Xchange - Discussion Notes

Romans Study – 9
Submission to Authority?

Romans 13:1-7 (NRSV)
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.

Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.

Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honour to whom honour is due.

Compliance and Rebellion

Throughout the letter to the Romans, Paul has highlighted how worshipping Christ is a subversive, rebellious way of living. To worship Christ as the Lord of the Universe, is to challenge the authority of Rome, relativising its power. So coming to this passage seems, on the surface, as though Paul is contradicting himself : following Christ will bring you into conflict with authorities / submit to the authorities!

This passage is not a full blown set of theories about how Christians ought to submit to any government. Again, taken within context, we remember what happens when Jewish or Christian believers begin to get smug about their beliefs. How easy it is to point the finger of judgement at others. Here, living under the yoke of a hostile power, the easiest thing in the world would be to point a pious finger at the injustice of Roman Imperial evil. And in this passage, Paul reminds us that:

1 – Rome is not the ultimate enemy.
2 – Roman authority is not absolute, but is granted solely by the grace of God. Here, there is an inherent critique of the sort of authority that Rome did claim – its own, divine authority.
3 – We need order. It is not inconsistent to protest at length about Police brutality when it occurs, and then call 999 when your house is burgled. Leaders hold an office – and whilst they may abuse that office, the office is god-given.
4 – Seeing Rome as unjust, does not justify ignoring Roman law. Regarding one’s leaders as corrupt does not justify one’s own injustice. Given the sheer weight of Paul’s critique of Rome, this passage brings a ‘nevertheless’ element to his argument! Don’t go behaving as though there were no authority at all.

So here, towards the end of his letter, Paul is shown to be doing something strikingly close to what Jesus himself was doing. When Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom of God, it was an almighty challenge to the religious and political powers of the day. But Jesus did not teach outright revolution or rebellion. In fact, when he was tried by the Roman governor, despite the outrageous claims Jesus made, he was found to be no direct threat to Rome – so Pilate found him innocent.

In similar fashion, Paul incites his readers to ‘gracious rebellion’. That is, not to some half-brained over zealous political revolution. Instead, he calls the Roman Christians, Jew and Gentile, to undermine the authority and legitimacy and divinity of Roman rule, by living out the Gospel communally. To be characterised by a grace that is God-given, and shapes the way they live in public and in private. As far as Roman law is concerned, and in the eyes of Roman leadership, a good Christian then, would pose no obvious or immediate threat to the status quo. They would be good citizens. But they would be such good citizens, that the values, pretences and vanities of imperial rule would be quietly, slowly, but devastatingly undermined. The overthrow of the empire would not be a goal for the Christian community, but would simply be a consequence of honouring God.

Discussion Questions

1 – In what ways might our lifestyles actually contradict the prevailing and dehumanising values of our own era. Well, do they – in fact – manage to do this at all? In what ways might we ‘rebel graciously’ against the Roman Empire of the 21st Century?

2 – Personally, have you found yourself rightly disagreeing or even disliking another person – and slowly given way to bitterness by perceiving them as some kind of ‘ultimate’ enemy? Do we enjoy disliking those we know to be wrong? Do we do this politically today?

3 – “Love God, and do as you like” was Saint Augustine’s basis for Christian living. In other words, if we focus above all else on loving God, then the lifestyle that follows will be in accordance with God’s will, at the personal, social and political level. It’s great logic: is it true for us?

4 – This passage has often been used by abusive regimes, to keep the masses in check by reminding them of their god-given authority. Should we always, automatically obey our god-given authorities? In which circumstances might we deliberately, and legitimately, rebel?

> Questions? Comments? Let us know your views. Click here

> Click here to return to programme.

Click here for the Bloomsbury News sheet - a complete list of this month's events at the church.