Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Church and State Relationship: Questions & Answers

What are the two main historical views on the relationship between church and state according to Dr. Lloyd-Jones?

According to Dr. Lloyd-Jones, there are two main historical views on this relationship. The first view held that church and state are one, which is further divided into two positions: the Roman Catholic view (where the church should control the state) and the Erastian view (where the state should control the church). The second major view is that church and state are essentially different and distinct entities. This second view is also subdivided between those who believe in an alliance between church and state (like many mainline Protestants) and the Separatists who believed in complete separation from the state.

Who was Roger Williams and why is he important in the history of church-state relations?

Roger Williams was a Cambridge-educated Anglican minister born around 1600 who emigrated to Boston in 1631. He's important because he was a pioneer of complete religious freedom and separation of church and state. After finding that the American colonists hadn't separated far enough from the Church of England's errors, he advocated that magistrates had no right to punish breaches of the "first table of the law" (religious matters). For these views, he was banished from Massachusetts and went on to establish Providence and found Rhode Island state. Dr. Lloyd-Jones calls him "the father of American democracy" and largely credits him for America's complete separation between church and state. Williams maintained friendly relationships with leaders like Oliver Cromwell and John Milton despite his challenging positions.

How did the Pilgrim Fathers contradict their own purpose after arriving in America?

Dr. Lloyd-Jones points out a remarkable irony about the Pilgrim Fathers. They left England in 1620 to escape ecclesiastical tyranny and to have freedom to worship God as they believed was right. However, after establishing their colonies in Massachusetts, they "proceeded to do the exact thing from which they were escaping." They became religious and ecclesiastical tyrants themselves. They confined the franchise (right to vote) only to church members, expected the state to enforce church discipline, and were "utterly intolerant." Dr. Lloyd-Jones describes them as "semi-separatists" because while they had separated from the Anglican Church, they still believed that magistrates and governing powers should exercise discipline on behalf of the church.

What position did Oliver Cromwell take on church-state relations?

Oliver Cromwell, whom Dr. Lloyd-Jones calls "in many ways the greatest Englishman who's ever lived," was an Independent but wasn't entirely clear on the church-state relationship. As Lord Protector, he felt that governance required some ordering of church affairs, so he appointed "triers" to examine preachers and appointed preachers himself. In this way, he continued a system similar to what Elizabeth and the Stuarts had done before him, though with different theological foundations. However, despite these practical compromises, Cromwell had "very clear ideas about religious tolerance and freedom of worship" and was the first leader to give freedom of worship to Jews in England.

Why does Dr. Lloyd-Jones suggest that the confusion between church and state has hindered evangelism?

Dr. Lloyd-Jones suggests that "this whole confusion as between church and state has been, and I would suggest still is, one of the greatest obstacles to true evangelism." He offers two main reasons. First, the state-church idea has "offended many people and still does." Second, it introduces an element of confusion that harms the gospel. He further notes that historically, the state church has "generally resisted true revival and the efforts of the most notable evangelists that God has produced in the Christian church." This suggests that when political and religious authority become intertwined, it can create barriers to the genuine spread of the gospel and authentic spiritual renewal.

Why do Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals in England have opposite views on disestablishment of the Church of England?

In a fascinating observation about contemporary church politics, Dr. Lloyd-Jones explains that Anglo-Catholics (including the Archbishop of Canterbury at that time) generally favor disestablishment of the Church of England to gain what they call "spiritual freedom" from state control. They were frustrated when Parliament rejected their proposed 1928 prayer book.

Meanwhile, Evangelicals, whom one might expect to support spiritual freedom from state interference, actually oppose disestablishment. They do so because disestablishment would put power into the hands of bishops, most of whom are Anglo-Catholics in doctrine. Evangelicals rely on Parliament to reject Anglo-Catholic innovations. Dr. Lloyd-Jones calls this an "argument from expediency" that raises questions about whether Christians should make decisions based on pragmatic concerns rather than biblical principles.