Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good and thou shalt have praise of the same: (Romans 13:2-3)
A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall perish. The discretion of a man deferreth his anger; and it is his glory to pass over a transgression. The king's wrath is as the roaring of a lion; but his favour is as dew upon the grass. (Proverbs 19:11-12)
So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle: Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation. (Acts 15:30-31)
It's been a long time since I last posted here, and such a lot has happened. My previous post emphasized the value of keeping our cool before authorities. This is still true. The last few years have been proof of the need to stay calm in a crisis, and also the reality that the power of government is still very dangerous to resist.
It is clear that Paul is speaking pragmatically, he wants the dew of government favour not the bite of the lion's jaws. Paul has experienced the benefit of working inside the system, when he made his appeal to the central leadership of the church. These leaders were opposed to Paul and the way he did his mission, but he appealed to them humbly and got the approval he needed to carry on.
There is a contrast here with the attitude of many Christians from early times, who were martyred for their faith. Most were lawfully executed by the officers of the law for the crime of failing to demonstrate loyalty to the state, represented by worshipping an idol. Many church leaders today would scoff at such fanatics, unable to discern the separation of church and state and render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's. Where would Paul himself fit in here?
Paul was a zealous missionary but also a pragmatist. He wouldn't let a law get in the way of his mission, but he would try his hardest to get around the law or even use it to further his aims. I'm thinking of the time he was thrown in prison and flogged in Phillipi. This was actually illegal, but he didn't tell the officials until they'd already done it. Why not? Perhaps he thought there was something to gain by showing up these corrupt officials, and indeed he planted a church out of this incident.
If rulers are a terror to evil and not to good works, then we should not resist them. But when they do become evil we have some difficult decisions to make. We may be permitted or even obligated to resist, but how? Resistance may not be futile but it is dangerous for the brave people who do it. Nazi Germany has been written about very extensively, and it is a great case study for different types of resistance. I think all these types are morally valid, but that doesn't mean they are equally good:
- Guerilla warfare (French, Polish, Yugoslav Resistance etc)
- Righteous treason (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Alexis von Roenne, Wilhelm Canaris)
- Defection (Albert Einstein etc)
- Merciful compliance (Oskar Schindler)
- Merciful non-compliance (Corrie Ten Boom, Sofka Skipwith etc)
These are not particularly in order, and I'm not going to decide which are the appropriate for a Christian, but I think in the right circumstances they all can be. In the government overreach during the last few years I chose merciful compliance. Where I could I helped people who were marginalized by society without breaking the law. I appreciate the courage of those who moved across to non-compliance, but I never quite reached the point where I felt that was necessary for me personally. Now I see that despite the passion of the past, the memory of the last few years is fading from people's minds. The time is coming for people to express their feelings lawfully through the democratic process. A clear message can be sent that the police brutality was wrong. But will they send it or will they sit on their cynicism?
No comments:
Post a Comment