Political-Theology

“We have to follow the law. Romans 13 is clear.” I’ve heard this argument countless times in discussions about immigration policy. Christians who would never dream of treating immigrants with personal cruelty nevertheless defend harsh enforcement policies by appealing to Paul’s command to submit to governing authorities. The logic seems airtight: God established governments, governments make laws, therefore Christians must support strict immigration enforcement. Case closed. But what if we’re reading Romans 13 in isolation from the rest of Scripture’s witness? What if Paul’s instruction to the Roman Christians needs to be held in tension with Jesus’ own teaching about how we will be judged? ...

INTRODUCTION: ACCEPTING, BLOCKING, AND STATUS From the church’s perspective, is the state a promising offer, or a threatening one? At the risk of breathtaking oversimplification, Anglicans have tended to adopt the former perspective, leading to accommodation, and Anabaptists the latter, resulting in separation.1 Following Samuel Wells in his theological appropriation of terms from theatrical improvisation, the Anglican tradition has tended to respond to the promising offers (invitations to respond) of the state by accepting – maintaining the premise(s) of the state’s action(s).2 The historical legacy of the Church of England has given Anglicanism, as Anderson notes, an “inheritance of a strong loyalty to the state and a conservatism that has led the church to promote the status quo more often than it agitates for reform.”3 This inheritance from the established Church of England has coincided with a dual tendency to adopt a high status (a strategy for getting one’s way), in terms of relative privilege and political optimism, and a low status, in terms of frequent subservience in church-state relations.4 ...

Without context, words can mean anything and everything, and therefore mean nothing. It is only through the delimiting influence of context that words, phrases, sentences, and paragraphs have any meaning at all. Although this seems simple enough, it is often forgotten when interpreting the Bible. Due to influences as simple as our versification of the biblical text and as complex as the historical/theological developments which have dictated how we teach and interpret the Scriptures, many interpreters (wittingly or unwittingly) ignore context when trying to ascertain the meaning of particular biblical texts. ...

(Note: for a more recent piece on the relationship between Church and State, see my essay: “Improvising Church and State.”) I just read an article by Kevin DeYoung at The Gospel Coalition: “Thinking Theologically About Memorial Day”. Listen to his intro: This post probably has something to make everyone unhappy. But here goes. With Memorial Day on Monday (in the U.S.) and, no doubt, a number of patriotic services scheduled for this Sunday, I want to offer a few theses on patriotism and the church. Each of these points could be substantially expanded and beg more detailed defense and explanation, but since this is a blog and not a term paper, I’ll try to keep this under 1500 words. ...