1. Falsehood must not be allowed to go unchallenged.

It must never be forgotten that Christianity began as a thoroughly marginalized religion. To be a Christian was to set oneself against both the ruling Romans and the religious Jewish leadership. Many horrible rumors circulated about the Christian church, including accusations of sedition, child sacrifice, and even cannibalism (clearly a misinterpretation of the Eucharist). In response to these rumors (and the persecution to which Christians were subjected due to them), Justin wrote the first apology. In the apology he gives answers to all accusations, and he repeatedly appeals (often sharply and sarcastically) to the emperor to see reason and piously and wisely exercise his duty.

We ask that the charges against us be investigated, and that, if they are substantiated, let us be punished as is fitting. But if nobody can prove anything against us, true reason forbids you, because of an evil rumor, to wrong people, and indeed rather to wrong yourselves, who think fit to instigate action, not by judgment, but by passion.¹

Later he writes:

Giving in to unreasoning passion, and the instigation of evil demons, you punish us without trial or consideration.²

Justin was not afraid to call the political class to account in their discharge of their duties. This is perfectly rational for one who is convinced that, as Paul says in Romans, the state is established by God for certain duties ³ and that they are therefore accountable to God for the discharge of those duties.

This is one place in which the Christian church today must continue to have a profound impact. The outcry of the church against moral atrocities such as abortion, corruption, and injustice must be continued and, where appropriate, redoubled. This is one of the implications of the churches mandate to disciple the nations.

2. Christians are ultimately citizens of the heavenly kingdom and are not out to establish a kingdom in this world.

It has ever been a danger for the church to fall into thoughts of empire and to be tempted by the Constantinian route to influence and power in society. Justin contradicted this sort of thinking before it even became prevalent in his response to the charge that Christians were engaged in sedition to overthrow Rome.

And when you hear that we look for a kingdom, you uncritically suppose that we speak of a human one; whereas we speak of that with God.⁴

Justin points out that if Christians really sought an earthly kingdom they were going about it in all the wrong ways. Their acceptance of martyrdom for the name of Christ was proof that they were not so politically employed. Someone who sought an earthly kingdom would deny Christ to avoid martyrdom so that he could continue to strive for the earthly reward. By contrast, Justin says:

But since we do not have our hope on the present, we do not heed our executioners since death is in any case the debt of nature.⁵

What we can learn from Justin’s teaching on this point is that we will never be able to establish Christ’s kingdom on earth for him. His kingdom is in heaven and in the hearts of his followers. One day, he will come to judge the living and the dead, which will constitute an overthrow of all earthly governments, but it will be in his timing rather than in ours. It is not our goal to bring about heaven on earth. It is our goal to announce his kingdom to the world; he will take care of establishing it.

3. Christians and the state share a common objective through different means: the pursuit of justice and peace.

Having reassured the emperor and members of his court that the church was not out to set up an alternative to the Roman empire, Justin shows that the opposite is the case. The church seeks to cooperate with the empire where it is doing what is right.

And more than all other people we are your helpers and allies in the cause of peace, convinced as we are that it is alike impossible for the wicked, the covetous, the conspirator, and the virtuous to escape the notice of God, and that everyone goes to eternal punishment or salvation in accordance with the character of his acts…we demand what is just and true.⁶

As Justin points out in the remainder of his apology, Plato and his philosopher ilk had long condemned many of the moral evils that the church was now condemning. However, it seems obvious that the church does not pursue this common end by the same means as the state. The state takes up the sword and punishes the wicked while praising the good. The church preaches the law and the gospel and exercises its divine authority to forgive sin and to bind the consciences of men to the law. They do share the same goal: the maintenance of good in society by means of the natural law. This is not the entire purpose of the church (far from it), but it is one of the functions of the church and one in which it may profit from cooperation with the state.

The Importance of These Basic Principles

While the apologies are by no means a comprehensive manual on church-state interaction, Justin does provide us with these foundational principles for thinking about and learning to clearly articulate our relation to the state. While these principles may seem very basic and almost as though they may be taken for granted, they are often the very principles which must be clarified in conversations about the interaction of church and state.

1. paragraph 3, page 24 in Ancient Christian Writers edition
2. paragraph 5, page 25
3. cf. Rom 13
4. paragraph 11, page 29
5. Ibid.
6. paragraph 12, pages 29-30