Church and State

I have noted before that we have seen in history how church and politics do not mix, and when they do, it's never good.

It started very early in the church's history.

In 325 AD, Constantine became emperor over the entire Roman empire. His rise to power was bloody and not without its controversies. The Christians in the empire were by large, thrilled. It was Constantine who had ended the violent persecution of Christians. He even used military force to defend them.  They saw him as the "defender of the true faith" and "the emperor who God loves"*. 

Like many emperors before him, Constantine was determined to restore the ancient glory of Rome. Previous emperors had gone about this by enforcing the worship of the ancient gods - hence the persecution of Christians, who held fast to their faith in the One True God. Constantine took a different approach and decided to restore Rome on the basis of Christianity.

There is much debate over whether or not Constantine was a Christian himself, or if he merely called himself one in order to win support of the Christians within the Empire. He never put himself under the authority of a Christian teacher or bishop, he was never baptized, and he had a tendency to interfere with religious services. It is quite likely his alliance with Christianity was a political, rather than faith-based, move.

During his leadership, Constantine also continued to worship pagan gods, as though trying to cover all the bases. Yet despite his very public actions in worshipping other gods, he was never condemned by Christian leaders, who continued to support him because of the privilege and comfort he offered them. Constantine also appointed some of those leaders into government positions, giving them power, wealth, and influence.

The church had been strong and growing throughout the years of persecution, but under the safety Constantine provided, they became increasingly lax in their faith. Syncretism (the mixing of other religious beliefs with Christian beliefs) and superstition grew within the church. Membership was increasing, but many of the members joined because they believed it pleased the Emperor, not because they were seeking God. These members were Christian in name, but they still held on to their pagan beliefs and rituals as well. 

Before Constantine, most Christian worship services were small meetings of people in homes or cemeteries. During the time of Constantine, imperial policies and protocols began to influence the church. They incorporated practices which were used to show respect to the Emperor in their services - things like burning incense, kneeling to pray, wearing special priestly garbs, and selling religious relics with "miraculous powers". They also began building big, beautiful and ornate church buildings as centers of worship.

Prior to Constantine, there was vast persecution, and people were tortured and killed for their faith, it's true. But the Christian community was for the most part unified, strong, and committed. Under the freedoms Constantine allowed them, they became lazy and distracted, and their theology and doctrines blurred with that of the pagan world around them. They became comfortable. They were wooed by power and privilege, and it corrupted their witness. There were more "Christians", but most were only culturally Christian, much perhaps like Constantine himself, not truly committed to living like Jesus or worshipping the One True God.

Any of this sound familiar? It should. I almost don't feel like I even need to make a contemporary application here. It seems pretty clear.

Christians who believed they needed protection from the government, rather than relying on God?

An emperor committed to worship of self and false gods, while calling himself "Christian" to gain the people's favor? An emperor who Christian leaders not only refused to call out for his objectionable behavior, but even approved of it as long as he kept protecting them?

Christians selling out for comfort and privilege, striving after governmental power?

People being Christian in name only, and not knowing anything about Christ or the life He calls us to?

Relaxed doctrine and a decline in a commitment to truth?

Mixing Christianity with nationalism and pride of the empire (or country)?

This is why they say, if you don't learn your history, you are doomed to repeat it.

State-supported religion nearly killed the church. In Europe, where state-supported religion is common, and where even the queen of England is seen as the "defender of faith", Christianity is fading. Where Christianity is banned and under persecution, however, it is growing. There is something about being under fire that brings out true faith. 

The pilgrims came here to escape state-established religion. And yet here we are in America, a few hundred years later, trying to institute it. Don’t we realize how damaging that is to the faith? Christianity was never meant to be a state religion. Nowhere in Scripture does it tell us to establish a Christian nation. We are not Israel. We are not the chosen people. The promises of God's covenant with Israel in the Old Testament do not apply to us.

Rather, we are to be a community of believers known by our love and service to others. If we truly want change to come in our country, that is what we should be working towards.

* The majority of this history comes from Justo Gonzalez' excellent book, "The Story of Christianity: Volume I".