Given that, why should I as a christian care about governemtal policy and regimes? I know it sounds like a silly question, but what would you say to encourage me to care more about governance?
Hope your doing well!
So I just realized that I've been having people post comments about my posts. First, Kristen's question: Beginning with the Hebrew Scriptures, God seems to insist that He is the one who establishes all the kings and authorities, whether part of Israel or not - Yahweh raises up and Yahweh brings down. Compare David and Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus and Saul. Sometimes these kings are used for peace and sometimes they are used for wrath.
ReplyDeleteThis same role of governments and authorities is carried on in the New Testament, but the New Covenant takes on a different form in that Jesus bears the wrath of the world on Himself - the fulfillment Suffering Servant promised when God's people were in exile - and he becomes the first fruits of the church, which is called to continue that redemptive task of counterintuitive suffering for the redemption of the world. This is the vocation of the church to usher in the Kingdom. So in the midst of earthly authorities, to which the New Testament only tells the church to obey and submit, the Kingdom witnesses to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ through nonviolent submission.
More generally, if I were just to answer your question (and this answer's Whit's question too), the church is not to seek the government to solve the world's problems. Its job is to be the church first. The church is the agent of redemption for the world. Nonetheless, the salvation of the world is wholistic, which includes the governments. But the METHOD is the important part. You're right Whit, Jesus' kingdom is not of this world. We're not trying to take over the government by force, but if the church can be a witness to the government to cause it to change, it should. We witness through service and suffering and humility, and bearing the burden of those in need. Not by seeking power and prestige so that we can control people under the pretense of "influence."
More about Whit's question: Christians should also care about government policy because too many Christians care too much about government policy. Also, John Perkins says that you can keep saving fish from a polluted pond, but at some point, you have to figure out what's polluting the pond. Again, the method is extremely important: Be the Church first, humility first, and God will guide us. I'm not even sure if Christians in government can be done - perhaps at some point there must be a departure to avoid compromise. But if it can be done, it must be done by being like Jesus first.
ReplyDeleteI was thumbing through Shane Claiborne's new book "Jesus for President" the other day. I think he might have some good things to say about this. Also, read Hauerwas and Yoder to see who I mostly align myself with, and Rheinhold Niebuhr, Darrell Cole, and Paul Ramsey to see some alternative views (about war mostly).