Classic Anabaptism: Two Kingdoms Theology

By William Higgins

idea of two orders – comes out of the tension between

 the ethics of the sword required to run a worldly government – force, coercion, violence
 and the ethics of Jesus the sermon on the mount – loving enemies and not resisting evildoers

In a Christendom model of Christianity you have to deal with this tension because when church and state are fused together – you have Christians running the State - using the sword – ‘How can this be?’
__________________






Catholics – two realms within one society

 lay realm that can use the lower righteousness the sword
 and the monastic, priestly realm that holds to the way of Jesus
____________________

Luther – two realms in each person’s life

 public realm where you use the sword – if you are in office
 private realm where you are to hold to the way of Jesus


_________________

Anabaptists – two separate realms: the church and the world

The church is a separate social entity from the rest of society which is “the world.”

This is not a Christendom model so they don’t have to be fused together.

 the world lives by the lower standard of the sword (given by God to order the realm “outside the perfection of Christ” as Schleitheim famously says)

 all Christians live by the way of Jesus no matter what position they might have
_____________________

favorite text here - John 18:36 - "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world."

Christendom models try to reduce the tension between the sword and the way of Jesus to allow for Christians to take up the sword
____________________

But for Anabaptists - The two orders cannot be combined, they are different

awkward relationship: Christians are to respect and submit to governments . . . (in as much as this doesn’t require what is contrary to Jesus), but they cannot themselves take part in what involves the ethics of the sword.

some vagueness in the early Dutch here – some saw some possibilities for a Christian to be in government – but this faded over time – in terms of the confessional tradition.
____________________

Note: This is not the same as our Separation of church and state – which seems to mean:

the political part of society is kept separate from the religious part of society, but they are really just two parts of one society – its just best practically, legally to keep them separate

Anabaptist view: The church is a complete social unit – spiritual and political - not the spiritual part of secular or civic society

two halves of a whole // or two separate wholes that coexist in the same place.

church has its own leader – Jesus, elders, own justice system – discipline process etc.
_______________________

Summary: The world lives by the lower standard of the sword. Christians are to live by the standard of the way of Jesus in all situations.

Revolution and Institution

When revolution hits, the world gets turned upside-down.

Nothing remains the same. Every government institution is shut down and replaced with systems that are realigned in accordance with the new rulers. When a government has been in place for a while, institutions are old, with policies that pile up on one another, creating a bureaucracy of injustice that can never be righted. The only thing to do is to scrap the institutions and to begin anew.

Any institution is created to serve people. If it was not intended to do that, then it never would have been created. A war department is created to provide security for the people in a particular nation. A social department is created to help those in need. A Tax department is created to serve those who work for the government—perhaps a small percentage of the population, but it still serves people. However, should an institution and the people within that institution no longer serve people, but the institution itself, then that institution is no longer worth anything.

It must be recognized that any group or institution is only as good as the people working for it. If there are people who really care about others and seek their well being, then all is fine. However, usually, institutions become entities that train people to not care about people, but to care about policies and to maintain the status quo.

This is what had happened to the Temple institution in the first century. The building and maintenance of the Temple had become so huge, that it no longer served people, but the people of the nation were conscripted to serve it. Those who were in charge of the Temple were no longer concerned with doing what they could to help people, but to keep the programs of the Temple continuing. The Temple was a contention-point of national policy and the priests would do all they could to keep it up—they required taxes, created legal loopholes so money could be put into the Temple. The whole structure of the Temple itself was changed, so that it might be maintained, without consideration of the people who were to be connected with God. Salespeople were allowed to sell their goods right where the poor and outcast were to worship.

The Temple was no longer submitted to its true king, God, but it served the interests of its builders—the Herodians--, its maintainers—the priesthood, —and its lords—the Romans. But as for helping the people serve God, it no longer did that successfully.

Rather than being a servant of people to connect them to God, the Temple cult became a block between people and God. A new way was needed to connect with God, a way that the Temple could not provide. A way that people could worship and have God hear them anywhere, not just in one place in the world.

Thus, Jesus determined the Temple needed to be destroyed. And Jesus said that when the Revolution came, it would be.

All institutions are based on the foundational institution of all societies—the family. The family provides the structure and social formation necessary to create citizens and workers. All people work and create social institutions to protect and support their families. Thus are nations created. Nations provide military and economic security so that the family might thrive. However, should nations no longer serve the needs of families, then those structures will fall. Should it no longer provide for the needy, then the nation is no longer a necessary part of life.

