Romans 13:1

We are here taught how to conduct ourselves towards magistrates, and those that are in authority over us, called here the higher powers, intimating their authority (they are powers), and their dignity (they are higher powers), including not only the king as supreme, but all inferior magistrates under him: and yet it is expressed, not by the persons that are in that power, but the place of power itself, in which they are. However the persons themselves may be wicked, and of those vile persons whom the citizen of Zion contemneth (Psa 15:4), yet the just power which they have must be submitted to and obeyed. The apostle had taught us, in the foregoing chapter, not to avenge ourselves, nor to recompense evil for evil; but, lest it should seem as if this did cancel the ordinance of a civil magistracy among Christians, he takes occasion to assert the necessity of it, and of the due infliction of punishment upon evil doers, however it may look like recompensing evil for evil. Observe,

I. The duty enjoined: Let every soul be subject. Every soul - every person, one as well as another, not excluding the clergy, who call themselves spiritual persons, however the church of Rome may not only exempt such from subjection to the civil powers, but place them in authority above them, making the greatest princes subject to the pope, who thus exalteth himself above all that is called God. - Every soul. Not that our consciences are to be subjected to the will of any man. It is God's prerogative to make laws immediately to bind conscience, and we must render to God the things that are God's. But it intimates that our subjection must be free and voluntary, sincere and hearty. Curse not the king, no, not in thy thought, Ecc 10:20. To compass and imagine are treason begun. The subjection of soul here required includes inward honour (Pe1 2:17) and outward reverence and respect, both in speaking to them and in speaking of them - obedience to their commands in things lawful and honest, and in other things a patient subjection to the penalty without resistance - a conformity in every thing to the place and duty of subjects, bringing our minds to the relation and condition, and the inferiority and subordination of it. "They are higher powers; be content they should be so, and submit to them accordingly." Now there was good reason for the pressing of this duty of subjection to civil magistrates, 1. Because of the reproach which the Christian religion lay under in the world, as an enemy to public peace, order, and government, as a sect that turned the world upside down, and the embracers of it as enemies to Caesar, and the more because the leaders were Galileans - an old slander. Jerusalem was represented as a rebellious city, hurtful to kings and provinces, Ezr 4:15, Ezr 4:16. Our Lord Jesus was so reproached, though he told them his kingdom was not of this world: no marvel, then, if his followers have been loaded in all ages with the like calumnies, called factious, seditious, and turbulent, and looked upon as the troublers of the land, their enemies having found such representations needful for the justifying of their barbarous rage against them. The apostle therefore, for the obviating of this reproach and the clearing of Christianity from it, shows that obedience to civil magistrates is one of the laws of Christ, whose religion helps to make people good subjects; and it was very unjust to charge upon Christianity that faction and rebellion to which its principles and rules are so directly contrary. 2. Because of the temptation which the Christians lay under to be otherwise affected to civil magistrates, some of them being originally Jews, and so leavened with a principle that it was unmeet for any of the seed of Abraham to be subject to one of another nation - their king must be of their brethren, Deu 17:15. Besides, Paul had taught them that they were not under the law, they were made free by Christ. Lest this liberty should be turned into licentiousness, and misconstrued to countenance faction and rebellion, the apostle enjoins obedience to civil government, which was the more necessary to be pressed now because the magistrates were heathens and unbelievers, which yet did not destroy their civil power and authority. Besides, the civil powers were persecuting powers; the body of the law was against them.

II. The reasons to enforce this duty. Why must we be subject?

1. For wrath's sake. Because of the danger we run ourselves into by resistance. Magistrates bear the sword, and to oppose them is to hazard all that is dear to us in this world; for it is to no purpose to contend with him that bears the sword. The Christians were then in those persecuting times obnoxious to the sword of the magistrate for their religion, and they needed not make themselves more obnoxious by their rebellion. The least show of resistance or sedition in a Christian would soon be aggravated and improved, and would be very prejudicial to the whole society; and therefore they had more need than others to be exact in their subjection, that those who had so much occasion against them in the matter of their God might have no other occasion. To this head must that argument be referred (Rom 13:2), Those that resist shall receive to themselves damnation: krima lēpsontai, they shall be called to an account for it. God will reckon with them for it, because the resistance reflects upon him. The magistrates will reckon with them for it. They will come under the lash of the law, and will find the higher powers too high to be trampled upon, all civil governments being justly strict and severe against treason and rebellion; so it follows (Rom 13:3), Rulers are a terror. This is a good argument, but it is low for a Christian.

2. We must be subject, not only for wrath, but for conscience' sake; not so much formidine poenae - from the fear of punishment, as virtutis amore - from the love of virtue. This makes common civil offices acceptable to God, when they are done for conscience' sake, with an eye to God, to his providence putting us into such relations, and to his precept making subjection the duty of those relations. Thus the same thing may be done from a very different principle. Now to oblige conscience to this subjection he argues, Rom 13:1-4, Rom 13:6,

(1.) From the institution of magistracy: There is no power but of God. God as the ruler and governor of the world hath appointed the ordinance of magistracy, so that all civil power is derived from him as from its original, and he hath by his providence put the administration into those hands, whatever they are that have it. By him kings reign, Pro 8:15. The usurpation of power and the abuse of power are not of God, for he is not the author of sin; but the power itself is. As our natural powers, though often abused and made instruments of sin, are from God's creating power, so civil powers are from God's governing power. The most unjust and oppressive princes in the world have no power but what is given them from above (Joh 19:11), the divine providence being in a special manner conversant about those changes and revolutions of governments which have such an influence upon states and kingdoms, and such a multitude of particular persons and smaller communities. Or, it may be meant of government in general: it is an instance of God's wisdom, power, and goodness, in the management of mankind, that he has disposed them into such a state as distinguishes between governors and governed, and has not left them like the fishes of the sea, where the greater devour the less. He did herein consult the benefit of his creatures. - The powers that be: whatever the particular form and method of government are - whether by monarchy, aristocracy, or democracy - wherever the governing power is lodged, it is an ordinance of God, and it is to be received and submitted to accordingly; though immediately an ordinance of man (Pe1 2:13), yet originally an ordinance of God. - Ordained of God - tetagmenai, a military word, signifying not only the ordination of magistrates, but the subordination of inferior magistrates to the supreme, as in an army; for among magistrates there is a diversity of gifts, and trusts, and services. Hence it follows (Rom 13:2) that whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God. There are other things from God that are the greatest calamities; but magistracy is from God as an ordinance, that is, it is a great law, and it is a great blessing: so that the children of Belial, that will not endure the yoke of government, will be found breaking a law and despising a blessing. Magistrates are therefore called gods (Psa 82:6), because they bear the image of God's authority. And those who spurn at their power reflect upon God himself. This is not at all applicable to the particular rights of kings and kingdoms, and the branches of their constitution; nor can any certain rule be fetched from this for the modelling of the original contracts between the governors and governed; but it is intended for direction to private persons in their private capacity, to behave themselves quietly and peaceably in the sphere in which God has set them, with a due regard to the civil powers which God in his providence has set over them, Ti1 2:1, Ti1 2:2. Magistrates are here again and again called God's ministers. he is the minister of God, Rom 13:4, Rom 13:6. Magistrates are in a more peculiar manner God's servants; the dignity they have calls for duty. Though they are lords to us, they are servants to God, have work to do for him, and an account to render to him. In the administration of public justice, the determining of quarrels, the protecting of the innocent, the righting of the wronged, the punishing of offenders, and the preserving of national peace and order, that every man may not do what is right in his own eyes - in these things it is that magistrates act as God's ministers. As the killing of an inferior magistrate, while he is actually doing his duty, is accounted treason against the prince, so the resisting of any magistrates in the discharge of these duties of their place is the resisting of an ordinance of God.

(2.) From the intention of magistracy: Rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil, etc. Magistracy was designed to be,

[1.] A terror to evil works and evil workers. They bear the sword; not only the sword of war, but the sword of justice. They are heirs of restraint, to put offenders to shame; Laish wanted such, Jdg 18:7. Such is the power of sin and corruption that many will not be restrained from the greatest enormities, and such as are most pernicious to human society, by any regard to the law of God and nature or the wrath to come; but only by the fear of temporal punishments, which the wilfulness and perverseness of degenerate mankind have made necessary. Hence it appears that laws with penalties for the lawless and disobedient (Ti1 1:9) must be constituted in Christian nations, and are agreeable with, and not contradictory to, the gospel. When men are become such beasts, such ravenous beasts, one to another, they must be dealt with accordingly, taken and destroyed in terrorem - to deter others. The horse and the mule must thus be held in with bit and bridle. In this work the magistrate is the minister of God, Rom 13:4. He acts as God's agent, to whom vengeance belongs; and therefore must take heed of infusing into his judgments any private personal resentments of his own. - To execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. In this the judicial processes of the most vigilant faithful magistrates, though some faint resemblance and prelude of the judgments of the great day, yet come far short of the judgment of God: they reach only to the evil act, can execute wrath only on him that doeth evil: but God's judgment extends to the evil thought, and is a discerner of the intents of the heart. - He beareth not the sword in vain. It is not for nothing that God hath put such a power into the magistrate's hand; but it is intended for the restraining and suppressing of disorders. And therefore, "If thou do that which is evil, which falls under the cognizance and censure of the civil magistrate, be afraid; for civil powers have quick eyes and long arms." It is a good thing when the punishment of malefactors is managed as an ordinance of God, instituted and appointed by him. First, As a holy God, that hates sin, against which, as it appears and puts up its head, a public testimony is thus borne. Secondly, As King of nations, and the God of peace and order, which are hereby preserved. Thirdly, As the protector of the good, whose persons, families, estates, and names, are by this means hedged about. Fourthly, As one that desires not the eternal ruin of sinners, but by the punishment of some would terrify others, and so prevent the like wickedness, that others may hear and fear, and do no more presumptuously. Nay, it is intended for a kindness to those that are punished, that by the destruction of the flesh the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

[2.] A praise to those that do well. Those that keep in the way of their duty shall have the commendation and protection of the civil powers, to their credit and comfort. "Do that which is good (Rom 13:3), and thou needest not be afraid of the power, which, though terrible, reaches none but those that by their own sin make themselves obnoxious to it; the fire burns only that which is combustible: nay, thou shalt have praise of it." This is the intention of magistracy, and therefore we must, for conscience' sake, be subject to it, as a constitution designed for the public good, to which all private interests must give way. But pity it is that ever this gracious intention should be perverted, and that those who bear the sword, while they countenance and connive at sin, should be a terror to those who do well. But so it is, when the vilest men are exalted (Psa 12:1, Psa 12:8); and yet even then the blessing and benefit of a common protection, and a face of government and order, are such that it is our duty in that case rather to submit to persecution for well-doing, and to take it patiently, than by any irregular and disorderly practices to attempt a redress. Never did sovereign prince pervert the ends of government as Nero did, and yet to him Paul appealed, and under him had the protection of the law and the inferior magistrates more than once. Better a bad government than none at all.

(3.) From our interest in it: "He is the minister of God to thee for good. Thou hast the benefit and advantage of the government, and therefore must do what thou canst to preserve it, and nothing to disturb it." Protection draws allegiance. If we have protection from the government, we owe subjection to it; by upholding the government, we keep up our own hedge. This subjection is likewise consented to by the tribute we pay (Rom 13:6): "For this cause pay you tribute, as a testimony of your submission, and an acknowledgment that in conscience you think it to be due. You do by paying taxes contribute your share to the support of the power; if therefore you be not subject, you do but pull down with one hand what you support with the other; and is that conscience?" "By your paying tribute you not only own the magistrate's authority, but the blessing of that authority to yourselves, a sense of which you thereby testify, giving him that as a recompence for the great pains he takes in the government; for honour is a burden: and, if he do as he ought, he is attending continually upon this very thing, for it is enough to take up all a man's thoughts and time, in consideration of which fatigue, we pay tribute, and must be subject." - Pay you tribute, phorous teleite. He does not say, "You give it as an alms," but, "You pay it as a just debt, or lend it to be repaid in all the blessings and advantages of public government, of which you reap the benefit." This is the lesson the apostle teaches, and it becomes all Christians to learn and practise it, that the godly in the land may be found (whatever others are) the quiet and the peaceable in the land.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Ch. Rom_13:1-7. Christian practice: civil duties: authority and obedience

1. Let every soul be subject, &c.] A new subject is here treated—Civil Obedience. It is not isolated, however, from the previous context, in which (from Rom_12:19) subjection to individuals in private life was considered. And it passes in turn into a different but kindred context again, in Rom_13:8 below. We offer a few general remarks on the subject.

1. In this passage it is stated, as a primary truth of human society, that civil authority is, as such, a Divine institution. Whatever may be the details of error or of wrong in its exercise, it is nevertheless, even at its worst, so vastly better than anarchy, that it forms a main instrument and ordinance of the will of God.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_13:1-7

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.

For there is no power but of God.

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers

I. Every soul, or man (Exo_12:4; Gen_46:27).

1. Secular person.

2. Ecclesiastical or religious.

II. The object. The higher powers, or chief magistrates established in each nation.

1. To see that God be rightly worshipped (2Ch_14:2; 2Ch_14:4; 2Ch_17:6; 2Ch_17:9).

2. To preserve peace (1Ti_2:2; Psa_72:7).

3. To execute justice (Psa_72:2; Rom_13:4).

III. The act. Be subject. We owe them--

1. Prayers (1Ti_2:1).

2. Fear (Pro_24:21; 1Pe_2:17).

3. Not to speak evil of him (Ecc_10:20; 2Pe_2:10; Jud_1:8).

4. Dues (Rom_13:7).

5. Subjection and obedience (Tit_3:1).

(1) Otherwise the magistrates power is in vain.

(2) The public good depends upon our obedience.

(3) We are bound to obey for fear (Rom_13:2; Rom_13:5).

(4) For the Lords sake (Rom_13:5).

(5) He that resisteth, resisteth the ordinance of God.

IV. The reason of the command. All power is of God. This appears--

1. From Scripture.

(1) Every power is ordained of God (Rom_13:1-2).

(2) The magistrate is the minister of God, Λειτουργὸν (Rom_13:4).

(3) By God kings reign (Pro_7:15-16).

(4) They judge under Him (2Ch_19:5-7).

(5) He sets up kings (Dan_2:21; Dan_2:37; Dan_5:21).

(6) God first ordained the power of the sword in the hand of men (Gen_9:6).

(7) God gave particular direction for choosing most of the kings of Israel; as Saul, David, Jehu: and so now.

2. From reason.

(1) He is the first cause of all things (Joh_19:11).

(2) All power depends on Him (Act_17:28).

(3) As the stream from the fountain.

3. All power in men is Gods power in their hands (2Ch_19:6).

4. Power is good and necessary: therefore from God (Jam_1:17).

5. It is part of the law of nature (Rom_2:14-15). (Bp. Beveridge.)

Subjection to the higher powers

I. The duty.

1. Respects all legitimately constituted authority.

2. Extends to all persons, without distinction.

3. Requires submission in all matters not affecting conscience.

II. Its foundation. Power is--

1. Derived from God.

2. Is an ordinance of God.

3. Is established by the providence of God. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

Obedience to law

I. Subjection to the higher powers. Not abject subjection to governments, whatever their character; but intelligent, manly subordination to a divinely ordered arrangement--the social framework and the national dominion. Many are the corruptions and oppressions of rulers and the imperfections and perversions of constitutions. Nevertheless there is a Divine ordination, as of marriage and home, so of nationality. Per se, government is essential to the perfection of human life, and so far as it does not hinder our obedience to God as the direct Sovereign of our souls, we are properly obligated to obey it. Divine Providence may have so ordered our lives that we may be overshadowed by pagan authorities. While we approve not the perversions of depraved legislators--their intemperance, Sabbath desecration, profanity, luxury and ambition--we can, notwithstanding, hold ourselves in dignified yielding to normal law. When the corruptions or misapplications of government become glaring and intolerable, the right of revolution is rightly appealed to, and then may God speed the right.

II. Spiritual authority. Aside from references to political governments, the whole paragraph may have a truer application to spiritual authority. Rank pharisaic ecclesiasticism and Papal domination are extremely abhorrent to every soul whom the truth and grace of God have made free. But Church officers and institutions founded on the gospel are the reflex of the Lords own kingdom. These powers are ordained of God--apostles, deacons, elders; with regulations for Sabbath observance, public worship, evangelistic progress. That one or more persons should, therefore, in any community decry creeds, church association, ministerial functions and labours, etc., must be a grievous evil. Satan can quickly divide and scatter the fold by such disorganisers and malcontents if the least heed be paid them. At suitable public anniversaries we should look into the Magna Charta of our Christian rights and experiences. (Homiletic Monthly.)

The duty and obligations of civil obedience

I. The duty which we owe to civil governors.

1. Submission. This injunction is given to every soul. And with regard to its extent, Peter says, Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man. If anything, indeed, were enjoined on us inconsistent with Gods will, we are to obey God rather than man, as did the three Hebrew youths, Daniel, and Peter. For the commands of the greatest potentates in the world are of no weight against the paramount authority of the King of kings and Lord of lords. When, however, they are not at variance with the law of God, the Scriptures expressly enjoin an unreserved obedience.

2. Support (verse 6, 7). Expenses must be incurred, both in carrying on affairs and in supporting the dignity and remunerating the labours of the officers of state. Hence there must be taxes, tribute and custom. Hence all shrinking from bearing our proportional weight of the public burdens is not only against the law of the land, but the Word of God. Christ Himself paid taxes from which He was properly exempt.

3. Respect. Fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour, i.e., reverential homage due to kings and principal rulers, and the respect due to all who are in authority. Here, then, is forbidden everything that is disrespectful either in manner or language. The blazoning abroad the faults of our rulers, so as to degrade them in the eyes of others, is an offence against God. When Korah, etc., gathered themselves together against Moses, you know how God expressed His indignation against these contemners of constituted authority. The Scriptures regard it as a daring thing to speak evil of dignities, to despise dominion.

II. The grounds on which our obligation rests.

1. The penalty which those incur who transgress. A law becomes a dead letter, unless its penalties are enforced: and it is the duty of such as are in authority to be a terror to evil works, and not to bear the sword in vain, for they are appointed as the ministers of God, as revengers to execute wrath on him that doeth evil. Yea, it is said that they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation. We acknowledge this is a low motive. Still, low as it is, we fear, so great a lack of higher principle prevails amongst us, that, were it not employed, such a thing as obedience would hardly be known. Each would be an Ishmael.

2. The advantage we derive from civil government (verses 3, 4). So appalling is the evil of the want of a regular government, that the very worst government is better than no government at all (see Jdg_18:1-31). We have so long enjoyed the blessings of an equitable government, in which even the king dare not, if he would, invade the rights of the beggar, and in which every crime is prosecuted, and, in consequence, we have been so long privileged to sit each one under his vine and under his fig-tree, none daring to make us afraid, that we seem almost to forget that we owe this happy security, not to any improvement in man himself, but to a well-ordered government. It might help us to realise these advantages if we were to suppose for a time, a suspension of the laws throughout the land; and that every one was left to follow the full bent of his own will, without fear.

3. The consideration of the authority wherewith they are invested (verse 1). This applies to all that hold legitimate authority. It is not necessary, in order to make any power the ordinance of God, that it should be nominated by God Himself: as Moses, and Saul, and David were, for instance. For the apostle is speaking of the Roman emperors, who were elected by the army. It is mutual consent and contract that makes two persons man and wife; and yet matrimony is Gods ordinance; and the subjection under which the wife is required to be unto her own husband in everything arises not just from mutual contract, but from Gods appointment. Again, one becomes master, and another servant, by consent and covenant: but the masters authority over the servant is derived, not simply from the covenant entered into, but from the ordinance of God. Hence, when Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron, Moses says to them, Your murmurings are not against us, but against the Lord. And, moreover, when Israel rejected Samuel as their ruler God regarded it as a rejection of Himself. (J. Sandys, A.M.)

Christian duties towards civil rulers

These duties are enforced on two grounds--

I. That they are ordained of God, and therefore ought to be obeyed as a matter of conscience. This implies--

1. That it is according to Gods purpose that society should be organised into self-governing communities for--

(1) Protection against aggressions from without.

(2) For the restraint of wrong-doing and the promotion of prosperity within.

2. That government must assume some form. The administration cannot be left to chance. There must be a constitution, clearly defined, and generally known and approved. The first form of government was that of the family. But, as families multiplied, each having a variety of rights, out of which would arise differences not to be easily settled, some more general form became necessary. Government by patriarchy having fallen through, many other forms are possible, and have become actual. Which then is the one ordained of God? This does not concern the apostle. The general rule assumed seems to have been that, as every community is likely to secure for itself that form of government which is best suited to it, at any period of its development, so that form of government actually existing is the one which is of Gods ordination for that people at that time. For the apostle speaks not of what ought to be, but of the powers that be.

3. That there must be powers, i.e., living persons invested with both authority and power to administer government, and that to these the Christian must render conscientious obedience. But it does not follow that he is to take no part in insisting that the ruling powers exercise their proper functions legitimately. For the governors have no more right Divine to do wrong than have those who are governed. Only this was a matter in which Christians had at that time no special concern, and in respect to which it was no part of the apostles purpose to give instructions.

4. That, whatever the form of government, the real Divine purpose is for the punishment of evildoers, and for the good of them that do well. The government is made for the people, and not the people for the government. To the masses it matters little what form of government obtains, but it matters much indeed whether the government rules according to wise or unwise principles. Yet, after all, any government at all is better than none, and none is possible if no obedience is to be secured.

5. That each ought to be subject and to render respectful obedience out of conscience towards God. Of course, there are limits to obedience (Act_4:17-19). When Rome required of the Christians to render homage to an idol, they were under imperative obligation not to obey. And so, while it is incumbent upon every one to render to all officials their due, we are not bound in conscience to render that which is not due. If any state functionary should oppressively demand illegal taxes or service for illegal purposes, the duty of obedience has no place. If, indeed, the service is not in itself immoral, it may be found to be a matter of prudence to submit; but a man is not morally bound thereto: his conscience leaves him free to refuse. But, with such obvious exceptions, the duty of submission is universal.

II. That they have the right power, and will to punish those who disobey. Obedient subjects have nothing to fear. The magistrate is the minister of God to them for good; and those who do good shall have protection and praise of the same. But he has been entrusted also with the sword, the right and power to punish, even unto death, those who disobey. That this motive of fear should be urged appears somewhat strange. Any who were disposed to refuse obedience must have known that they did it at the risk of punishment. But some may have been fanatic enough to persuade themselves that a heathen power could have no moral right to enforce obedience, and that God would hold them harmless for their disobedience. Such are reminded that God, under whom these very rulers were marshalled, was on their side, and would sustain them in the enforcement of subjection and obedience. Therefore, if you cannot be moved to obedience on any higher ground, yet do learn obedience through fear. Even of the wrath of God, who will sustain by His almighty arm the just authority of these powers which are of His own ordination and appointment. (W. Tyson.)

The Christian view of the State

What has our religion to say to our patriotism? What is the final meaning of our relation to the State under which we live?

I. To begin with, the Bible teaches us to take a far higher view of the nation than any we are accustomed to hear. In Gods Word, the State is not a mere machine for keeping order and peace. The nation is not profane, but sacred; not secular, but Divine. The government derives its sanctions not merely from expedience or convenience, but from the appointment of God. You know how elaborately this idea is wrought out in the Old Testament. Jehovah is the actual, almost visible King of the Hebrew commonwealth. He establishes His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He it is that leads the nation out of bondage into freedom. No matter who sits upon the throne, at Jerusalem, or in Samaria, whether it be David or Saul, an Ahab or a Hezekiah, still Jehovah is their true King. From Him cometh promotion; in His name prophets speak; by Him princes rule, and kings decree judgment. But some one says, all this may be true of Israel. It is easy enough to see Gods hand there. But here is our new nineteenth century, where nothing is sacred, how shall we recognise the Divine? In authorities, chosen as ours are, out of the seething cauldron of our practical politics, how can we feel that the powers that be are ordained of God? The man who does not see Gods hand in our nations past history has read its records to very small purpose. Upon every shining page rests the finger of God as truly, if not as visibly, as in Judaea. You may see, if you will, nothing but a happy combination of chances--a happy chance that placed the fairest portion of the Western Continent in the hands of the progressive AngloSaxon race; a happy chance that wafted to our shores the Pilgrims and the Cavaliers, the high-spirited Huguenot, and the thrifty German. In the providence of God, says Charles Sumner--and a truer student of history never lived--there are no accidents. He who sees Gods hand in history at all, must be blind indeed if he does not see His guiding in our nations story. If the Lord Himself had not been on our side, now may Israel say, if the Lord Himself had not been on our side, when men rose up against us, they had swallowed us up quick, when they were so wrathfully displeased at us.

