What do you think?
Church and State
English (translation)Original German
- GenresTheology
100 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 1939
About the author
Karl Barth
488 books272 followersProtestant theologian Karl Barth, a Swiss, advocated a return to the principles of the Reformation and the teachings of the Bible; his published works include
Church Dogmatics
from 1932.
Critics hold Karl Barth among the most important Christian thinkers of the 20th century; Pope Pius XII described him as the most important since Saint Thomas Aquinas. Beginning with his experience as a pastor, he rejected his typical predominant liberal, especially German training of 19th century.
Instead, he embarked on a new path, initially called dialectical, due to its stress on the paradoxical nature of divine truth—for instance, God is both grace and judgment), but more accurately called a of the Word. Critics referred to this father of new orthodoxy, a pejorative term that he emphatically rejected. His thought emphasized the sovereignty of God, particularly through his innovative doctrine of election. His enormously influenced throughout Europe and America.
Critics hold Karl Barth among the most important Christian thinkers of the 20th century; Pope Pius XII described him as the most important since Saint Thomas Aquinas. Beginning with his experience as a pastor, he rejected his typical predominant liberal, especially German training of 19th century.
Instead, he embarked on a new path, initially called dialectical, due to its stress on the paradoxical nature of divine truth—for instance, God is both grace and judgment), but more accurately called a of the Word. Critics referred to this father of new orthodoxy, a pejorative term that he emphatically rejected. His thought emphasized the sovereignty of God, particularly through his innovative doctrine of election. His enormously influenced throughout Europe and America.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
October 22, 2017
I enjoy Barth's thought process, and Barth encourages the reader to take a more nuanced view of the relationship between the Christian and the state than either blind allegiance, or viewing the state as an enemy of the church.
Barth published this in 1938 -- considering the politics of the day, passages that appear academic must have been quite radical in Hitler's Germany.
Barth published this in 1938 -- considering the politics of the day, passages that appear academic must have been quite radical in Hitler's Germany.
March 13, 2024
Barth's starting point concerning the relationship between Church and State is an interesting one – the scene where Pilate sentences Jesus to die; a picture of the State's adversarial relationship with the Church. Jesus expressly confirms that Pilate has power over Him, but it is given to Pilate "from above" (p 14). Ultimately, that power is used to crucify Christ. Even when power of the State runs against the Church, even when injustice is "[allowed] to run its course", State power is still a mere "instrument of that justification of sinful man", i.e. a tool for God's purposes (p 16). It is for this reason that Barth affirms Romans 13 that honour is due to the State, because "in [the State's] authority we are dealing indirectly, but in reality, with the authority of Jesus Christ." (pp 18, 36)
However, it is not lost on Barth that the State is in subordination to Christ (pp 26, 31). In light of that, Barth submits that the State honours the Church (Christ's body) no matter if it honours good and punishes evil, or vice versa. If it honours good, it honours the Church by administering justice and protecting the law, and thus indirectly "granting the gospel of justification a free and assure course." (pp 30-31). However if it honours evil, the "honour" it bestows upon the Church "will then consist in the suffering of the followers of Christ." (p 54) This, then, is how the Church is to be subject to the State (Rom 13): by either preaching justification under the State's protection (i.e. its proper role), or by suffering injustice. Either way, the Church acknowledges the State's power as God-given (p 65). If the Church is not prepared to suffer injustice, then, Barth submits, it "would belong to those evil ones who must fear its power" in Romans 13:4-5 (p 66).
While they share a relationship, Church and State should remain separate and distinct. The Church should not try to be the State, and the State should not usurp the role of the Church (p 54). The Church should also not unquestioningly assent to the State which directly or indirectly suppresses the freedom of God's Word (p 69). Rather, the Church intercedes for (1 Tim 2:1-2) and gives honour to the State through calm and dignified resistance. If it unquestioningly assents, it acquiesces to the perversion of State power and thus becomes an enemy of the State (p 69).
