The Conscience of the Kingdom: A Third Way for Christians Caught Between Isolationism and Constantinianism

Christians today seem to be having a difficult time navigating the always choppy and often treacherous waters of public discourse and cultural involvement. Something seems “off” with many of the interactions (or lack of interaction) with issues of the day—whether that’s political, social, or moral. How should a Christian situate herself in the cacophony of voices in such a way that others will not only hear her voice but listen to her voice? How can a Christ-follower do this in a way that honors his Savior and acknowledges Him alone as Lord of heaven and earth? When it comes to Christians engaged in society and politics, they have often dichotomized the issue into two mutually exclusive tendencies—“Constantinianism” or “Isolationism.” In doing so, they have neglected a classic approach more typical of the early church of the first few centuries.

An Isolationist tendency is about withdrawal. In this approach, Christians turn inward, disengage from the world of society and politics, and focus on things that concern the everyday life of the church. The world rages, problems increase, morality degenerates, unjust laws are passed, politicians reign, and wars are fought. At the same time, Christians attend their Christian churches, read their Christian literature, watch Christian movies, listen to Christian music, and spend almost all of their time with Christian people talking about Christian things. Their orientation toward the world of politics, social issues, and cultural changes is one of remoteness (the world is “out there”), passivity (the world is out of control) and complacency (there’s nothing we can do about it anyway). In its modest form, isolationists muzzle themselves with regard to political speech, they hold their tongue in the face of social injustices, and they withdraw from activities that appear too political or worldly. In its radical form, isolationists neglect basic Christian outreach like evangelism, missions, and helping the suffering. In Isolationism, the Church retreats from the State to protect itself from wickedness; but in isolationism the Church loses its witness.

On the other side of the spectrum we find Constantinianism. In this approach, Christians take on the world by use of political and legal means. They often form strategic alliances with political parties, organizations, and leaders—whether Christian or not—to help them advance their Christian priorities and values. These values, of course, depend on the Christian’s theological perspective. They could align with a political organization to advance a certain moral position among lawmakers or the courts. Or they could invest time, money, and energy in a political action group to address a particular social or economic cause. For the sake of political, social, or moral victories, Constantinians empower a “strongman”—whether that’s a literal politician, a political party, or an organization. Christians in the fourth century joined hands with Constantine to advance their positions and ultimately became pawns in political interests themselves. Today, advocates of this Constantinian approach are always on the lookout for the next “Charlemagne” to crown as their king . . . or the next “Cyrus” to identify as their savior. The result is the Christian testimony rises and falls with the party or politician. And both the Christians and the world fail to distinguish the priorities of the one from the values of the other. In Constantinianism, the Church unites with the State to promote its churchly agenda; but in reality, the State uses the Church to promote its own worldly agenda.

A quite different approach from Isolationism and Constantinianism can be found among most Christian leaders of the first few centuries. We’ll call this the Conscience of the Kingdom model. In this approach, Christians uncompromisingly commit to the Lordship of Jesus Christ with regard to their priorities and values, morals and message. They surrender none of these to any other lord or any other leader. The Church is the community of their primary allegiance, which they will share with no other party or political organization. However, Conscience Christians view their relationship to the world as analogous to the conscience of an individual. On the basis of God’s Word and in allegiance to the Lord Jesus Christ, Christians speak and act on behalf of righteousness. Christians address political corruption, weigh in on social ills, take righteous action on behalf of truth, justice, and mercy, and do so in ways that refuse either to empower a “strongman” or take shelter in a bunker. All of this is done in a manner that reflects the fruit of the Spirit and the virtues of faith, hope, and love. Conscience Christians avoid any alliances or allegiances that would surrender their ability to speak prophetically to the “Herods” of their day. And they refuse to surrender the impartiality necessary to serve as the conscience of the kingdoms of their age. This kind of approach almost always means withdrawing membership and loyalty to political parties and political action organizations, but it never means retreating from political, social, cultural, and moral engagement. It means boldly but lovingly speaking out against unrighteousness and injustice while promoting righteousness and justice—assuming, of course, that Christians are actually living out righteousness and justice themselves! In the Conscience of the Kingdom approach, the Church neither unites with nor retreats from the State; rather, she lives as the Church in the State and speaks as the Church to the State. Yes, in many cases, the Conscience of the Kingdom model leads to the State’s attempts at silencing the prophetic voice of the Church, often violently. But in countless cases throughout history, by the grace of God, the nagging conscience of the kingdom wore away at the world’s wickedness and resulted in real, long-term, genuine change.

It simply isn’t true that Christians today have only two choices when it comes to political and social engagement. We aren’t stuck with only two options: empowering the strongman or heading for the hills. We have an option to serve and honor Christ alone as Lord by living out Christ’s righteousness, speaking out for righteousness, and thus promoting righteousness beyond the walls of the Church.