II. Nor is it only a question of the past: God is now in the nations midst. Gods hand is still leading. Thus the state, in its own place, and for its own work, is as divine as the Church herself. Nor is this all. Just as individuals are sent into the world with a calling from God to do some great work, so nations may have a mission. Was not the Hebrew nation called of God to keep alive in the world the knowledge and the worship of the one true God? Was not the Greek nation sent by God to spread broadcast its golden wealth of culture and civilisation? Was not the Roman nation sent to impart its iron strength, its splendid instinct of law and order to the barbarian hordes of Central and Northern Europe? Was not the English people chosen to colonise and settle the new worlds, and to pave the way for this marvellous nineteenth century of ours? Such a mission, such a calling impose upon each of us a mighty responsibility--a responsibility which not a few of us are all too willing to shirk These earthly powers speak to us of a higher sovereignty which we must acknowledge. They point us to a King, eternal, immortal, invisible, to whom we all owe allegiance. There is one will that we wish to be done, on earth as in heaven, in the State as in the Church, in politics as in religion, and that is the will of Him who rules in righteousness. And now what is this again but to say that righteousness must rule? For the will of God is the supremely righteous will. Nor is this all. For our countrys sake, for our Kings sake, let us be good men and true. Thoreau well says, It matters not half so much what kind of a vote you drop into the ballot-box once a year, as what kind of a man you drop out of bed into the street every morning. (L. R. Dalrymple.)

Governors and subjects

I. With respect to governors. The apostle declares--

1. That they are ordained of God (verse 1); that their authority is the ordinance of God (verse 2); that they are the ministers of God (verse 4, 6). Not that these expressions signify that God had appointed one particular form of government, all deviations from which are unlawful. There is not the least ground for such an opinion from history, or the reason of the thing. Can any one imagine that Paul intended to declare that the Roman emperors, who manifestly usurped and maintained their authority by force of arms, had their commission immediately from God? or that he would not have said the same things had the republic continued?

2. That the sole business of all governing power is to consult the good of society by maintaining peace and virtue in it (verses 3, 4, 6). Governors are not persons exalted by Heaven to a height above their neighbours, to be arbitrators, at their own pleasures, of the lives and fortunes of their fellow-creatures, and to receive the servile homage of whole nations, but persons called by the providence of God to a laborious task; not to live in ease, but to watch day and night for the good of that society in which they preside. Their office, indeed, is a glorious office; but the glory of it doth not consist in the outward majesty of the governor, and the servility of the subject, but in the happiness derived from the labours of the supreme head to all the members of the body politic. And that governor who contradicts the character here laid down, who is not a terror to evil works but to good, is not the governor to whom Paul presses obedience. And much less if he manifestly act contrary to the only end of his institution. And this may serve to explain yet farther in what sense these higher powers are from God, viz., as they act agreeably to His will, which is, that they should promote the good of society, which St. Paul all along supposes them to do. And consequently, when they do the contrary they cannot be said to be from God, or to act by His authority.

II. With respect to subjects.

1. The duty of submission and non-resistance is laid down in such absolute terms, that many have been induced from hence to think that the Christian religion denies the subject all liberty of redressing grievances. And yet methinks if the apostle had done nothing but enforced the duty of obedience it would be reasonable to judge from the nature of the thing and the absurdities of the contrary, that he meant this only as a general rule rather than to imagine that he should absolutely conclude whole nations under misery without hopes of redress.

2. But the apostle so explains his own doctrine by the reasons he gives for this obedience, and the account he gives of the duty of governors, as to leave subjects all the liberty they can reasonably desire. For though he doth at first press upon them, in unlimited words, an obedience and non-resistance to the higher powers, yet he manifestly limits this obedience to such rulers as truly answer the end of their institution (verses 3-5). As far as they deflect from Gods will, so far they lose their title to these declarations, so far are they excluded from Pauls argument. These persons are the ministers of God for the good of society; therefore they must be obeyed. But it will not follow from hence that obedience is due to them, if they ruin the happiness of society. And therefore to oppose them in such cases cannot be to oppose the authority of God. Nay, tamely to sit still and see the happiness of society entirely sacrificed to the irregular will of one man seems a greater contradiction to the will of God than any opposition can be. For it is a tacit consent to the misery of mankind. Whilst he commands submission, he puts no case of princes acting contrary to the purpose of their institution, much less of princes who make an express contract with their people and afterwards break it. Nor doth he mention anything of a passive submission in such cases, but plainly leaves nations to the dictates of common sense and the law of self-preservation. But some may say, Where, then, is the great virtue of submission to governors, if it is to be practised towards none but such as answer the ends of their institution? But it is easy to reply, That there is an indispensable duty upon all, subjects as well as others, to regard the public interest; and if their submission help to destroy and ruin that, their submission cannot be a virtue. The great objection against this is that it may give occasion to subjects to oppose their superiors. But a rule is not bad because men may mistake in the application of it to particular instances, or because evil men may satisfy their own passions under its supposed sanction. The contrary doctrine we know by an almost fatal experience may be very much abused. The truth ought not to be concealed, or to suffer in the opinions of men for the sake of accidental inconvenience. Conclusion: It is highly requisite that all in authority should--

1. Be happy in a public spirit, and a true regard to the public interest.

2. Have a deep sense of religion, of the great importance of virtue, and of the bad influence and malignity of vice and immorality.

3. Have a great love to justice, and regard to peace.

4. Show a blameless example. (Bp. Hoadley.)

Human magistracy

Note--

I. That human magistracy of some kind or other Is of Divine appointment. Taking the word ordained in the sense of permit, all the governments of the world, good or bad, aye, all things, even the most sinful, are ordained of God (Dan_4:32; Deu_2:21; Joh_19:11). But taking the word in the sense of decreed it means that the principle of civil government is of Divine appointment.

1. Mans social tendencies indicate this. Some men are royal in their instincts and powers, and are evidently made to rule; others are servile, feeble in faculty, and made to obey. There is a vast gradation of instinct and power in human society, and it is an eternal principle in Gods government that the lesser shall serve the greater.

2. Mans social exigencies indicate it. Every community, to be kept in order, must have a recognised head. Hence, man in his most savage state has a chief.

II. That the human magistracy which is of Divine appointment is that which promotes good and discourages evil. The Divinely appointed rulers of whom the apostle speaks are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. They are those who praise the good; those that are ministers of God for good. To determine, therefore, what kind of civil government is really of Divine appointment, and that is to be obeyed, you must ascertain what is the good which it is to promote, and the evil which it is to discourage. What is good? Obedience to the Divine will. The standard of virtue is not the decree of an autocrat, nor public sentiment, even when organised into constitutional law; but the will of God. Whether it be right in the sight of God, etc. The civil government, therefore, that does not harmonise with this is not the government of which the apostle is speaking. We may infer--

1. That the infringement of human rights is not in accordance with the will of God, and therefore not good.

2. The promotion of injustice, impurity, and error, is not according to the will of God, and therefore not good. Opposition to governments is sometimes a duty. Daniel, etc.

III. That the human magistracy which promotes the good and discourages the evil is authorised to enforce obedience and support (verse 4). The magistrate is Divinely authorised to punish transgressors and rebels. But coercion has its rules and limitations.

1. The sword should never be used but from benevolent desires. The new commandment is the law of humanity; nothing can justify its violation. Punishment should not be inflicted for the sake of giving pain and gratifying revenge, but for the sake of doing good and serving the criminal.

2. The sword should not be used for the purpose of taking life. The advocates of capital punishment and war insist that the sword is used here as the emblem of destruction, whereas it is the emblem of righteous coercion.

IV. That such obedience and support are binding upon all classes of the community. Disobedience to such a government is--

1. Impious. To resist it is to resist the ordinance of God. Rebellion against a righteous human government is rebellion against God.

2. Self-injurious. A righteous ruler is the minister of God to thee for good. He aims at thy good. To resist him, therefore, is to wrong thyself. Conclusion: This passage does not teach that we are bound to obey laws that are not righteous, to honour persons that are not honour-worthy. If we are commanded to honour the king, the precept implies that the kings character is worthy of his office. Some kings it is religious to despise. The obligation of obedience is ever-dependent upon the righteousness of the command. (D. Thomas, D.D.)

Earthly citizenship

(election sermon):--

1. Government is a Divine institution for the preservation of society and the happiness of mankind. As to the substance,the powers that be are ordained of God; as to the form, they are left to the decision of each country and age, and areordinances of man; but whether under the name of monarchy, aristocracy, or democracy, governments equally claim reverence as the depositaries of authority and the conservators of order.

2. In the duties enumerated in the previous chapter there is this--He that ruleth (let him do it) with diligence. By the British constitution the people are the ultimate despositaries of power. Every ordinance of man which is to be obeyed for the Lords sake is such as the people, by their representatives, make it. Every elector is, therefore, in some measure responsible for the framing of those ordinances, and should therefore labour with diligence that they be in accordance with truth and justice, for the good of men and the glory of God.

3. There cannot be a greater mistake than that on becoming Christians we escape from our obligations as citizens. Religion was designed to train us for heaven, not by unfitting us for the duties of earth, but by enabling us to perform them rightly. Religion would be an injury to the world if it withdrew the best men from it. True piety is nurtured and developed, not by avoiding any portion of our duties as men, but by diligently performing them.

4. Politics is the science and practice of legislation for the public good. Rightly to be political is the same thing as to promote the welfare of the people and the peace of the world. Christianity does indeed condemn the bitterness, the factious spirit, the selfish ambition which have too often disgraced political life; but Christianity, instead of, on this account, excusing its votaries from their duties as citizens, calls upon them all the more to sanctify politics by the nobler aspirations and purer motives of religious faith. What, then, is the duty of a Christian elector?

I. To ascertain who amongst the candidates are, on the whole, most suited for the office of representative. Not wealth, rank, personal friendship, nor any favour received or hoped for, should determine his choice, but fitness, both by character and opinions, to promote the public good.

II. To give effect to his conviction by endeavouring to bring his fellow-electors to the same opinion with himself. But in so doing he will avoid all unfairness in speech and conduct. As an employer, as a customer, it will never occur to him to urge his appeal. His only weapon will be rational persuasion. He will never become a mere partisan. Firmly holding his own opinions, he will do nothing opposed to the meekness and gentleness of Christ.

III. So quietly and seriously, but promptly and resolutely, tender his vote. He will not allow personal convenience, indolence, or fear to prevent the discharge of his duty to his country, and the exercise of that solemn function as one of Gods ministers to which he has been ordained, but the opportunity for which so seldom occurs. Conclusion: Let all of us, then, do our duty to our God and our country.

1. Zealously.

2. Patriotically.

3. Charitably.

4. Prayerfully. (Newman Hall, D.D.)

Human authority

I. Is derived.

II. Is limited.

1. To restrain evil.

2. To encourage good.

III. Is vested with the power of reward and punishment.

IV. Ministers to the general welfare.

V. Demands respect. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

The Christians political relations

I. The origin and need of civil government. If the powers that be (civil government) are ordained of God, we infer that civil society itself is ordained of God. This will be manifest when we consider--

1. Mans natural impulses for society. The instincts of our nature dispose us to live in society, and to seek sympathy and assistance from others. Solitary confinement is one of the most terrible punishments which can be inflicted.

2. Mans natural position and circumstances. By means of society the race is preserved, and civilisation developed. If human beings were completely isolated, the race would degenerate and become extinct. Man needs the aid of civil authority to protect his life and property from the malice and power of the evilly-disposed.

II. The obligation of obedience to civil authority. In civil society laws are enacted and governments appointed to enforce the right and put down the wrong. And all rightly disposed persons willingly subject themselves to this authority. This must needs be--

1. As a matter of duty, not of fear only. The fear of punishment is a check upon evil-doers, and thus, in a measure, prevents lawlessness. With evildoers obedience is a matter of compulsion or of expediency. But there is another standard, that of duty, which some take who are not disposed to admit that the powers that be are ordained of God.

2. As a matter of conscience towards God. No human government is infallible. But the Christian, from love and conscience towards God, yields a cheerful obedience to the powers that be, so long as the civil laws do not conflict with the Divine.

III. The duty of reverence to official dignity.

1. As to our dues to the public revenue. The language implies that we are not to regard the levied rates as gifts to the government, but as debts.

2. As to our respect for official distinction. Fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour (2Pe_2:10). In no society or government shall we find matters exactly agreeable. But we must remember that the basis of society is mutual forbearance and self-sacrifice for mutual benefit. Our dislikes, then, should not prevent us from rendering due reverence to official dignity, as well as to rank, talent, and all true worth. The whole of the apostles teaching shows that we are bound to render obedience on the ground that government is an ordinance of God. But this implies that the government shall not enact, nor its authorities seek to enforce anything that would require disobedience to the will of God. Hence we conclude--

1. That this precludes all illegal action against government on the part of Christians.

2. That it permits all legal means for the redress of any real injustice.

3. That the obligation of obedience is ever dependent on the righteousness of the command. (J. W. Kaye, M.A.)

The effect of religion on a nations grandeur

1. Religion secures subordination.

2. Subordination law.

3. Law freedom.

4. Freedom fame.

5. Fame respect and power. (G. Croby, LL.D.)

St. Pauls respect for Roman law

The warmth with which the apostle speaks of the functions of civil governors may, at first sight, seem surprising, when we remember that a Helius was in the Praefecture, a Tigellinus in the Praetorium, a Gessius Florus in the provinces, and a Nero on the throne. On the other hand, it must be borne in mind that the Neronian persecution had not yet broken out; and that the iniquity of individual emperors and governors, while it had free rein in every question which affected their greed, ambition, or lust, had not as yet by any means destroyed the magnificent ideal of Roman law. If there were bad rulers, there were also good ones. A Cicero as well as a Verres had once been provincial governors; a Barea Soranus as well as a Felix. The Roman government, corrupt as it often was in special instances, was yet the one grand power which held in check the anarchic forces which but for its control were nursing the impatient earthquake. If now and then it broke down in minor matters, and more rarely on a large scale, yet the total area of legal prescriptions was kept unravaged by mischievous injustice. St. Paul had himself suffered from local tyranny at Philippi, but on the whole, up to this time, he had some reason to be grateful for the impartiality of Roman law. At Corinth he had been protected by the disdainful justice of Gallio, at Ephesus by the sensible appeal of the public secretary; and not long afterwards he owed his life to the soldier-like energy of Lysias, and the impartial protection of a Festus and even of a Felix. Nay, even at his first trial his undefended innocence prevailed not only over all the public authority that could be arrayed against him by Sadducean priests and a hostile Sanhedrin, but even over the secret influence of an Aliturus and a Poppaea. It is obvious, however, that St. Paul is here dealing with religious rather than political prejudices. The early Church was deeply affected by Essene and Ebinotic elements, and St. Pauls enforcement of the truth that the civil power derives its authority from God, points to the antithesis that it was not the mere vassallage of the devil. It was not likely that at Rome there should be any of that fanaticism which held it unlawful for a few to recognise any other earthly ruler besides God, and looked on the payment of tribute as a sort of apostasy. It is far more likely that the apostle is striving to counteract the restless insubordination which might spring from regarding the civil governor as a spiritual enemy rather than a minister of God for good. (Archdeacon Farrar.)

Obedience to legal authority

Whilst commanding the allied army in Portugal, the conduct of the native population did not seem to Wellington to be either becoming or dutiful. We have enthusiasm in plenty, he said, and plenty of cries of Viva. We have illuminations, patriotic songs, and fetes everywhere. But what we want is, that each in his own station should do his duty faithfully, and pay implicit obedience to legal authority.

Law is the shadow of Gods justice

Law is a great and sacred thing. It is nothing less than a shadow upon earth of the justice of God. The forms which surround it, the rules which govern it, the dignity and honour which belong to its representatives are all the outworks of a thing in itself entitled to our reverence. But when the machinery of law is tampered with, as was now the case by Jezebel, when a false witness or a biassed judge contributes to a result which, if legal, is not also moral, then law is like an engine off the rails, its remaining force is the exact measure of its capacity for mischief and for wrong. Then, indeed, if ever, summum jus is summa injuria. (Canon Liddon.)

Reverence for law

So it is with loyalty, the reverence for order and law incarnated in a man, reverence for the king, as Gods vicegerent and visible symbol. With their politics I have no sympathy, but for the loyalty of the old Cavaliers to Charles I have intense admiration. He stood to them not merely as the man Charles Stuart, but as the embodiment of Law, Order, Divinity; hence they were willing to lay down all they had for his sake, to peril life and limb in defence of his rights. Who can read the tale of that heroic woman who, when the life of her beloved queen and mistress was sought, bravely made her own frail white arm a bolt across the door to guard her from danger, and held it there until the shattered bone refused longer to obey her will, without saying that she did this, not as friend for friend, but as subject for queen? If we are not loyal now, it is because loyalty lacks objects on which to bestow itself, not because the deep perennial feeling of the heart is less strong than it was of old. (George Dawson.)

Civil government an ordinance of God

It seems very plainly and explicitly taught here, that civil government is an ordinance of God, and that obedience to our lawful rulers is a Christian duty. We say again, God does not ordain any particular form of government, but He does ordain government. He does not say you must be ruled by an emperor, a king, a generalissimo, or a president. But He does say you must have a ruler and administrators of law. They must exist and administer in the form best adapted to secure the highest good of the people. God does not say you must have a king, and the king can do no wrong. But He says government must exist, and be respected and obeyed, so long as it subserves its true end--the general good. If it fails to do this, you must not run into anarchy and chaos, but wisely and firmly, in proper ways, reform or revolutionise, and establish a better system, or choose better men. The Protectorate under Cromwell was a revolutionary measure, but it was justifiable because the monarchy under Charles had failed to secure the true end of government--the good of the people. But it was only a temporary measure, and prepared the way for what came at last, an admirable system of constitutional government, under which England has steadily and increasingly prospered for two hundred years. (E. P. Rogers, D.D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 13:1. From exhorting the believers at Rome to a life of entire devotedness to God, and the various duties of brotherly kindness, the apostle now proceeds to inculcate upon them that subjection and obedience which they owed to their civil rulers, and those duties of justice and benevolence which were due from them to all men. And as Rome was the seat of the empire, it was highly proper for the credit of Christianity, for which indeed it was, in effect, a public apology for him to do this when writing to inhabitants of that city, whether they were originally Jews or Gentiles. Let every soul — Every person, of whatever state, calling, or degree he may be, however endowed with miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost, whatever office he may sustain, or in what esteem soever he may be held in the church of Christ; (for that these things were apt to make some Christians overvalue themselves, is obvious from what St. Paul says to the Corinthians, first epistle, chap. 12.; and to the Romans, in the preceding chapter of this epistle;) be subject to the higher powers — Εξουσιαις υπερεχουσαις, the superior or ruling powers; meaning the governing civil authorities which the Divine Providence had established in the places where they lived: an admonition this peculiarly needful for the Jews. For as God had chosen them for his peculiar people, “and, being their king, had dictated to them a system of laws, and had governed them anciently in person, and afterward by princes of his own nomination, many of them reckoned it impiety to submit to heathen laws and rulers. In the same light they viewed the paying of taxes for the support of heathen governments, Mat 22:17. In short, the zealots of that nation laid it down as a principle, that they would obey God alone as their king and governor, in opposition to Cesar and all kings whatever, who were not of their religion, and who did not govern them by the laws of Moses.” And it is probable, as Locke and Macknight further observe, that some of the Jews who embraced the gospel, did not immediately lay aside this turbulent disposition, and that even of the believing Gentiles there were a few, who, on pretence that they had a sufficient rule of conduct in the spiritual gifts with which they were endowed, thought that they were under no obligation to obey ordinances imposed by idolaters, nor to pay taxes for the support of idolatrous governments. That some Christians were involved in this error, or at least were in danger of being involved in it, appears also from the caution which Peter gives the believers to whom he wrote, (first epistle, chap. 2.,) not to use their liberty for a cloak of maliciousness or misbehaviour. Now, as these principles and practices, if they should prevail, must, of necessity, cause the gospel to be evil spoken of, the apostle judged it necessary, in this letter to the Romans, to show that they had no countenance from the Christian doctrine, by inculcating the duties which subjects owe to magistrates, and by testifying that the disciples of Christ were not exempt from obedience to the wholesome laws, even of the heathen countries where they lived, nor from contributing to the support of the government by which they were protected, although it was administered by idolaters. For there is no power but of God — “There is no legal authority but may, in one sense or another, be said to be from God, the origin of all power. It is his will that there should be magistrates to guard the peace of societies; and the hand of his providence, in directing to the persons of particular governors, ought to be seriously considered and revered.” The powers that be — The authorities that exist, under one form or another; are ordained of God — “Are, in their different places, ranged, disposed, and established by God, the original and universal governor.” So Dr. Doddridge renders the word τεταγμεναι, here used, thinking the English word ordained rather too strong. Compare Act 13:48. “Divine Providence,” says he, “ranges, and in fact establishes the various governments of the world; they are, therefore, under the character of governments, in the general, to be revered: but this cannot make what is wrong and pernicious, in any particular forms, sacred, divine, and immutable, any more than the hand of God in a famine or pestilence is an argument against seeking proper means to remove it.” But the expression, υπο θεου τεταγμεναι εισιν, might be rendered, are subordinate to, or orderly disposed under God; implying that they are God’s deputies, or vicegerents, and consequently their authority, being in effect his, demands our conscientious obedience. “In other passages,” says Macknight, “εξουσιαι, powers, by a common figure, signifies persons possessed of power or authority. But here, αι εξουσιαι υπερεχουσαι, the higher powers, being distinguished from οι αρχοντες, the rulers, Rom 13:3, must signify, not the persons who possess the supreme authority, but the supreme authority itself, whereby the state is governed, whether that authority be vested in the people or in the nobles, or in a single person, or be shared among these three orders: in short, the higher powers denote that form of government which is established in any country, whatever it may be. This remark deserves attention, because the apostle’s reasoning, while it holds good concerning the form of government established in a country, is not true concerning the persons who possess the supreme power, that there is no power but from God; and that he who resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. For, if the person who possesses the supreme power in any state, exercises it in destroying the fundamental laws, and to the ruin of the people, such a ruler is not from God, is not authorized by him, and ought to be resisted.” The declaration, there is no power but of God, he thinks, “was written to correct the pride of the Jews, who valued themselves exceedingly because they had received a form of government from God. The government of every state, whether it be monarchical, aristocratical, democratical, or mixed, is as really of divine appointment as the government of the Jews was, though none but the Jewish form was of divine legislation. For God having designed mankind to live in society, he has, by the frame of their nature, and by the reason of things, authorized government to be exercised in every country. At the same time, having appointed no particular form to any nation but to the Jews, nor named any particular person or family to exercise the power of government, he has left it to the people to choose what form is most agreeable to themselves, and to commit the exercise of the supreme power to what persons they think fit. And therefore, whatever form of government hath been chosen, or is established in any country, hath the divine sanction; and the persons who by choice, or even by the peaceable submission of the governed, have the reins of government in their hands, are the lawful sovereigns of that country, and have all the rights and prerogatives belonging to the sovereignty vested in their persons.” The sum appears to be, the office of civil government is instituted by him, and the persons who exercise it are invested therewith by the appointment or permission of his providence.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The Christian's Duty to the State and to his Neighbour

St. Paul now passes to the duties of Christians to the State. In Rom_12:19 he had condemned revenge; but he asserts here that the State may rightly punish, as God's agent in temporal affairs. He enforces obedience to government, i.e. to social order, not to any special form of government. He gives no directions as to what is to be done when there is a conflict of civil authority (Rom_13:1-7). Our behaviour to men in general is to be regulated by love (Rom_13:8-10). The nearness of Christ's coming is a motive for holiness of life (Rom_13:11-14).

1-14. Paraphrase. '(1) Obey civil rulers, for they are divinely ordained, (2) and therefore God will punish disobedience. (3, 4) They do God's work, rewarding the good and punishing the evil. (5) Therefore obey, not only for fear of punishment, but because it is right, (6) as is implied by our rule that Christians are to pay taxes. (7) To sum up, give all authorities their due. (8) Owe no debt but that of love, which you can never adequately discharge, (9) for love sums up and includes all the commandments, (10) and, by loving, you fulfil them. (11) Let the thought of Christ's coming awaken you to these duties. (12, 13) Let us put off all evil ways, and conduct ourselves as those who belong to the kingdom of light. (14) Provide for your spiritual nature by clothing yourselves with the likeness and power of Christ, but pay no attention to the wrong desires of your fleshly nature.'

