As Christians wrestle with the rise of the Islamic State with its blending of political and religious elements, and aware that something similar happened in the days of Christendom, it is wise to remember there is a key distinction between the church and the state. This distinction has been recognized for centuries, even within medieval Roman Catholic theology and practice. We can also find something analogous in the Mosaic era of the Old Testament. The law of Moses distinguishes judges, kings, prophets, and priests. It sets out distinctive roles and responsibilities for judges and kings, who are responsible for public justice (Ex. 18:13–27; Deut. 16:18–20; 17:14–20); they are thus analogous to modern officers of the state. The priests and Levites are responsible to care for holy things and to instruct people in God’s law (Lev. 6:8; 21–22; Numbers 3–4; 8; Neh. 8:1–8; Mal. 2:6–9); they are thus analogous to the church.

Old Testament Analogies Are Not Identities

But the analogies with the Old Testament are indeed analogies rather than identities, because Israel as a whole people was the people of God, a holy nation, distinct from all other nations (Ex.19:5–6). Its distinctive character as a holy nation was a shadow and foretaste of the holiness of Christ and the holiness of his church. Christ is now our Great High Priest. He has made obsolete the Aaronic priesthood of the Old Testament (Heb. 7–10). Christians have direct access to God through his mediation, not the mediation of earthly priests (Heb. 10:19–22). Thus, it is a mistake to think of New Testament pastors as priestly mediators for an unqualified laity. The laity themselves are now all priests (1 Pet. 2:5; Rev. 1:6; 5:10) through the great high priesthood of Christ.

God alone has ultimate authority to specify what falls within the state’s responsibilities.

You yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Pet. 2:5)

To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. (Rev.1:5–6)

And you [Christ the Lamb of God] have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth. (Rev. 5:10)

In the end, everything depends on just how one understands the distinction between church and state. There are many views. They involve, among other things, how one understands the distinctive, limited powers that God has delegated to the authorities who are officers in the church versus officers in the state.

Scripture Limits the Authority of Church and State

Appalling consequences have ensued when the state has interfered with the affairs of the church, and vice versa. The most notorious evil consists in the persecution of people judged to be heretics. In late-medieval times, judgments of heresies were sometimes in the hands of state authorities, or in the hands of church commissions (the Inquisition), or both. If the heretics did not recant, the state imposed on them bodily punishment (including death). In our day, severe abuses of power occur in some modern Islamic states. Governments suppress Christian worship and evangelism, and forbid people who are classified as Muslims from professing faith in Christ.

Such measures for allegedly protecting true religion are not only disastrous in practice but unjust. But to reach this conclusion, we must reflect on the power and the limits of the state, as revealed in Scripture. God alone has ultimate authority to specify what falls within the state’s responsibilities. European history has seen its share of appalling consequences of state interference with the church. In many cases, officers of the state or nobles or patrons have had the privilege of appointing people to ecclesiastical office. And that practice has corrupted the church. Whether state interferes with church or church with state, the people involved may claim they are serving Christ. But they are mistaken. And the appalling consequences bring disgrace on the name of Christ.

It is also important to note the limited authority that God has given to the elders of the church. The elders are the officers appointed to rule over the church on behalf of Christ, the great Shepherd. They have a God-given responsibility to “shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight” (1 Pet. 5:2). But they have authority only to call on the sheep to believe and do what Scripture teaches. It is not their responsibility to give pronouncements that go beyond the teaching of Scripture. Scripture criticizes people who in the name of religion add extra rules for people to follow, supposedly for their religious benefit:

And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,
‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;
in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’
You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition
of men.” And he said to them, “You have a fine way of
rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your
tradition!” (Mark 7:6–9)

If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world,
why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to
regulations—“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch”
(referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according
to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an
appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and
asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in
stopping the indulgence of the flesh. (Col. 2:20–23)

People in the church, and especially officers in the church, need to take these warnings to heart. We must beware of adding to Scripture “human precepts and teachings” (Col. 2:22) that claim to bring spiritual advantages. In reality, they are “of no value” (v. 23). These are steps that we must avoid. But we must also pay attention to what are the positive roles of church officers. The apostle Paul defines the task of the church positively in his discussion with the elders of the Ephesian church: “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24). “I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27).

Conflicts will decrease only to the extent that both church and state submit to the rule of Christ.

The church has the task of declaring the gospel and, more broadly, communicating the Scripture, which is summed up in the expression “the whole counsel of God.” It also has the responsibility of discipling its members and disciplining any who fall into sin (1 Corinthians 5).

In our day, as mentioned under the trap of “politicizing”, the officers of the church can be tempted to make all kinds of pronouncements about political affairs—not just pronouncements about moral principles that are clearly taught in Scripture, but “meddling” pronouncements beyond the competence and authority of the church officers. Christian citizens may serve the Lord by voting or by being involved in political organizations or by being appointed as officers in civil government. But such service is not part of the responsibility of elders in their function as elders of the church.

Church and State Are Not the Only Authorities

We also need to remember that other institutions exist alongside the church and the state. Church and state are not the only authority structures that God has established. There are many spheres of human interaction. In addition to churches, there are institutions of false religion, such as temples, mosques, and “churches” that are churches only in name. There are economic institutions, educational institutions, and institutions for sports.

To be sure, historically the church and state and their relations with one another have proved to be the source of many tensions and fights. It is not hard to see why. People who are fond of the state are tempted to claim for the state unbounded and unlimited authority over everything else.

And people who belong to the church must proclaim the universal rule of Christ. Because of his rule, the state is responsible to obey Christ, and to submit to his standards of justice. The state is not a god on earth. Christ is the ultimate Lord, not Caesar. Conflicts will decrease only to the extent that both church and state submit to the rule of Christ the Lord and both reckon seriously with the limited authority that God has given to each kind of officer.

That said, it is still important to remind ourselves of the many institutions to which God has given responsibilities of various kinds. If we think only in terms of two—church and state—we unwittingly create a situation in which the state is tempted to take over as much as it can, gradually dominating more and more over every other institution except the church. And then it is all too easy for it to take the final step and crush the church, because the state has already come to regard itself as god on earth in every other way.

This piece is adapted from Vern Poythress, The Lordship of Christ (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2015), 179–84. Used with permission of the publisher.

Read More On Church and State, government, public theology

Share This