In the first century, the nation-province of Judea was not serving families. Rather, Rome used the government of the province to maintain its bloated government and to uphold the wealthy of its government. It moved people around at will and blocked people from their daily work to survive.

Thus, Jesus determined that the nation of Judea must be destroyed.

Every institution is only worthwhile if they recognize the authority that created them and followed the fundamental principles that they were created for.

The Jewish families of the first century were created by God to love each other and to serve God with all of their heart. However, many of these families were only seeking their own greed and power. They were insisting on every member to serve the family, or the leaders of the family, but they did not focus on serving God and dedicating all of their resources to honoring Him and helping the needy, as God established.

Thus, Jesus determined that the family must be destroyed. And his Revolution would destroy it.

The Revolution is not coming to support the institutions that already exist. Most churches that exist now are bloated and focused on self-maintenance, not on serving others. Even the “outreach” that most churches do are simple programs to grow the church, not to meet people’s needs. The United States government is out to serve the interests of the wealthy and its own policies and it doesn’t care who they need to kill or what lies they need to say in order to maintain the status quo. The Christian families are no longer concerned with serving Jesus or obeying him. Rather, they are focused on their own greed and authority in the world.

When the Revolution of Jesus hits, they will all be destroyed.

These institutions will not just be re-formed. They will not just be gutted. They will not just be given new leadership. Revolution transforms society. It rips it apart. Revolution takes all that is known and replaces it with new things.

Apathy will be replaced with love.
Bureaucracies will be replaced with caring people.
Policies will be replaced with trust.
Conservatism will be replaced with radical transformation.
Liberalism will be replaced with strong leadership.
And nothing will be the same.

The State Is Still The State

By David C from Young Anabaptist Radicals:

Yesterday was truly a big day in U.S. history. The inauguration of the first African-American President is truly a turning point for our nation, especially given our abysmal history on race. Moreover, it was encouraging to hear Senator Dianne Feinstein’s reflections on the nonviolence of Martin Luther King, President Obama’s message that we need not choose “between our safety and ideals” and his call to diplomacy and international aid over sheer violent force and military power, and Reverend Joseph Lowery’s prayer that one day we will “beat our tanks into tractors.”
Nevertheless, I had a difficult time getting too emotional or excited over this change of guard. For, while yesterday was historical from the perspective of the United States, it was a pretty small speck when history is viewed rightly. As John Howard Yoder tirelessly argued, the locus of history is not with the state but with God’s work through his church. The state is merely the context in which the real drama of history can unfold.

So, while the words and symbolism of the inauguration may be moving, the sobering fact is that the state is still the state. Yes, Obama seems more intent than Bush on using diplomatic tactics to secure peace, but his message to our “enemy” was still virtually the same: “We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.”

Not much room there for Jesus’s message to love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, and turn the other cheek. But this is as should be expected, because the state is still the state.

Ironically, with this change of guard many us open-minded, progressive Christians will begin to forget that the state is still the state. We will start to put our faith in the ideals of the state and our hope in its progress. As blogger Halden recently argued, now more than ever is it imperative (though difficult) to be resolute in our anti-empire polemics. It was far too easy to maintain a prophetic witness to the state when those in charge overtly sanctioned military aggression, torture, and seemingly unbridled increase of personal power. But when those in power seem to share many of our ideals, the temptation will be to give them a pass when they deem military violence necessary in this or that situation. And it will be difficult for us to make the unfashionable charge that those in power sanction the unjust extermination of the least of those among us. Indeed, to increase the irony still further, it may be the conservative Christians who begin to recognize with more clarity the separation between church and state (as many of my students, for example, ponder whether or not Obama is the anti-Christ!). They will now be the ones to speak prophetically, though their witness will be narrow and tainted by their continual use of political means to grasp for power.

It as at this time, perhaps more than any other, that we need to heed Yoder’s exhortation to what he calls “evangelical nonconformity,” quoted here at length:


When then Jesus said to His disciples, “In the world, kings lord it over their subjects . . . Not so with you”; He was not beckoning His followers to a legalistic withdrawal from society out of concern for moral purity. Rather, His call was to an active missionary presence within society, a source of healing and creativity because it would take the pattern of his own suffering servanthood.