1. Of God] i.e. having its source in God.

2. Damnation] RV 'judgment.'

4. Revenger] RV 'avenger.' Wrath] i.e. God's anger against evil-doing.

5. For wrath] RV 'because of the wrath.'

6. Tribute] i.e. taxes paid by subject races. The Christians obeyed Christ's direction, Luk_20:20.

7. Custom] i.e. ordinary taxes. Fear] i.e. scrupulous obedience.

8. Another] RV 'his neighbour.' Hath fulfilled] i.e. hath fully met its requirements: cp. Mat_22:40; For the Christian, faith and love have taken the place of law.

9. The Ninth Commandment is omitted in the best texts.

Thou shalt love] cp. Leviticus 1 s Rom_9:18; Luk_10:27; Jam_2:8.

10. Worketh no ill] cp. 1Co_13:4. No one who truly loves his fellow-man will injure him.

11. And that] RV 'and this,'i.e. and do this: cp. 1Co_6:6, 1Co_6:8. Time] RV 'season.'

Salvation] i.e. complete salvation. Nearer] However long Christ tarry, death brings Him near to each. But the first Christians evidently expected His return in their own time. Sanday and Headlam point out that this belief proved beneficial, by quickening the zeal of the Church for its difficult task, and by preventing the apostles from laying down minute regulations for the future. Believed] RV 'first believed.'

12. The day] i.e. of Christ's appearing.

Armour of light] cp. Eph_6:13.;

13. Walk] i.e. along the path of daily life. Honestly] or, 'becomingly.' Envying] RV 'jealousy.'

14. Put ye on] Christ is put on in baptism, cp. Rom_6:3; Gal_3:27 but the union must be realised.

The reading of these last vv. marked the turning-point in St. Augustine's life: see his 'Confessions,' bk. 8, Romans 12.

J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3. Subjection to government as to a divinely established authority, Rom_13:1-7.

To the young Christian Church it could not but occur as a very momentous and very doubtful question, What are we to do with the governments of the world? They are all in pagan hands, with despots for their heads. In the Old Testament the visions of Daniel describe them as beasts. Christ is our true king, and we know not how soon he may appear to overthrow all existing despotism and establish a universal reign of righteousness.

Paul here furnishes the divine reply. Bad as human governments are, brutal and ferocious as is often their spirit, there is a benign and beneficial side to them. Government is ordained of God. Society is not formed by a fabled social compact. On the contrary, God has formed man for society, and government is the form into which he has obliged society to throw itself for its own peace and conservation. Hence, at all times, every government that truly is a government is ordained of God and entitled to our obedience.

The exceptions to this normal law, and its limitations, the apostle does not discuss. That an authority which commands us to violate the law of God should not be obeyed, he would, of course, not only have admitted, but affirmed. Had the emperor with all his powers required him to abjure Christ, he would have promptly disobeyed and suffered the result. Why? Because government, if ordained by God, is limited by the law of God. And if it oversteps the law of God, it oversteps the boundary line of its authority, and ceases to be a government, and has no title to be obeyed. Cesar, then, is no longer Cesar, but, so far, simply a private man. If the President of the United States orders his general to overthrow the Constitution he acts outside his office, and on that outside ground he is not President, and can claim no rightful obedience. What a legitimate government is the apostle does not here discuss. Nor does he raise the question of the right of revolution. The only question before him is, What is the duty of the Christian to a government which he acknowledges to be the government? (See note on Act_4:19.)

1. Every soul—A term of solemn universality; every human being needs the government and should obey it.

Higher powers—The apostle uses the abstract, and not the concrete. It is the government that is of God, not necessarily the particular governor.

No power but of God—Nor is it said that there is no usurper who is of the devil. But as government is ordained of God, so every admitted government must be attributed to God.

It has often been the case in human history that conscientious Christians have been doubtful what, or which, is the true government, the government entitled to their Christian obedience. When the popish tyrant, James II., was driven from the throne of England, and a constitutional sovereign substituted in his place, a large class of conscientious thinkers continued for near half a century sincerely to believe that James and his heirs were their true and lawful sovereigns. So believing, they thought it their duty to withhold their allegiance from the reigning authority. They believed that there is no power but of God; but they also believed that the new king was, in the apostle’s sense, not a power.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom_13:1.—Let every one submit to the authorities that are over him. A precept made remarkable by the time in which it was written. πᾶσα ψυχή, every soul; every office-bearer as well as member of the Church. ἐξουσία is authority, distinguished from δύναμις, power or force, and may exist where there is no authority, and even in opposition to it. If any earthly authority command anything that is contrary to the will of God, the apostles have taught us to say, “We ought to obey God rather than man” (Wordsworth). Authority used for human magistrates. In Peter Rom_3:22 denotes rather angelic powers. Of or from God; mediately through men. By divine permission; divine appointment. Form of government left to human discretion.

Rom_13:2.—Origen having cited this and the previous verse in his dissertation against Celsus, confesses it is a place capable of much disquisition, by reason of such princes as govern cruelly and tyrannically, or who, by reason of their power, fall into effeminacy and carnal pleasures. He says this is not to be understood of persecuting powers, for in such cases that of the apostle takes place, “We must obey God rather than man,” but of those powers which are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. It is a contradiction to the holiness, justice, and goodness of God to say that He has given princes any power to do any injury to their subjects. Non-resistance of the Greek commentators is the non-performance of subjection and obedience to commands. We cannot be obliged from conscience towards God to be subject to them in those things which they have no authority from God to require, and for refusal of obedience to which we have God’s authority.

Rom_13:3. For rulers are not a terror.—He is speaking of what is commonly the case, of what may fairly be expected to be the case. And even the worst authority is better than mere force.

Rom_13:4.—μάχαιρα is not here a dagger, but gladius. The Roman power is symbolised in the Apocalypse with the great sword. Symbol of magistrate’s power to punish.

Rom_13:5.—διὰ τὴν συνείδησιν, for conscience’ sake—because of God’s institution and command.

Rom_13:6.—Revenues of the Roman empire consisted chiefly:

1. Of the rents of public lands farmed by the publicans, and collected by tax-gatherers employed by them—the publicans of our version;

2. Customs or taxes on goods;

3. Tithes;

4. Pasturage, etc.;

5. Poll or personal tax;

6. Property tax;

7. Army tax—φόρος paid as capitation money according to census, τέλος paid on any other account; the former paid on things immovable, the latter on things which may be conveyed.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Rom_13:1-6

True subjection.—There are many powers in the world—material, social, intellectual, and moral. Above all powers is the supreme Power. God ordains all powers. Man must recognise his inferiority. How the infinite Spirit directs material powers we cannot tell. There must be a way, though we cannot comprehend. But as man by the greater force of his intellectual power rules the brute creation and makes vast material changes, so God by His infinitely vast nature must have a marvellous method of controlling all powers. There are men who resist the highest ordering power. They reject God or relegate Him to some remote corner of His own universe. Such shall receive to themselves condemnation. Resistance of the supreme power leads to other resistance, engenders anarchy, and produces disaster. Man’s power of resistance, though often futile, speaks of man’s dignity and man’s great responsibility. Man’s wisdom is seen in learning the lesson of subjection. Man, sooner or later, falls by rebellion. Man rises by subjection.

I. True subjection is inward.—The subjection of the brute is outward; he is not a consenting party. The subjection of material forces is an affair of material pressure; when that is removed or becomes weak the material force revenges the restraint by destructive leaps and bounds. The subjection of the man is inward; with his soul he places himself beneath the higher powers. The motive force of true subjection is conscience. Thus the man who has the spirit of true subjection is ennobled and not degraded by the process. Nobility is seen in recognising human limitations and working in harmony with divine order. Greatness sees its own littleness, does not parade a fancied largeness, and thus attains to highest dignity.

II. True subjection is upward.—Some take downward glances; their range of vision is contracted; they resist, and that resistance binds them with galling fetters. Others take upward glances; their range of vision is large. They see a divine force beyond and above human forces. They submit, and by their very submission are elevated. The humble are exalted somewhere, somehow; all the powers are moving towards the exaltation of the souls that look upward. The recognition of a higher power is the exaltation in measure and degree of the recognising being. Thus to bend low is to rise high.

III. True subjection works outwardly from the inward.—The earth subject is a time-server. He works through pressure. He submits to law and pays tribute; but he is subject only for wrath, so that if he can break the law without punishment he is not averse, if he can shirk the tribute or defraud he is not indisposed. The good subject works through pressure, but it is an inward pressure. He pays tribute conscientiously. The only resistance he knows is that which is induced by an enlightened conscience, and so careful is he not to go wrong that he rather suffers wrong than be found guilty of doing wrong. The citizens of heaven are the best citizens of earth. Eternal laws are the best basis for time laws. The powers that be will find it safest and wisest to recognise the supreme Power and to foster in the nation all God-fearing spirits.

IV. True subjection is beneficial; it benefits the individual, for it scatters fear.—The sword does not appal when goodness emboldens. Judicial pomp does not affright when good works are maintained.

1. It secures praise. If it do not always secure the praise of men, it must meet with the praise of God. In lowly spheres we cannot always obtain the plaudits of the higher powers. We cannot all do some great deed which may blazon our name into the ears of the world. Westminster Abbey could not find room for monuments to be erected to all faithful subjects. Most can only tread the lowly pathway to heaven’s immortality. “The trivial round, the common task,” is the obscure way of the majority. Better and more enduring than the praise of fallible men is the praise of God. Sweet as may be the voice of the approving power, sweeter is the voice of an approving conscience. Royalty itself has no gifts so rich as those which a conscience royally kept can bestow. Let us be true to its claims; let us see that it moves along right lines; let us be subject to the highest Power, that ordains all higher powers.

2. It benefits the nation. The individual is helped to the performance of his duty by regarding himself as an important factor in the nation’s welfare. If we consider ourselves as parts of the national fabric, we feel our importance and rise up to the proper sense of our duty. The claims of self should be subordinated to the claims of the state in the consideration of the Christian patriot. The nation is strong as its good men are increased. When virtue is triumphant, the nation is victorious and prosperous. Let us work to the increase of good men; and to this end let each man begin to improve himself. Good men are the seed-germs out of which other good men grow. The sword may rust in the sheath when good men abound. The executors of wrath have no functions to discharge when evildoers cease from the land. Material wealth engenders selfishness, licentiousness, and corruption. Moral wealth promotes benevolence, purity, and all things that are grandly noble. The increase of material wealth is often promotive of national decline. The increase of moral wealth tends to the larger growth and the more permanent establishment of the nation.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom_13:1-6

Universal necessity of government.—Human society is so constituted that the instinct of self-preservation compels men to set up a form of government—i.e., to commit to some men power over the rest. Every one knows that a bad government is almost always better than none at all. The universality and the universal necessity of government prove it to be God’s will that men live under rule. But God has not prescribed a definite form of rule. Consequently the universal principle of government assumes an infinite variety of forms. We also notice that nearly always opposition to the men actually in power tends to weaken and destroy the principle of government and leads towards anarchy. How frequently the murder even of a bad ruler has been followed by utter lawlessness and by infinite loss to the nation! Consequently opposition to the individuals in power is practically, with few exceptions, an opposition to the divine principle of government. Observing this, and remembering that nothing takes place without foresight and permission of God, we may say, as Paul says, that the existing rulers, by whatever steps they mounted the throne, have been put on it by God. For God created that felt necessity for government which was their real stepping-stone to power. And He did so in full view of the persons into whose hands, throughout the ages of the world, the power would fall. We notice further that all bad conduct tends to weaken and good conduct to strengthen a government. Consequently rulers are compelled, for the maintenance of their position, to favour the good and oppose the bad. We cannot doubt that this necessity comes from the Ruler of the race. Therefore God, who has laid upon mankind the necessity of appointing rulers, has laid upon rulers the necessity of rewarding the good and punishing the bad; and has done this in order to make rulers the instruments of carrying out His own purpose of kindness to the good and punishment to the wicked. Thus rulers are, perhaps unconsciously, ministers of God, doing God’s work. These considerations are an abundant reason for obedience to civil authority. Since rulers are compelled by their position to favour the good and punish the bad, resistance to them generally proves that we are in the wrong, and will be followed by the punishment which they cannot but inflict on evildoers. Hence the motive of fear should lead to obedience. And since resistance to existing rulers tends to weaken and destroy that principle of government which God has set up for the good of the race, we ought to submit to them for conscience’ sake. That we feel ourselves morally bound to pay the taxes imposed without our consent or in opposition to our judgment, and that all admit the right of the ruler to enforce payment, also confirms the divine origin of his authority.—Beet.

How far should a Christian resist?—But for the very reason of this precept it is asked, If it is not merely the state in itself which is a thought of God, but if the very individuals who possess the power at a given time are set up by His will, what are we to do in a period of revolution when a new power is violently substituted for another? This question, which the apostle does not raise, may, according to the principles he lays down, be resolved thus: The Christian will submit to the new power as soon as the resistance of the old shall have ceased. In the actual state of matters he will recognise the manifestation of God’s will, and will take no part whatever in any reactionary plot. But should the Christian support the power of the state even in its unjust measures? No; there is nothing to show that the submission required by St. Paul includes active co-operation; it may even show itself in the form of passive resistance; and it does not at all exclude protestation in word and even resistance in deed, provided that to this latter there be joined the calm acceptance of the punishment inflicted. This submissive but at the same time firm conduct is also a homage to the inviolability of authority; and experience proves that it is in this way all tyrannies have been morally broken and all true progress in the history of humanity effected.—Godet.

Religious feeling required in governors and governed.—He who does not bring into government, whether as governor or subject, some religious feeling, some higher motive than expediency, is likely to make but an indifferent governor or an indifferent subject: without piety there will be no good government.—Sir Arthur Helps.

Corruption of an institution does not disprove divine origin.—The fact that an earthly government may be corrupt and tyrannical does not disprove the divine origin of government, any more than the fact that parents may be unfaithful to their duties proves that the family is not divinely originated, or the fact that a particular Church may become corrupt proves that the Church is not divine in its source. St. Paul, however, does not teach here that any degree of tyranny whatever is to be submitted to by a Christian. If the government attempt to force him to violate a divine command—for example, to desist from preaching the gospel or to take part in pagan worship—he must resist even unto death. Most of the apostles suffered martyrdom for this principle.—Shedd.

The wide sway of law.—Of law there can be no less acknowledged than that her seat is the bosom of God, her voice the harmony of the world; all things in heaven and in earth do her homage; the very least is feeling her care, and the greatest is not exempted from her power: both angels and men and creatures of what condition soever, though each in different sort and manner, yet all with uniform consent, admiring her as the mother of their peace and joy.—Hooker.

God uses all nations.—For each of the nations God had “an office”; for each He had appointed a beginning and an end. One by one, in orderly succession, those stupendous kingdoms of the East, Babylonian and Persian, Egyptian and Greek, God had required their armies; He had His hand upon their captains; Assyria was His hammer, Cyrus was His shepherd, Egypt was His garden, Tyre was His jewel; everywhere He was felt; everywhere the divine destiny directed and controlled. The shuttle of God passes in and out, weaving into its web a thousand threads of natural human life. All history is put to the uses of God’s holier manifestations; He works under the pressure laid upon Him by the wants and necessities of social and political progress.—Canon Holland.

“Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same.”—Archbishop Ussher, in his treatise on the “Power of the Prince and the Obedience of the Subject,” quotes the following admirable paraphrase, by Primasius, of the above clause: “Either thou dost justly, and the just power will praise thee; or, thus doing justly, although the unjust power should condemn thee, the just God will crown thee.”

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 13

Rom_13:1-2. Condescension.—The following simple story illustrates a trait in the character of our Queen which explains much of the feeling of fond regard entertained for her by all classes of her subjects. One year, when the Court was at Balmoral, her Majesty made a promise to Jenny—the daughter of a humble Balmoral neighbour, but who was an especial favourite with her Majesty—saying, “I’ll bring a pretty toy for you when we come back next year.” The Court went, and the promise was thought little more of—at least on one side. Her Majesty went that year to Paris to visit the emperor of the French. Amid all the pomp and style of royalty and imperiality, there was enough in the events of the year generally to drive many others besides the peasant child from the thoughts of the sovereign of Great Britain. Well, next season came, and with it the Court returned to Balmoral. The Queen, in making her rounds, soon called on her little protégée, and, with a “Now, I haven’t forgotten you,” exhibited the promised present. While Queen Victoria was in the French capital, amid all the din and distraction of French state pageantry, she found time to think of the little Highland girl on the banks of the Dee, and then and there bought an article to please and gratify the little child. Royal courtesy.—Frederick II., king of Prussia, made it a point to return every mark of respect or civility shown to him in the street by those who met him. He one day observed at table that whenever he rode through the streets of Berlin his hat was always in his hand. Baron Polintz, who was present, said that his Majesty had no occasion to notice the civility of every one who pulled his hat off to him in the streets. “And why not?” said the king, in a lively tone. “Are they not all human beings as well as myself?”

Rom_13:5-6. New experiments in government.—It is a dangerous thing to try new experiments in a government; men do not foresee the ill consequences that must happen when they go about to alter the essential parts of it upon which the whole frame depends; for all governments are artificial things, and every part of them has a dependence one upon another. And it is with them as with clocks and watches—if you should put great wheels in place of little ones, and little ones in the place of great ones, all the movement would stand still: so that we cannot alter any part of a government without prejudicing the motions of the whole.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Third Section.—Christian universalism (Roman Catholicism in Paul’s sense) in proper conduct toward the civil Government (the heathen State), which has a diaconal and liturgical service in the household of God. The office of civil Government defined

Rom_13:1-6

1Let every soul be subject [submit himself] unto the higher powers [to the authorities which are over him].1 For there is no power [authority] but of [except from]2 God: the powers that be are [those which exist3 have been]ordained of [by] God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power [So that he who setteth himself against the authority], resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that [those who] resist shall receive to themselves damnation [condemnation].3For rulers are not a terror to good works [the good work],4 but to the evil, Wilt thou then not [Dost thou then wish not to] be afraid of the power [authority]? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of [from]the same: 4For he is the minister of God [God’s minister] to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth [weareth] not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God [God’s minister], a revenger to5execute wrath upon [an avenger for wrath to] him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs5 be subject [submit yourselves], not only for [because of the]6wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. For, for this cause pay ye [ye pay] tribute also: for they are God’s ministers [the ministers of God],6 attending continually upon this very thing.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

General Remarks.—As, in chap. 12, ecclesiastical duties are supplemented by personal duties, so here, in chap. 13, civil duties are supplemented by duties toward the world in general.—According to Tholuck, the passive conduct in relation to private injuries, in Rom_12:19-21, has led to this exhortation. Yet this would be too accidental an occasion. The thought of the transition is, that, even in the heathen State, evil must be overcome with good. But the possibility of this conquest lies in the necessity of the Christian’s recognizing something good even in the large State, as well as in the personal opponent. Chrysostom held that this section has the apologetical design of showing that Christianity does not lead to the dissolution of the State, and of the social legal relations (comp. 1Ti_2:1; Tit_3:1; 1Pe_2:13-14). According to Calvin, and others, the occasion lay in the fact that the Jews were inclined to resistance to heathen government, and that also the Jewish Christians often became subject, with them, to suspicions of the same disposition.7 As might be expected, Baur finds the key for the solution of this question also in the Clementines. On these and other hypotheses, particularly those of Neander and Baumgarten-Crusius, see further details in Tholuck, pp. 678 ff. The same author says: “If the Epistle was written in the year 58, then it follows that Nero’s five mild years terminated in the following year.” In view of the universal character of this Epistle, even on its practical side, the Apostle must have felt the necessity of defining, from his principle, the relation of duty in which Christians stood to the State, without his having been led to it by this or that circumstance.

Rom_13:1. Let every soul, πᾶσα ψυχή. Every man; yet with reference to the life of the soul, whose emotions in relation to the government come into special consideration (Act_2:43; Act_3:23; Rev_16:3).—Submit himself, ὑποτασσέσθω. Voluntarily subjecting himself to authority. [The reflexive form describes the obedience as of a rational, voluntary, principled character, in distinction from blind, servile subjection.—P. S.]—To the authorities which are over him [ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχούσαις]. In ἐξουσία are comprised both the magistracy and their power (potestas). Ὑπερέχουσαι, Vulgate: sublimiores. Tholuck: The high, those high in authority, with a reference to 1Ti_2:2. [Philippi and Meyer refer to the German phrase: Die hohe Obrigkeit, but there seems to be no reference to the higher grade of rulers. The rendering given above is sufficiently explicit.—It must be noticed how general the injunction is—every soul, and whatever powers are set over him. Wordsworth: He does not say obey, but submit. On the limitations, see below, and Doctr. Notes.—R.]

Except from God [εἰ μὴ ἀπὸ Θεοῦ. See Textual Note2. The proposition is universal, its application follows. Wordsworth remarks that δύναμις, force, does not occur throughout.—R.] God’s sovereignty is, in the general sense (ἀπο Θεοῦ), the causality of magisterial power.

Those which exist [αἱ δὲ οὖσαι. See Textual Note3.] According to Erasmus and Schmidt, the Apostle understands by the αἱ δὲ οὖσαι, the rightful powers; with reference to Joh_10:12, ὁ ὤνποιμήν, qui verus pastor est. According to Meyer, and Tholuck, there is no difference whatever. [The words mean simply this: all existing civil authorities, de facto governments. This doubtless includes temporary and revolutionary governments, although nothing is said on this point. Of course, there has been much casuistry in the discussions as to what constitutes the existence, οὖσα, of the authority.—R.]

The general definition, ἀπὸ Θεοῦ, for which Codd. A. B.2, and others, would read ὑπὸ Θ., is “more specifically defined by the ὑτπὸ Θεοῦ τεταγμέναι εἰσί,” have been ordained by God, which denotes Divine appointment.8 The Apostle, however, seems desirous of making a distinction, yet not between the rightful and illegal authorities, but between the actual appearance of the authorities and their ideal and essential ground of life, whose validity should also undoubtedly be recognized in the actual authorities, because of their permanent destination. In harmony with this distinction, Chrysostom, and others, have distinguished between the magisterial office itself and its accidental incumbents. Yet we must hold that the Apostle not only enjoins obedience toward the ideal institution of the authorities, but also toward their empirical appearance. But he will establish the requirement of this obedience by reference to the ideal institution and design of the authorities. This arises clearly from what follows.

Rom_13:2. So that he who setteth himself against, &c. [ὣστε ὁ ἀντιτασσόμενος, κ.τ.λ. Notice the recurrence of τάσσω in various forms and combinations.—R.] Whoever becomes ἀντιτασσόμενος against the actual authorities, becomes also the resister of the ordinance of God. The ἀντιτάσσεσθαι denotes, primarily, military οpposition, the array of a hostile order of battle; but it has also a more general sense. Its meaning, over against the authorities, in every case must be that of resistance; and Tholuck makes an arbitrary limitation when he says: “Neither the armed opposition of the individual, nor of many, as in insurrection, is meant here; it rather appears, from Rom_13:7, what kind of opposition is meant, namely, that of refusal to pay taxes.” Besides, Rom_13:7 is the beginning of another section. [The more general sense is usually accepted, as in the above rendering: He who setteth himself against, which is adopted to bring out the reflexive force of the original.—R.] As related to the Divine appointment (διαταγή, here = διάταγμα), this resistance becomes a spiritual resistance. This is the rule; and, according to this rule, it is said of those who resist the Divine ordinance:

Those who resist shall receive to themselves condemnation [οἱ δὲ ἁνθεστηκότεςἑαυτοῖς κρῖμα λήμψονται]. Meyer properly remarks, that “a condemnation by God is meant, as it is produced by their resistance of God’s ordinance, but that the ἂρχοντες are regarded as executing this sentence; therefore Paul does not mean eternal (according to Reiche, and most commentators), but temporal punishment.” Yet these executioners are not always the ἂρξοντες; for it is well known that revolution very often “devours its own children,” and that the sorest punishments come from anarchy. [The next verse seems to point to the rulers as the instruments in inflicting the Divine punishment (Tholuck, Alford), yet there is no necessity for this limitation, in the face of the fact that punishment often comes by other hands. Though the punishment comes from God, condemnation is preferable to damnation, since the latter refers now to eternal punishment alone, which is not the meaning here.—On Rom_13:1-2, Dr. Hodge remarks: “The extent of this obedience is to be determined from the nature of the case. They are to be obeyed as magistrates, in the exercise of their lawful authority. This passage, therefore, affords a very slight foundation for the doctrine of passive obedience.”—R.]

