“Fundamental Principle of Christian Social Theology”
So here’s a fun quote from conservative writer Albert Jay Nock, courtesy of Jonah Goldberg over at National Review Online:
To take another example, the present state of public affairs shows clearly enough that the State is the poorest instrument imaginable for improving human society, and that confidence in political institutions and nostrums is ludicrously misplaced. Social philosophers in every age have been strenuously insisting that all this sort of fatuity is simply putting the cart before the horse; that society cannot be moralized and improved unless and until the individual is moralized and improved. Jesus insisted on this; it is the fundamental principle of Christian social philosophy. Pagan sages, ancient sages, modern sages, a whole apostolic succession running all the way from Confucius and Epicetus down to Nietzche, Ibsen, William Penn, and Herbert Spencer – all of these have insisted on it.
I find this quote quite interesting – I don’t think I’ve ever heard so many different sages and philosophers so neatly tied together along with Jesus! Nietzsche even! The question is – is this true?
Well – I think the sentiment that the state is mostly worthless for improving society is emphatically true. I’m not sure it’s fair to suggest that Jesus “insisted” on this particular point, although I think it’s implicit in his methodology – God did not appear to be in the habit of giving moral instruction primarily to kings and potentates, but to the people generally.
You might argue that God often spoke to people “collectively” rather than “individually,” but I find that distinction to be brain-warpingly useless. The point is, does God seek to reform the world through state power, or through the people, individually and collectively? The answer to THAT question seems fairly clear.
Good thoughts to muse on, I guess…
does God seek to reform the world through state power, or through the people, individually and collectively?
Good question! I would say yes….to both
Hmm… a fair point. Further thoughts in my next post.
I would say it’s hard to ignore that God used state power to create Israel, spread Christianity (thinking of Pauls’ Roman advantages here), and punish Israel (captivity). I would like to think God ignores the state for the person, but I think that’s wishful thinking.
Nonetheless, I agree with your original premise that you can’t fix people with government. Hey, even God tried that.
I’m not sure what you mean exactly – he may have used state power in the sense of hardening Pharaoh’s heart, letting Paul off the hook (from state power), and yes, punishing Israel – but none of those things are really pro-state-power, per se. God was simply using what was available. Obviously, we’re not supposed to emulate Babylon so God can use us to inflict punishment on various people.
God clearly didn’t intend a state for the Israelites anyway – they were supposed to be led by judges and prophets. The state was a concession to the hard-hearted people, not the original plan.