Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in
All Questions
Question 4
The chapter notes that “for the first time, Christians began assuming governmental positions,” and it frames this as part of losing separation from the world; what assumptions about holiness, witness, and mission are being challenged by the idea that taking government power is spiritually dangerous?
Another way to ask: Why might gaining government power be spiritually dangerous for Christians? What does that idea challenge about how we think about holiness, witness, and mission?

Direct Answer Bercot challenges the assumption that gaining governmental roles automatically strengthens Christian witness or advances the mission; he frames it as a step toward losing “separation from the world.” The transcript implies that proximity to power and prosperity tends to corrupt the church and pull it away from Jesus’ kingdom priorities.

Support from Transcript:

  • He says Christians “began to lose their separation from the world,” and “for the first time, Christians began assuming governmental positions.”
  • The church’s discipline became “lax,” particularly in Rome—suggesting worldliness and weakened holiness accompany social acceptance.
  • After Constantine’s favor, “Christians went from being a persecuted minority to being the court favorites,” showing how quickly the church’s social position can change.
  • Lactantius is quoted warning God kept Christians under others’ rule “lest they should become corrupted by… prosperity… slide into luxury… despise the commandments of God.”
  • Bercot adds this became reality: “once Christians came into power, they did become corrupted… slid into luxury… despised the commandments of God.”
Discussion Follow-ups How might a desire for “influence” be different from a desire for faithfulness, if influence tends to bring the temptations Bercot describes?

Jumpstarter 4 of 10
Back Questions Next