Resources

The integrated Public Square

How did the early Christians view the Public Square? Answer: as a whole. The Public Square meant the State, the local church and the household, with all in it – from parents to children to those who helped doing the housework and taking the children to school – the servants. Furthermore they gradually came to understand that the family of a mother and father, married for life, and bringing up their children is the primary unit in the Public Square

Peter illustrates this interconnectedness most clearly in 1 Peter 2.13-3.7:

Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good… Honour everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the emperor. Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly… Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct… Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honour to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.

Involvement in the local society

So the earliest Christians were to adapt to the existing social system. They did not go off to form communities as were formed in Judaism, as evidenced in the Qumran Community (now a must-see tourist stop, not far from Jerusalem). They adapted but with a Christian ethic that sometimes meant, until the emperor Constantine, regular conflict and, at times. outright persecution.

Along with marriage and sexual ethics including no abortions, especially the true believer's refusal to "curse Christ" and renounce their faith were distinguishing marks of the earliest Christians (read Pliny's famous letter to the Emperor Trajan and Trajan's reply). Also, of course, they were known for their helping the sick and needy inside and outside the church.

With regard to marriage and the family Paul in a number of his letters was clear on sex being for marriage alone. He never shies away from naming behaviours that threaten marriage and the family. So he starts off his great work, the epistle to the Romans, and following the Old Testament's lead, by majoring on the utter wrongness of sodomy and lesbian sex. For same-sex relationships were notorious in the ancient Greco-Roman world that impacted Palestine.

Same-sex relationship and the Jerusalem Gymnasium

In the 1st century AD to Jewish people and so the early Christian Jewish converts such relationships were particularly abhorrent. It reminded them of the 2nd century BC setting up of a Greek-style gymnasium in Jerusalem. For that was a trigger in their rebellion led by Judas Maccabaeus against the shockingly paganizing Antiochus IV (see 1 Maccabees 1.14-24 and 2 Maccabees 4.7-17). 1 and 2 Maccabees are books, of course, in our Apocrypha and which Article 7 of the 39 Articles of the Church of England says

the Church [now] doth read for example of life and instruction of manners – [manners' being 16th century for 'morals]".

It was a trigger because such gymnasia were characterized by male only nude competition and pederasty. And this was remembered because the purifying of the Temple after the idolatrous defilement by Antiochus and the success of Judas was celebrated annually in what the New Testament calls "The Feast of Dedication" (John 10.22) and which Jesus celebrated. Today it is called the festival of Hanukkah – this year (2020) 10-18 December.

Jesus and marriage

Of course, Jesus was ground breaking himself over marriage and sexual relationships, by making an addition to the divine injunction in Genesis 2.24:

Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh …

For he added the words (Mark 10.8b and 9):

… So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let man not separate.

That teaching of Jesus on marriage and no remarriage after divorce is in the three synoptic Gospels.

But, of course, we need to balance that with the fact that in John's Gospel we read of Jesus accepting a woman, at Jacob's well in Samaria, who had been divorced and remarried four times and she was now co-habiting with someone else! However she came to see that Jesus was the promised Messiah and then acted as his evangelist telling others about him and taking others to meet him.

And Paul follows Jesus' teaching exactly in 1 Corinthians 7 if read carefully.

Daily work and the State

With regard to the work-place Jesus has much to say in his Parables which is also directly relevant today. And Paul has teaching still relevant in the Thessalonian letters and in his letter to Philemon.

But then we come to national governance. Jesus taught little about that but what he said was so important. And this has to be preached as part of the Good News Jesus came to bring and the setting up of his kingdom. For Jesus differed from the Essenes (probably they were the Qumraners) because he taught his followers to get involved in society in a common sense way that included good works and the relief of suffering (witness the Parable of Good Samaritan).

Jesus also differed from the Zealots, another influential sect in first-century Judaism. who went to the other extreme – by wanting to wage war. Judas the Galilean, the founder of the Zealots according to the Jewish historian Josephus, in AD 6 had led a violent uprising against the Romans when Judea was annexed as an imperial province. As founder or forerunner of the Zealots, he followed the violent tradition of Old Testament Israel and the examples of Phineas (Numbers 25.10-13), Elijah (1 Kings 18.40) and Mattathias, the father of Judas Maccabaeus and his brothers (2 Maccabees 2.24-26). Judas was arguing that it was wrong for the people of God in the holy land to pay taxes or tribute to Caesar a Gentile. Jesus, therefore, certainly was no Zealot; for if he had been, he would have answered (when once asked the question whether it was right to pay tribute to Caesar) with a definite "No!"' Instead Jesus replied with that seminal teaching:

render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Luke 20.25).

