Two Masters? I'm a Christian and a Citizen, Part 3

The state and the church are both responsible to ensure that people are treated fairly.  This implies the possibility that a relationship between the state and church can exist to benefit the wider society.  I argued that this relationship should be based solely on ensuring that social justice is realized.   I then listed some significant dangers that the church should be aware of if entering such a relationship.  Now, I want to assume that the church and state can realize a relationship with the proper focus and that the church has taken the necessary precautions to ensure that it does not fall into sin.  With these two (huge) assumptions in mind, I want to explore what the relationship will look like.  Specifically, I want to ask: How can the church serve the wider society by serving the state?  My contention is that the church best fulfills its role as servant by assisting the state when it is acting within God’s will and by warning the state when it is acting outside of God’s will.  Our tools in offering this service are prayer, understanding the role of Church and the role of state, direct acts of service, and – only as a last resort – confrontation.

Prayer will be our first tool of service.  This blog has brought about a couple of confessions and it is time for another one.  I’m intensely skeptical of people who say, “Let’s pray.”  My default reaction is to think that he or she is attempting to get out of doing something.  I’m not sure if this skepticism comes from knowing people who treat prayer this way, or, if it is from me thinking that prayer isn’t as important as I think I think it is.  

My skepticism forces me to turn to scripture, partly for my own learning, and partly because I’m acutely aware of the need to appeal to someone else’s authority in this area.  To put it simply, God told us to pray for the government and then to live peacefully.  When we do that, we acknowledge the government’s authority over us (1 Timothy 2:1-2).[1]  When praying, we must know what prayer is and is not.  In the CBC’s 1967 Massey Lectures, Martin Luther King, Jr. explained that prayer is something to take seriously and, therefore, is not a way to avoid acting responsibly.[2]  

King’s thoughts on prayer are a bridge to the church’s second tool of service, which is to understand what the role and responsibility of the church is in society in light of the reign of God.[3]  The church needs to understand that both it and the state are under God’s authority and that God has given each a specific social role.  Each role has limitations.  The government cannot do everything.  If the church expects the state to take care of the body while we worry about saving the soul, we are wrong.  The government will inevitably leave holes that the Church should strive to fill.[4]  These holes are not always the result of poor decision-making or corruption.  The book of Jeremiah points out that the government often finds itself in a position where an entirely good choice is not available to it.  When this happens, the Church should help to meet needs that the government cannot.[5]  

Don’t misunderstand me.  The church should help the state fulfill its role by helping to serve people when the government cannot,[6] but the church should not attempt to use the government as a tool for fulfilling our role.  The Church must intentionally limit where it pushes the government to act.  This means acknowledging that our entire morality (even if we could agree on what that morality is) should not be applied to civil law.  Immorality and illegality are not always synonymous.  Confusing the two can actually result in injustice.  Legislating and enforcing the entirety of Christian sexual ethics, for example, would require the state to violate personal privacy.[7]

Our third tool is directly serving the state when appropriate.  Idolizing the state is a temptation.  This does not mean that the Church should not serve the state, but instead means that the Church should serve the state properly.  Remember the prophet Daniel, who served the state but sided with God instead of the state when there was a conflict.[8]  The tool of direct service requires humility, first by acknowledging that people who do not share our religious beliefs sometimes have better ideas than we do,[9] and second, by realizing that the state is responsible to all of its citizens, regardless of religious belief.  Even if a citizen is not a Christian, the church cannot hamper the state’s efforts to give this person freedom.[10]

The final tool I want to discuss is the trickiest.  When the government does not fulfill its role – that is, when injustice exists as a result of direct action by the government – the church serves the state by confronting the government.  This will come up at times.  While the state is God’s servant, it is not perfect.[11]  Confrontation happens primarily through criticism, but sometimes requires peaceful resistance.[12]  

We are part of a democracy.  Free speech, at times, means that we will offend people.  It is unfortunate if people are offended when we speak; however, the mere possibility of offense cannot encourage us to be quiet.  When we see injustice, we are obliged to speak.  The church is united to Jesus and is therefore united to victims of oppression.  If we ignore injustice, we ignore our savior.  The state does not have the authority to create injustice so we should not be quiet if it does.[13]  The weak undoubtedly exist.  Sometimes, they have no voice of their own.  As long as the Church has a voice, it must use it to speak for people who cannot speak for themselves.  God is the God of both the weak and the powerful.[14]

I’m a Christian and a citizen.  I’m doubtful that I have two masters, however.  I’m subject to both the state and to the church, but neither has absolute authority in my life.  Both are delegates of God.  I only have one master.  I have a couple guides in serving Him.

---

[1] John Stott, The Cross of Christ, 299-300.

[2] Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.  "Nonviolence and Social Change."  In The Lost Massey Lectures, 204.

[3] Glen Stassen and David Gushee, Kingdom Ethics, 479

[4] Mark Hill.  "Church-State Relations and Social Welfare in Europe,"  The Review of Faith & International Affairs 7:3 (2009): 27 – 31.

[5] Larry B. Jones. "Church-State Relations and Social Welfare in Europe,"  The Review of Faith & International Affairs 3:2 (2005), 32.

[6] Serving people when the government will not is also important, but this is not quite the same thing.

[7] Dennis P. Hollinger, Choosing the Good, 253 – 254.

[8] Larry B. Jones, 'Prophetic' NGO-Government Relationships: What Would Daniel Do?" The Review of FaithInternational Affairs 3, no. 2 (Fall 2005):  34.

[9] John G. Stackhouse, Making the Best of It, 167.

[10] Margaret Van Die, Introduction, and Public Life in Canada, ed. Marguerite Van  Die, 13.

[11] N. T. Wright, Surprised by Hope, 265.

[12] Dana Wilbanks.  "The Church as Sign and Agent of Transformation."  In The Church's Public Role, ed. Dieter T. Hessel, 35.

[13] Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.  "Conscience and the Vietnam War."  In The Lost Massey Lectures, ed. CBC Massey Lecture Series, 180.

[14] Glen Stassen and David Gushee, Kingdom Ethics, 478.