Brian Hamilton

A Faithful Christendom?

True Christendom has always been a form of doxology: Give praise to God! The rulers of nations have bowed before Christ’s throne! When the early church discovered that the Rome had heard its praises and wanted to be obedient to Christ, they recognized it as the consequence of their long-held conviction that Yhwh is king over all nations, that Christ is lord of history. The church did not go seeking imperial power or control; they went proclaiming Christ—and the nations took notice. Taking notice did not make the nations any less part of the old aeon that is passing away to be replaced by the rule of Christ, but it did make possible an exercise of authority more appropriate to their limited status. When the authorities admit their penultimacy under Christ, when the state asks for guidance in ruling rightly under Christ, can the church neglect to respond in truth? The church is obedient to a new law, yet it also affirms the legitimacy of the old within its own age.

This vision, Oliver O’Donovan argues, is the true Christendom idea that the church entertained for over a thousand years. It is an idea rooted in Israel’s proclamation of Yhwh as king, in Jesus’ proclamation of the coming kingdom analogous to but exceeding the kingdoms we know now, in the early church’s proclamation of Jesus as Lord. Christendom is an idea, moreover, that every political theory—theological or not—must engage, because the idea is inscribed in all modern political institutions and all modern political discourse in some form. The subtitle of his book The Desire of the Nations describes the way he intends to make this case: not with a formal and abstract argument but by “rediscovering the roots of political theology.” O’Donovan wants to tell a story about true political concepts (xx) that begins in tiny Israel and still survives today, though in many ways lost and distorted. Telling this story helps us make sense of our own situation, and moreover provide the normative grounds for constructive Christian political theology.

This book has quickly come to number among my favorites not because I agree with O’Donovan’s conclusions but because he is a careful scholar and a committed disciple, and because both of these characteristics are overwhelmingly manifest in his work. His command of the biblical texts and of Christian history is astonishing, his humility about his own project profound, his careful and charitable reading of other texts exemplary. Because of all this and more, he is able to proffer an account of Christendom with which even a Mennonite can find some deep sympathy. O’Donovan’s Christendom—which is, he would argue, the historic Christendom—does not explain away the Sermon on the Mount, does not succumb to the dangers of acculturation, does not begin with pragmatic concerns or power politics but with Yhwh the king of Israel. Nor does O’Donovan’s Christendom deny the church its rightful centrality in Christian political theology, since he agrees that the coming reign of God is foreshadowed by that missionary community of servant-disciples. Granting all these points (as O’Donovan confirms that a close reading of the Scriptures must), where are we left to disagree? The points of departure are fine though consequential, and most certainly worth the work of careful engagement.

13 November 2006 |
tags: Oliver O'Donovan