Members of the Church, however, should not only pray, and exclude themselves from participation in a democratic process, any more than serious prayer can continue without the corresponding work (p 79). Rather, Barth submits that Christians are called to work and struggle for the earthly 'city' while they hope for a heavenly one, striving for ideals of a just state (pp 80-81). However, Barth is also quick to point out that the distinction between Church and State as well as "the fact that Christians are "foreigners" in the sphere of the State" should still hold (p 80).
What is a just state? As alluded to above, a just state is one which protects and actively grants the Church's freedom to proclaim the gospel (p 83). The State should go no further, or risk intruding into the sphere of the Church, governing and requiring the love of its members, which turns it into an unjust state (p 77). Indeed, "the earthly State is neither called, nor able, to establish on earth the eternal law of the heavenly Jerusalem, because no humans are either called, or able, to perform that task " (p 84)
Final Thoughts
Church and State was written in 1938, during the height of Hitler's Nazi Germany. It is thus no wonder that Barth is very critical of the Church's unquestioning assent to the State (p 69) and affirms that the State is to be limited in its own sphere, not to intrude into the realm of the Church and dictate truth or require the love of its citizens (pp 54, 77). At the same time, Barth is very clear on the limitations of the earthly State and what it can accomplish (p 84), that it can never be the heavenly Jerusalem. Christians who engage in politics in the hope of striving for a glorious vision of a State (like many did in Barth's Germany) should thus tread carefully, especially when divine language is invoked in that vision.
Barth also calls for the Church to be subject to the State in accordance with the command in Romans 13 as the State's power comes from God (pp 18, 36). This applies to an unjust State as well, though since it perverts the divine origin of its power, the Church gives honour to it by calm and dignified resistance on top of a willingness to suffer injustice (p 65), pointing the State back to its proper function. Notice the difference between Barth's narrative and the fear-mongering in many religio-political circles – instead of preparing to suffer (like Christ did), many such circles advocate for resistance and/or advocacy by capitalising on fear, especially fear of suffering (be it from a 'tyrannical' government, a policy they view as unjust, or a change in way of life (eg. the effects of immigration policies in western nations)). It is thus striking that Barth both calls the Church to prepare to suffer and starts his book not with the vision of a just state, but with the stark reality of State power being used to execute Jesus.
Should Christians in democratic society then advocate withdrawal like the Anabaptists? Barth clearly does not think so, advocating for Christians to participate in the democratic process as serious prayer [cannot continue] without the corresponding work" (p 79). This part of Barth's thought thus also cuts against Christians only offering 'thoughts and prayers' with no concrete action towards alleviating injustice (eg. poverty, inequality, or (albeit specific to the US context) gun violence). Still, political participation does not equate or ipso facto lead to a diminishing of the separation between Church and State (p 80), nor should it cause Christians to place their hope in the State and politics, as some have done. We should be clear of the role and limitations of the State – it should not intrude into the sphere of the Church.
In a world where political parties and platforms claim God's name and promise 'Christian' nations and/or policies, the Church should be careful not to forget her role – she is not to enter into the realm of the State (p 54), nor is she to fear (p 66), but she should be prepared to suffer like her master.
P.S. Page references are with reference to the 90-page edition put out by the Student Christian Movement Press in 1939. An e-copy can be found here.
However, it is not lost on Barth that the State is in subordination to Christ (pp 26, 31). In light of that, Barth submits that the State honours the Church (Christ's body) no matter if it honours good and punishes evil, or vice versa. If it honours good, it honours the Church by administering justice and protecting the law, and thus indirectly "granting the gospel of justification a free and assure course." (pp 30-31). However if it honours evil, the "honour" it bestows upon the Church "will then consist in the suffering of the followers of Christ." (p 54) This, then, is how the Church is to be subject to the State (Rom 13): by either preaching justification under the State's protection (i.e. its proper role), or by suffering injustice. Either way, the Church acknowledges the State's power as God-given (p 65). If the Church is not prepared to suffer injustice, then, Barth submits, it "would belong to those evil ones who must fear its power" in Romans 13:4-5 (p 66).