Rom_13:3. For rulers are not [οἱ γαρ ἂρχοντες οὐκ εἰσίν]. It may be asked here, what the γάρ is designed to establish? According to Meyer, it explains the modality of the condemnation: they shall receive condemnation in so far as the civil authority is its executioner. But Tholuck and Philippi very properly suggest, that the κακὰ ἒργα in Rom_13:3 cannot mean merely resistance to civil authority. If the civil authority exists merely for the quelling of resistance, the whole State would be a mere circle, or the civil authority would be an absolute despotism. According to Calvin and Bucer, Rom_13:3 should connect with Rom_13:1, and prove the utilitas of the Divine ordinance of civil authority.9 But the γάρ refers simply to the idea of absolute punishment in the condemnation in Rom_13:2. In Tholuck there is a similar, and perhaps somewhat more general, reference to Rom_13:2. God punishes insurrection, because it is designed to shake a legal ordinance, existing for the protection of the good and the punishment of the bad. All those are guilty of this misconception of all the moral powers of existing order, who, in their abstract worship of a pure fancy, oppose the best form of government, and therefore finish their labors by perverting existing order to a moral chaos. Now, the limitation of the strict requirements of the Apostle lies in the definition of the civil authority, which he gives in this and the following verses.

A terror, φόβος. For terror, formidandi. Princes are not formidable to the good work, but to the evil.—[To the good work, but to the evil, τῶ ἀγαθῶ ἒργᾳ, ἀλλὰ τῷ κακῷ. See Textual Note4.—R.]

Dost thou then wish not to be afraid of the authority? [θέλεις δὲ μὴ φοβεῖσθαιτὴν ἐξουσίαν; Although it is not necessary to retain the interrogative form, yet it will express sufficiently the hypothetical force, which most commentators find here.—R.] These words are a hypothetical premise, and not a question, as Griesbach, and others, would construe them.—Thou shalt have praise [ἒξεις ἒπαινον]. Commendations by the magistrates, in opposition to punishments, were common even in ancient times. Origen, on the contrary, says, that it is not the custom of rulers to praise the non peccantes. To this, Pelagius says: Damnatio malorum laus est bonorum. Meyer says: “Grotius, moreover, properly says: ‘Cum hœc scriberet Paulus, non sœviebatur Romœ in Christianos?’ It was still the better period of Nero’s government.” Tholuck’s view is similar. Yet the written words of the Apostle have been of perfect application subsequently, even down to the present day. The Apostle sets up an ideal, by which the ruler also can and shall be judged. We must hold:

1. That he portrays obedience to authority as an obedience for the Lord’s sake (comp. Eph_6:5-6). This secures the sphere: “Render to God the things that are God’s;” bondage under religious and conscientious despotism is excluded.

2. The definition of what is good works and what are evil works, abides by the decision of God’s word, of Christian faith, and of conscience, but is not dependent on the ruler.

3. This also indicates that every power shall become weakness, when the poles of sword-bearing shall be so absolutely transposed that the sword becomes a terror to good works; but that it is a matter of the Divine government to prove that weakness, which lies in the fact that an actual government has absolutely dropped off from the idea of its design.[10]

Rom_13:4. For he is God’s minister [Θεοῦγὰρ διάκονός ἐστιν]. The γάρ of Rom_13:4 brings out the ground of the declaration in Rom_13:3. The rule of the magistracy as a terror to the evil, and for the praise and encouragement of those who do good, is explained by its character, its essential design, to be God’s servant.—[To thee for good, σοὶ εἰς τὸ ἀγαθόν.] But he is God’s minister for the good of man; see Book of Wis_6:4. [While rulers are of God, it is for the benefit of the ruled. A repetition of what precedes, and suggesting the same limitations.—R.]

He weareth not the sword in vain [οὐγὰρ εἰκῆ τὴν μάχαιραν φορεῖ]. He weareth it (φόρει is stronger than φερεῖ) as the symbolical token, insignia, of his governing and judicial sovereignty; but he does not wear it merely as a symbol, without reason, and for show. He makes use of it because he is God’s minister, as the punitive executioner of His wrath. The addition: for wrath, εἰς ὀργήν, expresses the fact that even in the State and municipal court there is the authority of something higher than merely human justice, namely, the Divine retribution of wrath upon offenders.

On the different antiquarian interpretations of the μάχαιρα, particularly as the dagger which the Emperor carried at his side, see Tholuck, p. 690. Tholuck and Meyer decide for the sword, because μάχ. in the New Testament always means this, and because everywhere in the provinces it was borne by the highest officers of military and criminal affairs, as the sign of the jus gladii. Nevertheless, the dagger of the Emperor, and of his representative, the Prœfectus Prœtorii, belongs under the symbolical description. After all, in an abstract and real direction, we would otherwise have to think only of the executioner’s sword. [It requires some ingenuity to escape the conviction that this passage implies a New Testament sanction of the right of capital punishment. At all events, the theory of civil penalties here set forth is in direct opposition to that so constantly upheld nowadays, that the end is simply the reformation of the offender. See Doctr. Note 6.—R.]

Rom_13:5. Wherefore ye must needs, &c. [διὸἀνάγκη, κ.τ.λ.] For the reason stated, it was not merely the duty of prudence, but also a religious and moral duty of conscience, to be subject. When the Apostle says, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ sake, he denotes thereby the antithesis of the servile fear of the external infliction of punishment, and of inward and free obedience, in the knowledge and reverence of the Divine order in the civil affairs of men.11 Comp. 1Pe_2:13.

Rom_13:6. For, for this cause ye pay tribute also [διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ φόρους τελεῖτε. The question of connection has been much discussed. Calvin, De Wette, Alford, and many others, make διὰ τοῦτο parallel with διό (Rom_13:5), as another inference from Rom_13:1-4. Meyer, however, connects immediately with Rom_13:5, finding here an inference from the necessity there described, as well as a confirmation of it. He thinks the other construction passes over Rom_13:5 arbitrarily. But if the verses are taken as parallel, this difficulty is not of much weight. See his notes for other views; Stuart takes διὰ τοῦτο γάρ as a strengthened causal particle, and the verb as imperative.—R.] The τελεῖτε must not be read as imperative (Heumann, Morus [Stuart, Hodge], and others); but the γάρ [οὖν with the imperative would have been more natural] and the imperative in Rom_13:7 are against this. The payment of tribute declares a recognition of the State, also according to our Lord’s own declaration (Mat_22:21). But by means of paying tribute, the subject himself takes part in the government of the magistracy. He actually takes part in the support of the administration, which, consciously or unconsciously, is, in the highest sense, a servant of the kingdom, and, in the widest sense, is a servant [Liturg] of God, analogously to the servant of the temple. Olshausen, and others, erroneously construe προσκαρτεροῦντες as subject.

[For they are the ministers of God, λειτουργοὶ γὰρ Θεοῦ εἰσιν. See Textual Note6. The subject is ἂρχοντες (supplied in thought); λειτουργοί is predicate (Meyer, Philippi, and most). See Philippi on the distinction between λειτουργος and διάκσσονος. He bases upon the former, which, he claims, applies to one engaged in a practical, external service, as well as on the concrete plural (instead of the abstract ἐξουσία), the reference to the collection of tribute in εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο. But it is better, with Tholuck, Wordsworth, and others, to find here the idea of servants ministering to God in representation of the people.—R.]

Attending continually upon this very thing [εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο προζκαρτεροῦντες]. Philippi12 explains εἰς αὖτὸ τοῦτο: for this very purpose, viz., the payment of tribute. But then that would mean: they receive taxes in order that they may exact more taxes. The purpose is the fundamental thought of the whole section: The State is the State of the police, of rectitude, and of civilization. Therefore the λειτουργεῖν τῶ Θεῶ is undoubtedly meant (Tholuck, and others) in the very sense in which the section has described it.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. As chap. 12. has defined the conduct of Christians toward the Church and the personal departments of life, so does chap. 13 define their conduct toward the State and the world. The Apostle has therefore very forcibly regarded the sphere of personal life as the atmosphere of the Church, and then the sphere of the world as the atmosphere of the State.[13]

2. In reference to the civil authority, the Apostle evidently makes the following distinctions: (1) The actual existence of the civil powers, which are in every case an ordinance of God’s providence [not of a social contract, nor simply by the will of the people.—R.]; and the ideal and real existence of the civil power, which is not merely providentially ἀπὸ Θεοῦ, but is also, by creation and institution, fundamentally an ordinance ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ τεταγμέναι. (2) He distinguishes between social opposition to the civil power, and the spiritual opposition to God’s institution which is comprised therein. (3) He also distinguishes between the power of the State itself and its incumbents, the rulers, by which designation he expresses the possibility of different political forms.[14] (4) He finally distinguishes between the actual appearance and its ideal destination, according to which the ἐξουσὶα should be a διακονία and administrator of Divine right, and the ἂρχο̇ντες should prove themselves as λειτουργοὶ Θεοῦ.

3. The following distinctions with reference to duty toward the State clearly appear:

A. The submission is of necessity (ἀνάγκη), Rom_13:5; (1) Because of the wrath. Since Divine providence has its wise purposes even in raising up, and permitting to exist, severe and despotic powers, so long as they are really State powers, ὑπερέχουσαι, so, in this relation, is the ἀντιτάσσεσθαι a sin against wisdom; the revolter draws upon himself the κρῖμα for his want of judgment, his presumption, and his wicked encroachment and invasion. The same ὀργή which makes the State pass over from an institution of Divine mercy to a phenomenon of Divine wrath, and which makes use of the despotic tool as an axe to be cast aside in due season (Isa_10:15), and which oppresses a people to its own chastisement, crushes, first of all, the individual anarchical despots of revolution, who, in excessive self-estimation, would cure the relative evil of despotism by the absolute evil of anarchy. (2) Although this folly itself must be avoided for conscience’ sake, there is added a specific obedience for conscience’ sake, which is unfettered respect for the ideal splendor of the Divine institution, joy at an existence protected by the laws and civilization of the State, gratitude for the moral blessings which humanity possesses in civil life; but, in one word, the knowledge of the Divine, which shines clearly enough even through the imperfect phenomenon of civil life.

B. The “submitting,” ὑποτάσσεσθαι, excludes the resisting, ἀντιτάσσεσθαι; but it by no means excludes it from God’s word and from conscience, nor from judgment (dependent on an existing power) on what is good and what is evil, and what is just and what is unjust; for it is only in consequence of this judgment that there can be a candid conviction that the higher powers, really as God’s servant, exercise the right of the sword for a terror to evil works and protection to good works. Consequently, judgment on the actions of the State within the purely ethical department, and the limits and legality of wisdom, is also unfettered.

C. According to the Apostle, the mark of voluntary obedience consists in not fearing the civil powers, in assuming their existence according to the idea in Rom_13:3-4, and not according to their accidental errors. This fearlessness may not only be united with the respect required by Rom_13:7, but is inseparably connected with it (see Tholuck, p. 692). As one has the right and duty to expect of the Christian that he will act in a Christian way, so has one the right and duty to expect of the State that it be clothed with the ideal principles of the State.

D. The Apostle says: “Render therefore to all their dues; tribute to whom tribute is due;” as if he would say that, by this voluntary act, you participate in the civil government, and pledge your obedience to it. But, in Rom_13:7, he characterizes the same act as indebtedness. The solution of this apparent antinomy has been given by our Lord himself, Mat_22:21 (see the Commentary on Matthew, pp. 396, 397). The individual has the right to emigrate when an extraneous power arises. But if, with the use of the coin of the country, he enjoys the profit, protection, and authority of the country, there arises the duty of paying the tribute required by the united life and necessities of the State. And he who pays tribute—that is, renders allegiance—with one hand, but with the other rises in revolution, is not only guilty of resistance, but also of self-delusion and self-contradiction.—These are the principal features; they may also be found in Eph_6:5; 1Ti_2:2; 1Pe_2:13. The application of them to the individual cases and questions arising here, has been committed by God’s word to the development of the Christian spirit. We are convinced that this spirit, and its foundation, can be misapplied by impure minds, when, on the one hand, Byzantine adulterers make the gospel of truth a gospel of absolute despotism, and, on the other, fanatical and hierarchical mutineers make it a gospel of revolutionary terrorism, as was the case with the Jewish Zealots, and appears now as secret political justice [Vehmjustiz] (practised in Westphalia in early times), now as brigandage, and now as Fenianism. In both respects the Old Testament is a commentary, rich in illustrations, on the sense of the New, Neither Pharaoh nor Korah’s company, neither Rehoboam nor Jeroboam, neither Nebuchadnezzar nor the adversaries of Jeremiah, escaped the condemnatory judgment of the Spirit recorded on the pages of Holy Writ. But in the Jewish war, when the fanaticism of power and the fanaticism of an enthusiastic fancy for freedom contended together for the Holy City, the Christians emigrated to Pella. The light and right of the Christian consist in the incapacity of any earthly power to intervene between his heavenly King and his conscience. When it is therefore imputed to him that his conscience is stained by falsehood, injustice, cowardice, or partiality, and that he has become faithless to his heavenly King, he knows—for he must know—that his inward life stands or falls with his fidelity to his Lord, it matters not from what side the imputation may come. He must likewise refute the imputation that he employs his whole life in political law questions; for there are other things to be attended to in religious, ecclesiastical, moral, and social life, than contending for the most perfect political and social forms. The same fanatical externalization, which in the Middle Ages took pleasure in absolute ecclesiasticism, can become absolute politicalism in modern society. But if conditions arise in the life of nations in which the Apostle’s definition is not of absolute application to the civil power, when the sword is a terror to the good, then does the definition cease to be of application at its time to ὑπερέχουσα. But even in such a case God could make a Russian winter do more for Germany, than man, alienated from God, could do for France by a series of revolutions. Of course, freedom never takes place without enthusiastic liberators, who know how to distinguish God’s fiery sign from human incendiarism. But every one must know for himself what his duty is in his particular calling. [The positions of Dr. Lange are justly taken, but may require some modification for a region where the civil power is more directly formed and sustained by the individual members of the State. In that case, the personal responsibility in political affairs is, of course, largely augmented; to the duty of obedience and tribute, that of political knowledge and prudence is added. The ideal must be formed by Christian reflection, and by Christian effort we must seek to make it a reality. The abstract right of revolution, which Dr. Lange himself does not deny, will be the more an abstraction as lawful means are at hand to alter the organic law of the State. Thus popular government, when, and only when, the people are permeated by Christian principle, contains in itself the preventive of revolutionary excess. How insupportable it can become when this condition is wanting, history tells plainly enough.—R.]

4. From the experience through which the Apostle had previously passed, he had been often protected by the sword of the Roman authorities against the mutinies of Jewish fanaticism. Learned people have observed, that he has written these exhortations to Rome although Nero was Emperor there. Other scholars have remarked, on the other hand, that the five good years of Nero’s reign had not yet come to an end. But it is certain that, in the ordinance of the State for posterity, as well as in the institution of the Church, the Apostle perceives the historical opposition to the germinating antichristianity in the world, according to 2 Thessalonians 2. But he did not regard his liberty of judgment thereby bound (see 2Ti_4:17).

5. To what extent is the State a Divine institution? Elaborate discussions on this question are summed up and deliberated upon by Tholuck, pp. 681–689. According to the principles of Romanism, the State is merely a human ordinance (see Tholuck, p. 684; Gieseler, Kirchengesch., ii. 2, pp. 7, 108).—The germ of the Divine institution of the State lies in the Divine institution of the family, in the authority of the head of the family in particular, as well as in the substantial relations of humanity. But as the Old Testament gift of the law is the institution of a theocracy, which still embraces in common the twin-offspring of State and Church, so is there contained also in the Old Testament a Divine sanction of the State—a sanction which pledges the future sanctified State to reciprocity with the future Church. And this presages that it is just as destructive to make the State the servant of the Church, as to make the Church the bondwoman of the State.

[The Scylla and Charybdis of European Christianity, as related to the State, are: Romanism, which subordinates the State to the Church, and Erastianism, which subordinates the Church to the State. The American theory is: that both are coördinate, the State protecting the Church in civil rights, the Church sustaining the State by its moral influence. Yet even here it is questioned whether this is the correct theory. It is an experiment, fraught with great blessings indeed, but, as yet, only an experiment. The dangers here are similar: (1) Romanism, which would make its Church the State; in a popular government, as really as in a despotism, and even more fatally, since the genius of the Church must then become that of the State—what that is, is obvious. (2) On the other hand, we find the theocratic tendency of Puritanism manifesting itself continually. This would identify Church and State, rather by making the State the Church, pressing upon it the duty of legislating men into morality, and even holiness. Here we must class the politico-religionism, which has become so common during the last ten years.—Still, the constant tendency of Christendom to make a practical synthesis of Church and State, is an unconscious prophecy of an era when both shall be united in a christocracy.—R.]

6. On the right of the death-penalty with reference to the sword of authority, sec Tholuck, p. 691. We must, of course, distinguish between the right of using the sword and the duty of its use. [Admitting that the Apostle is describing an ideal of civil government, we still find here the right of capital punishment. Of course, just in so far as the actual government has been below this ideal, has this right been abused. Still, the right remains justified by the theory of punishment here advanced, by the necessities of self-preservation on the part of society represented by the punishing power. The right to punish also implies the right to pardon; and the measure of the right (i. e., the conformity to the ideal here presented) will be also the measure of the sense of responsibility, both as to the punishing and pardoning power. The usual objections to capital punishment misapprehend (a.) the nature of punishment in general; (b.) the Divine authority in civil government.—R.]

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Obedience toward the powers that be is every Christian’s duty. 1. Without difference of possessions; 2. Of position; 3. Of culture; 4. And of confession (Rom_13:1).—In how far are there no powers that are not ordained by God? 1. So far as God himself is a God of order, who will therefore have order in civil affairs; 2. So far as God is also a God of love, who designs to do good for us by the powers which He has ordained (Rom_13:1-4).—Resistance to the powers that be, regarded as resistance to God’s ordinance (Rom_13:2).—To do good is the best protection against all fear of civil authority (Rom_13:3).—Praise from the civil magistrates. 1. Who shall obtain it? Every one who does good—that is, every one who, a. does not submit slavishly; but, b. obeys the laws of the country by voluntary obedience. 2. In what should it consist? a. Not so much in showy medals and ribbons, for which many are so eager, as, b. in the simple recognition of the faithfully discharged duty of the citizen (Rom_13:3).—The civil authorities should likewise serve: 1. God; 2. Men (Rom_13:4).—The holy judicial office of the magistracy. 1. From whom is it derived? From God, who is a righteous God, and to whom no wicked person is pleasing (Psa_5:4). 2. What belongs to it? The exercise of penal judgment, and, above all, the right of life and death. 3. How should they exercise it? In the ennobling, but also humiliating, consciousness that they are God’s ministers (Rom_13:4).

Luther: Worldly power is for the sake of temporal peace; therefore the conscience is bound, by dutiful love, to be subject to it (Rom_13:5).—See how good it is to pay taxes and be obedient; for you thereby help to protect the pious and punish the wicked. Therefore do not be provoked at it (Rom_13:6).

Starke: If persons in authority would attract their subjects to obedience, they should administer their office well, and, to that end, should remember: 1. That they are by nature no better than other men; 2. That they will therefore die, just as all others; 3. That they will have to give a far greater account than their subjects before God’s judgment-bar, because of their official prerogatives and government (Rom_13:1).—Lange: When those in authority read and hear that their station is from God, they should examine themselves as to whether they are to their subjects what the head is to the body and its members (Rom_13:1).—Hedinger: The powers that be, God’s minister! How much is expressed by this! Therefore there are no masters above God. He will hereafter hold to account, and throw aside, all titles of honor (Rom_13:4).—Ye subjects, give freely your possessions and blood, but not your conscience (Rom_13:6).

Gerlach: Though the office be divine, the incumbent may possess it illegally, and abuse it (Rom_13:1).—“Needs” here means not external compulsion, but the inward necessity of being obedient to God (Rom_13:5).

Lisco: The believer’s holy love is the fulfilment of the law; first of all, in relation to the powers that be (Rom_13:1 ff.).—Obedience is a matter of conscience with the Christian; it is an inward and sincere obedience (Rom_13:5).

Heubner: The Christian attitude toward the authorities (Rom_13:1 ff.).—The limits of obedience toward the powers that be are defined by conscience, faith, and God’s commandment; Act_5:29 (Rom_13:1).—The Christian mode of obedience is free, pure, conscientious, and not from compulsion or fear (Rom_13:5).

Schleiermacher: On the proper relation of the Christian to his ruler. 1. How utterly improper it is for the Christian to be subject merely to avoid punishment; 2. How natural and necessary it is for him to be subject for conscience’ sake (preached in January, 1809); Rom_13:1-5.

[Henry: Magistrates act as God’s ministers: 1. In the administration of public justice; 2. The determining of quarrels; 3. The protecting of the innocent; 4. The righting of the wronged; 5. The punishing of offenders; 6. And the preserving of national peace and order, that every man may not do right in his own eyes.—Waterland: It is the duty of those in authority: 1. To correct those that needlessly and causelessly disturb the public tranquillity; 2. To remove those that libel the established religion, without offering any better, or an equivalent; 3. To curb the insolence and humble the pride of such as fly in the face of authority, and pretend, without commission or qualifications, to instruct, and, under that color, to insult their superiors.—Scott: As to the efforts which are anywhere made by those on whom trusts constitutionally devolve, to preserve, increase, or assist the real liberty of mankind, personal, civil, or religious, or to check the career of despotism or oppression over men of any climate, complexion, or religion: let us zealously forward them with our prayers, and by every mean consistent with the peace and good order of the community; and, if we would enjoy the blessing of good government, we should pray earnestly and constantly for our rulers, and all in authority; else we have no just cause to complain of any real or supposed grievances to which we may be subjected by them.—Clarke: When a ruler governs according to the constitution of his country, and has his heart and life governed by the laws of God, he is a double blessing to his people; while he is ruling carefully according to the laws, his pious example is a great means of extending and confirming the reign of pure morality among those whom he governs.—J. F. H.]

Footnotes:

[1]Rom_13:1.—[The word ἐξουσία, rendered power in the E. V., has, as its German equivalent: Obrigkeit. Dr. Lange expands ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχούσαις into: den Obrigkeiten, den ihn überragenden Mächten. The rendering above is partly from Noyes, partly from the revision of Five Ang. Clergymen. Both of these versions substitute throughout, authority for power (E. V., Amer. Bible Union). The change is a happy one, since authority has both an abstract and a personal force, corresponding to that of ἑξουσία. Civil authority is, of course, intended.

[2]Rom_13:1.—[א. A. B. D3. L., some fathers, read ὑπό; adopted by Lachmann. D1. E1. F., Origen, ἀπό; which is adopted by modern editors (except Tregelles), since it might readily be changed on account of the ὑπό immediately following, and also because the other reading would be tautological.

[3]Rom_13:1.—[The Rec. inserts ἐξουσίαι after οὖσαι, with D3. L., some versions and fathers. It is omitted in א. A. B. D1. F., most versions and fathers. Later editors reject it. It would easily be written as an explanation. The Rec., also inserts τοῦ before θεοῦ, on very insufficient authority.

[4]Rom_13:3.—[Instead of τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἔργων, ἀλλὰ τῶν κακῶν (Rec., D3. L., some fathers, Scholz), the reading: τῷἀγαθῷ ἒργῳ, ἀλλὰ τῷ κακῷ is supported by א. A. B. D1. F., many versions and fathers, Lachmann, Tischendorf, De Wette, Meyer, Philippi, Alford, Tregelles. Stuart and Hodge do not notice the correct reading, which was doubtless altered into that of the Rec., for the sake of supposed grammatical accuracy.

[5]Rom_13:5.—[In D. F., and a few minor authorities, ἀνάγκη is omitted, and the infinitive ὑποτάσσεσθαι altered into the imperative ὑποτάσσεσθε. The Vulgate follows the reading ἀνάγκῃ ὑποτάσσεσθε. So Luther.

