Romans 13 ‘be subject to the governing authorities’ is a great text when the powers that are in place are ones that we favour! When they are not we are likely push for their removal… Surely that indicates that we do not have here a carte blanche text endorsing all authority as an extension of God. Totalitarian governments? North Korea? (And some closer to home?)
[My OT readings are in the Pentateuch for now… laws upon laws… not simply ‘spiritual’ laws (they are the minority) but social governmental laws. Societal behaviour – care for neighbour, extended by Jesus to ‘the enemy’ – lies at the heart of it… hence it is no surprise that the prophetic critique of Israel was as much at a social as a spiritual level, and no surprise that the ‘Gospel’ finds its context in the Roman world that was forever proclaiming ‘good news’ with ‘peace on earth and good will to all’.]
Here is the Romans 13 text:
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval, for it is God’s agent for your good. But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear the sword in vain! It is the agent of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be subject, not only because of wrath but also because of conscience. For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s agents, busy with this very thing. Pay to all what is due them: taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.
And why not first apply this to Jesus, who was executed as a criminal by the state / empire. Do what is good, Jesus, and you will be approved… oh no you must have been doing something bad cos we cannot see how you were approved by the authorities (God’s appointed ones) for they brought out the sword.
And what about Paul, bad rebel as he was, being imprisoned? He did not sit in prison saying ‘God put me here for those authorities are enacting the will of God’! He always found a way of cooperating with God, he was focused on doing what was right in the eyes of God, and understood where he was being punished unjustly that he was living out the cruciform life-style there.
Paul’s letters are contingent – they are into a situation and he is writing here to the Roman believers who are based in the centre of the Empire – a system of government that he was proclaiming that there was an eternal alternative in the kingdom (basileia – same word for empire) of God with Jesus as ‘Lord’. His message was not firstly understood as a private call to raise one’s hand and pray a prayer but as a political (and therefore economic) message, and an-anti Rome one at that (‘they proclaim another King’).
There is a measure of irony in the passage, for Nero, was praised as one who brought peace without the need for the sword. This was the Nero who had already expelled the Jews from the city (52CE under Claudius – see Acts 18:3), was later to blame the Christians for the fire and was responsible for the deaths of both Peter and Paul in the capital.
Paul was not averse to challenging the Roman authorities and he certainly did not give them the right to do whatever they took upon themselves to do. From the overarching challenge of the political (as well as cosmic) term that ‘Jesus is Lord’ to his deeply provocative insistence that he would not leave the prison until the Roman delegated authority came and apologised to him and Silas (Acts 16:37). He did not complement them with ‘you are such an example of the extension of God’s justice’ but required that they apologise.
[Alongside and interwoven with irony we might also have various quotes that Paul is using without a total endorsement of them. Not uncommon in the rhetoric style of the day.]
In it all, with or without irony, there are deeply practical applications into a specific setting. ‘Pay your taxes’ is deeply practical (Rom. 13:6). Rome was forever needing money, in the early years Nero lowered the taxation level but by the time Paul wrote (57CE) there was the beginning of unrest due to increased taxation. This increased in the immediate years that followed bringing about major clashes with the authorities. We have practical advice as to what battles to fight. This is common place in the NT – Jesus (who was God and therefore protected regardless!!) did not go to Judea for they ‘were seeking to kill him’ (Jn.7:1) and ‘hid himself’ for the crowd had picked up stones to throw at him (Jn. 8:59). Wisdom and an understanding of time (long term transformation) is needed and can modify our response at any given time. Jesus, and those who followed, did not simply behave in a way where their lives were taken from them but they laid their lives down – timing was the key.
We have many other instances of disobedience in Scripture – the Egyptian midwives who did not kill the sons being born… and even lied, but had God’s approval!; Jesus not being handed over as a baby to the powers; Mordecai et al. The theme with regard to earthly authorities is summed up in the apostolic statement that ‘we must obey God rather then any human authority’.
