The Christian hope for government
- Feb 18, 2010 -
The apostle Paul identifies hope as being one of the major characteristics of Christian living. In 1 Corinthians 13 where he describes the supremacy of love, he nonetheless includes hope along with faith as an enduring quality. Christians hope for many things related to the world in which we live. We hope for the advance of the gospel, for growth in personal holiness and righteousness, and opportunities to minister to those in need. Christians also have hopes and aspirations for the society in which we live because God is the creator of all persons and the one who ordains all government.
The Bible is testimony of God’s involvement in societies of old and of his activity for the redemption of individuals as well as his concern for the societies of which they are a part. The history of the Christian church is testimony to the power of God not only to redeem individuals but also to transform societies.
Based upon God’s involvement as demonstrated in past actions, as experienced in the present, and as promised for the future, the Christian lives in hope for society. Hope, like faith, is active. Hope motivates Christians to work so that persons and institutions, including government, fulfill the purposes God has for them.
The more difficult task, however, is specifying what the Christian hopes for. Some Christians have expected too little of their society and its governmental structures. Other Christians have expected the society of which they are a part to be identical with the church. What can Christians in twenty-first century America truly hope for in our society? What should we expect of our political structures?
Inadequate Models of Christian Hope
As Christians, we are citizens of this world while at the same time we are “not of this world.” We live with a dual citizenship. This somewhat complicates our determination of what we are to hope for. The tension has given rise to several distorted patterns of hope.
The dualist model
In this model, life is divided into spiritual and secular realms. Although the believer must live in both, the two are perceived as not having much to do with each other. Government is viewed as being a part of the merely secular realm.
Christians sometimes hold this view as a result of theological emphases. It is possible for the believer to so emphasize the “spiritual” dimension of faith that the importance of social responsibility is ignored. This happens also when an over-emphasis upon eschatology leads Christians to conclude that the world will soon be left behind and therefore is not worthy of our concern. Christians have been persuaded for many different reasons that government is either unimportant or inherently evil.
Passivity is a word which describes this attitude toward society. Believers who hold this position recognize that God is sovereign and that he has ordained the political order. They also regard change and development in the political order as being solely God’s responsibility. Romans 13:1-7 is interpreted as meaning that God has ordained government and has placed in office those specific individuals who lead government. Since God has established the leaders in office, it is reasoned they are due our unquestioning obedience. They exercise the authority with which God has vested them. Opposing them and failing to submit to their authority would be an act of disobedience to God.
According to this view, change in government, if needed, will be accomplished by God. The Christian is to do no less and no more than pray for the leaders. If the leaders of government are evil, the Christian can pray that God will change them or remove them.
About the only real involvement in politics for most Christians holding these dualistic views is participation in elections. The only justifiable basis for active opposition to government, according to this view, is when government seeks to compel the believer to violate his or her conscience. If the leaders of government seek to compel actions which are forbidden by the Christian faith, such as idolatry, then some form of resistance may be justified.
This general understanding of the relationship between faith and politics was held by Martin Luther, the great German reformer.
The theocratic model
The word “theocracy” describes a form of government found in the life of the people of Israel in the Old Testament. God was the supreme king who ruled over his people through human agents such as prophets, priests, and kings. In the ideal theocracy, there would be no kind. God, as the divine lawgiver, would establish the civil and moral laws which would guide the nation. All of life, ideally, would be lived under the leadership of God.
God allowed Israel to have a king after warning the people that human kings were subject to all of the frailties which ordinary mortals experience. The ideal of a government in which God is the ruler was increasingly distorted in Israel as king after king proved to be unworthy and inadequate to provide the moral and spiritual leadership called for by one who rules as God’s representative.
Nothing could be a nobler ideal than establishing a form of government after the model of God’s ideal. Unfortunately, in a sinful world, few things have proven more impossible to attain. The theocratic model has been attempted from time to time, by some Christians seeking to make their governments totally responsive to the intentions of God.
One form that has taken is through efforts by Roman Catholicism, in different historical periods, to establish a relationship between the church and the state in which the church is absolutely superior and the state is completely inferior. Since Roman Catholicism is considered by Roman Catholic teaching to be the spiritual representative of God in society, the claim is made that Church authorities are justified in acting in society with the full authority of God.
The theocratic model has been attempted by some Protestants as well. One of the more notable efforts was that of John Calvin in Switzerland. In America, the Puritans sought to establish a theocratic society in New England. This model has been advocated by Christians who are involved in the resurgent interest in politics among some Evangelicals and Fundamentalists.
In the theocratic model, government is ordained of God and exists to serve a function entirely separate from that of the church. Government is the source of power that restrains evildoers and regulates society in nonspiritual matters. Church history abounds, however, with struggles marked by the inability to agree upon a clear delineation between what is spiritual and what is not spiritual. The inevitable result of such a struggle is a bitter conflict over authority and power. Church authorities, motivated by an ideal of establishing God as ruler, become involved in petty strife, selfish ambition, and destructive conflict. In such an environment, both the church and the state fail to fulfill the responsibilities which God has given to them.
The Christian Hope for Government
Hope for government involves not only desire but also action, for hope is not passive but is active. If the Christian has hope for government, he or she does not allow God’s purpose for government to go unrealized. He or she seeks to change government by action. What are some of the things for which the Christian hopes and for which the Christian works to achieve?