[6]Rom_13:6.—[The E. V. has here, God’s ministers, and in Rom_13:4, the minister of God. The expressions are altered in both verses in the version of Five Ang. Clergymen, which I have followed, for this reason, that, in Rom_13:4, the idea of serving on behalf of God is implied in διάκονος; while here, that of serving or ministering to God, on behalf of the people (λειτουργοὶ θεοῦ) seems to be included also. It were perhaps still better to render διάκονος, servant, and reserve the word minister for this verse, as Noyes has done. “We could not vary the English rendering of διάκονος and λειτουργός, except by introducing some word like ‘officer,’ which would have had an awkward sound” (Five Ang. Clergymen).—R.]

[7][This exhortation was probably occasioned by the turbulent spirit of the Jews in Rome, who had been on this account banished from the city for a time by the Emperor Claudius (A. D. 51). Their messianic expectations assumed a carnal and political character, and were directed chiefly toward the external emancipation from the odious yoke of the heathen Romans. A few years after the date of the Epistle to the Romans, the spirit of revolt burst forth in open war, which ended in the destruction of Jerusalem (A. D. 70). The Jewish, and even the Gentile Christians, might readily be led away by this fanaticism, since the gospel proffered liberty, and they might not understand that it was mainly spiritual—moral freedom from the slavery of sin, out of which, by degrees, in the appointed way, a reformation and transformation of civil relations should proceed. Such mistakes have been common; e.g., the Peasant’s war, the Anabaptist tumults in the time of the Reformation, and many revolutions since the latter part of the last century. The attitude of Christ, His Apostles, and His Church down to the time of Constantine, toward the civil government, is truly sublime. They recognized in it an ordinance of God, despite its degeneracy, yielding to it, in all legitimate affairs, a ready obedience, despite the fact that they were persecuted by it with fire and sword. It should be remembered that this exhortation was addressed to the Romans, when the cruelties and crimes of a Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius were in yet fresh remembrance, and when the monster Nero sat on the imperial throne—the same Nero who, a few years later, wantonly and mercilessly persecuted the Christians, condemning the Apostles Paul and Peter to a martyr’s death. It was, however, by just such Christian conduct, in contrast with such cruelty, that Christ’s Church won the moral victory over the Roman Empire and heathendom. Under the influence of such precepts, the early Church was “great in deeds, greater in sufferings, greatest in death, for the honor of Christ and the benefit of generations to come;” thus she was enabled to “overcome evil with good.”—P. S.]

[8][Without anticipating the discussion in the Doctrinal Notes, it may be well to remark here, that while this phrase has been used very frequently in the interest of the divine right of kings, such an application is rather an accident than a necessary inference from the Apostle’s proposition. The theologians of Germany are apt to turn this against the revolutionary tendencies of Europe, &c.; but should the government under which they live in any way become republican, or ultra-democratic, then consistency must lead them to concede to such authorities also the jus divinum. The simple, pellucid meaning of the Apostle is, that civil government is necessary, and of Divine appointment. We infer that anarchy is as godless as it is inhuman; that magistrates are not “the servants of the people,” nor do they derive their authority from the people, but from God, even though chosen by the people; that republican officials, no less than the hereditary monarchs, can subscribe themselves, “by the grace of God.” Unless the principle be of universal implication, anarchy will be justified somewhere. This principle, moreover, respects the office, not the character of the magistrate; not the abstract authority, indeed, but the concrete rulers, whatever their character. If it be deemed too sweeping, then its self-imposed limitation has been overlooked. For as the obedience is demanded because of God’s appointment, then it is not demanded in matters contrary to God’s appointment. When the civil power contradicts God’s Word and His voice in our conscience, then it contradicts and subverts its own authority. Herein the superior wisdom of Christian ethics is manifest. Human self-will leads to anarchy, human power to despotism; but obedience to de facto rulers as a Christian duty has led, and must lead, to true civil freedom, since it alone makes the individual truly free, and, by asserting the higher law as the basis of the lower authority, ever elevates the lower authority nearer the Divine Law. For, as Alford observes of the duty here laid down: “To obtain, by lawful means, the removal or alteration of an unjust or unreasonable law, is another part of this duty; for all powers among men must be in accord with the highest power, the moral sense.” And the elevation of the moral sense of individuals will accomplish more than revolutions, however justifiable and necessary.—R.]

[9][The view of Calvin, Philippi, Hodge, Alford, and others, that this verse gives an additional ground for obedience, viz., that magistrates, besides being ordained of God, are appointed for a useful and beneficent purpose, has much to commend it. Dr. Lange seems to be led toward such exclusive references as bear against revolution.—R.]

[10][In thus presenting an ideal of civil government (as most commentators suppose), the Apostle gives both the reason for obedience to rightful authority, and makes room for resistance to rulers who utterly and entirely depart from this ideal. Wordsworth, however, takes decided ground against any right of insurrection, and adds: “But even suppose a Nero, and a Nero persecuting the Church; yet even then you may have praise therefrom. You may overcome his evil by your good; you may be more than conqueror—you may derive glory from it. For though it is unjust and condemns you, yet God is just and will reward you. He will crown you for acting justly, and for suffering unjustly. Therefore hold fast your justice, and whether the power acquits or condemns you, you will reap praise from it. If you die for the faith from its hand, you will reap glory from its fury. Augustine (Serm. 13:302).” Yet even this author admits that the Apostle “charitably presumes rulers to be what, being God’s ministers, they ought to be.” This is virtually the presentation of an ideal, the non-realization of which implies certain limitations to absolute submission.—R.]

[11][Melanchthon thus strongly puts the case: Nulla potentia humana, nulli exercitus magis muriunt imperia, quam hæc severissima lex Dei: necesse est obedire propter conscientiam.”—R.]

[12][The original says Meyer, but gives the very words of Philippi; while Meyer (4th ed., without any indication of change of view) defends the wider reference, among other reasons, because the verb, which includes a moral idea, would be inapplicable to the mere collection of taxes. The great thought, ministers of God, seems to be the controlling one. Stuart, Hodge, and the older commentators, prefer the other reference, which, perhaps, to a certain extent, implies this.—R.]

[13][Jowett escapes all the difficulties of this section, by intimating that the Apostle’s exhortation has a reference only to the Roman Christians in their then circumstances. He thinks many a scriptural precept is abused because not thus limited, and adds, respecting the Apostle: “It never occurred to him that the hidden life, which he thought of only as to be absorbed in the glory of the sons of God, was one day to be the governing principle of the civilized world.” It is not likely to be so long, if all its professed possessors pare down the scriptural precepts in this fashion.—R.]

[14][From the expression, “God’s minister to thee for good,” the relative excellence of the different forms of government must be determined, since this is the only rule laid down, and an empirical one at best. So long as a popular government best fulfils this Divine purpose, so long will men gladly lay down their lives, that “the government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth” (Pres. Lincoln at Gettysburg Cemetery.—R.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CHAPTER 13

1. Obedience to Authorities. (Rom 13:1-7.)

2. Love the Fulfilling of the Law. (Rom 13:8-10.)

3. The Day is at Hand. (Rom 13:11-14.)

Rom 13:1-7

The children of God are strangers and pilgrims in the world. Our citizenship is in heaven. But what is the Christian to do as living under different forms of government? The Christian is to be in subjection to these, for the powers that exist are ordained by Him. Resisting these powers would mean resistance to God who has ordained them. They are God’s ministers to maintain order. “Render therefore to all their dues, tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.” If Christians had always obeyed these injunctions, how well it would have been. But often they are forgotten and an attempt is made to control the politics of this age and to rule.

Rom 13:8-10

“Owe no man anything, but to love one another, for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.” The first sentence does not mean that it is wrong to borrow money. The question is about paying. If a debt is due it should be paid exactly on time. Borrowing money in a reckless way, without any prospect of returning the amount, is sinful, and often great dishonor has been brought upon the name of our Lord on account of it. But there is another debt which always remains. The Christian owes the debt of love to all. And this love is the fulfilling of the law. Love does not work ill to his neighbor. The natural man may claim that he keeps the sum of the other commandments, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” but he cannot do it. Only one who is born again, in whose heart there is love, has the power to do this.

Rom 13:11-14

The Coming of the Lord is brought before us in these verses as a motive to holy living. The final salvation is nearing, for the night is far spent and the day is at hand. The blessed hope is to be always before the Christian’s heart; it is a purifying hope. “He that hath this hope set upon him purifieth himself as He is pure.” In view of that approaching day, when we shall see Him face to face and be with Him in glory, the exhortations are given to awake out of sleep, to cast off the works of darkness, to put on the armor of light, to walk becomingly as in the day, to abstain from the things of the flesh, putting on the Lord Jesus and making no provisions for the flesh. We are to walk in the light as the children of the day, with faces set towards the coming glory. And never before were those exhortations more needed than now. The night is far spent, the day is at hand. The signs of the end of the age are seen everywhere, and yet in these solemn days how few of God’s people walk as the children of the day in the path of separation.

Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 13:1

The Principles and Method of Christian Civilisation.

I. It may not be certain that this Epistle was written at one of the worst moments of Roman tyranny. It may possibly belong to that short interval of promise which preceded the full outburst of Nero’s natural atrocity. But the character which the empire had assumed must have been perfectly well known to St. Paul. It could have been no surprise to him that within a few years the Christians whom he was addressing should be called to expiate the emperor’s own crime by frightful tortures, or that he himself should be one of the victims. He wrote to prepare them for such events. And yet he says, "Let every soul be subject to the higher powers, for they are ordained of God."

II. We lose, it seems to me, much of the Apostle’s meaning, and pervert it to a purpose the most opposite to that which he contemplated, while, at the same time, we weaken the obligation which is laid upon us, if we do not perceive that these words contain the most strong and effectual protest ever made against the tyranny which they command Christian men patiently to endure. The very reason upon which St. Paul rests his exhortation to the Roman Christians is the reason which proves all such oppression as the Roman emperors were guilty of to be a false and hateful thing, a contradiction so gross and monstrous, that it can last only for a short time. "There is no power but of God." If the powers that be are ordained of men, they may be used according to the pleasure of men. It is merely a conflict between this form of self-will and that; between a despotism that exists and a despotism that is struggling to exist. If the powers that be are ordained of God, they must be designed to accomplish the good pleasure of God, all self-will must be at strife with a perfect will which is working continually for good. All efforts at absolute dominion must be a daring outrage upon Him who alone is absolute, and such struggles and such outrages, though they may be permitted a while for the fuller manifestation of that purpose which shall be accomplished in spite of them, have a lying root, and must at last come to nought.

F. D. Maurice, Christmas Day and Other Sermons, p. 393.

I. This text is a good illustration of the manner in which Christian doctrine is ever made by the apostles the ground of Christian duty. They do not often teach us new duties—in fact, there are very few duties in any part of the New Testament which were not either recognised in the Old, or else perceived to be duties by the light which is naturally in the human mind; but the great feature of the New Testament teaching is this, that all duties whatever are put upon a higher ground than they occupied before. What Christ has done for us is made the measure of what we should do and the argument why we should do it; and Christians are regarded not so much in the character of men who know more than their fellows, as in the character of men who feel themselves bound by the mercies of God and the love of Christ to offer themselves up a living sacrifice.

II. Note two or three reasons why we might have expected that the teaching of Christ’s disciples would not omit to lay stress upon the duty of honouring and submitting to the Queen. (1) In the first place, the general spirit of gentleness and longsuffering which belonged to all the teaching of Christ would suggest that quiet submission to authority was the right course for Christians. (2) Again, it is not to be forgotten that Christ Himself was declared to be a King, and that all Christians become by their profession subjects of this new kingdom. And in this kingdom submission was to be unlimited and obedience complete; the very lesson which all Christians had to learn was that they were bound to give themselves up with all their power and all their might to be a living sacrifice to Him who redeemed them, and to do His will with all their soul and strength. Hence, to a Christian the name of King was sanctified by its having been assumed by Christ, and the relation of people to king was hallowed. (3) Once more, the example of our Lord Jesus Christ in the days of His flesh would have a great effect in enforcing such duties as those which the text contains. He who would not allow Himself to be made the means of insurrection when the people would take Him by force and make Him a King, and who paid the tribute to avoid giving offence, and who permitted Himself to be given up to the rulers and to be tried and condemned, would certainly have given His sanction to the doctrine of the text.

Bishop Harvey Goodwin, Parish Sermons, vol. iv., p. 227.

References: Rom 13:1.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. viii., p. 88; C. Kingsley, National Sermons, p. 32. Rom 13:1-7.—Homilist, new series, vol. i., p. 141.

Rom 13:4

I. In the chapter from which my text is taken St. Paul speaks of civil rulers as ministers of God. He does not limit or soften his language to suit the circumstances of his own time. Nero’s will might be devilish; every power which he wielded was Divine. He had been appointed to rule the world which he tormented by Him who loved the world. He was the steward of His treasures even by, if he spent them in making those miserable whom they were intended to bless.

II. But St. Paul says further—"He is a minister of God to thee." A strange assertion. The emperor’s existence was a testimony to the poor Christian that he belonged to the great Roman world, that he was concerned, whether he was citizen or slave, in its welfare and its misery. That was a great step in his education, in his moral and spiritual education.

III. "He is a minister of God to thee for good." St. Paul writes this to men who might, in a short time, be lighting the city as torches to cover the guilt of him who set it on fire. Well! and was he not a minister of God to them for good if he was the instrument of inflicting that torture? The Apostle could venture the daring sentiment. He knew that by some means God would prove it to be true, for that generation and for all generations. And it will be known, some day, to how many men governments the most hypocritical and accursed have been ministers of good, by leading them from trifling to earnestness, by changing them from reckless plotters into self-denying patriots, by turning their atheism or devil-worship into a grounded faith in the God of truth. As Paul believed Jesus Christ to be the Son of God and the King of men, he could not help believing that all human society was organised according to the law which He expressed in words, which He embodied in His incarnation and death—"The chief of all is the servant of all." He could not doubt that every Christian ought to maintain the truth which Nero set at naught, and that if he did, it would prove itself in his case—Nero would be a minister of God for good to him.

F. D. Maurice, Sermons, vol. iv., p. 81.

Reference: Rom 13:4, Rom 13:5.—W. F. Fremantle, Church of England Pulpit, vol. i., p. 91.

Rom 13:7

The Doctrine of Obedience. Note:—

I. As suggested by the passage generally, the breadth and largeness of the gospel precepts. The broad principle is stated: obedience to lawful power. The application of it is left to reason, to conscience, to the inward guidance of the Holy Spirit.

II. The wholesomeness of the gospel teaching. There is nothing morbid in the Bible. Every one of Christ’s precepts, this one most of all, tends to make earth a scene of order and tranquillity in the very same degree in which it teaches men to regard earth as a small and insignificant portion of the whole of their space and the whole of their time.

III. Notice a few practical suggestions upon the principle here laid down. (1) Among these I must place foremost the charge to carry it out consistently in all departments of life. (2) If it is the duty of one to obey reverently, it must be the duty of another to rule well. Whatever be our position, however humble it may be in some aspects, yet so far as it is one of authority, if it be but over a few servants, each one of us is, in the sense here designed, "a minister of God," an "officer of God." (3) We must act upon the charge before us in small details. Such as (a) cheerfulness in bearing the burdens imposed on us for the state-service; (b) respectful language at all times about those in authority. (4) Once more, we are bound at all times to cherish, and from time to time more earnestly to express, a spirit of thankfulness to God Himself for His gift to us of government. (5) We should take a more lively interest than is, I fear, common amongst us, in those parts of our public worship which have a direct reference to the persons of our rulers and to the deliberations of our legislature.

C. J. Vaughan, Epiphany, Lent, and Easter, p. 39.

Rom 13:10

I. The law being an expression of the mind and will of God, we have only to study the character of God more closely to interpret more correctly the spirit and intention of the law. The character of God is known to us by His works, His providences, His revelations of Himself by prophets and saints, to whom He has made Himself known. Now, the confluence of all these streams of knowledge, derived from what He has said and done, issues in the revelation of a God of love. To begin with, the act of creation is a work of Almighty love. So it has been said with reason that if a man should realise his existence as a creature, he would be urged by his own consciousness to live a perfect life of love. But to come nearer than creation, to come to our personal contact with God, what is it that we find? The life we now enjoy rises in an ascending scale from peace and friendship and fellowship in work with God, to hope and promises beyond, from a seedtime of manifold experiences here to a harvest of immortality hereafter.

II. Consider some of the features of love. (1) In its aspect towards God, love has this note of encouragement, namely, that every movement of your love towards Him, though it be shortlived, intermittent and frail under temptation, is yet a witness to a certain congeniality and conformity of your nature to the nature of God. (2) Again, love is a motive which leads to imitation; you desire to grow like the one you love. (3) It is love that gives unity of design to the whole mechanism of the Catholic Church—its creeds, its sacraments, its ritual, its seasons, its festivals, its fasts, its penitences, and its joys. Just as the master-mind and the genius of one architect give order and harmony to the almost infinite details and creations of a Gothic church, so does love give system and symphony to the infinite varieties of the Christian life.

C. W. Furse, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxv., p. 129.

Reference: Rom 13:10.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. i., p. 28.

Rom 13:11

The Sleep of the Church.

There are many thoughts crowded together here, but each is necessary to the other. They will not bear to be separated, but we must disentangle them by considering how each of them bears on our own life and practice.

I. It is clear that the sleep or torpor which the Apostle speaks of is not one into which Jews or heathens had fallen. He was not writing to them. He was writing to a society of men confessing the faith of Jesus Christ, declaring Him to be the Image of God and the head of men. How could the Apostle think that such a society should fall into sleep? Because he knew what the temptation to it was in himself. He knew that he, who had been called by Christ Himself, who had had visions and revelations, who had been in the third heaven, might sink into indifference and listlessness.

II. A society is sleeping a death-sleep when its love becomes stagnant, when it is not a vigorous operative power. Now, St. Paul knew that no circumstances imparted this love to him; that if he depended on circumstances it perished. From personal experience he could testify that love to man might be as much killed by frosts as by suns; that if it is not kindled from within, everything from without may be fatal to it.

III. And how does he ward off the danger from himself? What contrivance does he use to wake them out of their slumbers? He reminded them that this indifference, lovelessness, this contention, self-seeking, was the accursed state out of which Christ came to redeem them. It was this hell into which He found His creatures sinking. It was to rescue them from this hell that He took flesh and dwelt among them and died on the cross and rose again and ascended on high. They had received the first pledges of this Redemption, of this Salvation. They had been enabled to feel and suffer for others, to desire their good, to love them as themselves. It was but a beginning; the glimpse of a Paradise; a first taste of the Tree of Life. They had a natural gravitation to self-indulgence, a preference for self-will, a desire for self-glory. These tendencies were always threatening to become supreme. Therefore St. Paul bids them think of the salvation which Christ had promised as something yet to come, as a blessing yet to be attained. This salvation from all which clogged their progress and hindered them from seeing things as they were—this salvation from lies, from hatred, from indifference—was all contained in the promise that He in whom is light and no darkness at all should be fully manifested. Every day and every hour was hastening on this manifestation, and therefore this salvation.

F. D. Maurice, Sermons, vol. v., p. 15.

Rom 13:11

Self-denial the Test of Religious Earnestness.

I. By "sleep" in this passage St. Paul means a state of insensibility to things as they really are in God’s sight. When we are asleep we are absent from this world’s action as if we were no longer concerned in it. It goes on without us, and if our rest be broken and we have some slight notion of people and occurrences about us, if we hear a voice or a sentence and see a face, yet we are unable to catch these external objects justly and truly; we make them part of our dreams, and pervert them till they have scarcely a resemblance to what they really are: and such is the state of men as regards religious truth. Many live altogether as though the day shone not on them, but the shadows still endured; and far the greater part of them are but very faintly sensible of the great truths preached around them. They see and hear as people in a dream; they mix up the Holy Word of God with their own idle imaginings; if startled for a moment, still they soon relapse into slumber; they refuse to be awakened, and think their happiness consists in continuing as they are.

II. If a person asks how he is to know whether he is dreaming on in the world’s slumber, or is really awake and alive unto God, let him first fix his mind upon some one or other of his besetting infirmities. Many men have more than one, all of us have some one or other, and in resisting and overcoming such self-denial has its first employment. Be not content with a warmth of faith carrying you over many obstacles even in your obedience, forcing you past the fear of men and the usages of society and the persuasions of interest; exult not in your experience of God’s past mercies, and your assurance of what He has already done for your soul, if you are conscious you have neglected the one thing needful,—daily self-denial.

J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. i., p. 57.

I. The text tells us what we are. St. Paul is addressing Christians, yet even they are asleep. Sleep is a torpor of the powers. The more complete the suspension of the energies, whether of brain or muscle or limb, the deeper, the sounder, the more thorough is the sleep. If the Christian man is spoken of as sleeping, it must be with reference to the inactivity, to the torpor, of his characteristic activities. St. Paul does not say that we sleepers may not be dreamers, may not be imaginers, may not be somnambulists. This would be just his idea of the Christian sleeper. The children of light, living like children of the world,—what are we, while this is true of us, but sleeping men, haunted by phantoms, disquieted by night’s illusions, and traversing (candle in hand) the chambers and halls and gardens of earth, with eyes closed and sealed to the light of an immortal day?

II. To awake out of sleep—what is it? There are acts of the soul as well as of the life. There are critical moments and there are decisive actions in the history of man’s spirit. St. Paul knew this—knew it in himself. A moment changed him from an enemy to a friend. He never looked back. It has been thus in ten thousand lives. St. Paul seems to recommend this kind of transaction—a transaction between a man and his soul, between a man and his life—in the short sharp watchword of the text.

III. The text adds a motive. "It is high time to awake." The nearness of the Advent is the motive for the awaking. It is a gratuitous supposition that St. Paul positively expected the Advent within the lifetime of the then living. St. Paul knew who had said, "Of that day and that hour knoweth no man," and yet had coupled with it the warning, "Therefore, be ye always ready." Each generation—the first not least—each successively until the latest—should live in the expectation, gilding the darkness of death by the brightness of the coming. Happy they to whom it can be said, Christians, awake, for your salvation draweth nigh. This is the motive of the text.

C. J. Vaughan, Sundays in the Temple, p. 1.

References: Rom 13:11.—E. Blencowe, Plain Sermons to a Country Congregation, p. 373; H. J. Wilmot Buxton, Sunday Sermonettes for a Year, p. 1; R. D. B. Rawnsley, Village Sermons, 1st series, p. 1; Homilist, 3rd series, vol. iv., p. 286; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. vii., p. 282; G. E. L. Cotton, Sermons and Addresses in Marlborough College, p. 481; H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 2893. Rom 13:11, Rom 13:12.—G. Moberly, Parochial Sermons, p. 1; Homilist, new series, vol. ii., p. 456.

Rom 13:12

Inducements to Holiness.

I. The argument which is drawn from the greater nearness of death (for this is evidently the argument here employed) is not of the same urgency when applied to the believer as to the unbeliever. If I ply the unbeliever with the fact that he is approaching nearer and nearer destruction, I just tell him that he has less time in which to escape and therefore less likelihood of obtaining deliverance. He must do it before daybreak, and the night is far spent. But when I turn with a like argument to the believer, and bid him cast off the works of darkness because the day is at hand, there is by no means the same appearance of force in the motive. "Now is our salvation nearer than when we believed"; and if a man be secure of salvation, so that his attainment of it does not depend on his striving for the rest of his life, to tell him that the end is at hand does not look like plying him with a proof of the necessity of exertion. But it is no Scriptural, and therefore no legitimate, feeling of security which can engender or excuse sluggishness. The only Scriptural certainty that a man will be saved is the certainty that he will struggle. Struggling is incipient salvation. Christ died to save us from our sins, and therefore the more striving there is against sin the more proportion is there of salvation. The Christian’s life is emphatically a life of labour. Ought not then this well-ascertained principle—the principle that the consciousness of the greater nearness of the end of a task generates fresh strength for the working it out—ought not this thoroughly to convince us that to remind a man of there being less time for toil should urge him to toil with more energy?

II. And if this suffice not to explain why the day being at hand should animate the Christian to the casting off of the works of darkness, we have two other reasons to advance—reasons why the consciousness of having less time to live should urge a man who feels sure of salvation to strive to be increasingly earnest in all Christian duties. The first reason is, because there is less time in which to strive for a high place in the kingdom of God; the second, because there is less time in which to glorify the Creator and Redeemer. Let these reasons be well considered and pondered, and they will, we think, show that there is full motive to "the casting off the works of darkness and putting on the armour of light" in the announced fact that the "night is far spent, the day is at hand."

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 2286.