And central to our faith is the breaking of the Roman seal on the tomb of Jesus. Truly an act of God,and one that forever established that earthly authorities are temporary. The birth of the new era is marked by the relativising of all authority – the ultimate political act of disobedience. In this Roman passage we also have the relativising of authority – if they are in some way related to God then they are accountable to act in a godly way.
To use Romans 13 (7 verses) as a universal and absolute theology of ‘submit to the powers’ is to abuse the passage and to ignore the wider context – both in this letter (‘do not be conformed to the spirit of this age’) and the canonical context – try another chapter 13, such as Revelation 13… appointed by God or a ‘beast’ in opposition to God?
Christianity (a modern term) will never make a good state religion; and followers of Jesus can never put their hope in the government (why on earth… on earth being a good term to use here… did Paul use / adopt the term ekklesia for the communities within the empire that expressed faith in the resurrected Jesus?).
If I insist on ‘obedience’ to the powers when they suit my preference, but work and pray for their removal when they are not in line with my bias I am indeed simply being subject to this age (Rom.12:2 – the wider context for these verses).
By all means have political leanings. I do. Have wisdom where to resist (though not with violence against people); have a long term vision. Do not give up hope. And when we do what is right we should not be surprised that we are marginalised or punished – by the governing authorities. That is something the Pauline and biblical corpus would agree with, hence we cannot make what Paul wrote, here in Romans 13, something to be implemented at face value.
Excellent Martin. As you know, I wrote of my early view of submitting to authority, even when I felt they were wrong…and as I grew in my life experience, evolved out of that position to a place of freedom, where we can and should evaluate what to adhere to and what not. Now, in this season of life, it’s hard to imagine some of the silly and extreme theological positions I bought into as a young follower of Jesus. I’m thankful for His grace and the maturing process that brings us to the realization that we have the “mind of Christ,” and can make wise and right decisions with the brain God gave us.
Hey Mike… thanks. And I think we can all identify with the ‘interesting’ positions that we once held. Thankfully for many of us it did a work in us of losing that exalted ego – sadly for others it was not positive. Now of course I have almost arrived and will not be needing to update any of my positions… And if you don’t agree with that… (As if!!! When we see him face to face then we will be like him, until then.)
Nice Martin. I think a more nuanced understanding of many verses would have prevented at least some of what we see in a significant portion of the so called Christian world. Think of how that admonition to comply with authority has shaped our world in the west. How many have suffered because a few were given power they should not have had.
I hope for a similar rethink of the Pauline verses about women submitting to husbands (often mindlessly). We are in a revival and rise of patriarchy globally. And women and children are suffering and dying because of it. Surely, Christ would have something to say about it all other than ‘too bad, that’s your lot in life’.
Funny how we are so fast to accept interpretations that were obviously countered by Jesus.
Absolutely Ann… I think absolutely likewise. Jesus as male (and Jewish) because male and Jewish is superior? Or because he embodies sinful ‘flesh’… Gentiles and females not absolved but Jews and males where sin centres? I go for the latter – also why I see a link between Zionism and patriarchy. Also if (as I believe) Ascended Jesus is neither male nor female… So easy to read Scripture with the lens of patriarchy – after all so much is written through that lens – I was reading Leviticus this morning and the different valuations used for male and female. But a Jesus’ lens… good news to females, Gentiles and slaves (there is neither Jew nor Greek, rich nor poor, and not male and female… does that mean that those who held the centre and positioned everyone else the Gospel is ‘bad news’ for those who won’t give way?)
The ‘submit to husbands’ (in Ephesians) begins with ‘submit yourselves to one another’ and there is no ‘submit’ verse in the verse translated as ‘wives submit’… Other passages are not so easy but they move away from the culture of the day while not totally offending the culture. Thank God for those who challenge the (apparent) absolute statements such as those to say continue on the journey and let’s see where the Gospel takes us…
Probably the male/ female is the crux that has to be challenged – if that is truly embraced there should be a follow through to other hierarchies being challenged… hence your observation of the rise of patriarchy / misogyny is so pertinent.
(Maybe I will do a post on this.)