christian rebellion theories as delivered by st. paul from mars hill by augustine, calvin and adams

165 Pages·2008·5.89 MB·English

CHRISTIAN REBELLION THEORIES
AS DELIVERED BY ST. PAUL FROM MARS HILL
BY AUGUSTINE, CALVIN AND ADAMS
JASON MICHAEL HASTINGS
B.A. Political Science, U of L, 2000
A Thesis
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies
Of the University of Lethbridge
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTERS OF ARTS
Political Science
University of Lethbridge
LETHBRIDGE, ALBERTA, CANADA
© Jason Michael Hastings, 2003
Abstract
This thesis explicates the rebellion theories of three renowned Christian political
thinkers and evaluates the extent that each can communicate an intelligible rebellion
theory to a non-Christian audience. Augustine of Hippo, at the dawn of the medieval
ages, John Calvin of Geneva during the Reformation and John Adams of the USA in the
midst of the Enlightenment are the three thinkers selected for consideration. These
thinkers have produced ideas that have transcended time and geographical location.
Rebellion is an issue of the utmost political importance as it reveals the limits, and the
first principles of politics. The issues surrounding the involvement of religion in politics
have created a place for confusion in minds of many people today. The issues
surrounding religion and politics need further elucidation. The way these thinkers were
able to translate the divine command from Romans 13:1, which decrees an absolute
prohibition against rebellion, into an intelligible rebellion theory to non-Christians, is an
important consideration in this thesis.
Preface
This thesis examines the rebellion theories of three different devoutly Christian
thinkers. The intermingling of religion and politics is a concerning consideration for
many of those in liberal western democratic nations because of the Islamic terrorist
attacks. Many are also suspicious of the "Christian Right" and their agenda. However,
this thesis shall aim to show that Christians can, while being committed to their Christian
principles, articulate an intelligible political philosophy for anyone to appreciate. The
delivery approach is modeled after Paul's sermon on Mars Hill when he spoke to the
Epicureans, Stoics and other Greek philosophers in a language that they could appreciate
while he as in Athens, as recorded in Acts 17:22-31.
The three thinkers chosen are dead now, but their ideas influence the way we
view and interact with politics today. There are two minor wrinkles that need to be
accounted for that comes with using these pre-medieval, reformation and early modern
thinkers. Firstly, the pronoun renderings for God are not consistent from translator to
translator. Sometimes translators will use a capital letter for a pronoun for God, such as
He or His, and others will use lower case letters, he or his. For consistency's sake, the
pronouns for God will always be capitalized. Secondly, some translators use old English,
which can often distract the modern reader. Where the old English is used, I have taken
the liberty of making the English translation modern.
Acknowledgments
Acknowledgment and thanks is owed to the University of Lethbridge, and the
Political Science department. The U of L's M.A. program provided helpful fellowships.
The Political Science department provided assistantships, funding for marking and
practical experience. These, along with parents with open arms and summers off tree
planting, make for a debt free student.
I sincerely thank all those involved in bringing this thesis to completion. Kathy
Schrage provided useful reminders and helpful guidance throughout the course of the
program and Barb Hodgson always had a kind word. I thank Peter McCormick for taking
a risk on a sometimes incorrigible student. 1 thank the respective overseeing professors
for their understanding and sensitivity towards a scholarly project inextricably entwined
with deeply seeded personal convictions. I appreciate the perspective Tom Robinson
provided me, as at times I felt 1 had a mouth full of gravel. I thank Paul Viminitz for
being approachable and for providing a welcoming environment both on and off campus.
I am grateful for my thesis supervisor John von Heyking for receiving the baton from
Peter McCormick. I also thank him for asking the leading questions, giving critical
remarks and for the many hours spent reading and correcting "ruff drafts. I thank John
Hiemstra from The King's University College for coming down from Edmonton for the
oral defense.
In Ecclesiastes it is written, "Of making many books there is no end, and much
study is a weariness of the flesh" (12:12b). Ted and Lily Harms, Jeremy Delong, and Will
Long Time Squirrel helped alleviate this weariness through their friendship. I thank
Craig Webber for the music lessons, biweekly discussions and his friendship.
This work is dedicated to my mom, Gwendolyn K. Hastings, since it is she who
prompted me to write a preface and acknowledgments to this thesis. I also acknowledge
my dad, Michael L. Hastings, for providing me with the courage to persevere to the end
and the perspective to see that this project is more about the process. I thank my younger
siblings; Kalen, Kara, and Kcndon for setting aside computer game time for a big
brother's homework. And for Aladdin's-every patient connoisseur waits ardently for the
time to say cheers-ferment.
