All Comments for: Church in State | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2008 > March

Christianity Today, March, 2008 |

Church in State

In post-Communist Germany, Christian political involvement is surging.

Philip Yancey | posted 3/10/2008 08:44AM

Last November I spent a week in Germany courtesy of the Konrad Adenauer Institute, a foundation named after the first chancellor of West Germany. Adenauer had the unenviable job of restoring government ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 comments.

Page: 1

Show All

Steve

Posted: March 12, 2008 9:26 PM

This article is way too simplistic. I expected the author to present something with much more thoughts and insights - after all,he is the favorite of my son who read almost all of Yancey. Separation of church and state is not the real problem. The real issue is this: for what purpose does the church work with or without the state? So called state churches can do an excellent job working for the best interest of people (education, health care, law making etc...) the 8% "church tax" can establish a feeling of togetherness and keep the level of solidarity high in a country, whereas independent churches can do horrible-horrible things (see the Christian Right in the US) no matter how far they are separated from the state - in principle... This article could have argued for or against Christians' responsibility in a world where billions live under their potential due to exploitation supported by their own political leaders under the watch of their own spiritual and/or church leaders.

Joseph

Posted: March 12, 2008 8:25 PM

The origins of the celebration of any holiday is much like etymology, interesting, but not necessarily relevant. Christmas and easter are not pagan holidays. The fact that there were corresponding pagan holidays on similar dates to Christmas and easter is interesting... but not a very convincing point for one who wants to argue that two Christian holidays celebrating events from the earthly life of our Lord and savior, are in fact pagan. They are not pagan holidays.

T P	Posted: March 11, 2008 3:21 PM

Yancey is misleading in a number of areas. 1st: Germany was not Communist. It was Fascist and a form of Socialism in competition with Italy's form. Russia is Communist. China is Communist. 2nd: Having a Catholic foreign exchange student from Germany, the reason "Church affiliation in Germany matters," is because if they aren't, then they are not allowed to bury their dead in Catholic sanctioned cemetaries. 3rd: Christmas is a pagan holiday as is Easter. Anyone willing to put the effort into research will learn that. Celebrate giving, but put away lying. 4th: The gov distributes the "church tax"...to *approved* denominations for their work in schools, hospitals [another gov. socialist welfare program] and church upkeep. 5th: In opposition to Yancey's "our mission"--Christ gave His [com]mission for the church to PREACH the gospel and tell what the woman did. Government is by nature an enemy of the church & faith. Christians have become lazy & want salvation without responsiblity.

chuch

Posted: March 11, 2008 10:13 AM

I think that this in not possible in our country. almos 200 year behind Benito Juarez the Mexican President (1860) made the division between the church and the state. it will be a chaos, usually the peoples try to use the church seeking a personal benefit. great that Germany can do. we have a official church. church that has recognaized receive money from the narcotrafic, but the church has said no problem with this, because the money to enter to the church is holy. can you believe this?

Andrew

Posted: March 10, 2008 11:48 PM

There is a difference between 1) keeping organized religion separate from control over activities of the state and 2) having Christians, Muslims, Jews, Mormons, or atheists, for that matter, be "public servants." In positions of political power, persons of faith have the right to bring their worldviews to bear on their decisions. But whenever the church and the state have gotten in bed with each other the bastard offspring of bad theocratic policies have caused the people to suffer and have hurt the gospel. Why can't we let the state be the state and the church be the church? This way, they can keep an eye on each other and each challenge the other to live up to its stated principles. In other words, rather than trying to take over the state, the church can "mix religion and politics" by speaking up in service not to itself but to the common good. The so-called Christian Right, hell-bent on theocracy has shown us recently how fragile the separation of Church and State really is.

