Article 23: The Church's Relation to Government and Society - being a holy nation within the whole nation

I must be honest about my own lack of clarity in regard to the application of the teaching we receive as we come to Article 23: The Church's Relation to Government and Society. With many of these articles, I recognize that I still have a lot to learn about what scripture teaches us and much to discern about how best to apply these truths to life. Yet I find myself wrestling with these realities more so on this article than on any other one we have covered. I think that this may be primarily for two reasons. First even among faithful Mennonites, there is significant variance in opinion about how best to apply these understandings. Second, it seems to me that scripture and the article itself set us up for a very difficult "both/and" juggling act.

Varied Opinions

Historically, Anabaptist-Mennonites have tended to have a "you leave us alone/we'll leave you alone," isolationist approach to government. Of course, in the beginning, the government worked with the state church to persecute, torture and kill the Anabaptists. This required an isolationist approach to government simply to survive. Later there were several instances in which governments would provide land to Anabaptists that no one else wanted and was thus unproductive in exchange for the "freedom" to live life the way they wanted to and to be left alone. For a time this served as a "win-win" situation, but invariably this broke down at some point for one reason or another and was also counter to the nurture of an Anabaptist evangelistic approach to faith.

Today, we carry that heritage with us and yet we find ourselves in the midst of a very different system of government in the United States. Here we are not under the protection of a dictator who has sole authority but of a democracy, a system of government which inherently (when functioning in a healthy way) invites and even expects us to participate. And yet with that comes the inherent dangers of any government:
- Do we put our ultimate trust in God or government for our protection and provision?
- Do we put our ultimate allegiance in God or government when they call us to opposing realities?
- Do we use our resources of time and money to further the reign of God or the reign of our government?

This plays out in many different ways and often times each Mennonite and sometimes each community of Mennonites chooses for him, her, or their selves. For instance, should we vote? Some do and some don't. Do we pay the portion of our taxes that supports the military? Some do and some don't. Do we serve in political offices? Some do and some don't. Do we lobby the government about policy decisions? Some do and some don't. Our denominational delegate assembly at Charlotte 2005 even included a discussion between John D. Roth and J. Daryl Byler about Speaking to Government and whether we should or shouldn't.

The Article and Scripture

Given all this and the text of our article, it seems to me that we are given a "both/and" juggling act that requires ongoing discernment. On one hand, "the church is the spiritual, social, and political body that gives its allegiance to God alone." On the other hand, "governing authorities of the world have been instituted by God for maintaining order in societies" and "as Christians we are to respect those in authority." This juggling act is reinforced by scriptural teaching as well.

Romans 13:1-7 tells us that we should be subject to our governing authorities because they are established by God and as a matter of conscience. We are to give taxes, revenue, respect and honor. In mainstream Christianity, this is often used as a blanket proof text to say that the government is always right and that we should do whatever the government says. And yet, if it is a matter of conscience, we may sometimes be conflicted about carrying out all that the government demands. This struggle comes into greater focus when we look at the context for these verses and realize that they follow immediately after Romans 12:17-21. Here Paul tells us not to repay evil or evil, to live at peace with everyone and not to take revenge. When the government calls us to act counter to these instructions, we are faced with a "matter of conscience" and forced to choose whom we ultimately follow.

Likewise I Peter 2:9-17 tells us that we should submit ourselves to every human authority including the emperor and governors. In fact, we are to honor the emperor. And yet we also see within this verse that we are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, and holy nation. We are God's special possession and we are to live in such a way that we witness to the pagans and lead them to glorify God. In fact if we would continue reading, we would come to verse 21 which tells us that we should follow in Jesus' footsteps. We should follow the example of Jesus, an example that lived within the bounds of his society, not waging war against it and yet challenging the ruling authorities in their oppressive behaviors. And ultimately while we are to honor the emperor, we are to fear God.

From all of this, it is clear that we are not to be anarchists and yet it seems that there are limits to what we should do in support of the government. For all of this "give and take," in the end perhaps it comes down to the beginning of the article: "We believe that the church is God's 'holy nation,' called to give full allegiance to Christ its head and to witness to all nations about God's saving love." While the claims of this article become very contextual and require ongoing personal and congregational discernment for its application, we are called to being a holy nation within the whole nation.