Christians have been divided over citizenship throughout the history of the church. The major issue that Christians have struggles with regarding citizenship has always been the extent to which the Christian owes allegiance to a nation. While there have been some anarchist groups within the larger framework of Christianity (radical Anabaptists, Shakers, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc.) who have denied earthly citizenship altogether, most who have claimed to be Christ’s followers have tended to recognize themselves as having what Augustine of Hippo (354-430) described as dual citizenship in both the earthly city and the eternal city of God (See Augustine’s The City of God). And, while all will claim their heavenly citizenship must be preeminent, this still leaves some to ponder how far a Christian’s identity should be shaped by their earthly citizenship.
THE OLD TESTAMENT
The concept of citizenship in the Old Testament differed vastly from what developed in both the New Testament and modern times. In the Old Testament, citizenship was tied to the Israelites’ covenant relationship with God as their theocratic ruler. The primary goal of being a citizen of Israel was not to submit to human laws and rulers, but ultimately to obey God and live out the calling that God had given to Israel as his covenant people, through which he would bring the Messiah into the world as the means for human deliverance.
JESUS
Within the New Testament Scriptures, Jesus clearly stated that his kingdom “is not of this world” (John 18:36). Yet, he commanded his followers to “give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (Matt. 22:21). The implications of Jesus’ statements are that his followers should obey the political authorities of their day (i.e., be good citizens), so long as doing so does not interfere with their primary allegiance to God and his demands for his people. In Acts 5, this principle is illustrated when the apostles were arrested and instructed to refrain from teaching about Jesus. The response of “Peter and the other apostles,” however, was “We must obey God rather than human beings!” (Acts 5:29). Later, in his first epistle, Peter referred to the followers of Christ as “foreigners and exiles” in this world (which is akin to being non-citizens), though he instructed them to “submit [themselves] for the Lord’s sake to every human authority,” and to “honor the emperor” (1 Pet. 2:11-17).
PAUL
Paul also offered early believers some instruction about their citizenship. To the church in Rome, Paul wrote, “be subject to the governing authorities” because they have been “established by God” (Rom. 13:1-7). In so doing, however, Paul also reminded the church in Philippi that “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20). It is worth noting that Paul repeatedly appealed to his status as a Roman citizen for the benefit it offered for his personal welfare and ministry (Acts 16, 22, 25).
THE EARLY CHURCH
Citizenship in the early church was a unique situation. There are no reliable statistics about the growth of Christianity in its earliest centuries, but most agree that Christianity had a rapid growth within the Roman Empire. Even so, the percentage of Christians within the empire in the first three centuries of the church was likely to have been less than 1% of the total population. (For a plausible growth model within the early church, see Rodney Stark, The Triumph of Christianity, pp. 156-158.) As a small minority within the empire, Christians were occasionally confronted with persecution and were often surrounded by pagan worship. As a result, Christians seldom, if ever, attempted to exert themselves as citizens within the civic affairs of the empire. One of their most significant civic-related concerns, however, was to question whether Christians should serve in the military or not. Christian leaders from the early years of Christian history had a variety of opposing views on this topic.
The issue of citizenship within Christianity was dramatically changed in the early fourth century after Constantine the Great (272-337) gained control of Rome and legalized Christianity with the Edict of Milan in 313. Christians, who had generally viewed themselves as outsiders, found both protection and imperial favor during Constantine’s reign as emperor. As Constantine permitted Christians to both hold government positions and participate in the civic affairs of the day, many Christians began to view Constantine as a divinely appointed instrument that God was using for Christian purposes. Thus, the lines between Christianity and good citizenship began to overlap until Christianity became the official, government-sanctioned religion of the Roman Empire in 380.
ROME
The establishment of Rome as a “Christian Empire,” and the formation of numerous “Christian Empires” in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Holy Roman Empire), did not settle the question of the proper relationship between earthly and heavenly citizenship. Opposition to the close ties between church and state appeared almost immediately with the emergence of both splinter groups that saw themselves as the true church (e.g., Donatists) and monastics who withdrew from society as an effort to separate themselves from the corruption brought by the intermarrying of faith and politics.
THE REFORMATION
As the Protestant Reformation developed in the sixteenth century, the question of the Christian’s relationship to the state gained added momentum as the hold of the Roman Catholic Church over European nations weakened and reformers promoted opposing ideas about the relationship of church and state. The Erastian Controversy, for example, raised the question of whether the church or state should have the final authority over matters within a Christian society. Figures like Huldrych Zwingli (1484-1531) and Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575) supported the Erastian view that gave authority to the state, while John Calvin (1509-1564) said authority for religious affairs must reside solely within the church. Aside from the Erastian conflict and the questions it raised about church-state relations and the role of the Christian citizen within these systems, many other perspectives on these matters were expressed by Martin Luther (1483-1546), the Anabaptists, and other emerging separatist groups.
RESTORATION MOVEMENT
Even within the Restoration Movement, the duties and responsibilities of citizenship have not been uniformly observed. While most of the leading figures of the Restoration Movement accepted the primacy of their relationship to the Kingdom of God over the kingdom of this world, there remains a number of thoughts with nuanced degrees of difference regarding beliefs about citizenship and the Christian’s obligation.
Alexander Campbell (1788-1866) believed all governments are ordained by God, but he was a patriotic supporter of his adopted country (the United States). Campbell believed citizens should be cautiously involved with politics but must realize that they cannot legislate Christian practices or create a theocratic government. Although he unequivocally cautioned Christians to refrain from getting too involved with political affairs, he encouraged them to vote based upon their Christian convictions and even viewed the right to vote as something of a Christian duty. Barton W. Stone (1772-1844), however, was less supportive of Christians having an active involvement in civic affairs. Stone repeatedly called for Christians to avoid nationalistic sentiments in favor of loyalty to the Kingdom of God. Moreover, he admonished his followers to refrain from political and military engagements.
Perhaps the most extreme view of a major Restoration Movement leader was that of David Lipscomb (1831-1917). In 1889, Lipscomb wrote Civil Government as an influential explanation of his position on government and citizenship. Lipscomb insisted that “Human government had its origin in the rejection of the authority of God.” Thus, he argued, the Christian’s true allegiance should be focused upon their citizenship in heaven. While Lipscomb admonished his followers to obey civil authorities as far as their heavenly citizenship will permit, he advised his followers to abstain from voting, holding public offices, engaging in military actions, or being involved in civic affairs.
PRIMARY OBLIGATION
While there are many questions that remain about a Christian citizen’s obligations to an earthly kingdom (e.g., should he/she hold public office? Should he/she vote? Should he/she influence legislation? Should he/she serve in the military? etc.), most of these reside within the realm of opinion. So long as the Christian citizen realizes that his/her primary obligation is to the heavenly Kingdom (Phil. 3:20) and obeys the governing authorities that have been placed over him/her (Rom. 13) until they conflict with God’s demands (Acts 5:29), all of the other concerns are opinions to be explored between the individual and the Lord.
Dr. Rick Cherok serves as Managing Editor for Christian Standard, is a monthly columnist for The Restoration Herald, and is the Executive Director of Celtic Christian Mission. He has also served as Professor of Church History at both Cincinnati Christian University and Ozark Christian College. Dr. Cherok has recently become the preaching minister for the Phillips Christian Church in Salem, OH.
