ROMANS 13:1-7

PROBLEMS

1. Kasemann: “Our section is an independent block. In view of its singular scope it can be pointedly called an alien body in Paul's exhortation.” The passage does not seem to belong to the surrounding verses; chapters 12-13 read well if it is omitted entirely, and therefore it was felt to be later addition perhaps from a Stoic author. However:

A. We will see that this passage fits very well into the whole literary structure of Romans.

B. There are other NT passages, some by Paul himself, that teach basically the same thing:

1. Mark 12:13ff: Jesus' teaching to render unto Caesar. We will discuss this later.

2. I Timothy 2:1-2: prayers for the authorities; obedience is not mentioned. Motive: to live peaceable lives

3. Titus 3:1-2: Obedience is an expression of our regenerated life in the Spirit

4. 1 Peter 2:13-17: Be subject to the authorities (a) for the Lord's sake and (b) to silence                         critics.

2. Fitzmyer: “The passage has created a major problem in modern theological thought because Paul's teaching has at times been invoked to justify any sort of human government.”

O'Neill: “These seven verses have caused more unhappiness and misery in the Christian East and West than any other seven verses in the New Testament.” The reason for this comment is that Paul apparently demands absolute obedience to all earthly authorities. We will see that this is not necessarily true, and that there are at least eight caveats or limitations to our obedience that must be taken into account.

HISTORICAL CHURCH STANCE

2nd-4th cent AD Rome: Christians showed little interest in serving in the government or in the military, which was felt to be one of the reasons for the downfall of the Roman Empire. However, even during early Roman persecution, the Church Fathers taught respect for the Roman government:

Justin Martyr: “Everywhere, we, more readily than all men, endeavor to pay to those appointed by you the taxes, both ordinary and extraordinary, as we have been taught by Jesus. We worship only God, but in other things we will gladly serve you, acknowledging you as kings and rulers of me, and praying that, with your kingly power, you may be found to possess also sound judgment.”

Athenagoras: “We deserve favor because we pray for your government that you may, as is most equitable, receive the kingdom, son from father, and that your empire may receive increase and addition, until all men become subject to your sway.”

Tertullian: “We offer prayer for the safety of our princes to the eternal, the true, the living God, whose favor, beyond all other things, they must themselves desire. ..We pray for life prolonged; for security to the empire; for protection for the imperial house, for brave armies, a faithful senate, a virtuous people, the world at rest – whatever, as man or Caesar, an emperor would wish...Caesar is more ours than yours because our God appointed him.”

And Christians were allowed to serve in the Roman government as long as they were subject to church discipline and did not take part in pagan acts (emperor worship, for example). After Constantine, Christians were actually excommunicated if they refused to serve in the army.

During the Middle Ages, the church and state were usually closely aligned so there was no conflict between which one to follow.

Reformation: Luther used this text to urge that the princes crush the Peasants' Revolt, and Calvin taught that kings are to be obeyed unless they directly attack the church. This time period saw the setting up of individual state churches, still present in parts of Europe today. The modern church in America has expressed the whole gamut of views on the subject, from (a) civil disobedience for any matter of conscience (illegal aliens, abortion protests) to (b) a view that treats as almost heresy anything less than wholehearted support of a particular political party and all its leaders.

So look at the historical and literary context of these seven verses first to see where they fit, and I think that may give us some help in their interpretation.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF PASSAGE

Jews from the Hellenistic period on usually took their cue from Jeremiah's teachings to those in exile to pray for the good of the country into which they would be sent. The Jews would petition Greek and Roman authorities to listen to their grievances, but except on rare occasions did not rebel against authorities.

However, Jews were expelled from Rome about 54 AD under Claudius (see Acts 18:2) although allowed to come back when he died. Jewish zealots in various parts of the Roman Empire were carrying out acts of violence not only against Roman authorities, but also against fellow Jews who paid taxes. So it is appropriate for Paul to warn the Roman church, especially since Romans treated Christianity as a mere sect of Judaism.

Nero had been reigning for about four years at the time of writing, but the persecutions had not yet really begun. Nero in 58 AD (about the time of writing) actually reduced some of the people's taxes in reaction to widespread complaints against the indirect taxes levied by the publicans, and sped up trials against publicans accused of taking advantage of the people.