Rom 13:12

The Day of the Lord.

It is more than eighteen hundred years since the Apostle uttered this exulting cry. We cannot repeat it today when once more we come to our Advent time without some sense of hopelessness. For what has come of it? we ask; is the night gone, is the day at hand? Century after century, with the indestructible aspiration of the heart, has this note of joy been taken up. and the aspiration has been disappointed and the joy unreached. The drama of mankind has been charged with so much action, apparently wasted, and so much suffering, apparently squandered, on the ground of this incessant hope, and yet the great end seems no nearer. On and on, stumbling in the night with bleeding feet and wearied brain, the great world has struggled forward, hoping for the dawn. "There is no radiance," it mutters, "on the mountains yet. I hope for ever, that is my doom; but the night is deep, and the day delays. Would God I could see the morning glow!"

I. St. Paul was wrong when he expected the final close in his own time; but he was right in this—that a new day was near at hand. We are wrong when we think we are near to the last great hour of time; but we are right when our heart tells us that God is coming to bring light to our own souls, to awaken our nation out of wrong into right, to set on foot new thoughts which will renew the life of mankind, for that is His continuous and Divine work. The reason, then, denies the nearness of the time when God will close this era of the world, and denies it on account of the slowness of God’s work. In reality God’s work is never slow or fast; it always marches at a constant pace; but to our sixty or seventy years it seems of an infinite tardiness. We live and grasp our results so hurriedly, and we have so short a time in which to work, that we naturally find ourselves becoming impatient with God. To work quickly seems to us to work well. But we forget how, even in our little life, we lose the perfection of results by too great rapidity. We seclude no hours of wise quiet, and our thought is not matured. God never makes these mistakes, the mistakes of haste. He never forgets to let a man, a nation, the whole of mankind rest at times, that they may each assimilate the results of an era of activity.

II. But though that great day is far away, the heart asserts, and truly, that when there is deepest night over nations and the world and men, a day of the Lord is at hand; that a dawn is coming—not the last day, not the final dawn, but the uprising of Christ in light, deliverance, knowledge, and love. The belief is born not only out of our natural hatred of evil and suffering and the desire to be freed, but out of actual experience. Again and again have these days of the Lord come, has the night vanished and the sunlight burst on the world, not only in religion, but in the regeneration of societies, in the revolutions of nations, in the rush of great and creative thoughts over the whole of the civilised world. Men sunk in misery, ignorance, and oppression cried to the watchers, and the prophets answered, "The night is far spent," we see the coming day. And never has their answer been left unfulfilled.

S. A. Brooke, The Spirit of the Christian Life, p. 262.

References: Rom 13:12.—H. J. Wilmot Buxton, The Life of Duty, vol. i., p. 1; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. v., p. 271; A. Jessopp, Norwich School Sermons, p. 219. Rom 13:12-14.—E. Blencowe, Plain Sermons to a Country Congregation, vol. ii., p. 1. Rom 13:14.—Homilist, 3rd series, vol. vii., p. 96; Archbishop Maclagan, Church of England Pulpit, vol. iv., p. 273; F. W. Farrar, Contemporary Pulpit, vol. vi., p. 286; H. Bushnell, Christ and His Salvation, p. 371. Rom 13:14.—J. B. Mozley, University Sermons, p. 46.

The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

[Paul, having shown how the faith-life offers itself as a daily sacrifice of love in spiritual and social spheres, now gives an outline of the sacrifice of self which it is to make in civil and business affairs. This he does in two sections, the first of which sets forth the Christian's relationship to government ( Rom_13:1-7 ), and the second his civil relations to men, business, etc., under government ( Rom_13:8-10 ) As in spiritual matters he was to first limit himself by humility ( Rom_12:1-8 ) and then give himself in love ( Rom_12:9-21 ), so he is here to limit himself by submission to the state ( Rom_13:1-7 ), and then give himself in love to his fellow-citizens ( Rom_13:8-10 ). But conditions at Rome made this instruction as to the Christian's duty to be loyal and submissive to government particularly opportune, for (1) the Jew believed that, as a citizen of the Theocracy, it was at least derogatory to his character, if not an act of treason toward God, to acknowledge allegiance to any earthly government ( Deu_17:15 ). This belief had already fomented that unrest in Palestine ( Act_5:36-37 ; Josep. Ant. 8:1:1) which ten years later broke out in rebellion, and necessitated the destruction of Jerusalem. This unrest had already resulted in banishment of Jews and Christians from Rome about seven years before, in A. D. 51 ( Act_18:2 ; Suet. "Claudius" c. 25; Dio Cassius 60:6). This unrest was sure to permeate the church (Ewald), for a considerable percentage of the churches, the world over, were Jews, and this influence in the church was great. There is nothing in Acts 28 to contradict the idea that there were Jews enough in the Roman church to have influence in it (contra, see Weiss and Alford). (2) The world generally looked upon the Christians as a mere Jewish sect, and the suspicions of disloyalty which attached to the Jews would readily attach to the Christians (Calvin). History confirms this. Nero had no difficulty in turning suspicion against them. How circumspectly, then, should they have walked. (3) Moreover, many Christians entertained notions similar to the Jews. They belonged to the new Theocracy, and held that loyalty to Christ absolved them from all allegiance to earthly government. Rome, as the center of the world-power, at once inspired and hindered the false dreams of well-intentioned but deceived disciples. History proves that the world-power of the Roman capital seduced Christians into attempting to form of Christ's kingdom a temporal world-power like that of the Cæsars--viz., the Roman Catholic hierarchy--and Paul tells us that this evil influence was already at work, though hindered, in his day ( 2Th_2:6-12 ). (4) On general principles, the atrocities so soon to be perpetrated by Nero were apt to put revolutionary and even anarchistic ideas in the heads of the most staid and sober. Nero's persecutions began about a year after this Epistle was written (Tholuck). These conditions made Paul's words timely indeed, but they are not, however, to be regarded as savoring of the temporary. His words are abiding and eternal truth, and contain fundamental and organic instruction for all ages.] XIII. Let every soul [all humanity, whether in the church or not] be in subjection to the higher powers [Be subject to all civil powers--power higher than that of the common citizen, whether monarchic, oligarchal or republican. This injunction includes hot persons and offices, and asserts that there is no inherent and essential conflict between the claims of God and those of the state. One can render, and must render, what is due to each-- Mat_22:21 ]: for there is no power but of God; and the powers that be are ordained of God . [Having asserted and commanded duty toward the state, the apostle next states the ground or reason of that duty, the justification of his command, in two heads: (1) Abstractly considered, governments are of divine origin; (2) concretely considered, God has ordained the present system of government, and has chosen the officers now in power; not directly, according to the exploded notion of the divine right of kings, but indirectly by the workings of governmental principles which God sanctions, by the operations of general providences of his ordering. Thus the government in force and the ruler in power in any country at any given time are, de facto, God-appointed. The apostle s first statement, that governments, viewed in general and abstractly, are ordained of God, is readily accepted as true; but this latter concrete statement, that each particular government and governor is also of divine appointment, is harder to receive. The reason is that God's providences working evil to the evil, as well as good to the good, often place evil men in power as a cure to the evil in man which helped to place them there.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Subdivision 2. (Rom 13:1-14.)

As strangers and pilgrims in the world.

1. Now we have the Christian attitude toward the outside world, to which we are not to be conformed. "Strangers and pilgrims" in it, we yet recognize, surely, all that is of God. Government is of God, not this or that form of it; there is no decision as to what is best or of any form being best. The world is outside of us and all that belongs to it, but God’s hand is in it and over it, and with a restraining power upon the evil, which is immense mercy to all. Government is of God, whatever exists, whatever we find practically in the place in which we are. We are only passing through, and it is not ours to meddle or make. Any form of government whatever is comparatively beneficial: think of what anarchy would mean. While all forms fail, as Daniel at large shows us, because the One who alone is capable of exercising perfectly righteous rule has not come. God’s mercy comes in everywhere to temper things; but the world is in opposition to God and therefore to us. As long as we are here, there will never be another condition of the world. Our place is in the world to come. There we shall reign with Christ, but now, if the apostle says to Christians, "Ye have reigned as kings," it is plainly a reproach on his lips, and he adds "without us." If they got reigning, they were out of communion with the apostles, clearly; they were more apt to be in a prison than on a throne; and, if we are to be in communion with the apostles, it must be so still with us. If we say times have changed and our conduct therefore must change with that, the world is still the world, if it is without God. If it is with God, it is not in the evil sense "the world"; but who will assert that, however Christianized it may apparently be, the mass is not truly the world any longer? If this shifts for us, if the world is gradually growing better and our position in it is to be affected by that, then we are without practical guidance in the word of God. The changed times would require a new Bible. The Lord’s prophetic words speak of His disciples being brought before rulers and kings for a testimony against them and the nations, nothing else. The apostle of the Gentiles is left at the close of the Acts in the Gentile prison; and, while we find in his epistles careful directions for Christians as subjects, there are plainly none for Christian kings or magistrates. We may say, perhaps, that there were none at that time, but that does not argue that there would be none; the coming king was provided for in Judaism long before he came, as well as the absolutely necessary law book in which he would find the divine laws which he was to execute. Think of Christian magistrates and kings to execute laws other than divine! Plainly, nothing of all this is given to us; and yet we accept the authorities that are as "ordained of God," and "he who setteth himself against the authority, withstands the ordinance of God." Thus, plainly, "he will receive to himself judgment." Nothing that is of God can rightly be resisted, and on the whole, through His mercy, things are so ordered that rulers are still His ministers for good, not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. Blessed it is to be able to realize how, through all that seems to be most opposed to Him, God nevertheless works, and thus we are to be in subjection for conscience, sake. How good to know that in every circumstance of this world through which we pass, while yet we are strangers in it, the world is not so strange but that we shall find God everywhere, and things that seem the most contrary, yet ordered by Him. If, indeed, the governments of the world yet require of us that which is in plain conflict with the word of God, we must obey Him rather than men, but in suffering, not resisting. This the apostle carries out to the smallest detail. We are to render to all their dues: "Tribute to whom tribute, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, and honor" also "to whom honor." We are not permitted, even, to have freedom of speech against that which is of God’s institution.

2. Now comes the debt to all men. Here, it is not a question of loving the brethren merely. We are to owe no one anything save to love one another, and here it is pointed out that we have the fulfilment of that which the law sought, but could never obtain. Love is that which is the fulfilment of the law, or the whole of it, for if we love our neighbor as ourselves, love works no ill to one’s neighbor. The commandments give us only the prohibition of these various forms of ill. Love owns the debt to all men and pays it. "The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit."

3. We have now another thing. We are "children of the light and of the day." We walk in the night and in the darkness, but the darkness is passing away. The hour of dawn is approaching. It is already time to be aroused out of sleep. Our salvation, final salvation of course, is getting ever nearer, but for us, already the light shines upon us. If it has not come for the world, for us it has come. We are in it in such sort that we should be reflecting it. Heaven is open to us, and the glory in the face of Christ already shines upon us. Practically to enjoy this is to manifest it and to manifest what we are. It is to put on the armor of light. Who is unaware of what a defence light is in itself in the midst of darkness? The evil deeds of men are done in the darkness. Light reproves them. How blessed to walk in the joy of that which manifests us for what we are, and which, by its presence in us, rebukes evil and breaks, as it were, the power of temptation; but we have, therefore, to put on the Lord Jesus Christ in a practical way. It is, in fact, but to sit in the sun and the sun will make its mark upon us; but that means the heart laid hold of and therefore no thought of provision for the flesh, which, with its lusts, belong to the darkness.

F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 27

CHRISTIAN DUTY; IN CIVIL LIFE AND OTHERWISE:

Rom_13:1-10

A NEW topic now emerges, distinct, yet in close and natural connection. We have been listening to precepts for personal and social life, all rooted in that inmost characteristic of Christian morals, self-surrender, self-submission to God. Loyalty to others in the Lord has been the theme. In the circles of home, of friendship, of the Church; in the open field of intercourse with men in general, whose personal enmity or religious persecution was so likely to cross the path-in all these regions the Christian was to act on the principle of supernatural submission, as the sure way to spiritual victory.

The same principle is now carried into his relations with the State. As a Christian, he does not cease to be a citizen, to be a subject. His deliverance from the death sentence of the Law of God only binds him, in his Lords name, to a loyal fidelity to human statute; limited only by the case where such statute may really contradict the supreme divine law. The disciple of Christ, as such, while his whole being has received an emancipation unknown elsewhere, is to be the faithful subject of the Emperor, the orderly inhabitant of his quarter in the City, the punctual taxpayer, the ready giver of not a servile yet a genuine deference to the representatives and ministers of human authority.

This is he to do for reasons both general and special. In general, it is his Christian duty rather to submit than otherwise, where conscience toward God is not in the question. Not weakly, but meekly, he is to yield rather than resist in all his intercourse purely personal, with men; and therefore with the officials of order, as men. But in particular also, he is to understand that civil order is not only a desirable thing, but divine; it is the will of God for the social Race made in His Image. In the abstract, this is absolutely so; civil order is a God-given law, as truly as the most explicit precepts of the Decalogue, in whose Second Table it is so plainly implied all along. And in the concrete, the civil order under which the Christian finds himself to be is to be regarded as a real instance of this great principle. It is quite sure to be imperfect, because it is necessarily mediated through human minds and wills. Very possibly it may be gravely distorted into a system seriously oppressive of the individual life. As a fact, the supreme magistrate for the Roman Christians in the year 58 was a dissolute young man, intoxicated by the discovery that he might do almost entirely as he pleased with the lives around him; by no defect, however, in the idea and purpose of Roman law, but by fault of the degenerate world of the day. Yet civil authority, even with a Nero at its head, was still in principle a thing divine. And the Christians attitude to it was to be always that of a willingness, a purpose, to obey; an absence of the resistance whose motive lies in self-assertion. Most assuredly his attitude was not to be that of the revolutionist, who looks upon the State as a sort of belligerent power, against which he, alone or in company, openly or in the dark, is free to carry on a campaign. Under even heavy pressure the Christian is still to remember that civil government is, in its principle, "of God." He is to reverence the Institution in its idea. He is to regard its actual officers, whatever their personal faults, as so far dignified by the Institution that their governing work is to be considered always first in the light of the Institution. The most imperfect, even the most erring, administration of civil order is still a thing to be respected before it is criticised. In its principle, it is a "terror not to good works, but to the evil."

It hardly needs elaborate remark to show that such a precept, little as it may accord with many popular political cries of our time, means anything in the Christian but a political servility, or an indifference on his part to political wrong in the actual course of government. The religion which invites every man to stand face to face with God in Christ. to go straight to the Eternal, knowing no intermediary but His Son, and no ultimate authority but His Scripture, for the certainties of the soul, for peace of conscience, for dominion over evil in himself and in the world, and for more than deliverance from the fear of death, is no friend to the tyrants of mankind. We have seen how, by enthroning Christ in the heart, it inculcates a noble inward submissiveness. But from another point of view it equally, and mightily, develops the noblest sort of individualism. It lifts man to a sublime independence of his surroundings, by joining him direct to God in Christ, by making him the Friend of God. No wonder then that, in the course of history, Christianity, that is to say the Christianity of the Apostles, of the Scriptures, has been the invincible ally of personal conscience and political liberty, the liberty which is the opposite alike of license and of tyranny. It is Christianity which has taught men calmly to die, in face of a persecuting Empire, or of whatever other giant human force, rather than do wrong at its bidding. It is Christianity which has lifted innumerable souls to stand upright in solitary protest for truth and against falsehood, when every form of governmental authority has been against them. It was the student of St. Paul who, alone before the great Diet, uttering no denunciation, temperate and respectful in his whole bearing, was yet found immovable by Pope and Emperor: "I can not otherwise: so help me God." We may be sure that if the world shuts the Bible it will only the sooner revert, under whatever type of government, to essential despotism, whether it be the despotism of the master, or that of the man. The "individual" indeed will "wither." The Autocrat will find no purely independent spirits in his path. And what then shall call itself, however loudly, "Liberty, Fraternity, Equality," will be found at last, where the Bible is unknown, to be the remorseless despot of the personality, and of the home.

It is Christianity which has peacefully and securely freed the slave, and has restored woman to her true place by the side of man. But then, Christianity has done all this in a way of its own. It has never flattered the oppressed, nor inflamed them. It has told impartial truth to them, and to their oppressors. One of the least hopeful phenomena of present political life is the adulation (it cannot be called by another name) too frequently offered to the working classes by their leaders, or by those who ask their suffrages. A flattery as gross as any ever accepted by complacent monarchs is almost all that is now heard about themselves by the new master section of the State. This is not Christianity, but its parody. The Gospel tells uncompromising truth to the rich, but also to the poor. Even in the presence of pagan slavery it laid the law of duty on the slave, as well as on his master. It. bade the slave consider his obligations rather than his rights; while it said the same, precisely, and more at length, and more urgently, to his lord. So it at once avoided revolution and sowed the living seed of immense, and salutary, and ever-developing reforms. The doctrine of spiritual equality, and spiritual connection, secured in Christ, came into the world as the guarantee for the whole social and political system of the truest ultimate political liberty. For it equally chastened and developed the individual, in relation to the life around him.

Serious questions for practical casuistry may be raised, of course, from this passage. Is resistance to a cruel despotism never permissible to the Christian? In a time of revolution, when power wrestles with power, which power is the Christian to regard as "ordained of God"? It may be sufficient to reply to the former question that, almost self-evidently, the absolute principles of a passage like this take for granted some balance and modification by concurrent principles. Read without any such reserve, St. Paul leaves here no alternative, under any circumstances, to submission. But he certainly did not mean to say that the Christian must submit to an imperial order to sacrifice to the Roman gods. It seems to follow that the letter of the precept does not pronounce it inconceivable that a Christian, under circumstances which leave his action unselfish, truthful, the issue not of impatience, but of conviction, might be justified in positive resistance; such resistance as was offered to oppression by the Huguenots of the Cevennes, and by the Alpine Vaudois before them. But history adds its witness to the warnings of St. Paul, and of his Master, that almost inevitably it goes ill in the highest respects with saints who "take the sword," and that the purest victories for freedom are won by those who "endure grief, suffering wrongfully," while they witness for right and Christ before their oppressors. The Protestant pastors of Southern France won a nobler victory than any won by Jean Cavalier in the field of battle when, at the risk of their lives, they met in the woods to draw up a solemn document of loyalty to Louis XV; informing him that their injunction to their flocks always was, and always would be, "Fear God, honour the King."

Meanwhile Godet, in some admirable notes on this passage, remarks that it leaves the Christian not only not bound to aid an oppressive government by active cooperation, but amply free to witness aloud against its wrong; and that his "submissive but firm conduct is itself a homage to the inviolability of authority. Experience proves that it is in this way all tyrannies have been morally broken, and all true progress in the history of humanity effected."

What the servant of God should do with his allegiance at a revolutionary crisis is a grave question for any whom it may unhappily concern. Thomas Scott, in a useful note on our passage, remarks, that perhaps nothing involves greater difficulties, in very many instances, than to ascertain to whom the authority justly belongs Submission in all things lawful to the existing authorities is our duty at all times and in all cases; though in civil convulsions there may frequently be a difficulty in determining which are "the existing authorities." In such cases "the Christian," says Godet, "will submit to the new power as soon as the resistance of the old shall have ceased. In the actual state of matters he will recognise the manifestation of Gods will, and will take no part in any reactionary plot."

As regards the problem of forms or types of government, it seems clear that the Apostle lays no bond of conscience on the Christian. Both in the Old Testament and in the New a just monarchy appears to be the ideal. But our Epistle says that "there is no power but of God." In St. Pauls time the Roman Empire was in theory, as much as ever, a republic, and in fact a personal monarchy. In this question, as in so many others of the outward framework of human life, the Gospel is liberal in its applications, while it is, in the noblest sense, conservative in principle.

We close our preparatory comments, and proceed to the text, with the general recollection that in this brief paragraph we see and touch as it were the cornerstone of civil order. One side of the angle is the indefeasible duty, for the Christian citizen, of reverence for law, of remembrance of the religious aspect of even secular government. The other side is the memento to the ruler, to the authority, that God throws His shield over the claims of the State only because authority was instituted not for selfish, but for social ends, so that it belies itself if it is not used for the good of man.

Let every soul, every person, who has "presented his body a living sacrifice," be submissive to the ruling authorities; manifestly, from the context, the authorities of the state. For there is no authority except by God; but the existing authorities have been appointed by God. That is, the imperium of the King Eternal is absolutely reserved; an authority not sanctioned by Him is nothing; man is no independent source of power and law. But then, it has pleased God so to order human life and history, that His will in this matter is expressed, from time to time, in and through the actual constitution of the state. So that the opponent of the authority withstands the ordinance of God, not merely that of man; but the withstanders will on themselves bring sentence of judgment; not only the human crime of treason, but the charge, in the court of God, of rebellion against His will. This is founded on the idea of law and order, which means by its nature the restraint of public mischief and the promotion, or at least protection, of public good. "Authority," even under its worst distortions, still so far keeps that aim that no human civic power, as a fact, punishes good as good, and rewards evil as evil; and thus for the common run of lives the worst settled authority is infinitely better than real anarchy. For rulers, as a class, are not a terror to the good deed, but to the evil; such is always the fact in principle, and such, taking human life as a whole, is the tendency, even at the worst, in practice, where the authority in any degree deserves its name. Now do you wish not to be afraid of the authority? do what is good, and you shall have praise from it; the "praise," at least, of being unmolested and protected. For Gods agent he is to you, for what is good; through his function God, in providence, carries out His purposes of order. But if you are doing what is evil, be afraid; for not for nothing, not without warrant, nor without purpose, does he wear his sword, symbol of the ultimate power of life and death; for Gods agent is he, an avenger, unto wrath, for the practiser of the evil. Wherefore, because God is in the matter, it is a necessity to submit, not only because of the wrath, the rulers wrath in the case supposed, but because of the conscience too; because you know, as a Christian, that God speaks through the state and through its minister, and that anarchy is therefore disloyalty to Him. For on this account too you pay taxes; the same commission which gives the state the right to restrain and punish gives it the right to demand subsidy from its members, in order to its operations; for Gods ministers are they, His λειτουργοί, a word so frequently used in sacerdotal connections that it well may suggest them here; as if the civil ruler were, in his province, an almost religious instrument of divine order; Gods ministers, to this very end persevering in their task; working on in the toils of administration, for the execution, consciously or not, of the divine plan of social peace.

This is a noble point of view, alike for governed and for governors, from which to consider the prosaic problems and necessities of public finance. Thus understood, the tax is paid not with a cold and compulsory assent to a mechanical exaction, but as an act in the line of the plan of God. And the tax is devised and demanded, not merely as an expedient to adjust a budget, but as a thing which Gods law can sanction, in the interests of Gods social plan. Discharge therefore to all men, to all men in authority, primarily, but not only, their dues; the tax, to whom you owe the tax, on person and property; the toll, to whom the toll, on merchandise; the fear, to whom the fear, as to the ordained punisher of wrong; the honour, to whom the honour, as to the rightful claimant in general of loyal deference.

Such were the political principles of the new Faith, of the mysterious Society, which was so soon to perplex the Roman statesman, as well as to supply convenient victims to the Roman despot. A Nero was shortly to burn Christians in his gardens as a substitute for lamps, on the charge that they were guilty of secret and horrible orgies. Later, a Trajan, grave and anxious, was to order their execution as members of a secret community dangerous to imperial order. But here is a private missive sent to this people by their leader, reminding them of their principles, and prescribing their line of action. He puts them in immediate spiritual contact, every man and woman of them, with the Eternal Sovereign, and so he inspires them with the strongest possible independence, as regards "the fear of man." He bids them know for a certainty, that the Almighty One regards them, each and all, as accepted in His Beloved, and fills them with His great Presence, and promises them a coming heaven from which no earthly power or terror can for a moment shut them out. But in the same message, and in the same Name, he commands them to pay their taxes to the pagan State, and to do so, not with the contemptuous indifference of the fanatic, who thinks that human life in its temporal order is God-forsaken, but in the spirit of cordial loyalty and ungrudging deference, as to an authority representing in its sphere none other than their Lord and Father.