Jesus thereby unmasks the pretension to use violence for the good as being a form of hypocrisy: these rulers call themselves “benefactors” but they are not servants. He who would claim to have the right to use violence, and especially legal violence, against another, places himself outside of the scope of Jesus’ mode of servanthood. This is not so much because he sins against the letter of the law from the Old Testament or the New but because he claims (with a pride intrinsic to his position) to have the right — (whether on the basis of official status, of superior insight, or of his moral qualities) — to determine in a definitive way the destiny of others. The older language in which the theme of “conformity to this world” was stated in Bible times had to do with “idols,” with those unworthy objects of devotion to whom men in their blindness sacrificed. Thus it is quite fitting to describe the use of violence as the outworking of an idolatry. If I take the life of another, I am saying that I am devoted to another value, one other than the neighbor himself, and other than Jesus Christ Himself, to which I sacrifice my neighbor. I have thereby made a given nation, social philosophy, or party my idol. To it I am ready to sacrifice not only something of my own, but also the lives of my fellow human beings for whom Christ gave His life.

- John Howard Yoder, “Christ, the Hope of the World” in The Original Revolution: Essays on Christian Pacifism, 174-75

In this time of celebration, may we not forget that the state is still the state. And we are still called to be the church.

Welcoming: Transfoming Culture 2

Jesus told the disciples another story: "God's utopia is like a mustard seed, a tiny seed compared to most other seeds. But a man took that insignificant thing and planted it in his land and he let it grow. And when it grew up fully, it became a sturdy tree so strong that the birds rested in the branches. Even so, you, my disciples, are insignificant and the least. But when the Father and the Spirit are done with you, you shall be strong enough that the nations of heaven will rest comfortably within you."

This alternative society of Jesus is not to be a separatist society, but an evangelistic one. In other words, the church doesn’t protect its purity, but opens up its purity to all the world. All are to be welcome to be a part of the church, no matter how corrupt, no matter what they have done in the past, no matter how far from the ideal they are. The great task of the church is welcoming all who desire to be transformed into God’s people, and then to help them to become part of that.

We accept people as they are, but we are not content with who they are. All of us, should we be a part of Jesus, must be transformed into the image of Jesus. This is not something that happens overnight, nor does it happen before conversion. Rather, this is the process we go through that conversion begins. We assist each other, allowing the Spirit to create diamonds out of coal.

Thus, the church does not remain completely separate from the church. Jesus places parts of the church within the world, commanding them to welcome the world into the church. Within the world, the church holds onto its unique purity, a purity based on love of God and neighbor, and opens itself up to be understood by the world. More and more people become a part of this community, embracing Jesus’ ideals.

In this way, the world becomes the church. Individual by individual, family by family, soon tribes and even nations become a part of the community of Jesus’ love. People flock to be a part of the alternative community because it works better than other communities, and it is led by Jesus, our example of patience, faithfulness and endurance.

Transforming Culture, Part 1

In his book, Christ and Culture, H. Richard Niebuhr wrote about how the church influences the world. He was right, that Jesus asks us—even demands—that we transform the world. However, he set up a false dichotomy between passivism and activism. As if those who do not act in the political manner in which he was used to, then they were not acting at all.

Jesus, on the other hand, presented a kind of transformationalism that is not necessarily politically active, but is powerfully active, nevertheless. He established the following principles:
a. Creating alternative communities
b. Being welcoming to all who desire transformation
c. Gently, patiently influencing without force
d. Attacking the forces behind the evil

1. The church as saltYou are salt—essential for the world. But if you lose the basic qualities that make you important, you cannot regain them. You will be useless, cast out of God’s kingdom and trampled.
You are light—God’s glory and truth in the world. You are the kingdom of God to come, and you cannot be hidden. Nor should you be hidden—God’s glory should be displayed, not hidden. So display the true righteousness of God before everyone, so that people will see your acts of God and so glorify the Father. Matthew 5:13-15

The church is not a building, an organization or a political force. Rather, the church is, according to Jesus, an alternative society, a unique people, a separate nation which lives by God’s law of love. The church, in the form Jesus established it, is a group of people who are living according to Jesus’ principles of love. The church is made up of the outcast of society, engaged in community not to just improve ourselves, but to love all of those in need. And we strive to live out the principles of love found in Jesus’ law—we do not insult, we do good to those who persecute us, we do not look with lust, we keep our promises, we do our religious deeds before God, not for people’s being impressed, we do not judge others, but we are constantly repenting of our sin and forgiving those who repent. And we will strive not to be put in a situation—like the military or addiction to drugs—that will cause us to act in opposition to this way of life.