Freedom of conscience in matters of faith. Jesus by his teachings and his life made it clear that several things may be expected of government. Following one’s conscience in serving God represents the believer’s highest responsibility (Matt. 22:21). The first desire of the believer is that government will not persecute him and seek to prevent the exercise of freedom of religion. Paul spoke of authority as having been instituted by God with no mention of the religious beliefs of the authorities themselves (Rom. 13:1-7). Paul’s early experiences included the government-sanctioned freedom to travel and to preach openly with a good measure of freedom of conscience.
The United States was established as a nation for several reasons. One major reason was the desire for religious freedom. The initial draft of the United States Constitution was criticized for not recognizing clearly the right to freedom of religion. In order to allay these fears, the guarantee of freedom of religion was added as the very first part of the First Amendment. Without the first 10 amendments, also known as the Bill of Rights, it is doubtful that the Constitution would have been adopted.
Protection of the rights of the weak, the poor, and the helpless. Both the Old Testament and the New Testament are very specific about the need for compassion on the part of government in dealing with those who are weak. The civil laws which God established to guide the nation of Israel provided very specific protection for the weak, the poor, and the helpless. God promised that he would reward faithfulness and punish disobedience with regard to the observance of the laws. Leviticus 25 and 26 spell out vividly the judgment upon the nation and its rulers for failure to abide by God’s laws which sought to protect the poor, the weak, and the helpless (Micah 6:6-8).
The ministry of Jesus abounds with illustrations of his concern for the weak and the poor. He regarded this as a model to be followed by all who were his disciples. Several specific passages teach about this duty for political figures. Zacchaeus was a tax collector who saw clearly the need for compassion in discharging this responsibility (Luke 19:1-10). The ultimate challenge of meeting the needs of the poor was given to the rich young ruler (Mark 10: 17-22). These passages, very familiar to us, abound with political meaning. Those who govern are to do so compassionately.
The United States government was established with a vision of providing a refuge for the oppressed, the persecuted, the dispossessed, the needy, and the poor. The early settlers were looking for an opportunity to start life anew. They were mostly poor people seeking to find a place where they could have land, raise food, develop crafts and businesses, and raise their families. The United States Constitution speaks of the role of government as not only providing for the common defense but also promoting the general welfare. American history is in some ways the story of an expansion of this vision. This vision includes immigrants, former slaves, indentured servants, convicts, and penniless refugees, people who were the very opposite of land-owning aristocrats.
Restraint of those who are powerful
The Christian understands that government is responsible for restraining those who are powerful so that society is not simply an expression of the vested interests of the powerful and the wealthy.
One of the great stories in the Bible is the story of David and the prophet Nathan. David was the most powerful man in Israel. As the king, the full authority of government was his to use. Yet not even David, in God’s plan for government, was allowed to use his power without moral restraint (2 Samuel 12: 1-15). The prophet Elijah was God’s spokesman to pronounce judgment upon the sin of Ahab and Jezebel in wrongfully taking Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kings 21).
Since not even the king can use his power without restraint, all citizens are subject to restraint. No one is free to use his power without limitations as set forth in God’s plan for society. This view is reflected in Paul’s teachings, “For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do good and you will have its approval.” (Rom. 13:3).
Revelation 13 indicates that it is possible for government to become a persecutor rather than protector. When this happens, government is failing to fulfill one of the basic responsibilities for which God established it.
Peace and order
A fundamental hope of the Christian is the hope that he or she will not be subjected to acts of violence, oppression, persecution, or destruction. The Christian lives with the hope that government will be a protector of its citizens from aggressors, whether criminals or foreign nations. The Old Testament develops this protective role of government in many ways. Exodus 20-23 not only describes the moral guidelines by which the people of Israel were called to live but also sets up a system of laws to deal with those who broke these commandments by acts of violence and infringement upon the rights of others. The rulers of Israel were judged by their ability and willingness to protect the people of Israel.
Paul, in Romans 13:1-7, describes the ruling authorities as the servants of God to encourage good works and to punish evil. Paul traveled widely and preached openly as a beneficiary of the peace which had been established by the Roman government throughout the regions around the Mediterranean Sea.
The Christian hopes for more than the absence of conflict, however. Peace has a deeper quality then merely the absence of conflict. Peace is a quality present in the relationships between humans and between humans and God. Peace is rooted in the believer’s relationship with God. But this peace transforms the relationships of believers with other human beings. Though difficult to realize in a sinful world, Christians hope for peace on earth which will permeate the societies of which we are a part and which will shape the policies of government. Jesus, the Prince of Peace, came to redeem the world, including the world of government.
Justice
As God was establishing the people of Israel, he gave moral and civil guidelines by which they were to live. These guidelines, if followed, would establish justice in the nation. The people would live, as individuals and as a society and as a society would result. The rulers of the people were to lead in establishing justice. The message of many of the prophets was one denouncing injustice. This message is seen clearly in prophets such as Amos (see 5:24) and Micah (see 6:7-8).
Hope Expresses Itself in Action
Christian hope is never passive. It is always active. If the Christian has hope for society and for government, action and involvement are expressions of this hope. Just as faith without works is dead, so hope without action is dead.
Christian hope for government is not rendered passive just because the task is complicated and difficult. Since human beings are involved in government, government is affected by human sinfulness and human finiteness. But government is no more affected by these human frailties than family life or any other aspect of life.
Christian hope for government is active and involved, seeking to transform and redeem that institution which God has established to provide freedom of conscience, protect the weak and the helpless, restrain the mighty and the wrongdoers, establish peace, promote justice, and support the general well-being of all.
Adapted from a document published by the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission in May 1992
Further Learning
Learn more about: Citizenship, Christian Citizenship, Church and State,