Contents
Preface iv
Introduction 1
1. The Rebellion Theory of Augustine of Hippo, Africa, 354-430 10
2. The Rebellion Theory of John Calvin of Sixteenth Century Geneva 72
3. The Rebellion Theory of John Adams of Eighteenth Century USA 115
Epilogue 148
Bibliography 151
List of Figures
1.1. At What Point to Rebel
Introduction
This thesis will address the political philosophy of Aurelius Augustine, John
Calvin, and John Adams. In particular, their perspective on rebellion and the extent that
they were able to make their Christian rebellion theories intelligible to their respective
non-Christian audiences shall be treated. This is a useful exercise because in considering
rebellion one considers the purpose and limit of political power, as understood by each
thinker, and we will see how power is understood under auspices of Christian revelation
and is brought into an understandable context for the broader non-Christian culture.
Romans 13 heavily influences the Christian rebellion philosophic tradition.1 Paul's
Epistle to the Romans 13:1,2, (ESV) reads as follows: "Let every person be subject to the
governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist
have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God
has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment." The most basic reading one can
take from this is: do not rebel because God is the one that ordained the ruler, and so
rebellion is an act against God's deliberate ordination. What does a Christian political
philosophy, in particular a rebellion theory, taken out of this passage look like? How do
Christians articulate a rebellion theory in light of Romans 13, to an audience that believes
1 Kenneth S. Wuest, Wuest's Word Studies From the Greek New Testament Vol 1. (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1977), 222-226. See also Walter E. Pilgrim, Uneasy
Neighbors, Church and State in the New Testament (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), 8-12; Robert H.
Stein, "The Argument of Romans 13:1-7," NovT 30.4 (1989), 325-43; John Howard Yoder, The Politics of
Jesus (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1994), 193-214; for their treatment on Romans 13:1,2 and its
political significance.
1
in a different God, or no God at all? To what extent are Augustine, Calvin, and Adams
able to articulate their rebellion theory, despite the reliance on Romans 13, in a way that
is communicable to a non-Christian audience? To what extent can a Christian thinker
articulate an intelligible rebellion theory based on reason, yet remain committed to
Christian principles? From answering the rebellion question, what purpose does
government serve for these thinkers? On what basis do Christians live politically with
non-Christians? These are the questions that shall be considered in the following
chapters.
Religion in politics has become an issue that is on the forefront of many people's
minds as well as on the policy makers' minds with the Islamic terrorist attacks. For the
Western world, religion had left the forefront of politics for the last number of decades.
The Islamic terrorist attacks of 9/11, and the many subsequent attacks that followed and
continue throughout the Western world, including attacks against the US, Russia, France,
Germany, Indonesia and Canada leave many wondering what to think of the
intermingling of religion and state.
Canada is not exempt from this philosophic inquiry. There are many
contemporary religious and political issues that religious leaders and political leaders
face. Religion is undeniably entrenched deep within the polity of Canada. The Charter of
Rights and Freedoms, Section 15.5, recognizes the rights' of Canadians to practice their
religion. In the preamble of the Canadian Constitution Act, 1982, of the Charter of
Rights and Freedoms it is written, "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that
recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law."2 The "freedom of conscience and
religion" is accounted for by section 2 (a) under the heading of Fundamental Freedoms.
2
Conflict arises between religion and politics, in this context, when one right interferes
with or inhibits another right or freedom. There have been high profile legal battles over
religious rights conflicting with other rights that have life-impacting implications. This
thesis shall touch on the relationship between religion and politics, although the focus
will be on the Christian religion.
Stockwell Day's Christianity shaped the face of the Canadian election of 2000 in
a significant way and brought to the forefront the issue of faith and politics. How did
Day put forth his convictions in a communicable way to the public? Day personally
responds to this question in an email. "I believe that in executing one's duties in public
office, one can remain true to his or her values and most deeply held beliefs. I believe
that elected leaders and officials have a responsibility to provide principled leadership.
That is not to say that elected representatives have the right to impose their views and
faith on others, but that the perspective of all faith communities should have a place in
political debate." He then referred me to an article he submitted to the Opinion-Editorial
of the Globe and Mail, Monday, July 31, 2000, entitled, "My Faith in public life." He
begins this editorial by writing, "I have absolutely no intention of making my religion
into someone else's law."4 Day's position is frighteningly conservative for some
according to today's standards, but historically his position is very moderate.5
2 Ian Green, The Charter of Rights (Toronto: James Lorimer & Company, 1989), 229.
3 The case of Adler v. Ontario [1996] 3 S.C.R. 609 was a case that involved a Jewish couple seeking
funding for the Jewish religious school their children went to. They argued that it was unconstitutional that
Catholics Schools receive funding, and not Jewish schools. The most recent case involving religion and the
courts is the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Bethany Hughes to legally refuse blood transfusions, over­
turning Alberta Court of Appeal's decision to force Hughes to undergo blood transfusion. Hughes, of
Calgary, died only a short time ago because of this decision. Trinity Western University v. British Columbia
College of Teachers [2001] 1 S.C.R. 772 is one recent case where the Supreme Court granted graduates of
the Christian University full certification to teach in public schools without having to do an additional year
at a secular institution.
4 Neither Augustine nor Calvin were above imposing their religious views on the people. Augustine was
not reluctant to make his religious convictions public policy in shaping people towards Christianity. In
3