“9-1-1, what is the nature of your emergency?” is the standard question when the emergency services operator answers your call for help. This phone call has the potential to unleash the power of the state in response to a diverse array of natural and man-caused disasters. The person on the other end has to digest the panic-driven information you give and send the appropriate authority.
“Yes…. I need help…”
“Go ahead, sir, what kind of help do you need?”
“I need the police… there’s been a… disturbance…”
“What kind of a disturbance, sir?”
The sensitive recording devices pick up the minute nuances of your tense breathing, ragged as you seek the words to describe in concise and exact detail the breach of public peace.
“It’s …. it’s….a dispute about theology…”
You can feel the deflation and confusion on the part of the operator. Poised to unleash the helping hands of the ambulance and the pacifying presence of the police department, no button exists to summon the doctors of theology to settle this manner of conflict.
While our modern world disconnects the exercise of church and civil authority, John Calvin’s world did not. Disputes over theology regularly boiled over into the realm of governmental authority as no real line separates church and state. Everyone was involved in the theological and political climate of the day and disagreeing with John Calvin publicly was, well, a bad idea.
Jerome Bolsec publicly disagreed with Calvin over the issue of predestination, identifying a dark side to the doctrine that makes God the author of evil. Whatever one’s opinion of the matter, what punishment should this man have received? This doctrine begs for controversy, even among the most zombie-fied bodies of churchgoers. Perhaps a sharp rebuke in public or a special business meeting of the church body addressing the wayward soul in fervent hopes of restoration? No such thing! In this case, Bolsec received a warning, but remained unrepentant. His arrest followed and he spent over a month in prison before being banished from Geneva. Seemingly harsh, at least he avoided execution; comparatively rare in Geneva, but a possible option in the sixteenth century. The tight connection between religious and civic life in Calvin’s world morphs into our post-modern abandonment of religious influence in public life.
Disconnecting religion and civic life creates a void in our discussion of public policy issues. Religion informs our total worldview, and our public discourse desperately needs a secure ethical (and perhaps even epistemological) foundation. But perhaps the relationship should only move one way: from religion to public life, with limited interference the other way. This allows the best of religion to inform public life and keep some of us out of jail.
“Sir, hang on… I’ve got the police coming out now… “
The tight connection between religion and state is something that has continued to impress me as I am teaching Church history this semester. Ever since Constantine signed the Edict of Milan and legalized Christianity, there has been this unbreakable connection between the two. When we read about wars and state squabbles occurring in the Middle Ages over religious issues, it is hard for our American mind to grasp the tightness of the connection. We are used to religion and politics being separate.
ReplyDeleteI like how your phrased a solution. Religion must inform politics, but it does not seem to work well the other way around.
I'm reading through some of your archives as I just stumbled onto your blog this morning. I also like the idea of religion informing politics up a one-way street. I have been reading Kuiper's The Church in History and it seems that Augustine inspired a tendancy in church leaders to over-reach with his City of God. So many sought to bring this to a reality (Constatine, Charlamagne, Nicholas I, Gregory VII) How does the church achieve the right measure of influence on politics; the balance between being silent and total domination? I think your blog and the topics you discuss is a good example of how the church can begin to regain a voice, and move from silence into conversant.
ReplyDeleteTaking a course on Calvin was very helpful for understanding the history of the church in relation to the state. For Calvin, and the larger 16th century culture, there was no separation of church and state and no concept of a pluralistic society in which multiple religions coexist. For them, the state and church (narrowly defined as a particular sect of Christianity) worked together to enforce morality and conformity to religion.
ReplyDeleteThis doesn't translate well into our time, even though some movements want more religious influence in the state. The problem comes when your religion is at odds with the state. Think of the persecution of Christianity under Islam. A good compromise comes when individuals are informed by religion (ideally by a restored relationship to Christ) and then participate in the political process. In the United States, for example, Christians should work for an environment of political stability and economic prosperity for all people. The state should not favor any particular religion, allowing the free exercise of all. Perhaps this is the environment envisioned in 1 Timothy 2:1-2.