On the secular

 A while ago I wrote in defence of something like a qualified sacred secular divide. In Bible terms, there is temple / garden, land and world. There is the holy and the common, the special and the general. Both of which matter. We live for Jesus in the church and in the world. There is special gathered covenant renewal corporate public worship and there is worshiping Jesus in your own quiet time, by doing the dishes, closing that deal, driving the kids to football, playing the drums and so on. 

The word secular is an interesting one. 

Around 1300, it referred to so-called "secular" rather than "religious" clergy. This almost seems nonsense to modern ears, but it referred to the regular parish clergy who lived in the world rather than in monasteries. 

In this sense, the Reformation did wonders to establish the holiness of the "secular" world. The family and home and work were just as good as the convent - in fact, better, because God meant this world and full engagement with it for his glory. (This is the anti-secular sacred divide point again, and it is well made).

But today the word "secular" tends to mean non-religious. 

In this sense, secular life is both impossible and undesirable. 

Impossible, because even atheists have a kind of religion in the sense of a code of ethics, a highest principle, a "god". It is naïve to think that there can be some space carved out that is immune from ultimate commitments. In the public square, some god will reign supreme (Freedom, Tolerance, Nation, Security, Prosperity, The Man of Power, maybe) or the gods will do battle. There is no neutrality and we ought to wake up to that. 

And the "secular" is also undesirable. If Jesus Christ is Lord and he is good he is Lord of all and Lord of all of life including so called secular education and government. 

Kuyper's famous line in his speech opening the Free University in 1880, was right:, “There’s not a square inch in the whole domain of human existence over which Christ, who is Lord over all, does not exclaim, ‘Mine’!”

The universe is a theocracy, in the sense that it is ruled by God. Imagine 99.99999% of a nation were Bible believing Christians. They might make all sorts of careful provisions for minority rights, but it would seem foolish that in their legislature they should suspend belief in reality. 

This Christian theocracy, which is a fact, does not mean the rule of clerics. The church and the state are ordained by God as distinct spheres. This is not the pastor for PM nor the King preaching sermons. But the "secular" ruler should of course read his Bible and listen to the Vicar. He will seek godly counsel as he seeks to make laws for the good of all his subjects. 

Alfred the Great was on to something when he pre-fixed the Ten Commandments to his legal code. The Americans are right to think of their nation as "under God", even if they are a little confused about what that might look like in practice. 

Or maybe we could learn lessons from the people of Ireland:

In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred,
		We, the people of Éire,
		Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial,
		Gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain the rightful independence of our Nation,
		And seeking to promote the common good, with due observance of Prudence, Justice and Charity, so that the dignity and freedom of the individual may be assured, true social order attained, the unity of our country restored, and concord established with other nations,
		Do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this Constitution.