It has been suggested that the first serious antagonism of the state towards these mysterious Christians was occasioned by the inevitable interference of the claims of Christ with the stern and rigid order of the Roman Family. A power which could assert the right, the duty, of a son to reject his fathers religious worship was taken to be a power which meant the destruction of all social order as such; a nihilism indeed. This was a tremendous misunderstanding to encounter. How was it to be met? Not by tumultuary resistance, not even by passionate protests and invectives. The answer was to be that of love, practical and loyal, to God and man, in life and, when occasion came, in death. Upon the line of that path lay at least the possibility of martyrdom, with its lions and its funeral piles; but the end of it was the peaceful vindication of the glory of God and of the Name of Jesus, and the achievement of the best security for the liberties of man.

Congenially then the Apostle closes these precepts of civil order with the universal command to love. Owe nothing to anyone; avoid absolutely the social disloyalty of debt; pay every creditor in full, with watchful care; except the loving one another. Love is to be a perpetual and inexhaustible debt, not as if repudiated or neglected, but as always due and always paying; a debt, not as a forgotten account is owing to the seller, but as interest on capital is continuously owing to the lender. And this, not only because of the fair beauty of love, but because of the legal duty of it: For the lover of his fellow (τόν έτερον, "the other man," be he who he may, with whom the man has to do) has fulfilled the law, the law of the Second Table, the code of mans duty to man, which is in question here.

He "has fulfilled" it; as having at once entered, in principle and will, into its whole requirement; so that all he now needs is not a better attitude, but developed information. For the, "Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not murder, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet," and whatever other commandment there is, all is summed up in this utterance. "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." {Lev_19:18} Love works the neighbour no ill; therefore love is the Laws fulfilment.

Is it a mere negative precept then? Is the life of love to be only an abstinence from doing harm, which may shun thefts, but may also shun personal sacrifices? Is it a cold and inoperative "harmlessness," which leaves all things as they are? We see the answer in part in those words, "as thyself." Man "loves himself" (in the sense of nature, not of sin), with a love which instinctively avoids indeed what is repulsive and noxious, but does so because it positively likes and desires the opposite. The man who "loves his neighbour as himself" will be as considerate of his neighbours feelings as of his own, in respect of abstinence from injury and annoyance. But he will be more; he will be actively desirous of his neighbours good. "Working him no evil," he will reckon it as much "evil" to be indifferent to his positive true interests as he would reckon it unnatural to be apathetic about his own. Working him no evil, as one who loves him as himself, he will care, and seek, to work him good.

"Love," says Leibnitz, in reference to the great controversy on Pure Love agitated by Fenelon and Bossuet, "is that which finds its felicity in anothers good." Such an agent can never terminate its action in a mere cautious abstinence from wrong.

The true divine commentary on this brief paragraph is the nearly contemporary passage written by the same author, 1 Cor. 13. There, as we saw above, the description of the sacred thing, love, like that of the heavenly state in the Revelation, is given largely in negatives. Yet who fails to feel the wonderful positive of the effect? That is no merely negative innocence which is greater than mysteries, and knowledge, and the use of an angel tongue; greater than self-inflicted poverty, and the endurance of the martyrs flame; "chief grace below, and all in all above." Its blessed negatives are but a form of unselfish action. It forgets itself, and remembers others, and refrains from the least needless wounding of them, not because it wants merely "to live and let live," but because it loves them, finding its felicity in their good.

It has been said that "love is holiness, spelt short." Thoughtfully interpreted and applied, the saying is true. The holy man in human life is the man who, with the Scriptures open before him as his informant and his guide, while the Lord Christ dwells in his heart by faith as his Reason and his Power, forgets himself in a work for others which is kept at once gentle, wise, and persistent to the end, by the love which, whatever else it does, knows how to sympathise and to serve.

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

13:1-2 The basic command of 13:1-7 is to submit to governing authorities. In God’s ordering of the world, we answer to those in positions of authority. Our submission to them will usually take the form of obedience. However, because God stands over all governments, our submission to governing authorities must always be in terms of our ultimate submission to God (see Acts 4:19-20). The Roman Christians might have been resisting government (see study note on Rom 13:6) based on a false understanding of the Good News, as if no longer copying “the behavior and customs of this world” (12:2) meant that they could ignore earthly institutions. • placed there by God: Scripture consistently teaches that God is actively involved in raising up and casting down human governments and leaders (1 Sam 2:6-10; 12:8; Prov 8:15-16; Isa 41:2-4; 45:1-7; Jer 21:7, 10; 27:5-6; Dan 2:21, 37-38; 4:17). God instituted governing authorities, so rebelling against them is rebelling against God, who will respond with judgment (Rom 13:2).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom 13:1. Πᾶσα, every) The apostle writes at very great length to the Romans, whose city was the seat of empire, on the subject of the magistracy, and this circumstance has all the force of a public apology for the Christian religion. This, too, may have been the reason why Paul, in this long epistle, used only once, and that too not until after this apology, the phrase, the kingdom of God, on other occasions so customary with him; Rom 14:17, for, instead of the kingdom, he calls it the glory; comp., however, Act 28:31, note. Every individual should be under the authority of the magistrate, and be liable to suffer punishment, if he has done evil, Rom 13:4.—ψυχὴ, soul) He had said that their bodies ought to be presented to God, ch. Rom 12:1, presupposing that the souls would be; now he wishes souls to be subject to the magistrate. It is the soul, which does either good or evil, ch. Rom 2:9, and those in authority are a terror to the evil work, i.e. to the evil doer.—A man’s high rank does not exempt him from obedience.—ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχούσαις) ἐξουσία from εἰμὶ, ὑπερέχω from ἔχω; being is before having: ὑπερεχούσαις contains the aetiology [end. Be subject to the powers because they are ὑπερέχουσαι: the cause or reason], 1Pe 2:13, Fr. Souverain, Sovereign.—ὑποτασσέσθω) The antithesis to this is ἀντιταοσόμενος, Rom 13:2. The Conjugates are τεταγμένοι, διαταγή. Let him be subject, an admonition especially necessary to the Jews.—ἐξουσία, power) ἐξουσία, denotes the office of the magistrate in the abstract; αἱ δὲ ἐξουσίαι, Rom 13:2, those in authority in the concrete, therefore δὲ is interposed, ἐπιτατικὸν [forming an Epitasis, i.e. an emphatic addition to explain or augment the force of the previous enunciation.—Appen.]. The former is more readily acknowledged to be from God than the latter. The apostle makes an affirmation respecting both. All are from God, who has instituted all powers in general, and has constituted each in particular, by His providence,—εἰ μὴ ἀπὸ) See Appendix. crit. Ed. ii. ad h. v.[133]

[133] G Orig. D corrected later, read ἀπὸ. But AB read ὑπὸ. Vulg. fg and Iren. have the transl. Lat. a.—ED.

Jerome omits from αἱ δε to εἰσίν. But ABD(Λ)G Vulg. Memph. fg Versions, Iren. 280, 321, retain the clause, omitting, however, ἐξουσίαι: which word is retained by Orig. and both the Syr. Versions and Rec Text.—ED.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_13:1. Πᾶσα ψυχή] In the sense of every man, but (comp. on Rom_2:9) of man conceived in reference to his soul-nature, in virtue of which he consciously feels pleasure and displeasure (rejoices, is troubled, etc.), and cherishes corresponding impulses. There lies a certain pathos in the significant: every soul, which at once brings into prominence the universality of the duty. Comp. Act_2:43; Act_3:23; Rev_16:3.

ἐξουσίαις ὑπερεχ.] magistrates high in standing (without the article). ὑπερεχ. (see Wis_6:5; 1Pe_2:13; 1Ti_2:2; 2Ma_3:11) is added, in order to set forth the ὑποτάσς.

ὑπέρ and ὑπό being correlativeas corresponding to the standpoint of the magistracy itself (comp. the German: hohe Obrigkeiten); the motive of obedience follows.

There is no magistracy apart from God expresses in general the proceeding of all magistracy whatever from God, and then this relation is still more precisely defined, in respect of those magistracies which exist in concreto as a divine institution, by ὑπὸ Θεοῦ τεταγμ. εἰσίν; comp. Hom. Il. 2:204 ff., ix. 38, 98; Soph. Phil. 140, et al.; Xen. Rep. Lac. 15. 2. Thus Paul has certainly expressed the divine right of magistracy, which Christian princes especially designate by the expression by the grace of God (since the time of Louis the Pious). And αἱ δὲ οὖσαι, the extant, actually existing, allows no exception, such as that possibly of tyrants or usurpers (in opposition to Reiche). The Christian, according to Paul, ought to regard any magistracy whatever, provided its rule over him subsists de facto, as divinely ordained, since it has not come into existence without the operation of Gods will; and this applies also to tyrannical or usurped power, although such a power, in the counsel of God, is perhaps destined merely to be temporary and transitional. From this point of view, the Christian obeys not the human caprice and injustice, but the will of God, whoin connection with His plan of government inaccessible to human insighthas presented even the unworthy and unrighteous ruler as the οὖσα ἐξουσία, and has made him the instrument of His measures. Questions as to special casessuch as how the Christian is to conduct himself in political catastrophes, what magistracy he is to look upon in such times as the οὖσα ἐξουσία, as also, how he, if the command of the magistrate is against the command of God, is at any rate to obey God rather than men (Act_5:29), etc.

Paul here leaves unnoticed, and only gives the main injunction of obedience, which he does not make contingent on this or that form of constitution. By no means, however, are we to think only of the magisterial office as instituted by God (Chrysostom, Oecumenius, and others), but rather of the magistracy in its concrete persons and members as the bearers of the divinely-ordained office. Comp. οἱ ἄρχοντες, Rom_13:3, and Rom_13:4; Rom_13:6-7; Dion. Hal. Antt. xi. 32; Plut. Philop. 17; Tit_3:1; also Martyr. Polyc. 10.

Observe, moreover, that Paul has in view Gentile magistrates in concreto; consequently he could not speak more specially of that which Christian magistrates have on their part to do, and which Christian subjects in their duty of obedience for God and rights sake are to expect and to require from them, although he expresses in generalby repeatedly bringing forward the fact that magistrates are the servants of God (Rom_13:3-4), indeed ministering servants of God (Rom_13:6)the point of view from which the distinctively Christian judgment as to the duties and rights of magistrate and subject respectively must proceed.

Rom_13:1-7. The proud love of freedom of the Jews (see on Joh_8:33; Mat_22:17, and their tumultuary spirit thereby excited, which was peculiarly ardent from the time of Judas Gaulonites (see Act_5:37; Josephus, Ant. xviii. 1. 1) and had shortly before broken out in Rome itself (Suetonius, Claud. 25; Dio Cassius, lx. 6; see Introd. § 2, and on Act_18:2), redoubled for the Christiansamong whom, indeed, even the Gentile-Christians might easily enough be led astray by the Messianic ideas (theocracy, kingdom of Christ, freedom and κληρονομία of believers, etc.) into perverted thoughts of freedom and desires for emancipation (comp. 1Co_6:1 ff.)the necessity of civil obedience, seeing that they, as confessing the Messiah (Act_17:6-7), and regarded by the Gentiles as a Jewish sect, were much exposed to the suspicion of revolutionary enterprise. The danger thus lay, not indeed exclusively (Mangold, Beyschlag), but primarily and mostly, on the side of the Jewish-Christians, not on that of the Gentile-Christians, as Th. Schott, in the interest of the view that Paul desired to prepare the Roman church to be the base of operations of his western mission to the Gentiles, unhistorically assumes. And was not Rome, the very seat of the government of the world, just the place above all others where that danger was greatest, and where nevertheless the whole Christian body, of the Jewish as well as of the Gentile section, had to distinguish itself by exemplary civil order? Hence we have here thein the Pauline epistles uniquedetailed and emphatic inculcation of obedience towards the magistracy, introduced without link of connection with what precedes as a new subject. Baur, I. p. 384 f., thinks that Paul is here combating Ebionitic dualism, which regarded the secular magistrate as of non-divine, devilish origin. As if Paul could not, without any such antithesis, have held it to be necessary to inculcate upon the Romans the divine right of the state-authority! Moreover, he would certainly not merely have kept his eye upon that dualism in regard to its practical manifestations (Baurs subterfuge), but would have combated it in principle, and thereby have grasped it at the root.

The partial resemblance, moreover, which exists between Rom_13:1-4 and 1Pe_2:13-14 is not sufficient to enable us to assume that Peter made use of our passage, or that Paul made use of Peters epistle; a view, which has been lately maintained especially by Weiss, Petrin. Lehrbegr. p. 416 ff., and in the Stud. u. Krit. 1865, 4; see, on the other hand, Huther on 1 Pet. Introd. § 2. Paul doubtless frequently preached a similar doctrine orally respecting duty towards the heathen magistracy. And the power of his preaching was sufficiently influential in moulding the earliest ecclesiastical language, to lead even a Peter, especially on so peculiar a subject, involuntarily to echo the words of Paul which had vibrated through the whole church. Compare the creative influence of Luther upon the language of the church.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 13:1 . πᾶσα ψυχὴ is a Hebraism; cf. Act 2:43 ; Act 3:23 , and chap. Rom 2:9 . For ἐξουσίαις cf. Luk 12:11 : it is exactly like “authorities” in English abstract for concrete. ὑπερεχούσαις describes the authorities as being actually in a position of superiority. Cf. 1 P. Rom 2:13 , and Mal 3:11Mal 3:11 ( ἀνδρὸς ἐν ὑπεροχῇ κειμένου ). οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ἐξουσία εἰ μὴ ὑπὸ θεοῦ : ὑπὸ is the correct reading ( [32] [33] [34] ), not ἀπό . Weiss compares Bar 4:27 . ἔσται γὰρ ὑμῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἐπάγοντος μνεία . It is by God’s act and will alone that there is such a thing as an authority, or magistrate; and those that actually exist have been appointed set in their place by Him. With αἱ δὲ οὖσαι the Apostle passes from the abstract to the concrete; the persons and institutions in which for the time authority had its seat, are before his mind in other words, the Empire with all its grades of officials from the Emperor down. In itself, and quite apart from its relation to the Church, this system had a Divine right to be. It did not need to be legitimated by any special relation to the Church; quite as truly as the Church it existed Dei gratia .

[32] Codex Sinaiticus (sæc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[33] Codex Alexandrinus (sæc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).

[34] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

F. 12–15:13. THE POWER OF THE GOSPEL SEEN IN ITS EFFECT UPON BOTH THE COMMON AND THE INDIVIDUAL LIFE OF CHRISTIANS.

In this section S. Paul deals with the consequences of the principles he has worked out as they affect the character and the conduct of the Christian life. The main principles are two: (1) The Gospel offers to the Christian power to conform his life and conduct to the will of GOD (Rom 1:16), the use of that power depending solely on faith or trust, as man’s contribution to the result. (2) Service in the execution of GOD’s purposes is the fundamental demand made upon man by his relation to GOD; this principle has been exhibited as the explanation of Israel’s failure (9–11); and is now to be expounded in its positive bearing, as determining the main characteristics of the Christian life. In the course of this argument two main thoughts come into prominence. The power, as has been already shown (Rom 6:1 ff.), is the life of Christ in man, due to the living union given by the Spirit in baptism. And consequently the service is the service due from members of a spiritual society or body, conceived as potentially coextensive with humanity, the service due both to the Head and to the other members. The special instances of the operation of this power in service are determined by the conventions of the time and of the situation in which S. Paul found himself and those to whom he is writing. The section may be summarised as follows:

Rom 13:1-10. The true relation to the civil power and the outside world.

1–7. Relation to civil authorities.

There is no introduction or formula of connexion. This is still part of the new σωφροσύνη. It is to be observed that the reasons for civil obedience are fully and clearly given, even with repetitions, as though the matter required explicit treatment. Yet the occasion for the introduction of the subject is not explained or hinted at. It is possible that S. Paul may have had reason to fear, or may have feared that others would expect, that the Christian societies might inherit some of the turbulence of the Jewish, esp. there may have been a danger that Christians at Rome would be infected. Or again, the Christian theory of the civil order may have been raised by the emphasis laid upon the kingdom. And the necessity of clear views may have grown upon S. Paul’s mind with his gradual approach to the centre of the Empire, and his realisation of the importance for the propagation of the Gospel. The establishment of Christian societies in so many places and the development of their internal organisation would also bring this question into prominence, as it did that of legal proceedings (1 Corinthians 6). At the same time, it is to be noticed that the treatment of the question, though definite, is quite general; there is no sign either in the argument or in the tone of the passage of any special urgency: and we may conclude that it is due simply to the desire for completeness in indicating the outlines of Christian duty and the character and temper in which it should be fulfilled.

Note further some significant omissions. (1) The question of duty as between rival claimants to civil authority is not touched. (2) Nor is the question of duty to a corrupt and unjust authority: it is assumed throughout that the authority is just and has for its aim the good. (3) Nor is the question of conflict between the civil and spiritual authorities.

S. H. have an excellent excursus on the question, pp. 369 ff. Cf. also E. von Dobschütz, Die Urchristlichen Gemeinden, p. 95 (Leipzig, 1902). Cf. 1Pe 2:13-17; 1Ti 2:1 f.; Mat 22:15 f. |[257] Lk.

[257] | parallel to

1. πᾶσα ψυχὴ. Cf. Rom 2:9 (Rev 16:3, of fish); Act 2:43; Act 3:23. L. & S. give |[258] from Greek class. poetry. Epictet. fr. 33 ψυχαὶ = slaves.

[258] | parallel to

ἐξουσίαις, of persons holding civil authority Luk 12:11; Tit 3:1 only; cf. 1Co 15:24; Eph 1:21 alibi; Col 1:16 alibi; 1Pe 3:22.

ὑπερεχούσαις. Simply of superiority in any degree; cf. 1Pe 2:13.

οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ἐξ. κ.τ.λ. S. Paul lays down the principle that the fact of authority being established involves the divine ordinance of it. The two clauses state the same principle, in a negative and a positive form. The repetition emphasises the point.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chap.

13:1-7.] The duty of cheerful obedience to the powers of the state. It has been well observed (Calv., Thol., De Wette. See Neander, Pflanzung u. Leitung, &c. 4th ed. p. 460 ff.) that some special reason must have given occasion to these exhortations. We can hardly attribute it to the seditious spirit of the Jews at Rome, as their influence in the Christian Church there would not be great; indeed, from Act_28 the two seem to have been remarkably distinct. But disobedience to the civil authorities may have arisen from mistaken views among the Christians themselves as to the nature of Christ’s kingdom and its relation to existing powers of this world. And such mistakes would naturally be rifest there, where the fountain of earthly power was situated: and there also best and most effectually met by these precepts coming from apostolic authority. The way for them is prepared by vv. 17 ff. of the foregoing chapter. 1Pe 2:13 ff. is parallel: compare notes there.

1.] ὑποτασσέσθω, see 1Co 16:16, is reflective, subject himself, i.e. ‘be subject of his own free will and accord.’

For there is no authority (in heaven or earth—no power at all) except from God: and (so δέ, 2Co 6:15, 2Co 6:16. It introduces a second clause as if μέν had stood in the first) those that are (the existing powers which we see about us), have been ordained by God. We may observe that the Apostle here pays no regard to the question of the duty of Christians in revolutionary movements. His precepts regard an established power, be it what it may. It, in all matters lawful, we are bound to obey. But even the parental power does not extend to things unlawful. If the civil power commands us to violate the law of God, we must obey God before man. If it commands us to disobey the common laws of humanity, or the sacred institutions of our country, our obedience is due to the higher and more general law, rather than to the lower and particular. These distinctions must be drawn by the wisdom granted to Christians in the varying circumstances of human affairs: they are all only subordinate portions of the great duty of obedience to law. To obtain, by lawful means, the removal or alteration of an unjust or unreasonable law, is another part of this duty: for all authorities among men must be in accord with the highest authority, the moral sense. But even where law is hard and unreasonable, not disobedience, but legitimate protest, is the duty of the Christian.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

ON OBEDIENCE TO RULERS

13:1-7. The civil power has Divine sanction. Its functions are to promote well-being, to punish not the good but the wicked. Hence it must be obeyed. Obedience to it is a Christian duty and deprives it of all its terrors.

So too you pay tribute because the machinery of government is God’s ordinance. In this as in all things give to all their due.

1. πᾶσα ψυχή: cf. 2:9. The Hebraism suggests prominently the idea of individuality. These rules apply to all however privileged, and the question is treated from the point of view of individual duty.

ἐξουσίαις: abstract for concrete, ‘those in authority’ cf. Luk 12:11; Tit 3:1. ὑπερεχούσαις ‘who are in an eminent position,’ defining more precisely the idea of ἐξουσίαις: cf. 1Pe 2:13; Wisdom 6:5.

ὑποτασσέσθω. Notice the repetition of words of similar sound, ὑποτασσέσθω … τεταγμέναι … ἀντιτασσόμενος … διαταγῇ and cf. 12:3.

οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ἐξουσία κ.τ.λ. The Apostle gives the reason for this obedience, stating it first generally and positively, then negatively and distributively. No human authority can exist except as the gift of God and springing from Him, and therefore all constituted powers are ordained by Him. The maxim is common in all Hebrew literature, but is almost always introduced to show how the Divine power is greater than that of all earthly sovereigns, or to declare the obligation of rulers as responsible for all they do to One above them. Wisdom 6:1, 3 ἀκούσατε οὖν, βασιλεῖς, καὶ σύνετε, μάθετε δικασταὶ περάτων γῆς … ὅτι ἐδόθη παρὰ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡ κράτησις ὑμῖν καὶ ἡ δυναστεία παρὰ ὑψίστου: Enoch xlvi. 5 ‘And he will put down the kings from their thrones and kingdoms, because they do not extol and praise him, nor thankfully acknowledge whence the kingdom was bestowed upon them’: Jos. Bell. Jud. II. viii. 7 τὸ πιστὸν παρέξειν πᾶσι, μάλιστα δὲ τοῖς κρατοῦσιν· οὐ γὰρ δίχα Θεοῦ περιγίνεσθαί τινι τὸ ἄρχειν. St. Paul adopts the maxim for a purpose similar to that in which it is used in the last instance, that it is the duty of subjects to obey their rulers, because they are appointed and ordained by God.

The preponderance of authority (א A B L P and many later MSS., Bas. Chrys.) is decisive for εἰ μὴ ὑπὸ Θεοῦ. The Western reading ἀπὸ Θεοῦ was a correction for the less usual expression (D E F G and many later MSS., Orig. Jo.-Damasc.). The reading of the end of the verse should be αἱ δὲ οὖσαι ὑπὸ Θεοῦ τεταγμέναι εἰσίν א A B D F G.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Twenty-sixth Passage (13:1-10). The Life of the Believer as a Member of the State.

Meyer and many others find no connection whatever between the subject treated in this chapter and that of the foregoing. “A new subject,” says this author, “placed here without relation to what precedes.” It must be confessed that the connections proposed by commentators are not very satisfactory, and afford some ground for this judgment of Meyer. Tholuck says: The apostle passes here from private offences to official persecutions proceeding from the heathen state. But in what follows the state is not regarded as a persecutor; it is represented, on the contrary, as the guardian of justice. Hofmann sees in the legally-ordered social life one of the aspects of that good by which evil ought to be overcome (Rom 12:21). Schott finds the link between the two passages in the idea of the vengeance which God will one day take by the judgment (Rom 12:19), and which He is taking now by the power of the state (Rom 13:4). Better give up every connection than suppose such as these.

As for us, the difficulty is wholly resolved. We have seen that Paul, after pointing to the Christian consecrating his body to God’s service, places him successively in the two domains in which he is to realize the sacrifice of himself: that of spiritual life properly so called, and that of civil life. And what proves that we are really in the track of his thought, is that we discover in the development of this new subject an order exactly parallel to that of the preceding exposition. Paul had pointed to the Christian, first, limiting himself by humility, then giving himself by love. He follows the same plan in the subsequent passage. In Rom 13:1-7, he inculcates the duty of submission by which the believer controls and limits himself in relation to the state; then, in Rom 13:8-10, he enters into the domain of private relations, and points to the Christian giving himself to all in the exercise of righteousness. We therefore find here the counterpart of the two passages, Rom 13:3-14, the former of which presented the believer in his relations to the church as such; the latter, in his conduct in the midst of society in general.

