Politics and the Kingdom of God: Why I am (sort of) a Libertarian
Today’s western governments have been charged with an unprecedented array of responsibilities. As Christians in a western country, we’re charged with the task of understanding what responsibilities we attribute to our government in light of Scripture. This is not to say that we necessarily advocate the legislation of morality or the establishment of biblical law as civic law. Rather, we need to understand our government in light of what Scripture says regarding the institution of the state.
The state is a legitimate institution specifically ordained by God. Likewise, of course, the church – the body of Christ – is an institution specifically ordained by God. Each institution has been given specific responsibilities. We can take many of God’s instructions to the ancient Israelite state in the Old Testament as the responsibilities of the New Testament church. Caring for the poor, widows, and orphans are specific tasks attributed to the people of God who were embodied in the ancient Israelite state in the Old Testament but are embodied in the church in the New Testament.
As for the state, we are at a bit of an impasse. Matthew, Mark, and Luke recount Jesus stating “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s” (NIV) which seems to indicate that the state has a biblical grounds to tax. Also, some, like Justice Antonin Scalia, argue on the basis of Romans 13 that the state has been given the “power of the sword” which gives it the right to enforce its laws, punish “evildoers,” and pursue justice (for more on this see Scalia’s May 2002 article in First Things). But what laws should the state have? What defines an “evildoer?” How should the state conceive of justice? These are compelling questions that Scripture does not directly address.
A number of Christian political theorists have tackled this issue. Some, such as James Skillen, suggest a limited role for government on the grounds that people ought to be free to pursue their various callings from God. Others, such as Abraham Kuyper, argue for a notion of “sphere sovereignty” wherein the world is divided into spheres: family, church, state, etc. Each sphere has its own unit of sovereignty and unique responsibilities. And, while there is necessarily a bit of overlap and redundancy (i.e. Christian politicians are members of the church) each sphere is separate and equal. In sum, these Christian thinkers advocate unique roles for the church and unique roles for the state.
Hence, my “libertarianism.” Folks often equate the term “libertarian” with the Libertarian Party: an organization that advocates a polity just shy of anarchy. In broad terms, however, “libertarian” refers to those who generally believe in human liberty and limited government. Libertarians of this ilk disagree to what extent people should be “free” and how a government ought to be limited.
Defined this way, Christians may rightfully consider themselves libertarians.
Fundamentally, I agree with the theorists above: the church and the state are separate institutions ordained by God with separate functions. Further, since the responsibilities for the church are spelled out so well, I believe that we can infer certain responsibilities to be outside of the state’s purview. For instance, the church is clearly charged with the task of caring for the poor. While this doesn’t necessarily negate certain social welfare programs, Christians ought to believe that the primary responsibility for the care of the poor belongs to the church – not the state. Likewise, since the “power of the sword” has been granted to the state, it would be improper for the church to take up arms. In short, the institutions of church and state have been ascribed specific responsibilities and many of the state’s responsibilities can be inferred by deduction.
In addition to the concept of sphere sovereignty, I believe James Skillen is right in advocating a constitutionally limited government on the basis that people ought to be free to pursue their callings unimpeded by government. Though far from a strict libertarian (i.e. not a member of the Libertarian Party), I believe that constitutionally limited government and human liberty are Scripturally defensible concepts.