We will look and act different for all this. The world will see us as strange, as ignorant, as naïve or even as hateful because we will stand with Jesus, no matter what anyone else says or does to try to promote us or to try to oppose us. At times, we will act different from that which the world calls “the church” or “Christianity.” “And this is because a majority of the church is caught up in the ways of the world, and has become a part of the world—focusing on education, on politics, on judging, on intellectualism, on power and the manipulation of it. And so they, the façade church, looks at the church of Jesus, and thinks that they’ve missed the point.

The church of Jesus is a community, not a political party. It doesn’t seek to compromise its ideals so it can fit better into the world. It doesn’t seek to give a message less than the love of Jesus, ever. If it changes it’s ideal of love and mercy and hope in God’s future, then it is no longer the community of Jesus, but a part of the very empire it seeks so hopelessly to transform. The compromised church is in a place to be transformed, not to create transformation.

Paul and Economics, Part II

Paul the apostle, the ancient missionary and theologian, has appeared on a 21st century university campus! With his good friend, Don, a professor of ancient Hebrew literature, they speak the truth of the ancient Christians to students who ask Paul questions!

Adam: Well, I am glad that the church is a bit more economically savvy, now than it was in the ancient past.

Paul: Economically wise? In what way?

Adam: You were just saying that the church provides charity for anyone in need. This system creates laziness and dependence and an unstable economic system. And you were initiating the very system that the Reformation had to do away with—paying for a priestly class that provided nothing to the community.

Paul: Ah, like your pastors today, you mean?

Adam: A pastor today is paid by the excess of a particular community. If a community isn’t fiscally wealthy, they don’t get a pastor. And the pastor is paid because of his or her superior education. So they had to prove their place. Not just show up and say, “I’m an apostle” or a monk or whatever, and expected any stranger to provide for them.

Paul: And this is superior, why?

Adam: Because the church isn’t providing assistance to those who are just taking advantage of the system. This supports the economy of the country, it is not a drain from it.

Paul: So everyone only receives that which they deserve?

Adam: That is correct.

Paul: So no one lives off of charity?

Adam: There are some people who live off of the government. However, eventually, the government will stop giving to those who don’t deserve it.

Paul: I hope so.

Adam: You do? That’s good. I was afraid that you’d be some kind of socialist…

Paul: I hope the government steps out of welfare so the church could step in.

Adam: What?

Paul: It is the church’s witness to the world, to provide charity that no one else provides. It is the demonstration of God’s care to give food to those who are not able to provide for themselves. And that without a large administration, a book of policies or hired workers.

Adam: But you would create a class of unproductive people in society. It would destroy the economy!

Paul: Not at all. Rather, you would have a group who would provide work for people that would be in accord with their ability. Remember, we began this discussion talking about work. It is a principle of the church that everyone should work, should be productive, but that the church should provide charity to everyone in need.

Adam: And you will create a class of people who only do “god work” a spiritual glut.

Paul: You are so concerned about unproductive people. Yet the economic system you support seems to have many people whom I consider unproductive. Pencil pushers, over-qualified decision makers, people who never make food or assist another person, but they only make money or paperwork appear out of thin air. The church would create a class of people who would work to build God’s kingdom. Build a class of people who will be followers of Jesus and not just speakers of Jesus.

Adam: Just as I said, lazy people—unproductive.

Paul: Is it unproductive to know people well enough to be able to meet their needs? Is it unproductive to visit people in the hospital or in prison? Is it unproductive to be friends with the friendless, to provide hope for the depressed? Is it unproductive to create places where the sick can rest in peace instead of on the street? Is it unproductive to grow food and give it to the poor? Is it unproductive to help the “sinners” of society to repent and depend on God’s grace? Is it unproductive to pick up food from those who cannot use it and give it to the needy? Rather, it is a work of honor. And even if it does not pay in this world, those who do this work in Jesus’ name will be rewarded by Him on the final day.
Adam: But you don’t understand. Such a society would economically self-destruct! There is nothing there to provide economic security—just like you were saying about the ancient economy.

