Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 5

Clement says, “We have no country on earth,” and Tertullian says “nothing is more entirely foreign to us than the affairs of state”; how does that posture challenge modern Christian patriotism, political activism, and the assumption that civic engagement is a primary way to love neighbor?

Another way to ask: Clement and Tertullian talk like Christians don’t really belong to any earthly nation or politics. How does that challenge Christian patriotism and activism today, and the idea that politics is a main way to love your neighbor?

Direct Answer Their posture challenges the idea that Christians should center their identity in a nation or treat politics as a main arena of faithfulness. The transcript presents early Christians as detached from patriotism and “affairs of state,” suggesting love of neighbor was pursued through kingdom loyalty rather than civic power.

Support from Transcript:

Clement: “We have no country on earth. Therefore, we can disdain earthly possessions.”
Tertullian: “Nor is there anything more entirely foreign to us than the affairs of state.”
Tertullian adds that “All zeal in the pursuit of glory and honor is dead in us,” weakening political ambition.
He describes one broader identity: “We acknowledge one all-embracing commonwealth, the world.”
Bercot explains why: because their focus was “on Jesus Christ and His kingdom,” “public affairs…were essentially irrelevant to them.”

Discussion Follow-ups What parts of your political identity feel like “citizenship,” and what parts are simply informed concern? If early Christians avoided state affairs to stay loyal to Jesus, what would that mean for how you define neighbor-love today?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 5 of 10