lewsta

Posted: March 10, 2008 10:34 PM

Mr. Voth says this: But with the Constitutional separation of Church and state the Church in the US had nearly recovered, until the Cheney/Bush administration.. There IS no "separation of church and state" CONGRESS cannot establish a specific religion, nor prevent the free exercise thereof. That is ALL. As to the present administration, I've no clue what you're on about. You speak as if Mr. Bush has singlehandedly destroyed religion in the USA. Are you really sufficiently deluded to believe the church was in fine shape during Clinton's adminstration? Or Ford. Reagan, Nixon? The fruit we see presently rotting is from seed sown during the entire latter half of the twentieth century, concerning which the present administration had no influence. Is there ANYTHING for which Mr. Bush does not shoulder the blame? Will we fare better under, say, Clinton, Obama, McCain? No the church, by abdicating her responsiblity, has brought upon herself the present ill health.

Norman Martin

Posted: March 10, 2008 8:21 PM

Article is only some-what balanced. The Baptist, Methodist and others who fought long and hard for the separation of church and state in our country's early history knew what it was like to be considered an outlaw for simply preaching the gospel without approvial of the established church (translated:The State Church). The First Amendment with full religious freedom gave rise to a huge growth of Christianity in America. Those coming to the American colonies knew of the blood bath as England went from Catholic back to Anglican. Many experienced it first hand such as John Helwys, the first Baptist pastor in England put in Newgate prison where he died for telling King James (same one of the King James Bible) that he had no right to the souls of men. His wife also died in prison with him for taking such a stand. In our present time it seems we not only want the government to pay for religous schools, but evangelize for us and do the mission work we should do. God help us.

Greg Chase

Posted: March 10, 2008 6:25 PM

Balance is key to developing how a Christian should live in the world that includes politics and imperfect people. Remembering that we are citizens of a heavenly kingdom that is eternal in the heavens, should help us to live as responsible members of our earthly society. Part of that responsibility is to help choose leaders for our own respective countries. Some Christians should become leaders and enter politics as a service to God and His people. Philseems to lead us in that direction in his article.

George T.

Posted: March 10, 2008 6:02 PM


Very,very interesting article. Europe as a whole NEEDS this "tendency."

Patrick Gann

Posted: March 10, 2008 5:55 PM


Very balanced, very well-written. Europe "offers a cautionary tale in both directions." Exactly.

Jim Frisbie

Posted: March 10, 2008 4:55 PM


Again Yancey's insights are good and thought provoking. I doubt that any of us want to see an "official" American church... but we do need the church to be the conscience of the country.

state and Christians

Posted: March 10, 2008 3:25 PM

the state should carry the sword to protect society, tax citizens, build roads and other infrastructure and carry out work cleaning and providing services like the provision of power and garbage collection. Anyone can do that; whether Christian or not. But Christians, more than anyone, should provide hospitals and schools, especially schools for Christians. Bible study is the most important activity anyone can be involved in...it guides decision making amongst scholars themselves and helps them counsel people's decisions regarding finances and marital behavior. Problems arise when people rely on the government for schooling and for the regulation of the care of the weak. Christians should take the high ground as far as moral actions are concerned and not leave it up to the state. Then, as far as finaces are concerned, I plead with you, answer the ones who deny Christ for the sake of their pocketbooks! What Christian in his/her right mind denies Christ to be richer?

Ted Voth Jr

Posted: March 10, 2008 3:00 PM

The situation of Christians in a republic is considerably complicated over that in a proper old-fashioned autocratic absolute monarchy/tyranny/despotism. The state is by nature an enemy of the faith, being a 'creature' of the world-- the establishment of the Church was nearly the kiss of death for the Church. But with the Constitutional separation of Church and state the Church in the US had nearly recovered, until the Cheney/Bush administration. Yet the Lord knows that 'we the people', including us His children, are the sovereign rulers in a republic, and He we ask us how we fulfilled our responsibility as the sovereign rulers. If we abdicate... the House of David has still not recovered from his dereliction of duty when he stayed home 'in the time when kings go forth to battle' and 'got himself involved' with Uriah's wife, all because he wasn't where he should've been, doing his job...

Page: 1

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment