Christians in an Age of Empire, Then and Now

 

Marcus begins by commenting on his surprise at finding a multitude of students interested in studying Christianity and religions at public universities when he first began his tenure at Oregon State University, especially in Oregon which is one of the least religious states. As the world becomes more and more pluralistic, an understanding of the world’s religions becomes vital to understanding the world’s culture.

Prologue: What does it mean to be Christian and American in the time of the American empire?

Speaking of America as an empire used to be a left wing claim but it has become a claim supported by conservatives as well. Imperialism is not just geographical expansion, it can also be to use one’s superior military, political or economic power to shape the world in one’s own self interest. We are the empire of the world and yet America is also the most Christian country in the world. Not necessarily in terms of our country’s behavior but in terms of percentage, 80% of people who identify as Christian. So what does it mean to be Christian in the American empire.

Christians range from uncritically supportive of the American empire roughly 20-40% of the Christian spectrum, mostly the far right. At the other end of the spectrum are vocal critics of American imperialism which accounts for roughly another 20% of the Christian population. This leaves a great Christian middle that might sway one direction or other that might account for 40-60% of the Christian population. The most vocal Christians represent the far right. The demographic group that was most supportive of beginning the Iraq War were white evangelical Christians. Eighty four percent of white evangelical Christians supported starting a war in Iraq. By 2006 this figure was down to 65% but they were still the group giving the most support for that policy. Jim Wallace in “God’s Politics” asks ‘how did the religion of Jesus become pro-rich, pro-war and only pro-American?’

Part 1: The Bible and Empire

The bible is very negative and critical of empire. It is an anti-imperial book, in the name of God. This section will be filled with anecdotes to demonstrate the big picture.

The story of ancient Israel begins with liberation from the empire of ancient Egypt in the story of the exodus. The story of the exodus is the primal narrative of Israel. The exodus is about liberation from political, economic and religious bondage. The story of the exodus dominates the first half of the Torah.

Within a few hundred years Israel has become it’s own little empire. Around 1000 B.C.E. the monarchy emerges. This monarchy is in effect a little oppressive Egypt. This is what the prophets of the old testament protest. The prophets take up the other half of the Jewish bible. From the sixth century B.C.E. onward the Jewish people are ruled by a succession of imperial powers until Roman rule beginning in the year 63 B.C.E. and remained in control of the Jewish homeland for several centuries after that. The early Christian movement lived under an empire.

What’s wrong with Empire as far as the bible is concerned?

Is the problem that all of the empires are pagan and not Jewish or Christian? Would a Jewish or Christian empire be okay? The answer in the bible is pretty clear. The problem is with empire’s themselves.

Empires were domination systems on a large scale. Social historians refer to the ancient domination system, sometimes it is called the pre-industrial agrarian society. If you understand this context you will understand more about the bible and history in general. There are four central features of this system. One, they were ruled by a few, the king and the aristocracy, common people had no say in the system and were politically oppressed. Second, the people at the top, used and structured the system in their own economic self interest. They were economically exploitative and unjust. In most of these societies the ruling one to two percent usually acquired half to two thirds of the annual economic production of wealth in the society which came from agricultural production. This was accomplished with taxation on agricultural products and land ownership and renting. The consequences for the peasant class were severe, peasants lived at the subsistence level of existence. Life expectancy for the elite class was 60-70 years while the peasant class was 30 years. The third feature of the domination systems was they were chronically violent, not criminally but violence used by the ruling class to maintain order. Additionally warfare between groups of ruling elites was common. The only way to expand one’s wealth was often to acquire additional lands from another group of ruling elites by force. Fourth and finally, ancient domination systems were legitimated by the religion of the elites. These religions said that the social order was a reflection of the will of god. This allowed them to shirk responsibility for setting up the systems in the way they were set.

This is the world of the bible, not the world that the bible advocates but the world that the bible came into existence in. This is the source of what god is passionate about. God’s passion in the bible is anti-imperial precisely due to the amount of suffering inflicted by empire. God’s passion in the bible is for a world of justice and peace. Justice meaning people get a fair share of the world’s wealth. The prophets don’t cry out that the elites increase their charitable giving but rather that the system be more fairly structured. God also has a dream for peace, when the nations turn their weapons into farming implements.

Part 2: Jesus, the New Testament and Empire

The world of the first century, in which Jesus and the early Christian moment grew and acted, was under roman imperial control and it’s theology. It’s exceedingly illuminating to know about roman imperial theology when reading the new Testament. Roman imperial theology used the same language as early Christianity did. The official titles of Cesar Augustus, the emperor contemporary to Jesus, included Son of God, Lord, God from God, Savior of the World (due to his ending a decades long civil war), the One Who Brought Peace on Earth. Stories were told of Caesar being born of the god Apollo, a divine conception.

If we turn to Jesus and his birth stories, of course they are religious but they are also anti-imperial. In Mathew’s gospel the story centers around Herod the great’s plot to kill the newborn king of the Jews, Jesus. Herod is presented as the new pharaoh trying to kill the new Moses. He is also appointed by the Roman empire so he is the imperial puppet ruler in the Jewish homeland. In Luke’s story the conflict with the empire is even more dramatic. Not only is Jesus spoken of as the son of god, but think of the words spoken by the angel to the shepherds. The angel says “for unto you is born this day the savior, the lord, who will bring peace on earth.” The author of that story knew that he was deliberately countering roman imperial theology by transferring the titles of Caesar to a Jewish peasant whose adult life was spent advocating against imperialism and for the kingdom of god.

In the synoptic gospels Mathew, Mark and Luke what is most central to the teachings of Jesus is the Kingdom of God. The parables of Jesus are mostly about the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God has both a personal and political meaning. Personally it means putting yourself under the guidance and leadership of god. The political meaning is signaled by the phrasing of Kingdom. Kingdom was the most common form of political organization. Jesus’s listeners knew about the kingdom of Herod and the kingdom of Rome. For Jesus the kingdom of god was about life on earth not the afterlife. The kingdom of god is what life would be like on earth if god were king and those other guys weren’t. The next part is about economic justice, having enough food was the basis of economic fairness. Not that everyone should get the same, some people need more than others but everyone gets a fair allotment and enough. The kingdom of god is also about peace and non-violence. Christianity was committed to non-violence for it’s first three centuries of existence. Every christian author in the first three centuries attributes this non-violence to Jesus. In the old Testament this is the passion of god, in the new Testament this is the passion of Jesus.

Jesus died on a Roman cross which means he was executed by the imperial authority for advocating an alternative to the imperial domination system of his day. This is the political meaning of Good Friday. Easter also has a political meaning, god has vindicated Jesus by saying yes to Jesus and no to the powers that killed him. Marcus turns to Paul, Paul’s most frequently used short phrase to proclaim who Jesus is ‘Jesus is Lord’. That’s so familiar to Christians that it doesn’t sound the least bit subversive but in the first century, Lord was one of the titles of Caesar. To say that Jesus is Lord is to say that the Emperor is not. It would have been like using the title of Fuhrer for Jesus in 1930’s Germany and was committing high treason. If you attracted a following you were likely to be snuffed out as Paul, James and Peter were. Do we think was bad luck, no, there was some politically tumultuous content here.

The Book of Revelation, the book that has puzzled many people over the centuries. When that book is placed in the early first century however the meanings and symbolism become clear. The central conflict in that book is between the Lordship of Christ and the Lordship of Caesar. The beast from the abyss whose number is 666 makes people today wonder who is the beast. In the first century context the answer is clear, it’s the Roman Emperor. 666 decodes into a name in both Hebrew and Aramaic, ‘Caesar Nero’. Nero was the first emperor to actively persecute Christians, so the beast from the abyss is Roman Imperial power from the late first century.

To answer the question ‘Is the problem with empire that they were pagan empires?’ So long as you worship Jesus would empire be okay? To Marcus the answer is clear, no. Empires stand against God’s dream for the earth a world of justice and peace. Empires treat the resources and people of the world as if they were property of the empire. Additionally empires are filled with hubris or inappropriately big. Thirdly, empires use violence to maintain control.

Part 3: Imperatives for Christians Today

What are the implications for Christians today?

‘American Christians are members of pharaoh’s household.’ Pharaoh symbolizing imperial rule. What are our obligations as members of pharaoh’s household besides moving away? Our first imperative is education in local congregations about three things. First education about the bible and empire which has been discussed in the first two parts. Secondly education about the perils and fate of empires. All the previous empires are gone, England still exists but the empire is gone, the same can be said for Russia. It is very sobering to travel through Turkey which probably has more archaeological ruins than any other country in the world. To visit these ruins is to see the ruins of more than eight past empires. The primary reason for the fall of empires is because they over extend themselves because of hubris and the limited vision that comes from hubris. The third teaching to emphasize in local congregations is the bible’s teachings on war and peace. For being the most powerful and Christian nation in the world we are not very peaceful. After 300 years of advocacy of non-violence, the ‘Just War Theory’ arose. It arose because now Christians were in the majority in the Roman empire. What happens if you are attacked and you are part of the Christian majority, do you say ‘the non-Christians can defend us?’ Alternatively you can say ‘under certain circumstances it is acceptable to go to war to defend ourselves and even the non-Christians among us. Thus the Just War Theory arises. It is important that Christians understand this and that the theory has specific criteria that must be met in order to support a Christian going to or supporting a war. The criteria include; it must be a last resort, you must have tried everything else. It must be a war of self defense, you may not start a war. No war that you start may by definition be a just war. These are the only legitimately supported by Christianity positions on war, non-violence or non-aggressive self defense. How can the most Christian country in the world have countenanced starting a war? It’s not that we’re vicious people but that most Christians have never been taught about the Christian position on war. Why do some things seem to matter and others do not?

Christian’s need to renounce our nation’s claimed right to preemptive war. We have started more than one war in our history but it’s only in this decade that our government has publicly announced our right to make preemptive strike against someone who might someday be dangerous. We need to renounce that for moral reasons but also pragmatic reasons. Very few Christians now think that invading Iraq was a good idea. If we had a firm commitment about avoiding wars we might have avoided the costly and time consuming struggle. We need to work against American unilateralism and work instead for multilateralism. This is the primary way an empire’s hubris can be moderated and controlled. This applies to war but also agreements about the climate and world court.

What if we as a nation, and empire, were to use our imperial wealth and influence for the world’s well being? Is that an impossible dream or could we? For American Christians, loyalty to God and the Bible means standing in opposition to American Imperial policies. This does not mean anti-American this stance can be motivated by a love for what is best in the American tradition. To be Christian and a citizen of American empire means standing for god’s passion and dream for the earth. It means standing for what god loves.