While they share a relationship, Church and State should remain separate and distinct. The Church should not try to be the State, and the State should not usurp the role of the Church (p 54). The Church should also not unquestioningly assent to the State which directly or indirectly suppresses the freedom of God's Word (p 69). Rather, the Church intercedes for (1 Tim 2:1-2) and gives honour to the State through calm and dignified resistance. If it unquestioningly assents, it acquiesces to the perversion of State power and thus becomes an enemy of the State (p 69).
Members of the Church, however, should not only pray, and exclude themselves from participation in a democratic process, any more than serious prayer can continue without the corresponding work (p 79). Rather, Barth submits that Christians are called to work and struggle for the earthly 'city' while they hope for a heavenly one, striving for ideals of a just state (pp 80-81). However, Barth is also quick to point out that the distinction between Church and State as well as "the fact that Christians are "foreigners" in the sphere of the State" should still hold (p 80).
What is a just state? As alluded to above, a just state is one which protects and actively grants the Church's freedom to proclaim the gospel (p 83). The State should go no further, or risk intruding into the sphere of the Church, governing and requiring the love of its members, which turns it into an unjust state (p 77). Indeed, "the earthly State is neither called, nor able, to establish on earth the eternal law of the heavenly Jerusalem, because no humans are either called, or able, to perform that task " (p 84)
Final Thoughts
Church and State was written in 1938, during the height of Hitler's Nazi Germany. It is thus no wonder that Barth is very critical of the Church's unquestioning assent to the State (p 69) and affirms that the State is to be limited in its own sphere, not to intrude into the realm of the Church and dictate truth or require the love of its citizens (pp 54, 77). At the same time, Barth is very clear on the limitations of the earthly State and what it can accomplish (p 84), that it can never be the heavenly Jerusalem. Christians who engage in politics in the hope of striving for a glorious vision of a State (like many did in Barth's Germany) should thus tread carefully, especially when divine language is invoked in that vision.
Barth also calls for the Church to be subject to the State in accordance with the command in Romans 13 as the State's power comes from God (pp 18, 36). This applies to an unjust State as well, though since it perverts the divine origin of its power, the Church gives honour to it by calm and dignified resistance on top of a willingness to suffer injustice (p 65), pointing the State back to its proper function. Notice the difference between Barth's narrative and the fear-mongering in many religio-political circles – instead of preparing to suffer (like Christ did), many such circles advocate for resistance and/or advocacy by capitalising on fear, especially fear of suffering (be it from a 'tyrannical' government, a policy they view as unjust, or a change in way of life (eg. the effects of immigration policies in western nations)). It is thus striking that Barth both calls the Church to prepare to suffer and starts his book not with the vision of a just state, but with the stark reality of State power being used to execute Jesus.
Should Christians in democratic society then advocate withdrawal like the Anabaptists? Barth clearly does not think so, advocating for Christians to participate in the democratic process as serious prayer [cannot continue] without the corresponding work" (p 79). This part of Barth's thought thus also cuts against Christians only offering 'thoughts and prayers' with no concrete action towards alleviating injustice (eg. poverty, inequality, or (albeit specific to the US context) gun violence). Still, political participation does not equate or ipso facto lead to a diminishing of the separation between Church and State (p 80), nor should it cause Christians to place their hope in the State and politics, as some have done. We should be clear of the role and limitations of the State – it should not intrude into the sphere of the Church.
In a world where political parties and platforms claim God's name and promise 'Christian' nations and/or policies, the Church should be careful not to forget her role – she is not to enter into the realm of the State (p 54), nor is she to fear (p 66), but she should be prepared to suffer like her master.
P.S. Page references are with reference to the 90-page edition put out by the Student Christian Movement Press in 1939. An e-copy can be found here.
May 10, 2025
Written by German theologian Karl Barth in 1938. It still stands today as a must read in regard to the issue of the church and the state. I highly recommend it. The only reason I did not give it five stars is a technical one. The edition I have, is an English translation of the German original, however the text leaves untranslated the citations of the New Testament in Greek and the church fathers in Latin. If you are not versed in those languages, you will have to look up some of the references that can't be inferred form context.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews