In light of the current crisis involving the Roman Catholic Church and President Obama, today's reading from Romans 13 was most interesting. An extended snippet: Let everyone 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."
So what is a Roman Catholic to do? Now the problem can be pretty easily dealt with if one simply recalls yesterday's exhortation, taken from chapter 12. "Let love be genuine, hate what is evil, hold fast to what is good." Abortion is evil. It involves killing an unborn child (referred to as a fetus, which is a stage in human development, no different than terms like baby, adolescent, adult are other terms). The fact that in our nation it is legal to kill unborn babies does not make it any less evil. The fact that the President of our nation has determined that Roman Catholics, who consider abortion to be murder, are being told that they have to provide access to abortion as part of their insurance plans, is evil. Am I saying the President is evil? Probably not, typical of most Liberal Protestants (that is a technical term dating to the 19th Century) our President's faith informs his decisions. He thinks a woman's rights to choose is the "Christian" thing to do as an act of justice. Like all Liberal Protestants (or Catholic Modernists) he is muddled in his thinking. A smart person making clear arguments from an erroneous assumption will always end up in error. He has made a huge error here. But it is up to God to judge if he is evil. I am not inclined to say that.
However, this does not solve the problem of St. Paul's blanket statement about a Christians response to government. Obedience to (human) authority is always risky. Politicians (Conservative, Moderate or Liberal) are notoriously human. They are afflicted with the limitations of human understanding, motivated by human desires and emotions, limited by human sin and brokeness, and prone to error (both intentional and unintentional). To equate obeying governments with obeying God is an overreach. So why did Paul (inspired by God!!!) do it?
I think our approach to Scripture is what is really at question here. Do we think that one should be able to read a verse, or several verses, and answer all life's questions? There is a brand of Christians who do seem to say this. I envy them, in many ways. Their lives are simpler. There is, however, another way. It is a way that embraces the Bible in its entirety as God's Word to us. Such an approach, reading Scripture passages in light of the entire message, is exhausting and difficult. How does one balance hundred and hundreds of pages in one's head? That is not easy and it is a good reason for official church teaching. Interpreted Scripture, if you will, provides a framework for reading and studying individual passages.
I know, because the church has taught me, that good citizenship is a Christian duty. Hence, I see Paul's words in that context. Government is good. It is God-given. I also know that Kings (and other officials) are supposed to be faithful. Paul did not say that here, but it is said elsewhere, especially in the OT. So I know Paul is not saying whatever the government does is fine, good and godly. He assumes we already know that there is more to the story. He is, however, dealing with Christians in Rome (and no doubt making an effort to clarify to Roman authorities that he is a friend of the Empire). His words are a helpful corrective to an overzealous individuality which disdains authority. Christian anarchists need not apply! Paul wants the church and the Roman Empire to know, that he believes God says good citizenship is good.
As much as most of us dislike it, there is tension in the life of a disciple. Memorized verses are no antidote for the mandate to "die to self" and follow Christ. Simplistic answers to complex questions are not enough. We are called to read and internalize the word of God, but we must do it in a community of faith, where we can come to a fuller understanding. As much as I love to read the Bible, I always know that it is not an answer book. It is an invitation to deeper prayer and thought, together. It is why I write this blog and read others, it is why I go to church and pray and study in community. It is why God made the church and authority in the church.
Paying attention to what it actually SAYS is important to determining what it means.
ReplyDeleteObeying "authority" is one thing. When an individual or group has usurped power and is acting where he has no authority, then it is no longer a matter of "obeying authority", and becomes a matter of resisting tyranny.
John, I think what it SAYS is pretty straightforward. While I agree with what you say, this particular text does not provide your level of helpful nuance. The differentiation between authority and tyranny is exactly what is at issue. My claim is that how to draw the line on legitimacy is difficult and is certainly the basis of much debate. I would guess Liberal Christians are close to unanimous that the President is a legitimate authority and what he is doing is right. Paul, in this section, is certainly someone they can use. While I disagree with them on this (and many) issue, I do think that the text from Romans is something they would say I have to deal with, and I think they would be right...
DeleteThanks for the comment. I appreciate you taking the time to add to this discussion.