Church and State
According to the student (me), the Church and State are
inseparable because the Gospel is not only in the church but also outside
social work. God has given us a different gift which is to serve Him alone. The
different does not mean that “you are higher or below than me” it is the roles
of our job. The Church has to be satisfied in participating the Christian
individuals´ contribution to the society. In Myanmar, the state just recognizes
the Church as a minority alien society which is subject to the State in any
circumstances. Thus, the government does not pay much attention to the Church
except for organizing the political unity. They used to attend the important
celebrations or occasions from the Church and they have been quoting Romans
13:1 “to be submissive to the government,” in their speeches.
In Myanmar, the situation of the Church under the totalitarian government in the context of Church and State relationship. One of the characteristics of the Baptist tradition in Myanmar is the separation between politics and religion, and it may become an excuse for the Church to refrain from politics. I believe that Church and state should not be separated from each other because the Church could not avoid those who discriminate from social standard and who are not accepted as a member due to their lack of money. Myanmar leaders need to be more sensitive to social issues. The big sadness of the Church in Myanmar is that it is just Church oriented. The Church must recover the good news to the poor at the heart of the gospel. It must become part of the praxis of liberation.
Niebuhr mentioned: "Our effort in the Church is directed toward understanding the Christian manner, way, and style of life. We are not trying to defend or to recommend, but only to understand it as best we can. That is why it is important to distinguish between the responsibility of individual Christians and voluntary groups, and the responsibility of the Church as a community of faith" (Niebuhr, 1963: 161).
In Myanmar, the situation of the Church under the totalitarian government in the context of Church and State relationship. One of the characteristics of the Baptist tradition in Myanmar is the separation between politics and religion, and it may become an excuse for the Church to refrain from politics. I believe that Church and state should not be separated from each other because the Church could not avoid those who discriminate from social standard and who are not accepted as a member due to their lack of money. Myanmar leaders need to be more sensitive to social issues. The big sadness of the Church in Myanmar is that it is just Church oriented. The Church must recover the good news to the poor at the heart of the gospel. It must become part of the praxis of liberation.
Niebuhr mentioned: "Our effort in the Church is directed toward understanding the Christian manner, way, and style of life. We are not trying to defend or to recommend, but only to understand it as best we can. That is why it is important to distinguish between the responsibility of individual Christians and voluntary groups, and the responsibility of the Church as a community of faith" (Niebuhr, 1963: 161).
Biblically, it is the most appropriate text that
describes the relationship between the Church and State. The Church has to
submit the state. However, according to the historical evidence and present
situation, the Myanmar government cannot be identified as fair and just
government. They rule the country only for the benefit of the military junta
and human rights are violated and people are persecuted. Nevertheless, the
Church have to support and respect the State not because it is the supreme
authority but because it is God´s creation and property. If the government is
the creation and the property of God, it should have godly character and
admiration. If they do not have a godly demeanor, it automatically means that
they are alien to God. This can imply we only need to submit to the godly
government.
Berggrav
tried to insert his understanding of the just state which is seemed to be as
follows:
1)
The just state is under the sovereignty of God to carry out the just and
goodness for the people.
2)
The just state is limited in authority temporally and does not interfere with
the province of souls which is only concerned to God.
3) The just state’s power is only
for carrying out its duty to create order, justice, and peace.
4) The just state can
differentiate good and evil and choose to act justice. [1]
Based on this idea Berggrav does not interpret the
submission to the government in Romans 13 as unconditional. The supreme power
is God alone and state is under God. State must perform the acts that are
consistent to God’s will because God chose the rulers as his instruments to
promote his will and to represent his order. If the state itself is subject to
God and carries out the justice, it will be worthy to receive submission by the
people. The state must be good and constantly be under God’s rule. If the state
lusts for power, it becomes the devil. Thus, the Church´s has a possibility to
disobey the tyrannical government´s ungodly works and to transform the society
in order to be the place where God´s creation is orderly preserved.
Austad claims that,
The
state is an instrument which God uses in order to uphold the world until its
end. It has neither divine nature nor a specific appearance. It does not have
the eschatological quality of the kingdom of God and the gospel. [2]
We can conclude that the state and the Church are
God´s institutions with each respective functions and both are the instruments
of God since Jesus himself recognized the state´s authority and God´s
sovereignty in Matt 22:15-22. Berggrav, thus clearly asserts that the State and
the Church are two orders who are united in the common tasks that are to
promote Love and to oppose Satan and his rule. The two ordinations are
different in domains but not their intention. They are living for the same
purpose that is to do and perform the will of God (that is contrast to satanic
rule): justice, social order and social peace.
Gutierrez says, “To know God means to do justice.”[3]
The church needs to stand for justice. It is the duty of the Church to fight
for the justice. The Church must do this not because of the Church’s supreme
over the state but because it is called for God. Justice is not only concerned
with relationship of the individual to individual but it is also concerned with
the relationship of the individual to the community as a whole. Everyone can
and must get involved in it. Christ did not come to build the Church but the
Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is where justice is realized as the substance
of the life of Christians. However, the Church is the center in which God’s
people are working together to continue the mission of Christ to carry justice
into the public arena. The life of Christians should not be caged in the church
only; it should be inside-out for the world.
By: Victor Aung Thu Lin
Comments
Post a Comment