Two spheres – the secular and the sacred and no violence

So Jesus importantly spoke of two spheres in this present age, one, secular and related just to this age, and other divine, overlapping it and eternal. Also Jesus' ethical teaching was so different to that of the Zealots. Jesus, as is well known from the Gospels, in the words of F.F.Bruce, …

… stressed the importance of non-retaliation: his followers should turn the other cheek, repay evil with good, and go willingly the second mile when their services were requisitioned for one" (The Real Jesus).

Jesus taught that this is how the individual disciple should live in the community. So full and fair judgement will have to await the final Judgment Day – the Day of God's wrath or the wrath of God's agent whom God has appointed in this present age (as the Apostle Paul taught as we shall see) or by some circumstances that God permits as discipline or judgment in this present life.

Apostolic teaching on the State

But what does the New Testament teach about Caesar or the State? Well, Jesus left that to his Apostles. So we turn to them for more precise teaching about "Caesar's" sphere or realm. Paul has done that for us in Romans, John has done so in the book of Revelation and we've already heard some words from Peter.

With regard to Paul, I've found Nicholas Wolterstorff's article Theological Foundations for an Evangelical Political Philosophy the most helpful way of looking at Paul and the biblical material. What follows owes much to him.

So what is the apostolic teaching?

The basic lesson is the goal of government. For a simple statement we go to Peter (1 Peter 2.14): it is …

… to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.

Paul and Romans 12.19-13.7

However, the first lesson from Paul we need to note from Romans 12.19-13.7 - the foremost passage in the Bible on the state, is about the relation of God to that goal of government, namely that God himself has instituted or appointed governing authorities for punishing evil-doers and praising those who do good:

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God" (Romans 13.1).

So, two, not only must we be subject to governing authorities, we also must not think of them as some purely human creation, nor the work of the devil, but the work of God.

And, three, being subject to the government is not only because of governmental power ['wrath' or meting out of punishment] but because of conscience [suneidësis] (Romans 13.5):

Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath [orgë] [which the government is exercising on behalf of God] but also for the sake of conscience.

As Nicholas Wolterstorff says, therefore, …

… doing right is not just the prudential thing to do. For we are to 'honour' the authorities which is quite different from merely fearing them.

So there is an absolute moral law, not just human utilitarian agreement.

Therefore, four, honour is needed. Peter also says "honour the emperor" (1 Peter 2.17). It is not just Paul in Romans 13.7: "honour to whom honour is owed [referring to the authorities]." Interestingly, the Greek word used [timaõ] is the very word that Paul uses in Ephesians 6.2 where he tells children to "honour your father and mother."

Government that is evil

But, of course, you have to put alongside all that what John reports in Revelation 13. For John reminds us that government, as all else in the world, is fallen and sinful – the major problem. So governments may become demonic and praise the evil and punish the good. Revelation 13 features a beast which most see as symbolizing Rome at a time of widespread persecution – perhaps under Nero (54–68 AD) or under Domitian (81-96 AD).

And the beast puts itself in the place of God to be worshipped. Then a second beast acts on behalf of the first beast making …

… the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast" (verse 12).

There are then killings of those who don't worship the first beast; and after causing everyone to be bodily marked with its mark – the number 666 - the second beast orders that nobody without the mark be allowed to buy and sell.

Now, of course, Paul and John didn't start their thinking from zero. Paul certainly knew his Old Testament and he directly quotes from it in the epistle to the Romans.

The Old Testament vital still

Key for Paul in Romans 12.10 and 19 was Leviticus 19.17-18 with God speaking:

You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbour, lest you incur sin because of him. You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Lord.

Then Paul quotes directly in Romans 12.19, Deuteronomy 32.35, again with God speaking:

Vengeance is mine, and recompense [the LXX reads, 'I will repay'].

And that is followed in Romans 12.20, by Proverbs 25.21-22:

"If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat,
and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink,
for you will heap burning coals on his head."

So the Old Testament, in those readings, reveals God as a God of both love and justice.

Primary and Secondary Justice

And Wolterstorff helpfully reminds us that justice, of course, has two forms – primary and secondary justice.

When someone does something wrong, secondary justice (also called – 'corrective justice') makes sure the various parties in an offence get what is their due - punishment for the wrong doer and vindication for the person wronged. But such justice depends on primary justice. For an unjust action is a transgression against the demands of primary justice.

But both need to be "just" or fair - secondary justice (the judging) and, of course, primary justice (the law that determines judgment with punishment or vindication).

So if the judge is to be executing God's judgment in God's place, primary justice needs to be in line with God's law.

But how is any of that possible for people outside God's own people?

For God does render judgment not just for his own people – so in the Old Testament, not only for Israel and Judah, but also for the surrounding nations as well.

