I’ve always been intrigued with institutions, specifically the family, the church, and the state.  These three have all been set up by God and endowed with authority to implement his wishes on earth.  As a pastor most of my time is spent on firming up the first two.  I think a lot about the state too.  Unfortunately there is ample confusion as to where the church ends and the state begins or vice versa.  There is also much fighting, misunderstanding, and suspicion between these two institutions.  Each suspects the other of foul play and each has a fair amount of history to back up these suspicions.  In thinking about the church and the state I think a lot about what makes it strong.  There are weak churches and weak states.  There are strong churches and strong states.  Naturally we want to be part of a strong church but also a strong state.  Out of a question for what makes for strength, I recently read Livy’s Early History of Rome.

From the beginning Rome had a sense of destiny.  Consider Livy’s statement on pg. 21, “But (I must believe) it was already written in the book of fate that this great city of ours should arise, and the first steps be taken to the founding of the mightiest empire ithe world has known-next to God’s.”  This sentiment rested in the hearts of the Roman people.  They sensed from the beginning that God’s hand was on their city for greatness.

Rome was founded by a warrior king named Romulus.  He became the king after murdering his twin brother.  Romulus had a knack for gathering dissenters and outcasts who needed a second chance.  Rome became a city populated by males who loved to fight.  Romulus captured this propensity for war and channeled his armies effectively.  It was the military abilities of Romulus that drew men of like mind to him and made for this dynamic.  Thus, Rome was built on war.

Rome also had a knack for winning wars.  Over and over it seemed she would gain in a struggle.  Take for instance, the Sabine women.  The neighboring towns refused to allow the Romans to marry their women.  Frustrated, Romulus held a festival and invited all the neighboring towns to celebrate.  On cue, the Roman men forcibly abducted the Sabine women.  One by one the neighboring towns separately took up arms against Rome for this atrocity.  The neighboring cities fell as they came.  Had they fought together the outcome may have been different.  Finally, the Sabines came.  The battle was evenly match and reached something of a stalemate with Rome edging out somewhat victoriously.  As with all the other cities, Rome merged with the Sabines and thus became stronger.

When Romulus died power passed to a king named Numa.  Numa focused on peace and law.  The power of Roman law proved a formidable force in securing Roman prominence in the area.  In the years to come Rome’s power increased through the use of an excellent military machine and through the submission of every citizen to the laws of the state.  This is, in my opinion possibly the primary reason the Roman state worked.  Its citizenry adhered to the laws of the state.  I’m reminded of a commemorative stone at Thermopylae which reads “Go tell the Spartans, thou who passest by, that here, obedient to their laws we lie.”  The stone relays the words of the fallen Spartan soldiers.  This obedience is not a forced obligatory obedience but a voluntary yieldedness to the laws of one’s fatherland.  In the paragraphs that follow I want to provide a few examples of Roman adherence to law.

The reign of kings came to an end and was replaced by a republic which temporarily gave way to the decemvirs.  The decemvirs consisted of a board of ten men, something like an oligarchy.  A member of the oligarchy, Appius, attempted to abuse power by illegally procuring a girl while her father was off to war.  However, a message was delivered to him reporting that his daughter was in danger.  He returned in spite of Appius’ efforts.  Appius illegally used the law to forcibly take the young girl to be his own.  Her father resisted but to no avail.  For the father, the issue was freedom.  The magistrate had no authority to make a free born girl his own.  This undermined the stability of a nation of free born persons and it struck at the heart of Rome’s distaste for abuse of power and lawlessness.  The father saw that he could not prevail so he took his daughter’s life rather than submit both himself and her to the whims of a lawless man (pg. 220).  The incident proved to be a turning point.  Rome threw the decemvirs out of power and returned to a republic. 

The above-mentioned incident is severe and harsh.  However, it does illustrate a few things.  Romans were zealous of their freedom.  The father protested because Appius’ proposal was to make a slave out of a free born person due to his own selfish whims.   Imagine a populace that was so in tune with the foundation of the state that they would take such drastic measures to defy a breach of protocol.  Further, the father also understood law.  He would not submit to the decimvir.  His refusal to submit was based on the law which stood over Appius.  Rather than yield in order to live another day he simply refused based on principle.

Another example can be found in the story of Cincinnatus.  We have a city in OH named after this man and his picture can be found above.  In times of crisis Rome would appoint a dictator.  Rome had a intricate government in the republic which made for informed law but could get cumbersome in times of emergency.  The solution was a dictator.  Consider here the words of Livy in describing Cincinnatus (pg. 197), “Now I would solicit the particular attention of those numerous people who imagine that money is everything in this world, and that rank and ability are inseparable from wealth: let them observe that Cincinnatus, the one man in whom Rome reposed all her hope of survival, was at that moment working a little three-acre farm…”  It seems surreal but the hopes and dreams of the entire nation were put in the hands of this man.  Cincinnatus, upon request, took the power of the nation and wielded it with decisiveness on two separate occasions.  Having accomplished the salvation of the nation on two occasions, he returned the symbols of his power and went back to work on his farm. 

The first time Cincinnatus was given power it was to defeat a foreign army.  The second time it was to root out a usurper from within.  The usurper, Spurius Maelius, was maneuvering for power and position.  He was seeking to win political support through selling grain cheaply and then seizing power once his base was large enough.  Spurius had ambitions to have himself made sole ruler of Rome and to replace the republic.  Having rooted out the insurgency Cincinnatus gave a speech to the Roman citizenry in which he said of Spurius, “this was the man who thought he could buy our liberty with a bag of flour, and that Rome, the mistress of Italy, could be lured into servitude by tossing her a biscuit (pg. 271)!”  Rome's belly was in submission to principle and law.  Cincinnatus went on to chide Spurius for aspiring to “forbidden heights.”

Cincinnatus’ example was celebrated in Roman culture.  Here was self-restraint combined with a desire to see the state remain intact and be preserved.  He set an example of the model citizen by being content with three acres and a humble state in life and not aspiring to “forbidden heights.”  We see her also a refusal to bend the state to one’s personal desires and preferences.  The state cannot be compromised for the whims of the individual.

These are just two examples but they suffice.  Granted, the republic was eventually compromised by greedy men, the love of sensuality, and lawlessness.  These vices are the opposite of what made Rome great in the beginning.  The Romans were characterized by submission to law and a fierce resistance to compromise whether it be in battle or whether it be to the law.

 And now we move to a more noble idea.  A king, who lives forever, sits on his throne now and he too has a code.  This code is called the Sermon on the Mount.  The citizens are all those who choose him over the world system.  His kingdom can be found on every inhabitable continent, in different colors, sex, and socio-economic paradigms.  They too insist on his laws by living them out and dying in his name.  Of his kingdom Napoleon said, It is “founded upon love and to this day millions will die for him.”  The code springs from his wonderful person.  It is congruent with all beauty and harmony.  It proceeds from his divinity and is attractive to all who see it.  Without compulsion and without manipulation he rules his people with grace and righteousness.  His kingdom is now twice as old as the Roman one was.  To his kingdom, there shall be no end.