Ways to Govern Society 1: Theocracy

A blip in the philosophy textbook saga...

13.1 Ways to Govern Society
If we look at societies from the standpoint of who is in charge, certain basic options emerge to structure the governance of a group of people. We can find examples of each option in history, as well as of "philosophers" who have favored each option. Over the years different societies have learned to combine these options to maximize the benefits of each.

A very old option, and one that we see in play in various parts of the world today, is that of a theocracy. In a theocracy, God or gods are said to rule. We like to think of ancient Israel as somewhat of a theocracy from Moses to the time Israel got a king. John Calvin ran the city of Geneva in the 1500's something like a theocracy. When Muslim groups strive to bring their countries under sharia law, they are striving toward a relatively theocratic form of governance.

The problem with a theocracy, of course, is that the gods rarely came down to govern in person in ancient India, and we find no record of a theophany in Calvin's Geneva. Theocracies almost always turn out to be rule by priests or by central religious figures. All scriptures have to be interpreted by someone, and issues always arise that such scriptures do not address. Rule by God or gods thus usually turns out to be rule by one or by a few.

The question of a theocracy does, however, raise important issues for Christians to consider as they participate or decide not to participate in the governance of their countries. To what extent should Christians strive to make the laws of their lands a mirror of their Christian understanding? The same question applies similarly to Muslims today. To what extent should predominantly Muslim countries enact laws based on the Qu'ran?

H. Richard Niebuhr, in his book Christ and Culture, famously suggested five basic ways in which Christianity has related to its surrounding culture throughout history.

1. Christ against Culture
In this model, Christianity sees itself in hostile conflict with the secular culture around it. From an aggressive perspective, the goal might be to eliminate the secular and make the world conform to Christianity. Alternatively, this approach might lead a group to remove itself from the broader culture and isolate itself. Christ and culture are seen as adversaries.

2. Christ of Culture
At other times, Christianity has seen the progress of culture as the unfolding of God's will in the world. Accordingly, cultural developments are Christian developments and so the movement of secular culture is the movement of God. In this model the distinctiveness of Christian faith blurs into the broader worldview of the host culture. Classical Christian liberalism might illustrate this approach.

3. Christ above Culture
This perspective synthesizes culture with Christianity and is best illustrated today by the difficulty some people have of distinguishing things like patriotism from Christianity. The fact that many American churches have American flags on their pulpits is often a hint that a congregation has difficulty distinguishing nationalism or a certain secular political party from Christian faith.

4. Christ and Culture in Paradox
Some Christians have found it difficult to reconcile their Christian beliefs with their participation in secular culture, but they have participated in that broader culture nonetheless by thinking and acting one way in the secular realm and another way in the church. They may recognize that these two ways of thinking and acting are incompatible, but consign this paradox to the time before God sets all things aright.

5. Christ Transforming Culture
This is the conversionist approach to culture that does not eliminate pagan culture but seeks to win it over to Christ, to convert it. It accepts the distinction between Christ and culture but strives to see the culture won over to Christ.

Your sense of which of these options best fits with a Christian approach to culture will depend heavily on your particular theological tradition. For example, the Lutheran tradition functions largely within the fourth model where Christ and culture are two irreconcilable realities that will exist side by side until the end, two kingdoms coexisting next to each other. Even the life of an individual Christian for Luther was "at the same time sinner and righteous, as long as one is always repenting." In a way, a person belongs to both kingdoms at the same time.

The Calvinist model has generally viewed secular culture as something to be taken over for Christ. In Puritan New England, for example, the entire culture was expected to conform to the Christian understanding of its leaders. The Calvinist tradition emphasizes God's sovereignty to the exclusion of human freedom and so understandably tends to be oriented around crushing actions and beliefs that do not conform to its understanding of God's will.

Other traditions, such as the Arminian one in which this book stands, believe that God in His sovereignty has made it possible for humans on this earth to decide whether to serve Him or not. He will eventually reward and punish in relation to such choices, but in this world He has more often than not "given over" the world to the consequences of its choices (Rom. 1). It thus would lean to Niebuhr's fifth option, with an emphasis on winning the world over to Christ rather than forcing the world to conform, conforming to the world, confusing the church with the world, or isolating oneself from the world.