No rigid insistence on independence gathers the entirety of the biblical witness under its stern gaze. The Jews have at times known how to thrive as imperial subjects. A similar tolerance for political dependence characterizes the New Testament documents.
Ezra is particularly liberal with kudos to the Persian king:
‘And you, Ezra, according to the God-given wisdom you possess, appoint magistrates and judges who may judge all the people in the province Beyond the River who know the laws of your God; and you shall teach those who do not know them. All who will not obey the law of your God and the law of the king, let judgment be strictly executed on them, whether for death or for banishment or for confiscation of their goods or for imprisonment.’ Blessed be the LORD, the God of our ancestors, who put such a thing as this into the heart of the king to glorify the house of the LORD in Jerusalem, and who extended to me steadfast love before the king and his counselors, and before all the king’s mighty officers. I took courage, for the hand of the LORD my God was upon me, and I gathered leaders from Israel to go up with me.
At least in this writer’s country, the rhetoric of Christian people lurches easily towards the assumption that all is lost if political structures, processes, and indeed protagonists cannot be explicitly lumped with the spiritual body politic of choice. The biblical anthology looks, against this modern backdrop, more versatile.
Ezra’s conviction belies a confidence that YHWH works behind the scenes, his name sometimes missing from the credits.
Canter Bridge 
Leave a Reply