Should We All Submit to the Government?

[jinc1019]

There were no Democracies in Paul’s time. In a Democracy such as ours, tithe State is subordinate to the people, not the other way around. So it is the people that are sovereign and it is the government which must answer to the citizens.

So, to be obedient to that passage in Romans, government officials must submit to those whom they are supposed to serve.

How did democracies come about? According to Paul’s passage, by rebellion against God’s divinely instituted governments.

 

[jinc1019]

But what if we have a government that, while not requiring us personally to sin against God, does great harm, through its policies great harm to the weakest in our society while protecting the rich and powerful? What is we have a government that actively promotes a secular agenda, seeks to marginalise religion and legislates to push it out of public life? What if we have a government that promotes abortion and seeks to destroy the institution of marriage? What if we have a government that promotes gambling and does nothing to attempt to stem the flow of pornography even though it is freely available to children?

Are we really to believe that such governments have a mandate from God? Are we really to submit to these governments?

That’s what Paul says though.

I completely agree with you…I really do. But are you saying Paul is wrong? Are you saying Paul is not divinely inspired?

 

[jinc1019]

Another thing to consider here…Paul’s passage logically doesn’t even make sense.

If any rebellion against the government is against God because God has instituted all governing bodies, then what about a rebellion that overthrows the government and is now the government themselves? If all government is divinely instituted, that means a government that rebelled against a previous government is ALSO divinely instituted, but of course this also means that in order to get there, it had to rebel against God also. This makes no sense at all.

 

[jinc1019]

Could we not assume that Paul is speaking idealistically? That is, if the government is acting in accordance with Divine law, we should submit. Verse seven tells me that I will offer taxes, revenue, honor an respect only if it is deserved.

You could assume that yes. But if you are willing to go down the assumption road, there are LOTS of things that could be assumed to get to different conclusions outside of those you get from a plain reading of the text.

 

[Brendan_64]

That’s what Paul says though.

I completely agree with you…I really do. But are you saying Paul is wrong? Are you saying Paul is not divinely inspired?

I would interpret what Paul has said as not saying that we are bound to support governments, submit to, ot accept anything they legislate if we view it as sinful, but rather that we are to pay any taxes that we are due, and to respect the concept of civil authority over us. This does not exclude standing up against government if we feel that government is morally bankrupt.

On another note, does what Paul is telling us make it very wrong for Western powers to overthrow governemnts such as Saddam Hussein, the Taliban etc. and assist with the overthrow of many other governments? Surely the authority of these governments also comes from God?

 

[Brendan_64]

Satan tempted Jesus and “showed him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment in time”, saying “To you I will give all this authority and their glory; for it has been delivered to me, and I will give it to whom I will.”

Would this not indicate that Satan has dominion over nations (and therefore their governments) who are rebelling against God? How do we think the governments of, for example, the USA or the UK, through their actions, stack up in terms of either following or rebelling against God?

Are we obliged to submit to a government, if it is rebelling against God and under the dominion of the Satan?

 

[Monte_RCMS]

There were no Democracies in Paul’s time. In a Democracy such as ours, tithe State is subordinate to the people, not the other way around. So it is the people that are sovereign and it is the government which must answer to the citizens.

So, to be obedient to that passage in Romans, government officials must submit to those whom they are supposed to serve.

The Founders of the United States specifically worked to avoid the problems of “democracy” by establishing a Republic as a form of government.

A Republic has built-in safety mechanisms to maintain peace and preserve liberty and avoid the rise of totalitarian government.

In addition, by making the United States a decentralized Federal style of government it distributed authority down the the individual and to the community … which the Church endorses and applies the term “subsidiarity”.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Government is but one aspect of a “world-view”.

It’s important to organize various aspects and get the terms straight.

This chart is not necessarily complete, but it does offer some framework for organization:

summit.org/resources/worldview-chart/

 

[jinc1019]

All of these statements are interesting, but ultimately, they don’t deal with the primary issue, which is that for Paul, governments are established by God and rebellion against them is to rebel against God. This completely contradicts what our Western Judeo-Christian philosophy tells us about God, but it is the plain meaning of Paul’s writings. I think it’s unfair to try and change what the plain meaning is to make them easier to deal with, especially when Catholics so often criticize Protestants in mainline denominations for doing exactly the same thing. It cannot be denied that Paul meant what he said (or at least that this is the only reasonable conclusion we can get from the reading).

Isn’t the more logical conclusion here that not all of Paul’s writings are meant to be read as though God Himself wrote them?

