Is there a place for religion in government? It depends on who you ask. In Neighborly Faith’s 2023 study titled “Christian Nationalism: A New Approach,” one of the widest gaps between those classified as Christian Nationalist (CN) “adherents” and those identified as “Zealous Separationists” involved differing perspectives on the statement “Religion has no place in government.” More than 50 percent of CN adherents strongly disagreed with the statement, while approximately 75 percent of Separationists strongly agreed with it.
So, what role does religion, particularly Christianity, play in American government? To answer that question, we need to acknowledge that the Church and state are distinct. The Church is the community of Jews and non-Jews united in Christ called to point to and glorify the Triune God (Eph 2:11-22; 1 Pet 2:9). The state is a provisional set of governing authorities appointed by God to exercise judgment and maintain order (Rom 13:1-7). Biblically, the Church and state are distinct. They have separate functions though, at times, overlapping concerns. Christians must allow both to exercise their unique, God-given roles. However, when we distinguish Church and state, we will quickly recognize that we are dealing with two political bodies and two religions.
World religions (e.g., Christianity, Islam, Judaism) make theological claims. What we often overlook are the theological claims made by civil authorities. Such claims are often used to justify the actions of the state and to inspire adherence to the mandates of the state. This civil religion is not neutral. While the civil religion of the United States allows for the free exercise of other religions, that does not mean the religious claims of American civil religion are aligned with the claims of all other religions.
While some scholars, including sociologist Robert Bellah, suggest that American civil religion was not intended to replace Christianity, they neglect the complete allegiance to God called for in Scripture (Deut 6:4-5; Matt 22:34-40). We are to have no other gods besides Him (Exodus 20:3; Deut 5:7). Suggesting that American civil religion is compatible with Christianity rejects Christianity’s exclusive claims. Suggesting that American civil religion is Christianity is similarly problematic because it collapses the distinction between the Church and state. Whereas Christian theology calls the Church to point to and glorify the Triune God, the state’s theology serves the interests of the state. From a Christian perspective, we need to recognize that the god of civil religion is, at best, like the unknown God of the Athenians (Acts 17:22-34) and, at worst, like Jeroboam’s golden calves (1 Kgs 12:25-33).
If the nation makes religious claims, does the Church make political claims? Yes. Christian claims are inherently (and often explicitly) political. Christians, for instance, do not claim that Christ only has authority over the Church, but over all things (Eph 1:21; Col 2:10) and, in particular, governing authorities (Rom 13:1-2). One of our primary tasks is to draw people from the nations into a people whose “citizenship is in heaven” and who are “sojourners and exiles” (1 Pet 2:11). Even proclaiming, “Jesus is Lord” is a theological and political claim. The Church is an alternative “polis” whose all-encompassing loyalty to the Triune God conditions the way they interact with governing authorities who have been put in place by the Triune God.
How does the distinction between Church and state work itself out in practice? First, distinguishing between Church and state does not imply isolation or non-participation. The Church and its members can participate in the politics of the state, but they must do so as the Church. That is, Christian participation in politics must be an extension of the Church’s worship. It must point to and glorify the Triune God. The Church cannot become another political constituency swayed by the pandering and promises of those running for office. The political winds must not blow the Church off course. To become another lobby diminishes the Church’s capacity to remind the state that its efforts are provisional, and its authority comes from the Triune God. We cannot become so intertwined with one political regime that we lose the ability to speak truth to that regime. Again, we must remain distinct so that our presence in the world stands as a true reminder to the world that Christ is King.
Second, distinguishing Church and state reminds us that the Church is not intended to govern but to serve the Triune God. An unwavering allegiance to the Triune God must be the defining characteristic of Christian political participation. It must be the defining characteristic because when it is not, the Church denies the world the alternative it desperately needs. The state and, by extension, its politics are not trivial, but they are temporary (Acts 17:26-27). The Church must not trade its witness for provisional political wins.
Christians must recognize the vital connection between the Church’s theological identity and its mission. As Lesslie Newbigin argues, “It is precisely because she [the Church] is not merely instrumental that she can be instrumental,” and, as such, the Church is “both a means and an end.” The Church need not accomplish any earthly political agenda. Christian service, which is not limited to Sunday worship but extends into our everyday activities, is our political work in the world. That work may or may not sway governing authorities. They may ignore our witness. Yet, winning politically cannot become the Church’s solution because we know that the work of governing authorities (even Christian governing authorities) is temporary. The Church must ultimately point to an eternal solution.
None of this precludes Christian political participation, but it doesn’t assume it either. Christian participation in the state’s politics is not a “given.” It is not a “given” because the Church and the state are distinct. Unlike the state, the Church does not wrestle against flesh and blood (Eph 6:12). The Church is “playing a different game” than the state. That “game” does not give Christians an excuse to ignore the suffering in the world (Jam 1:27). Instead, it reminds Christians that the true solution to the world’s brokenness is found in Christ. Christian political participation conforms to the pattern of Christ rather than that of the world. Our politics are profound when we, in word and in deed, proclaim, “Jesus is Lord.”
Dr. James Spencer currently serves as President of the D. L. Moody Center, an independent non-profit organization dedicated to introducing people to the life and faith of Dwight Moody. He also has several courses and other resources available at Useful to God. His newest book title “Serpents and Doves: Christian, Politics, and the Art of Bearing Witness” is available on amazon.com. He previously published “Christian Resistance: Learning to Defy the World and Follow Jesus,” “Useful to God: Eight Lessons from the Life of D. L. Moody,” “Thinking Christian: Essays on Testimony, Accountability, and the Christian Mind,” as well as co-authoring “Trajectories: A Gospel-Centered Introduction to Old Testament Theology.”