Christian responsibility for the world is rooted in God’s creation of the world. The opening chapters of Genesis confirm that God made everything and, having done so, pronounced it all ‘very good’ (Gen 1.1; 1.31-2.1). Although this created order has since been radically corrupted by sin, the biblical narrative attests that God has not forsaken it. Indeed, he is actively involved throughout as its sustainer, ruler, redeemer and judge (Ps. 24; Isa. 40.28; Acts 17.24-31; Col. 1:17; 1 Tim. 4.4; Heb. 1:3). While God in time called certain individuals, and one particular people, Israel, to be custodians of his blessings and bearers his promises, they were to do so ultimately not for their own benefit, but on behalf of the world as a whole (Gen 12.1-3; Isa. 52.7-11). As such, God’s sovereignty extends not only to the religious dimensions of life, but to every aspect of existence. Indeed, part of his continuing mandate for human beings is that they should exercise dominion over the whole earth, filling and subduing it in the process (Gen 1:26; 28). This in turn rules out any hard dualism of ‘sacred’ and ‘secular’: as John Stott notes, ‘everything is ‘sacred’ in the sense that it belongs to God, and nothing is ‘secular’ in the sense that God is excluded from it.’[1] Hence the people of God are commissioned to represent and bear witness to God in social, civic and political arenas, as well as to assemble together for prayer and worship in ‘churches’ and ‘congregations’.[2]
Similarly, deducing Christian civic obligations from creation should act as a check against undue ‘spiritualizing’ of the church’s missionary task. The God who formed the world from a void and the land from the sea; who made Adam from dust and woman from Adam’s side to be ‘flesh of Adam’s flesh’ and ‘one flesh’ with him: this God is deeply concerned with the physical dimensions of life, and thus, with politics and governance, with nations and states. As Peter Scott has observed, ‘lack of attention paid to the theme of creation leads to a political theology that is insufficiently materialist. Matter matters to Christianity: how bodies, human and nonhuman, exist in relation to each other in a range of technological, economic-ecological, social, political, and cultural realms is – or should be – central to a present-day Christian political theology.’[3] Furthermore, this insight should prevent overly sectarian and parochial programmes of Christian engagement, since creation is, ipso facto, universal. In Oliver O’Donovan’s terms, just as morality is ‘man’s participation in the created order’, so it must thereby relate to the ‘totality of things’.[4] Narrow national self-interest, party political chauvinism and denominational arrogance deny human beings’ God-given authority over creation. Rather, the comprehensiveness of this authority should inform Christian support for international law, global relief work and essential human rights.[5]
[1] John Stott, New Issues Facing Christians Today (London: Marshall Pickering, 1999), 19.
[2] For more on the political implications of this anti-dualistic paradigm, see Philip Wogaman, Christian Perspectives on Politics (Louisville: Westminster, John Knox Press, 2000), 169-70.
[3] Peter Scott, ‘Creation’, in Peter Scott & William T. Cavanaugh (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Political Theology (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 333.
[4] Oliver O’Donovan, Resurrection and Moral Order (Leicester: IVP, 1994), 77.
[5] Daniel Hardy, ‘Creation’, in P.B. Clarke & A. Linzey (eds.), Dictionary of Ethics, Theology and Society (London: Routledge, 1996), 189-96.
