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