Brian Hamilton

The Specificity of Christian Ethics

Doesn’t it seem odd to you to support the state in doing something the church forbids? No, though ‘support’ might be stronger than what I would ever in fact do. (Permit? As if I, or the church, had, or wanted, such power.) Perhaps the point is simply that I do not protest. Or rather, my ‘protest’ is a call to repentance and baptism. Do we (as the church) protest or attempt to forbid Muslims from confessing Allah, or Mormon sects from practicing polygamy, or atheists from using birth control? It makes little sense to do so, since we recognize that our convictions on such matters are inseparable from our theological commitments which we cannot (would not, could not coherently) require universally. Rather, we preach the gospel—and explain to our new catechumens the changes of life that are involved in recognizing Christ as Lord.

Reversing the question, doesn’t it seem odd to require the state to do what the church requires, or to forbid what the church forbids? This would already admit that the way we live is in no serious way dependent on our having been remade, or washed clean, in baptism. It would say that the training required of new converts is not really necessary to live the saintly life, or it would say that the saintly life is just doing what everyone else is doing really well. It would it be an immediate confession against the quickening power of the Spirit in our lives, to require that those who have not received the Spirit live as we expect of those who have.

7 September 2007 |
tags: Political Theology, Theological Ethics