Thoughts from Romans 13 (part 11)

It’s fascinating to compare the different histories of Canada, the United States, and Mexico. Each one had a very different beginning, based on very different responses to government. And that beginning has affected the history of each.

After all, sometimes government is a very complicated thing. What if local government contradicts federal government? What if the government contradicts its own laws? What if someone takes power illegally?

Canada gained its independence peacefully, remaining loyal to the monarch back in England. In fact, the monarch is still the official Head of State. That perspective of loyalty was reinforced as both loyalists and pacifists streamed into Canada when their neighbour to the south took a different path.

In the United States, local government won out against higher government. Believing that the higher government in England was unjust, lower governments called for resistance. And so it was a war that led to independence in the USA.

Mexico was another situation again. When Napolean forced the king of Spain to abdicate along with his son, many Mexicans considered themselves loyal to the true king and in rebellion against a usurper. But the war in Mexico also turned into a war against more local government, and finally a war for independence. And so it was doubly different than the war in the USA.

Who was right? Or was everyone right? Of course, each country already had a very different history and culture, and each country was in a different situation. But each group felt that they were doing “the right thing” in the name of justice.

As we think about when and how we should obey a government, some complicated questions arise. As we’ve seen from Scripture so far, we are to be generally subject to governing authorities, but there are clearly biblical exceptions. And sometimes it is helpful to think of extreme cases – whatever that may be in our mind. What if the antichrist was the government? Or one of the great murderous tyrants in history? Is there a time to resist or even fight back, for the protection of our family and community? If so, when?

Of course we’re not the first people to struggle with these questions. People in the three countries above all struggled with them, in fact each looking at the problem from a Christian-based worldview.

Last time we talked about love, and were reminded of the importance of the law that God has revealed to us. We’ve also talked about our responsibility to call governments to repentance.

But what is our responsibility when governments begin to fall rapidly away from their responsibility to praise the good and punish the evil? What happens when they no longer punish certain evils, but they actually begin to actively praise evil, and even start to punish the good?

Governments in this world don’t tend to control their power, they tend to expand it. And they begin to believe – and maybe we start to believe – that they have responsibilities that they really don’t have. Some begin to believe that they are actually the ultimate authority in the world. They deny God’s authority, and try to take away authority from other leaders that He has designated in other spheres, such as the church or family.

I’ll be blunt. We should be very, very concerned about the direction that some governments are taking today.

In the mid-1500s, the believers of the city of Magdeburg (in modern-day Germany) were confronted with persecution, and felt that the time had come to “obey God rather than men”. And they wrote what we call The Magdeburg Confession.

The writers in the confession started with Romans 13 and its definition of governing authorities. If those authorities are not conforming to their purpose as set out in Scripture and in Romans 13 in particular, they are “tyrants”. They then basically describe different levels of government injustice, and how they felt that Christians should respond to each one. Whether you agree with their conclusions or not, I think it’s helpful to take a pause in our study and think a little about what they had to say.

The first level is represented by the “Not excessively atrocious” governor. (As you can see, they had a very optimistic view of government! Of course, we understand that we live in a fallen world. The only perfect king is the Lord Jesus!) This governor may indeed be causing harm to the people under him or her, but usually it’s not excessive or irreversible harm. Those under his jurisdiction have the responsibility to obey, but they should also warn him. Those under him would be what they would call the “lesser magistrates”.

For example, the governor or premier (the lesser magistrate) should obey, and yet at the same time warn a president or prime minister (the greater magistrate) that what they’re doing is harmful or unjust. And we continue to be subject to the governing authorities, treating them with honour and respect, even though we ourselves suffer from their unwise decisions or sin. In other words, in this case we obey, even if it causes us harm.

Next we have the lawless tyrant. This authority is much worse, doing significant harm, causing the death of many people, breaking treaties and agreements.

The authors of the confession say that in this case, although it would be permissible to disobey, we may still choose to suffer and yet obey, leaving vengeance to God. But of course this assumes that we can submit without sinning ourselves. So in this case, it depends – it’s a question of conscience. As you can see, our default is to obey – we’re trying to obey and live in peace, when it’s possible.

Third, we have the coercive tyrant. This authority is trying to get us to sin, using coercive means.

In this case, the lesser magistrate (and the individual, in his or her “self-government), must not obey. That’s not to say that we can never obey this authority, but when they are acting in this way – coercing us to sin – we do not obey. In fact, the lesser magistrate must defend his or her people from the greater magistrate. We defend our families or cities or churches from the harm that this authority is doing. Of course, we do this peacefully when at all possible.

At the last level is the persecutor of God. This authority is warring constantly and deliberately against what is good and just according to the Word of God. The Bible is, of course, the only standard for what is good and just. But this authority praises the evil and punishes the good, perhaps by deception, perhaps by “clever” arguments, or perhaps even by force.

This authority replaces the gospel with its own fundamental ideology, promoting its own sinful beliefs. It becomes an antichrist – perhaps not the antichrist, but an antichrist.

And so it becomes a constant and serious threat to those under its power. According to the authors of the confession, this authority should be resisted at all cost.

These people almost 500 years ago were struggling with the same basic ideas that we’ve been discussing. Yes, we know that we should submit to the governing authorities and honour them. But there are clearly times when we should resist. How do we know when we’ve crossed that line?

I don’t have all the answers, but we are certainly responsible to think about these things and talk about these things. And I have some news for you – these questions are not going to disappear in the next few weeks or months.

Next time we’ll try to pull together some of the many things that we’ve seen in the Scriptures about how we should respond to governments. But meanwhile, think about these things. Where does your government fit in the four levels above? Why? Which government (local, state, provincial, federal, city, etc)? What types of laws have they recently passed, and what are they promoting? How do these things affect the people and authorities under their jurisdiction?

Thanks for this summary of the levels of injustice from Ryan MacPherson. A modern English translation of the confession is available here.