SCRIPTURAL CONTEXT OF PASSAGE

A. Romans 2:14: civil authorities who promote God's law

B. Romans 2:24: poor reputation of Jews in the Roman Empire

C. Romans 12:1: part of a Christian's sacrifice

D. Romans 12:2: obedience to worldly systems must be severely limited

E. Romans 12:3: avoidance of extreme behavior

F. Romans 12:18: living in peace in society

G. Romans 12:21: coping with hostile authorities

LITERARY CONTEXT

The Literary Structure of Romans (partial)

    V. Doing the Law (2:12-29)

        VI. Present Position of the Jews (ch. 3-4)

            VII. Justification by Faith (ch. 5-6)

                A. Christ's Death (ch. 5)

                    B. United With Christ (ch. 6)

                    B'. Dying to the Law (ch. 7)

                A'. Life in the Spirit (ch. 8)

            VII'. New Life (ch. 7-8)

        VI'. Future Position of the Jews (ch. 9-11)

V'. Living in the Spirit (ch. 12-13)

The highlighted passages are the two main exhortation sections in a letter that is otherwise mainly devoted to theology. They contrast those “doing” the law on their own vs. what Christians are to do as led and aided by the Holy Spirit. So the number one message is that Christians do not have to carry out these teachings on their own power. One possible verse in chapter 2 to consider as a context for Paul's teaching (among the others listed above) is Romans 2:14. Individual governmental officials, even though they are non-believers, may carry out actions by their nature that promote what God's law demands. Another verse in this parallel section to highlight as a possible context of 13:1-7 is Romans 2:24. Jews were despised by many Romans (as seen in the writings of Tacitus and others) in part because of their generally superior and unfriendly attitude toward Gentiles. The hypocrisy of their behavior is also pointed out by Paul in Romans 2, and Paul may be warning Christians to avoid getting this reputation – something we need to keep in mind today

The Structure of Section V'

A. Be transformed (12:1-2)

B. Love within the body (12:3-13)

C. Attitude toward enemies (12:14-21)

C'. Attitude toward authorities (13:1-7)

B'. Love for neighbor (13:8-10)

A'. Put on Christ (13:11-14)

Sections C and C' both involve outsiders, probably hostile ones. These passages stress living in harmony with them. Both mention the wrath of God on wrongdoers: C states that vengeance belongs to God so we should not take it into our own hands; C' elaborates on this by pointing out that the state may be God's instrument for punishing wrongdoers. So these verses do fit the context.

The combined chapters 12 and 13 start out with three introductory verses, each of which has been claimed as the proper context for understanding Romans 13:1-7:

A. Rom. 12:1 (Leslie Allen): Part of a Christian's sacrifice is the idea of obedience, giving up our rights.

B. Rom. 12:2 (Jacques Ellul): Obedience to worldly systems must be severely limited. Regarding blind obedience to the government, Ellul says, “As I see it, we have an incredible betrayal of the original Christian view, and the source of this betrayal is undoubtedly the tendency toward conformity and the ease of obeying.”

C. Rom. 12:3 (Ernst Kasemann): The enthusiasts in the congregation are being called back within the limits of earthly order. They may have been influenced by earlier statements of Paul such as in Philippians 3:20. But Christian freedom is not a license to practice civil anarchy (Fitzmyer).

By keeping all of the teachings in these introductory verses in mind, we can start to formulate the bounds for our proper attitude toward any system of government.

Romans 13:1-2

Language such as “every person” (v. 1) and “he who” (v. 2) involves each individual, not just the church as a body. Marcus Barth treats this as a revolutionary step since Paul taught that all Christians, not just the men or those in power, had a responsibility in helping to maintain civil order.

The First Caveat or limitation to our obedience: “Submit” is the same word used in v. 5 and in Paul's teaching elsewhere to submit to one another. It means to recognize a claim laid upon one. But it is not the same as “obey” and not an admission that some people are more important in God's eyes or even here on earth, but a recognition of God's established order.

The Second Caveat: This involves the definition of “governing authorities.”

Fitzmyer: “Paul is not discussing in exhaustive fashion the relation of Christians to governing authorities.” Paul was speaking to a particular situation. According to Kasemann, this did not even refer to the Roman Empire as a whole, but just the relationship between individual Christians (see v 1) and the minor officials with whom they might come into contact (local tax collectors, magistrates, etc.).

Minority view: Governing authorities (lit. higher authorities) may also refer to the angelic powers behind these human officials:

either evil powers (Ephesians 6:12) or

angelic beings (compare Hebrews 1:14 with Romans 13:4)

Against this view, (a) Christians are to judge angels, (b) tax collectors in v. 7 are obviously human beings, and (c) this passage was certainly not interpreted in this manner by leaders of the early church (Clement, Polycarp).

“no authority except from God” Several OT passages may have been in mind:

A. Daniel told King Nebuchadnezzar, “The Most High rules the kingdom of men, and gives it to whom he will, and sets over it the lowliest of men.”

B. ( Isaiah 45) God called King Cyrus his “anointed” to “subdue nations” before him. “I call you...though you do not know me.”