 

[jinc1019]

Satan tempted Jesus and “showed him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment in time”, saying “To you I will give all this authority and their glory; for it has been delivered to me, and I will give it to whom I will.”

Would this not indicate that Satan has dominion over nations (and therefore their governments) who are rebelling against God? How do we think the governments of, for example, the USA or the UK, through their actions, stack up in terms of either following or rebelling against God?

Are we obliged to submit to a government, if it is rebelling against God and under the dominion of the Satan?

I don’t agree with your logic about Satan, but the point is…Does Paul require Christians to submit to the government based on the idea the government is the agent of God? Yes. Are we to believe this is what God really wants? Based on what authority? These are the very difficult questions I hope to have answered.

 

[Brendan_64]

I don’t agree with your logic about Satan, but the point is…Does Paul require Christians to submit to the government based on the idea the government is the agent of God? Yes. Are we to believe this is what God really wants? Based on what authority? These are the very difficult questions I hope to have answered.

Presumably that would also apply to the Germans submitting to Hilter’s government, as Hitler’s government would also have been the agent of God?

Or to the former government of the Soviet Union?

Or to the Communist government in Poland? What about Solidarity in Poland? Surely they ought to have submitted to the Polish government (as indicated by your interpretation of what St Paul said)? If the government in Poland was an ‘agent of God’ then surely Pope John Paul II must then have been backing the wrong side?

If a government becomes so twisted and corrupted that it is under the influence and effective control of Satan (as presumably the nations Satan tempted Jesus with were) then surely it is our duty to stand against them, and encourage and support others who do so? Isn’t that what we did in Poland? Encouraged, supported (and probably funded) Solidarity who were standing in defiance against the government there?

 

[jinc1019]

Presumably that would also apply to the Germans submitting to Hilter’s government, as Hitler’s government would also have been the agent of God?

Or to the former government of the Soviet Union?

Or to the Communist government in Poland? What about Solidarity in Poland? Surely they ought to have submitted to the Polish government (as indicated by your interpretation of what St Paul said)? If the government in Poland was an ‘agent of God’ then surely Pope John Paul II must then have been backing the wrong side?

If a government becomes so twisted and corrupted that it is under the influence and effective control of Satan (as presumably the nations Satan tempted Jesus with were) then surely it is our duty to stand against them, and encourage and support others who do so? Isn’t that what we did in Poland? Encouraged, supported (and probably funded) Solidarity who were standing in defiance against the government there?

I totally agree with your point! I really do…but my point is, how are we to treat Paul’s writings then? If Paul clearly said the government is always an agent of God, how do we deal with the notion that Paul’s writings are divinely inspired?

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Here is a thought: very often translations from the original language are less than satisfactory.

So, you might want to take a look at the original language … Greek? … and see if you can find alternative translations.
Also, in a blog post today, there is a discussion on alternative translations.

catholic.com/blog/christopher-check/in-infernum-detrude

Chris Check’s blog post is about Latin to English, and my example was Spanish to English [16th Century Spanish … which may make a difference, as well.]*

 

[jinc1019]

Here is a thought: very often translations from the original language are less than satisfactory.

So, you might want to take a look at the original language … Greek? … and see if you can find alternative translations.
Also, in a blog post today, there is a discussion on alternative translations.

catholic.com/blog/christopher-check/in-infernum-detrude*

Chris Check’s blog post is about Latin to English, and my example was Spanish to English [16th Century Spanish … which may make a difference, as well.]

Interesting but I imagine that by now, someone would have pointed this out. I could be wrong though. If someone has the ability to determine this, or knows a source that has done this already, that would be great.

 

[Brendan_64]

I totally agree with your point! I really do…but my point is, how are we to treat Paul’s writings then? If Paul clearly said the government is always an agent of God, how do we deal with the notion that Paul’s writings are divinely inspired?

And how then do we regard the actions of Peter, Paul and the early Christians who rebelled against the authority of Rome? Was Paul acting in direct contravention of his own divinely-inspired teaching?

Acts 17:6-7 “When they could not find them, they dragged Jason and some believers before the city authorities, shouting, “These people who have been turning the world upside down have come here also, and Jason has entertained them as guests. They are all acting contrary to the decrees of the emperor, saying that there is another king named Jesus.””

Since all authority comes from God, and therefore is divinely given, we do have a duty to submit to authority. However this does not mean complete and unconditional submission to Earthly governments and acceptance of all man-made rules.

