Over at Universitas Veritas they were discussing the role of government and the Christian stance. One commenter was dissenting with the blogger about whether or not a Christian must obey the government. The position of the blog was, essentially, that if the government fails to meet its responsibilities, then rebellion is justified. In particular view was the American Revolution. A "Christian" subject colony of England overthrew its rulers because they believed they had God-given inalienable rights. How does that correlate with the Romans 13 view that all authority is from God, and rebellion against authority is rebellion against God? Of course, they didn't come to an agreement over there. Nor would I expect them to. I can't seem to come to an agreement in my own mind.
One side is informed by modern democracy or the government of the people. The idea that the government would be put in place by God and the people must submit to the government as to God is abhorrent to that side. It is not merely abhorrent; it is immoral. That side believes that we have the responsibility to involve ourselves in government by voting at the very least to make sure that the government meets its God-given responsibilities. The notion, of course, is completely useless beyond anything resembling "democracy". The American Revolutionaries didn't have the option of voting out the King of England. Paul didn't have the option of voting Caesar out of office. Jesus was never allowed to go to the polling place to remove the religious authorities of His day.
The other side is informed by the simple and straightforward biblical statements:
Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil. Wherefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor (Rom. 13:1-7).How do we who are people who claim that the Bible is the Word of God get around something that says "he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God"?
So I end up in this little brain struggle. (The "little" refers to the size of my brain, not the struggle.) I see what Paul wrote. I see that no one in the Bible ever tried to overthrow the government in which they found themselves, even when it was an unmistakably evil government. And I say, "Never!" But if that were the case, then the American Revolution was a sin, not a victory from God. Yet the founding fathers were all convinced that they were acting on God's instructions. Am I smarter than they? No, not smarter. But it does seem clear that there are no exception clauses in the Rom. 13 passage. Oh yeah? So would you submit to Hitler or Stalin? I would as long as they didn't command that I do something to violate God's commands. But if you did nothing to stop them and they commanded the deaths of millions of Jews, wouldn't you share in their guilt to some degree? But if that's the case, where do I find the exception clause from Rom. 13?
You see? I'm just a mix sometimes of absolute certainty and muddled confusion. If any of you dear readers have the enlightenment I need to solve this riddle, please share it with me ... because I'm absolutely certain that I am not absolutely certain on this topic.
1 comment:
A true conundrum, knowing when to overthrow a government.
In my understanding, if you choose to overthrow government, even Hitler's, you may face a serious consequence. Dietrich Boenhoffer is a good example. He supported the failed plot against Hitler and was executed. Charles Stanley always says, "obey God and He'll take care of the consequences". Boenhoffer took a great risk and God did not take care of the consequences. I'd say it was still worth the try and I think Benhoffer said as much himself in his letters from prison.
Paul leaves a nagging question in this doctrine: for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil.
What happens when the government rewards evil and punishes good? The bold part above is as close to an escape clause as you're gonna get. But Paul doesn't give us a direct command of what to do when these servants don't serve God's will, and I think it's wise to leave us in the dark. Wrath belongs to God, not to a man.
The bottom line is that God is always sovereign over all people. All the civilizations that rose up in the ancient world had a system of governmental authority in place. It was not an idea that came from Rome or Egypt. It came from God just as Paul wrote.
Post a Comment