Paul: If we have a whole sub-structure of society that is based on work toward mutual need and charity, it would be supported by God’s grace and power. Such a society would never need to worry about their needs because God would provide for them daily and make sure that everyone would be provided for, as long as they share with whoever is in need.

Adam: This is magic, not sound economic principles.

Paul: It seems to me that your capitalism is based on magic. Your “invisible hand” directs economic prosperity, as long as everyone is promoting their own economic self-interest. That’s the theory. But the reality is that you have to have a sub-structure of people perpetually in poverty to support your economic system. You must have a two-tiered structure—the poor struggling for survival behind the scenes, all the while supporting the “middle class” of the West, who are really the ruling aristocrats of today. The immigrants in your country, those who can only afford to work “under the table”, those who work below a living wage in your fast food restaurants and bargain stores, as well as the millions around the world who work on farms and factories— they are all the backbone on which your economic prosperity is dependant on. If you paid them for their work, rather than for the education level of their work, then your whole economy would collapse. The structure is only beginning to creak now, but soon it will fall throughout the world.

Adam: So you are a socialist, as I thought.

Paul: No. A socialist believes that the government should provide for those in need. I don’t think that we need to make demands of the rich. Rather, the Lord makes a request of those who have more than they need, and they obey if they follow the Lord. I am a Christian. I trust in God to provide for me, and do as he commands. That is my real work, to obey the Father through Jesus. And I believe that every Christian should do the same.

Adam: That is just too simplistic to be a real economic system.

Paul: Whatever you want to think. But the reality of it is that God is in control of His people. He knows what work He wants them to do, and we do it, if we are listening to Him. And part of that work is to provide both sustenance and work for those who are in need. Everyone takes their turn. Everyone, at some point, has more than what they need, and so they provide. Everyone, at some point, is in need of assistance and so they receive help.

Adam: I will never need help from anyone.

Paul: Oh, yes you will. And when it happens you will wish that you were a part of a community that assists you instead of treating you like it was your own fault. And when that day happens, cry out to the Lord. Perhaps he will help you.

Constantine, The Apostle of Compromise

Posted on the MySpace Mennonite Group under the topic "How Much Can We Really Blame On Constantine?"

There are a couple things that are unique to Constantine himself, as opposed to other emperors before him:

First of all, he made an open attempt to find points of common interest between Christians and pagans, especially sun worshippers.

Constantine's family religion was sun worship, and so he promoted sun worship in the empire. Christianity was a popular new religion and he used them to gain political leverage, especially against the other two Roman rulers who were competing against Constatine to be emperor.

So Constantine did encourage the church to worship on Sunday because Sunday was the day the sun worshippers worshipped. While some early Christians worshipped on the first day of the week, it was probably on the evening of what we would call Saturday, but the Jewish folks would call the first day.

Also, the Chi Rho, the symbol of Constantine's vision, looked suspiciously-- almost exactly-- like his family crest, which was the symbol of the rising sun between two hills.

So Constantine catered to the church, trying to make them feel as a part of the Roman people, not as outsiders.

The second unique thing Constatine did is to invite the church into the political process. He passed a law which required bishops to act as a court of appeals if a Christian didn't like a decision coming down from a Roman judge. While I think that Constantine's motivation was good-- to prevent further persecution or misunderstanding-- but many bishops at the time was opposed to this law. But there was nothing they could do about it.

He also put himself as arbitrator over the council of Nissea. Nissea was chosen because it was right next to Constantinople. Now Constantine didn't make a ruling, but he did act as mediator.

These three items, I think, give adequate reason to name Constantinism after Constantine. First of all, he actively knocked down the wall of separation between the church and the world. Secondly, he got the church involved in the poltical life of the current state instead of focusing only on the kingdom of God. Thirdly, he encouraged the state to get involved in church business.

If you have any questions about it, read what Eusibius says about Constantine. He gives the emperor greater praise than he does any saint of the church, and the emperor didn't get baptized until he was one foot in the grave and then in his crypt, he put himself amidst the twelve apostles!

Constantine was a great political mind. But he was terrible for the church.

I recently found out that near the end of his life, Constantine killed his wife and one of his sons. Not exactly the act of a "Christian" emperor-- or perhaps he was the model for almost all Christian poltical leaders after him?