The Judgment of God not only for the Jews

The opening chapters of Amos couldn't be clearer. The prophet, speaking on behalf of God, pronounces sentence on Damascus, Gaza, Tyre, Edom, Ammon and Moab.

For example, here is the judgment on Damascus:

Thus says the Lord:For three transgressions of Damascus,and for four, I will not revoke the punishment,because they have threshed Gilead,with threshing sledges of iron'.

Then having denounced judgment on six of the neighbouring states, the prophet turns to Judah first and then Israel. The denunciation of Israel is far the longest. For they sin in spite of God having been good to Israel - he had delivered them from slavery in Egypt (see Amos 2.10-11). And Judah has known God's law – his Torah - but then rejected it – Amos 2.4:

Thus says the Lord:For three transgressions of Judah,and for four, I will not revoke the punishment,because they have rejected the law of the Lord,and have not kept his statutes'.

But notice, the fact that God renders judgment on the surrounding powers implies that even without the Law of God those nations knew, or could have known, what God's justice required.

The reality of Natural Law

Amos does not explain, but Paul does in Romans. Speaking of Christ's final judgment day, he says – Romans 2.12:

all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.

Clearly by "law" Paul means the Old Testament law. But he continues in verse 14:

… when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

This is the biblical basis for the idea of natural law. Though the Gentiles don't have God's law as such, nevertheless, it has been written on their hearts; their consciences witnessing to it. So God's judgment is good and fair regarding these pagan countries, for they knew better or could have done.

The agents of God's justice

Another important fact, seen in Romans 13 and the Old Testament is regarding the agents of God's justice. It is mediated by human beings and human institutions. On the one hand, in the Old Testament, prophets declared God's law, but, on the other hand, God's judgment was carried out by judges and rulers. Prophets were not authorized to carry out sentence as rulers were. In Deuteronomy, God is reported as telling Israel – Deuteronomy 16.18 - to "appoint judges and officers … [to] judge the people with righteous judgement." And such rulers and judges were seen as rendering judgment on behalf of God. So accordingly Psalm 72.1-2 is said to be a prayer for Solomon:

Give the king your justice, O God,and your righteousness to the royal son!May he judge your people with righteousness,and your poor with justice.

So the task of the ruling authorities is to mediate God's judgment. That is what they been appointed for. They are God's deacons (the word translated "servant" in verse 4). They are to approve those who do right and subject the wrongdoer to wrath [orgë]. This applied then to Nero and Domitian (and Trajan) and today to Johnson and Trump. But also it is imperative that the successors to the prophets, pastors and teachers in churches, today especially, communicate God's law to the governing authorities without getting involved in judgments and certainly not being vengeful. For their witness to biblical special revelation is clearer than the intuitive general revelation many politicians have. Paul himself is a great example of such witness. But we all may have opportunities. In times of opposition Jesus said: "you will be brought before kings and governors for my name's sake. This will be your opportunity to bear witness." (Luke 21.12-13). And, of course, if the leaders of the Church were told they should not take it upon themselves to execute vengeance (as indeed they were), of course, Paul includes the church members in his probation, they too are not to avenge [ekdikeõ] themselves and execute vengeance. They are to leave such execution of wrath to God. Rather they are to give even their enemies, the ones who have wronged them, food and drink.

The positive value of Government

But does government only have a judicial function? No! of course not. Paul and 1 Peter assume a legislative function – no laws, no judges! And, therefore, the laws themselves must be just. Old Testament prophet bewails unjust judges and unjust laws.

Also by function of the sanctions a just system of law not only discourages but also encourages. It is a guide toward just action. It has an educative function.

And that relates to one final point. There has been a debate among Christian thinkers whether government in God's order of things is simply "a remedy for sin". Put another way. Is it pre or post the Fall? Luther said, "Yes – it is just a remedy for sin." Calvin (and in practice the Church of England) said, "No! It is pre-Fall." For a just system of law not only inhibits sinful actions, in its educative function it instructs us in what justice requires – and reminds us when we are forgetful. On this understanding properly functioning government is part of God's providential care for us as finite, limited creatures, not just as fallen sinful creatures.

Calvin, surely, was right, For before the Fall there were "laws" in the Garden of Eden, on the one hand, of prohibition and permission regarding the trees! And, on the other hand, there was a law requiring population growth and husbandry. If so, Governments, aware of the dangers, are positively to seek human flourishing and the common good. That is where the churches' pastors and teachers should be faithful in their prophetic duty helping Governments to see what is truly for the common good; otherwise, evil can parade as good. So …

Wolterstorff's summary

"Government represents a blend of God's providential care of his creation as created, and of God's providential care of his creation as fallen. To which must be added the point, already made … that government today is itself fallen."