Can Christians Participate in Civil Disobedience?
November 15th, 2006
(By John MacArthur)
We believe the Scripture teaches that we are to submit to government even if that government does not function entirely (or even primarily) by biblical principles (Romans 13:1-7). That principle is explicit in Peter’s message to servants (1 Peter 2:18-19), which directly follows his more general comments regarding government (vv. 13-17). And that epistle teaches the same thing over and over again in varied ways: Submit even if you suffer, because in doing so you identify with Christ and are blessed (cf. 2:21-24; 3:1-2; 4:12-14; 5:9-10). There are times when we must obey God rather than men, but we believe that we should disobey the authorities only if they command us to do something directly against God’s law (e.g. Acts 5:29 and its surrounding context).
That is a fine distinction, but it is precisely where the issue lies. If we say that Christians are only required to obey their government when it is functioning by scriptural principles, we then nullify the teaching of Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 in just about any age of history–especially the time during which those passages were written! The Roman government was as corrupt and godless as any in history, and yet Paul and Peter told Christians to “live in subjection,” “submit to every ordinance,” and “honor the king.”
So we believe that civil disobedience is justified only when government compels us to sin, or when there is no legal recourse for fighting injustice. The reason we draw the line there is simply because all the scriptural examples of civil disobedience fall squarely into those two situations. Any other kind of activism has no precedent in the Word of God and violates the spirit of Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2.
Dr. M writes: “There are times when we must obey God rather than men, but we believe that we should disobey the authorities only if they command us to do something directly against God’s law (e.g. Acts 5:29 and its surrounding context).”
I would expand that slightly to include; “We believe that we should disobey the authorities if they forbid us to do that which God’s Word specifically requires of us” as well.
A much needed topic for discussion. A very welcome article.
…or when there is no legal recourse for fighting injustice.
I’d like to see further explication of this. In its broadest sense, it could negate the preceding delineation of civil disobedience’s limits (i.e., it is justified only when we are directly commanded to disobey God’s revealed will).
Surely the Roman government of Paul’s day was rife with injustice (as is every government of man, to a lesser or greater degree). Yet in Scripture he forbade disobedience to Rome. By what standard then do we judge that a law is so unjust–even if it requires no direct sin from us–that illegal action against it is justified?
Daniel was a good example(1:8).
For years, one of my toughest emotional battles was in consideration of the actions of Martin Luther King jr. in fighting institutional racism.
I had so many Christians telling me that he was wrong and should have submitted. Perhaps not coincidentally, all of these brothers and sisters were White, to a person.
(I’m not angry with them, nor do I hold it against them or let it fester in my heart.)
It wasn’t until I really started growing in understanding and submission to His Word that I understood that “fine distinction”, and finally gained some peace of mind.
They didn’t know it but these folks had, by their words, seeded a guilt within me, thinking that I was benefitting from a sinful action. (Not that we don’t in other ways, but when you believe something is a just action and then have those who you think are the people you should listen to tell you that it was wrong, you get kinda twisted in your thinking sometimes!)
There is a line of distinction yet honor, love(agape), and God’s glory alone are to be evident. When lacking or not the priority, humans are elevated and celebrated in history and recall tendency might not even consider a “tack on, oh by the way, in the name of Jesus” event.
Even further on this issue of our government I have written a blog on “To Vote or Not to Vote” which should “ruffle some feathers.” But, we must be careful as Christians how we deal with our governemnt knowing that God placed George Bush and Bill Clinton as much as He place Hitler and Saddam Hussein into their respective positions. Trusting in the Lord’s sovereignty is crucial in this thought of how far to take submitting to our government. Without believing in God’s complete sovereignty and preordination of all things we will only by default start to fall out of submission to those above us.
It is unfortunate that verse 8 is rarely expounded in discussions on Romans 13 It reads “owe no man anything except the obligation to love one another” It is this Law of love that frames the context in which Romans 13:1-8 is to be understood.
We are to obey the government because we love our fellow man not because God has subjected us to the state. Verse 1, stated as an imperative and not a declarative, makes that our responsibility to be subject, not God’s responsibility to subject us. We are to subject ourselves to the governing authorities.
The Law of Love provides a means to draw the fine when Christian must disobey the state. When the state becomes a threat to the welfare of people Christians must protect the oppressed. Sometimes we must hide the Jews, as the ten Boom family did,from the Nazis. Sometimes God uses such resistance to enact regime change. When He does the new regime becomes the ordained governing authority.
I would also submit for consideration the fact that, at least in principle, in the U.S. we are a government “by the people”. I think the reality of a self-governing society introduces additional responsibilities (voting, etc.) that should significantly influence discussions like this one and may, at times, make things less black & white.
I don’t believe the scriptures that command us to submit necessarily would mean that we give up our constitutional rights, for instance.
I am curious, do you view our Founding Fathers to have participated in a lawful rebellion?