Third Caveat: We are not to deify our leaders. I have seen this happen with politicians as diverse as JFK and Ronald Reagan. In Paul's time that referred mainly to Nero. God is the only ultimate authority. It is not a case of serving either God or the state, or God and the state, but serving God through the state.

Fourth Caveat: “Exist” is in the present tense, in other words, the Roman government, not necessarily those governments that don't yet exist (i.e., all future governments). It has been even suggested that the Roman Empire was specifically instituted by God to “restrain the man of lawlessness” (2 Thessalonians 2:7).

2. “Incur judgment” i.e., from civil authorities, and ultimately from God.

Romans 13:3-4

Fifth Caveat: “not a terror to good conduct” Civil authority is meant to help promote the righteousness of God. This poses a limitation to our obedience if the authorities actually begin to promote evil rather than good.

Ecclesiastes 8:2-5 has been cited as a parallel. Note that there is not a blanket blessing on earthly authority, and there is recognition that many injustices are carried out (Ecclesiastes 8:11, 14).

Government is concerned not with sin and goodness, but with the deeds themselves.

Sixth Caveat: “God's servant” is mentioned twice, once in the context of approving the good and once on judging the wicked. “In one fell swoop government is torn from its pedestal and made the servant of God for the Christian.” (Harrisville)

“For your good” It was actually a relatively calm time for the Christians. Pax Romana had brought order to the empire in terms of maintaining services (roads, etc.) and reducing banditry. This was aiding Christian missionary work whether or not Rome realized they were doing so. Also, the Book of Acts shows how the Roman authorities were helpful to Paul on several specific occasions.

“Be afraid” Protesters who break the law for a good cause may be compelled to do so for conscience's sake, but they should also recognize that they must pay the penalty imposed by the government.

“Sword” The Roman term ius gladii (“the right of the sword”) was applied to the ability of Roman officials such as governors and army officers to execute capital punishment on offenders who were Roman citizens or provincials. This applied not only to the death penalty, but was symbolic of all punishment.

Seventh Caveat: We must keep v. 4 in tension with I Corinthians 6:1-2, which states that Christians should not take all issues to secular courts to decide.

“Servant to execute wrath” This verse poses a problem to those Christians who are absolute pacifists. Some Christian pacifists confuse force with violence. There are times when controlled force/war is actually needed to combat uncontrolled violence and evil.

Cranfield: “Through the state there takes place a partial, anticipatory, provisional manifestation of God's wrath against sin.”

The Romans 13:5

The motive in following authorities should be something other than mere fear. Therefore the

Eighth Caveat is perhaps the most important. Our conscience must be followed even if it means going against the state on occasion (Acts 4:19-20; 5:27-29). Leon Morris: “Conscience at one and the same time obliges us to be obedient and sets a limit to that obedience.” We can't just say as some Nazis did: “I was only following orders.” Witness the example of the Confessing Church in Germany at that time.

Romans 13:6-7

This is very similar to Mark 12:13ff when Jesus picked up a coin and said, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's.” The image of Caesar on the coin designated ownership. Jesus allows that Caesar owns whatever has his mark (money, pagan altars, public buildings). The rest properly belongs to God. Caesar has no proper right over us as human beings because we are in the image of God..

“Ministers” (leitourgos, basis of our word “liturgy”) This is not the word for servants used earlier in this passage. It is usually applied to one in the service of God. Paul applies it to himself in Romans 15:16. So in their capacity as tax collectors they are not less than “servants” but actually have a higher status, if anything.

“Taxes” are direct (like property or income tax) while “revenue” is a tax on goods (like tolls or sales or custom taxes).

One receives certain benefits from the government so he cannot in good conscience refuse to support it in some manner. This goes beyond obedience into the issue of support. I have known Christians who were rather independent and isolated from the mainstream and who refused to pay income taxes because they didn't feel the U. S. Government was doing them any personal good. But we don't have to go that far to demonstrate a basically selfish attitude toward government. What about our complaining about school taxes because our children are grown up, failing to report income to the IRS, or claiming deductions that are dubious?

Conclusion

Although Galatians 3:28 teaches our equality before Christ, we must still recognize legitimate differences in the political and social realm.

Since we do not live in a dictatorship today, our responsibilities are not necessarily limited to those spelled out by Paul. We have more opportunities to influence government in a democracy.

This is not an exhaustive treatise by Paul on the subject. There is no guidance on what to do if, for example:

1. there are rivals to a throne, or in today's terms, there are several candidates for an office.

2. a rebellion puts someone else in power. Karl Barth taught that these verses certainly give no support to revolutionaries, who in turn will set up their own unjust form of government. But at what point does the new government become the legitimate government? Take the example of the American Revolution.