|
hellohellohi -> Christian Relationship to Government (7/16/2008 3:16:28 PM)
|
I got interested in this question in the Death Penalty thread, but it is bigger than the death penalty.
Consider Romans 13: 1-5 in order to dwell in or on the proper Christian relationship:
(NIV)
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.
Going along with what Paul has said, it seems to me that the authorities, government, exist to restrain the evil actions of which all of us are capable. That is, even those within government acknowledge themselves to be also citizens, subject to prosecution of authority -- of the law. Thus, a person in authority ought to act out of a certain sense of both humility, for it is possible that the power which they exert may one day have to be exerted against themselves, and of responsibility, because if it is not they who restrain the actions of evil on earth, what agent will? God? Yes, but through these agents; there are no other, barring supernatural, miraculous, that is to say, special, intervention.
Now, it seems to me that not only are the authorities capable of acting as individuals (or cabals) either rightly or wrongly, according to the law of the land, but they are also capable of ceding authority either explicity or by the implication of their own doubt in their authority. This can be evident, I say, whenever an authority asks for special approval of its actions or commisseration in them, when the general, implied social contract of the law should suffice; anything supplementary is redundant.
This can be seen in appeals to the mob: an authority has lost faith in the normal relation of the populace to the law (which all agree exists to restrain the worst elements in a population and within any individual should they be acted upon) and instead grants the spontaneous will of the people. This can also be seen in various forms of propaganda. For instance, the Nazis ceded their authority with the theory that the German people themselves had a type of spiritual superiority (see Heidegger, for instance) and that it is their destiny to fulfill such greatness on earth. It sounds to me that government decided to deify the people themselves, with the logical imlpication that law would take a backseat to the pursuit of the nation's destiny. This is obviosuly populism, regardless of the finer points.
It is my contention that a redundant request for approval above and beyond the social contract of law on the part of the populace entails the resignation of authority.
The further question is: What will you do (or would you have done) as a Christian when the SS comes knocking? What if they even say, "Open up in the name of the Third Reich" or "The German nation." My reply would be, I know no such authority, though I have heard the stirrings about that which you speak among the crowd. Simple enough.
It seems an important question, though, just in case they DO come knocking, figuratively or not.
Would you say, "Okay, and by the way, do you need to borrow some rope?"
What if someone impersonating a cop pulls you over? If you have suspicion of such, don't you call for the real authorities?
|
|
|
|