According to the CCC 2238 citizens are obliged “to voice their just criticisms of that which seems harmful to the dignity of persons and to the good of the community” , to Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience" (CCC 2242), and under certain circumstances allowowed to take up armed resistance against the state (CCC 2243).

Governments are not entitled to rule with absolute authority and are obligated to rule in accordance with the wishes of the power that has granted them this authority (i.e. God). No government “can command or establish what is contrary to the dignity of persons and the natural law” (CCC 2235). “They should take care that the regulations and measures they adopt are not a source of temptation by setting personal interest against that of the community” (ccc 2236). They are obliged to respect the fundamental rights of the human person. They will dispense justice humanely by respecting the rights of everyone, especially of families and the disadvantaged (CCC 237).

We are obliged to pay our taxes and follow the rules set by governments, unless those rules are contrary to God’s law. We are not just to ensure that we do not break God’s law by following any law that would cause us to do so, but are obliged to speak out vocally against any such laws. And in extreme cases we are allowed to take up armed resistance against the government.

The obligation is not merely from the citizen to the political authority, the authorities have an obligation to rule fairly and justly. Submission by the citizen is certainly not unconditional, and this is borne out by the actions of Peter, Paul and the early Church. However I think Paul had to be cautious with his choice of words in this matter to avoid the unecessary wrath of the authorities at a time when the Church was being built up.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Interesting but I imagine that by now, someone would have pointed this out. I could be wrong though. If someone has the ability to determine this, or knows a source that has done this already, that would be great.

Actually, no.

Surprisingly …

Here on CAF, someone posted the Hebrew of the Commandment … “Thou Shalt Not Kill” … and the correct translation of the Hebrew is “Thou Shalt Not Murder”.

The expression “Son of Man” appears all the time … but the Hebrew is “ben Adom” … which is totally different.

In Latin, there are different words for “man” depending on the context … mankind versus one man, etc. In English, there is only the word “man”.

It’s very interesting; check it out.

 

[jinc1019]

Actually, no.

Surprisingly …

Here on CAF, someone posted the Hebrew of the Commandment … “Thou Shalt Not Kill” … and the correct translation of the Hebrew is “Thou Shalt Not Murder”.

The expression “Son of Man” appears all the time … but the Hebrew is “ben Adom” … which is totally different.

In Latin, there are different words for “man” depending on the context … mankind versus one man, etc. In English, there is only the word “man”.

It’s very interesting; check it out.

I will, very interesting!

 

[David2010]

Re: Should We All Submit to the Government?

Another vote against.

I think that if government does wrong, we are doing right to oppose it.

A couple other points I keep in mind:

1. Some of the best, and right, advances that have occurred in the world happened when people opposed government.
2. The Church has often been a force that resists government, something that individuals might not have the power to do. I see the Church as another check and balance in the world, so government does not have free rein to do what it wants. If the Church believed that statement that everybody should submit to government, why have they so often been in opposition to government? It is contradictory.

Bottom line: No, we should not all submit to government.

 

[Genesis315]

Rulers, both good and bad, participate in the authority of God. That’s why we are bound in conscience to obey them. We are not bound to obey them when they command something contrary to Divine Law, because then they are acting outside the authority God has given them.

The Church is very consistent about this. See for example this encyclial from Leo XIII:
vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_29061881_diuturnum_en.html

Or paragraphs 46-52 of this encyclical from Bl. John XXIII:
vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_11041963_pacem_en.html

Here’s a little quote from St. Augustine concerning God being the source of all governmental authority:

“He Who gave dominion to Marius, gave it also to Caesar, He Who gave it to Augustus, gave it also to Nero, He Who gave it to Vespasian, father or son, most benign emperors, gave it also to the most cruel Domitian; and that it may not be necessary to recount every instance, He Who gave it to Constantine the Christian gave it also to Julian the Apostate.”

 

[jinc1019]

Another vote against.

I think that if government does wrong, we are doing right to oppose it.

A couple other points I keep in mind:

1. Some of the best, and right, advances that have occurred in the world happened when people opposed government.
2. The Church has often been a force that resists government, something that individuals might not have the power to do. I see the Church as another check and balance in the world, so government does not have free rein to do what it wants. If the Church believed that statement that everybody should submit to government, why have they so often been in opposition to government? It is contradictory.

Bottom line: No, we should not all submit to government.

I agree. But then where does this leave us with Paul? If his writings are truly divinely inspired, we should follow everything they say…even if they seem to contradict our own personal opinions, right?