Acts 25:11 “If then I am a
wrongdoer and have committed anything for which I deserve to die, I do not seek
to escape death. But if there is nothing to their charges against me, no one
can give me up to them. I appeal to Caesar”.
Having noted that the Old
Testament suggests a division of labor between the church and state, and having
seen that the New Testament explicitly gives the use of the sword to the state,
it is now time for us to consider the church-state relationship more closely. To
be sure, this can be a complicated issue, but there are conclusions we can draw
based on the New Testament’s division of labor and how the Apostles interacted
with the pagan state of Rome.
The Westminster Confession
of Faith of 1847 tells us, “It is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the
church of our common Lord, without giving the preference to any denomination of
Christians above the rest, in such a manner that all ecclesiastical persons
whatever shall enjoy the full, free, and unquestioned liberty of discharging
every part of their sacred functions, without violence or danger”. Here we find
a logical conclusion from the state’s duty to bear the sword, for if the state
is to punish evildoers, our churches may reasonably expect the state to respond
when thieves, slanderers, murderers, and others attack churches and Christians.
In other words, it is not wrong for the church to appeal to the state in
matters of common justice. Within the church, however, 1 Corinthians 6:1–8
states that Christians should strive to settle disagreements between one
another without involving the state insofar as their arguments do not involve
matters related to civic crimes and the common good. That Christians may
legitimately appeal to the state for protection and for justice is seen in Acts
25:1–12, where Paul exercises his right as a Roman citizen to appeal to the
emperor to hear his case. Of course, any time we appeal to the state, we risk
the state’s getting too involved in religious matters, so we must be wise in our
dealings with the civil magistrate. Still, the state does have as its duty the
protection of all its citizens, even the church and its members.
The state should not prefer
one denomination of Christians above others. There should be no
state-established and state-run church, for this would violate the church-state
division of labor. Christ gives to the church alone the power to discipline, to
bind and loose in spiritual matters. A state that prefers one denomination over
another has made a theological judgment it is not called to make. America’s
Founders strongly believed that there should be no national church
denomination, as they had experienced in England.
The phrase “separation of
Church and State” cannot be found in the Constitution or the Declaration of
Independence. In fact, it is not found in any of our nation’s founding
documents. Related to government, the phrase first appeared in a letter written
by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut in 1801.The
Danbury Baptists wrote Thomas Jefferson expressing their concern that the
government might try to regulate their religious expression. In response,
Jefferson wrote his now famous letter, using the phrase “Separation of Church
and State” to reassure the Danbury Baptists that the First Amendment prohibited
the government from trying to control religious expression. In short, the First
Amendment was intended to keep government out of regulating religion, but it did
not keep religion out of government or the public square. They codified this
belief in the First Amendment, keeping the federal government out of the
affairs of the church, and of its members. But in recent decades, this idea has
been twisted into the so-called “separation of church and state,” a phrase that
appears nowhere in the United States Constitution. Anytime you hear the
concept of the separation of church and state being talked about these days, it
is never in regard to maintaining the restraints on government; instead, it is
always talking about what Christians and churches cannot do.
No comments:
Post a Comment