If such is the nexus between the subjects treated in these two chapters, there is no necessity for seeking in the local circumstances of the church of Rome for a particular reason to explain this passage. Bauer, proceeding on the idea of a Judeo-Christian majority in this church, has alleged that the apostle meant here to combat the Jewish prejudice which held heathen authorities to be only delegates of Satan, as the prince of this world. But Hofmann justly remarks, that if such were the polemic of the apostle, he would have confined himself to proving that it is allowable for the Christian to submit himself to a heathen power, without going the length of making this submission a duty, and a duty not of expediency only, but one of conscience. Weizsäcker also replies to Baur, that if the matter in question were a Jewish prejudice to be combated, the apostle would require especially to remind his readers that the Christian faith does not at all imply, as the Jewish Messianic viewpoint did, the expectation of an earthly kingdom; whence it follows that nothing is opposed from this side to the submission of believers to the power of the state. It is in this line he argues, in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, Rom 7:21 et seq., when he shows that there is no incompatibility between the position of slave and Christian. Besides, we have seen the error of Baur’s hypothesis regarding the Judeo-Christian composition of the church of Rome too clearly to make it necessary for us to spend more time in refuting this explanation. If it were thought absolutely needful to find in the state of this church a particular reason for the following precepts, we should certainly have to prefer Ewald’s hypothesis. This critic thinks that the spirit of insubordination which broke out soon after in the Jewish nation in the revolt against the Romans, was already agitating this people, and making itself felt even at Rome. The apostle’s intention was therefore, he thinks, to protect the church of the capital from this contagion emanating from the synagogue. This supposition can no more be proved than it can be refuted by positive facts. All that we can say is, that it is not needed to explain the following passage. Expounding the gospel didactically, and the life which flows from it, the apostle must naturally, especially when writing to the church resident in the heart of the empire, develop a duty which was soon to become one of the most important and difficult in the conflicts for which it was necessary to prepare with the heathen power, that of submission to the state on the ground of conscience, and independently of the character of those who wield the power for the time. Weizsäcker thinks that all Paul says here to Christians supposes no persecution to have yet taken place. We think on this point he is mistaken, and that in any state of the case Paul would have spoken as he does. For, as we shall see, he treats the question from the viewpoint of moral principle, which remains always the standard for the Christian. And what is a clear proof of it is, that the course traced by him has been ratified by the conscience of Christians in all epochs, even in times of persecution. It was followed, in particular, by the whole primitive church, and by the Christians of the Reformed Church of France; and if there was a time when the latter, driven to extremity by extraordinary sufferings, deviated from this line of conduct, their action certainly did not turn out a blessing to them. Moreover, comp. the sayings analogous to those of Paul in Mat 26:52, Rev 13:10, and the whole of the First Epistle of Peter, especially chap. 2

We cannot help quoting here, as a specimen of Renan’s manner, the observation with which he accompanies the precept of the apostle: “Paul had too much tact to be a mover of sedition. He wished the name of Christian to be of good standing” (p. 477).

In Rom 13:1-7, the apostle points out the Christian’s duty in regard to the state (1a), and explains the ground of it (1b). He points out its penal sanction (Rom 13:2), and justifies it (Rom 13:3-4). Rom 13:5 draws the general consequence from these principles; finally, Rom 13:6-7 apply this consequence to the details of social life.

Vv. 1. “Let every soul submit itself unto the higher powers; for there is no power but of God, and the powers that be are ordained of God.”— Why does the apostle say: every soul, instead of every man, or rather every believer? Is he alluding to the fact that submission ought to proceed from the inmost sanctuary of the human being (the conscience, Rom 13:5)? The word every does not correspond well with this explanation; it leads rather to the thought that the apostle means to express that a duty is involved which is naturally incumbent on every human being. This is not an obligation on the believer arising from his spiritual life, like the precepts of chap. 12; it is an obligation of the psychical life which is the common domain of mankind. Every free and reasonable being should recognize its suitableness.

The present imperative, ὑποτασσέσθω, let it submit itself, indicates a reflex action, exercised by the man on himself, and that permanently. This expression is, indeed, the counterpart of the term σωφρονεῖν, to control oneself, in chap. 12

The term higher powers does not denote merely the highest class of authorities in the state. It is all those powers in general and of all degrees; they are thus designated as being raised above the simple citizen; comp. Rom 13:7.

The second part of this verse justifies the duty of submission, and that for two reasons: the first is the divine origin of the state as an institution; the second, the will of God which controls the raising of individuals to office at any given time. The first proposition has the character of a general principle. This appears—(1) from the singular ἐξουσία, power; comp. the same word in the plural before and after, in the same verse, which proves that Paul means to speak of power in itself, and not of its historical and particular realizations; (2) from the negative form of the proposition: “there is not but of”...; this form corresponds also to the enunciation of an abstract principle; (3) from the choice of the preposition ἀπό, of, or on the part of, which indicates the origin and essence of the fact. It is true the Alexs. and Byzs. read ὑπό, by, in this proposition as well as in the following. But this is one of the cases in which the Greco-Latin text has certainly preserved the true reading. It is clear, whatever Tischendorf may think, that the copyists have changed the first preposition according to that of the following clause. Meyer himself acknowledges this. We shall see that as thoroughly as ἀπό corresponds to the idea of the first proposition, so thoroughly does ὑπό apply to that of the second. Paul means, therefore, first, that the institution of the state is according to the plan of God who created man as a social being; so that we are called to recognize in the existence of a power (authority) the realization of a divine thought. In the second proposition he goes further (δέ, and, moreover). He declares that at each time the very persons who are established in office occupy this exalted position only in virtue of a divine dispensation. This gradation from the first idea to the second appears—(1) from the particle δέ; (2) from the participle οὖσαι, those who are, that is to say, who are there; this term added here would be superfluous if it did not denote the historical fact in opposition to the idea; (3) from the return to the plural (the powers), which proves that Paul means again to designate here, as in the first part of the verse, the manifold realizations of social power; (4) from the affirmative form of the proposition, which applies to the real fact; (5) from the preposition ὑπό, by, which more naturally describes the historical fact than would be done by the preposition ἀπό, on the part of.

The word ἐξουσίαι in the T. R. is probably only a copyist’s addition.

But for the very reason of this precept it is asked: If it is not merely the state in itself which is a thought of God, but if the very individuals who possess the power at a given time are set up by His will, what are we to do in a period of revolution, when a new power is violently substituted for another? This question, which the apostle does not raise, may, according to the principles he lays down, be resolved thus: The Christian will submit to the new power as soon as the resistance of the old shall have ceased. In the actual state of matters he will recognize the manifestation of God’s will, and will take no part whatever in any reactionary plot. But should the Christian support the power of the state even in its unjust measures? No, there is nothing to show that the submission required by Paul includes active co-operation; it may even show itself in the form of passive resistance, and it does not at all exclude protestation in word and even resistance in deed, provided that to this latter there be joined the calm acceptance of the punishment inflicted; comp. the conduct of the apostles and Peter’s answer, Act 5:29; Act 5:40-42. This submissive but at the same time firm conduct is also a homage to the inviolability of authority; and experience proves that it is in this way all tyrannies have been morally broken, and all true progress in the history of humanity effected.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter XIII

Contents

The chapter treats mainly of our political duties. From Rom_13:1 to Rom_13:7 inclusive, the apostle enforces the duties which we owe to civil magistrates. From Rom_13:8 to Rom_13:10, he refers to the more general obligations under which christians are placed, but still with special reference to their civil and social relations. From Rom_13:11 to the end of the chapter, he enjoins an exemplary and holy deportment.

Rom_13:1-14

Analysis

The duty of obedience to those in authority is enforced,

1. By the consideration that civil government is a divine institution, and, therefore, resistance to magistrates in the exercise of their lawful authority is disobedience to God, Rom_13:1, Rom_13:2.

2. From the end or design of their appointment, which is to promote the good of society, to be a terror to evil doers, and a praise to them that do well, Rom_13:3, Rom_13:4.

3. Because such subjection is a moral as well as civil duty, Rom_13:5. On these grounds the payment of tribute or taxes, and general deference, are to be cheerfully rendered, Rom_13:6, Rom_13:7.

Christians are bound not only to be obedient to those in authority, but also to perform all social and relative duties, especially that of love, which includes and secures the observance of all others, Rom_13:8-10. A pure and exemplary life as members of society is enforced by the consideration that the night is far spent and that the day is at hand, that the time of suffering and trial is nearly over, and that of deliverance approaching, Rom_13:11-14.

Commentary

Rom_13:1

Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. The expression every soul is often used as equivalent to every one; it is at times, however, emphatic, and such is probably the case in this passage. By higher powers are most commonly and naturally understood those in authority, without reference to their grade of office, or their character. We are to be subject not only to the supreme magistrates, but to all who have authority over us. The abstract word powers or authorities (ἐξουσίαι) is used for those who are invested with power, Luk_12:11; Eph_1:21; Eph_3:10, etc. etc. The word (ὑπερέχων) rendered higher, is applied to any one who, in dignity and authority, excels us. In 1Pe_2:13, it is applied to the king as supreme, i.e. superior to all other magistrates. But here one class of magistrates is not brought into comparison with another, but they are spoken of as being over other men who are not in office. It is a very unnatural interpretation which makes this word refer to the character of the magistrates, as though the sense were, Be subject to good magistrates. This is contrary to the usage of the term, and inconsistent with the context. Obedience is not enjoined on the ground of the personal merit of those in authority, but on the ground of their official station.

There was peculiar necessity, during the apostolic age, for inculcating the duty of obedience to civil magistrates. This necessity arose in part from the fact that a large portion of the converts to Christianity had been Jews, and were peculiarly indisposed to submit to the heathen authorities. This indisposition (as far as it was peculiar) arose from the prevailing impression among them, that this subjection was unlawful, or at least highly derogatory to their character as the people of God, who had so long lived under a theocracy. In Deu_17:15, it is said, Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose; one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee; thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother. It was a question, therefore, constantly agitated among them, Is it lawful to pay tribute unto Caesar, or not? A question which the great majority were at least secretly inclined to answer in the negative. Another source of the restlessness of the Jews under a foreign yoke, was the idea which they entertained of the nature of the Messiahs kingdom. As they expected a temporal Prince, whose kingdom should be of this world, they were ready to rise in rebellion at the call of every one who cried, I am Christ. The history of the Jews at this period shows how great was the effect produced by these and similar causes on their feelings towards the Roman government. They were continually breaking out into tumults, which led to their expulsion from Rome,‹68› and, finally, to the utter destruction of Jerusalem. It is therefore not a matter of surprise, that converts from among such a people should need the injunction, Be subject to the higher powers. Besides the effect of their previous opinions and feelings, there is something in the character of Christianity itself, and in the incidental results of the excitement which it occasions, to account for the repugnance of many of the early Christians to submit to their civil rulers. They wrested, no doubt, the doctrine of Christian liberty, as they did other doctrines, to suit their own inclinations. This result, however, is to be attributed not to religion, but to the improper feelings of those into whose minds the form of truth, without its full power, had been received.

For there is no power but of God; and the powers that be are ordained of God. Οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἐξουσία εἰ μὴ ἀπὸ θεοῦ. This is a very comprehensive proposition. All authority is of God. No man has any rightful power over other men, which is not derived from God. All human power is delegated and ministerial. This is true of parents, of magistrates, and of church officers. This, however, is not all the passage means. It not only asserts that all government (ἐξουσία, authority) is (ἀπὸ θεοῦ) derived from God, but that every magistrate is of God; that is, his authority is jure divino. The word ἐξουσία is evidently, in this connection, used in a concrete sense. This is plain from the use of the word in the other clauses of the verse. The higher powers, and the powers that be, are concrete terms, meaning those invested with power. Compare Rom_13:3, Rom_13:4, where rulers and ministers are substituted for the abstract powers. The doctrine here taught is the ground of the injunction contained in the first clause of the verse. We are to obey magistrates, because they derive their authority from God. Not only is human government a divine institution, but the form in which that government exists, and the persons by whom its functions are exercised, are determined by his providence. All magistrates of whatever grade are to be regarded as acting by divine appointment; not that God designates the individuals, but it being his will that there should be magistrates, every person, who is in point of fact clothed with authority, is to be regarded as having a claim to obedience, founded on the will of God. In like manner, the authority of parents over their children, of husbands over their wives, of masters over their servants, is of Gods ordination. There is no limitation to the injunction in this verse, so far as the objects of obedience are concerned, although there is as to the extent of the obedience itself. That is, we are to obey all that is in actual authority over us, whether their authority be legitimate or usurped, whether they are just or unjust. The actual reigning emperor was to be obeyed by the Roman Christians, whatever they might think as to his title to the sceptre. But if he transcended his authority, and required them to worship idols, they were to obey God rather than man. This is the limitation to all human authority. Whenever obedience to man is inconsistent with obedience to God, then disobedience becomes a duty.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now he showeth severally, what subjects owe to their Magistrates, to wit, obedience: From which he showeth that no man is free: and in such sort that it is not only due to the highest Magistrate himself, but also even to the basest, which hath any office under him.

Yea, though an Apostle, though an Evangelist, though a Prophet: Chrysostom. Therefore the tyranny of the Pope over all kingdoms must down to the ground.

A reason taken of the nature of the thing itself: For to what purpose are they placed in higher degree, but that the inferior should be subject unto them?

Another argument of great force: Because God is author of this order: so that such as are rebels ought to know, that they make war with God himself: wherefore they cannot but purchase to themselves great misery and calamity.

Be distributed: for some are greater, some smaller.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

CHAPTER XIII.

Subjection to civil governors inculcated, from the consideration

that civil government is according to the ordinance of God; and

that those who resist the lawfully constituted authorities

shall receive condemnation, 1, 2.

And those who are obedient shall receive praise, 3.

The character of a lawful civil governor, 4.

The necessity of subjection, 5.

The propriety of paying lawful tribute, 6, 7.

Christians should love one another, 8-10.

The necessity of immediate conversion to God proved from the

shortness and uncertainty of time, 11, 12.

How the Gentiles should walk so as to please God, and put on

Christ Jesus in order to their salvation, 13, 14.

NOTES ON CHAP XIII.

To see with what propriety the apostle introduces the important subjects which he handles in this chapter, it is necessary to make a few remarks on the circumstances in which the Church of God then was.

It is generally allowed that this epistle was written about the year of our Lord 58, four or five years after the edict of the Emperor Claudius, by which all the Jews were banished from Rome. And as in those early times the Christians were generally confounded with the Jews, it is likely that both were included in this decree.

For what reason this edict was issued does not satisfactorily appear. Suetonius tells us that it was because the Jews were making continual disturbances under their leader Christus. (See Clarke on Ac 18:2.) That the Jews were in general an uneasy and seditious people is clear enough from every part of their own history. They had the most rooted aversion to the heathen government; and it was a maxim with them that the world was given to the Israelites; that they should have supreme rule every where, and that the Gentiles should be their vassals. With such political notions, grounded on their native restlessness, it is no wonder if in several instances they gave cause of suspicion to the Roman government, who would be glad of an opportunity to expel from the city persons whom they considered dangerous to its peace and security; nor is it unreasonable on this account to suppose, with Dr. Taylor, that the Christians, under a notion of being the peculiar people of God, and the subjects of his kingdom alone, might be in danger of being infected with those unruly and rebellious sentiments: therefore the apostle shows them that they were, notwithstanding their honours and privileges as Christians, bound by the strongest obligations of conscience to be subject to the civil government. The judicious commentator adds: "I cannot forbear observing the admirable skill and dexterity with which the apostle has handled the subject. His views in writing are always comprehensive on every point; and he takes into his thoughts and instructions all parties that might probably reap any benefit by them. As Christianity was then growing, and the powers of the world began to take notice of it, it was not unlikely that this letter might fall into the hands of the Roman magistrates. And whenever that happened it was right, not only that they should see that Christianity was no favourer of sedition, but likewise that they should have an opportunity of reading their own duty and obligations. But as they were too proud and insolent to permit themselves to be instructed in a plain, direct way, therefore the apostle with a masterly hand, delineates and strongly inculcates the magistrate's duty; while he is pleading his cause with the subject, and establishing his duty on the most sure and solid ground, he dexterously sides with the magistrate, and vindicates his power against any subject who might have imbibed seditious principles, or might be inclined to give the government any disturbance; and under this advantage he reads the magistrate a fine and close lecture upon the nature and ends of civil government. A way of conveyance so ingenious and unexceptionable that even Nero himself, had this epistle fallen into his hands, could not fail of seeing his duty clearly stated, without finding any thing servile or flattering on the one hand, or offensive or disgusting on the other.

"The attentive reader will be pleased to see with what dexterity, truth, and gravity the apostle, in a small compass, affirms and explains the foundation, nature, ends, and just limits of the magistrate's authority, while he is pleading his cause, and teaching the subject the duty and obedience he owes to the civil government."-Dr. Taylor's Notes, page 352.

Verse 1. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.] This is a very strong saying, and most solemnly introduced; and we must consider the apostle as speaking, not from his own private judgment, or teaching a doctrine of present expediency, but declaring the mind of God on a subject of the utmost importance to the peace of the world; a doctrine which does not exclusively belong to any class of people, order of the community, or official situations, but to every soul; and, on the principles which the apostle lays down, to every soul in all possible varieties of situation, and on all occasions. And what is this solemn doctrine? It is this: Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. Let every man be obedient to the civil government under which the providence of God has cast his lot.

For there is no power but of God] As God is the origin of power, and the supreme Governor of the universe, he delegates authority to whomsoever he will; and though in many cases the governor himself may not be of God, yet civil government is of him; for without this there could be no society, no security, no private property; all would be confusion and anarchy, and the habitable world would soon be depopulated. In ancient times, God, in an especial manner, on many occasions appointed the individual who was to govern; and he accordingly governed by a Divine right, as in the case of Moses, Joshua, the Hebrew judges, and several of the Israelitish kings. In after times, and to the present day, he does that by a general superintending providence which he did before by especial designation. In all nations of the earth there is what may be called a constitution-a plan by which a particular country or state is governed; and this constitution is less or more calculated to promote the interests of the community. The civil governor, whether he be elective or hereditary, agrees to govern according to that constitution. Thus we may consider that there is a compact and consent between the governor and the governed, and in such a case, the potentate may be considered as coming to the supreme authority in the direct way of God's providence; and as civil government is of God, who is the fountain of law, order, and regularity, the civil governor, who administers the laws of a state according to its constitution, is the minister of God. But it has been asked: If the ruler be an immoral or profligate man, does he not prove himself thereby to be unworthy of his high office, and should he not be deposed? I answer, No: if he rule according to the constitution, nothing can justify rebellion against his authority. He may be irregular in his own private life; he may be an immoral man, and disgrace himself by an improper conduct: but if he rule according to the law; if he make no attempt to change the constitution, nor break the compact between him and the people; there is, therefore, no legal ground of opposition to his civil authority, and every act against him is not only rebellion in the worst sense of the word, but is unlawful and absolutely sinful.

Nothing can justify the opposition of the subjects to the ruler but overt attempts on his part to change the constitution, or to rule contrary to law. When the ruler acts thus he dissolves the compact between him and his people; his authority is no longer binding, because illegal; and it is illegal because he is acting contrary to the laws of that constitution, according to which, on being raised to the supreme power, he promised to govern. This conduct justifies opposition to his government; but I contend that no personal misconduct in the ruler, no immorality in his own life, while he governs according to law, can justify either rebellion against him or contempt of his authority. For his political conduct he is accountable to his people; for his moral conduct he is accountable to God, his conscience, and the ministers of religion. A king may be a good moral man, and yet a weak, and indeed a bad and dangerous prince. He may be a bad man, and stained with vice in his private life, and yet be a good prince. SAUL was a good moral man, but a bad prince, because he endeavoured to act contrary to the Israelitish constitution: he changed some essential parts of that constitution, as I have elsewhere shown; (See Clarke on Ac 13:22;) he was therefore lawfully deposed. James the Second was a good moral man, as far as I can learn, but he was a bad and dangerous prince; he endeavoured to alter, and essentially change the British constitution, both in Church and state, therefore he was lawfully deposed. It would be easy, in running over the list of our own kings, to point out several who were deservedly reputed good kings, who in their private life were very immoral. Bad as they might be in private life, the constitution was in their hands ever considered a sacred deposit, and they faithfully preserved it, and transmitted it unimpaired to their successors; and took care while they held the reins of government to have it impartially and effectually administered.

It must be allowed, notwithstanding, that when a prince, howsoever heedful to the laws, is unrighteous in private life, his example is contagious; morality, banished from the throne, is discountenanced by the community; and happiness is diminished in proportion to the increase of vice. On the other hand, when a king governs according to the constitution of his realms and has his heart and life governed by the laws of his God, he is then a double blessing to his people; while he is ruling carefully according to the laws, his pious example is a great means of extending and confirming the reign of pure morality among his subjects. Vice is discredited from the throne, and the profligate dare not hope for a place of trust and confidence, (however in other respects he may be qualified for it,) because he is a vicious man.

As I have already mentioned some potentates by name, as apt examples of the doctrines I have been laying down, my readers will naturally expect that, on so fair an opportunity, I should introduce another; one in whom the double blessing meets; one who, through an unusually protracted reign, during every year of which he most conscientiously watched over the sacred constitution committed to his care, not only did not impair this constitution, but took care that its wholesome laws should be properly administered, and who in every respect acted as the father of his people, and added to all this the most exemplary moral conduct perhaps ever exhibited by a prince, whether in ancient or modern times; not only tacitly discountenancing vice by his truly religious conduct, but by his frequent proclamations most solemnly forbidding Sabbath-breaking, profane swearing, and immorality in general. More might be justly said, but when I have mentioned all these things, (and I mention them with exultation; and with gratitude to God,) I need scarcely add the venerable name of GEORGE the Third, king of Great Britain; as every reader will at once perceive that the description suits no potentate besides. I may just observe, that notwithstanding his long reign has been a reign of unparalleled troubles and commotions in the world, in which his empire has always been involved, yet, never did useful arts, ennobling sciences, and pure religion gain a more decided and general ascendancy: and much of this, under God, is owing to the manner in which this king has lived, and the encouragement he invariably gave to whatever had a tendency to promote the best interests of his people. Indeed it has been well observed, that, under the ruling providence of God, it was chiefly owing to the private and personal virtues of the sovereign that the house of Brunswick remained firmly seated on the throne amidst the storms arising from democratical agitations and revolutionary convulsions in Europe during the years 1792-1794. The stability of his throne amidst these dangers and distresses may prove a useful lesson to his successors, and show them the strength of a virtuous character, and that morality and religion form the best bulwark against those great evils to which all human governments are exposed. This small tribute of praise to the character and conduct of the British king, and gratitude to God for such a governor, will not be suspected of sinister motive; as the object of it is, by an inscrutable providence, placed in a situation to which neither envy, flattery, nor even just praise can approach, and where the majesty of the man is placed in the most awful yet respectable ruins. I have only one abatement to make: had this potentate been as adverse from WAR as he was from public and private vices, he would have been the most immaculate sovereign that ever held a sceptre or wore a crown.

But to resume the subject, and conclude the argument: I wish particularly to show the utter unlawfulness of rebellion against a ruler, who, though he may be incorrect in his moral conduct, yet rules according to the laws; and the additional blessing of having a prince, who, while his political conduct is regulated by the principles of the constitution, has his heart and life regulated by the dictates of eternal truth, as contained in that revelation which came from God.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

1. Let every soul, etc. Inasmuch as he so carefully handles this subject in connection with what forms the Christian life, it appears that he was constrained to do so by some great necessity which existed especially in that age, though the preaching of the gospel at all times renders this necessary. There are indeed always some tumultuous spirits who believe that the kingdom of Christ cannot be sufficiently elevated, unless all earthly powers be abolished, and that they cannot enjoy the liberty given by him, except they shake off every yoke of human subjection. This error, however, possessed the minds of the Jews above all others; for it seemed to them disgraceful that the offspring of Abraham, whose kingdom flourished before the Redeemer’s coming, should now, after his appearance, continue in submission to another power. There was also another thing which alienated the Jews no less than the Gentiles from their rulers, because they all not only hated piety, but also persecuted religion with the most hostile feelings. Hence it seemed unreasonable to acknowledge them for legitimate princes and rulers, who were attempting to take away the kingdom from Christ, the only Lord of heaven and earth.

By these reasons, as it is probable, Paul was induced to establish, with greater care than usual, the authority of magistrates, and first he lays down a general precept, which briefly includes what he afterwards says: secondly, he subjoins an exposition and a proof of his precept.

He calls them the higher powers, not the supreme, who possess the chief authority, but such as excel other men. Magistrates are then thus called with regard to their subjects, and not as compared with each other. And it seems indeed to me, that the Apostle intended by this word to take away the frivolous curiosity of men, who are wont often to inquire by what right they who rule have obtained their authority; but it ought to be enough for us, that they do rule; for they have not ascended by their own power into this high station, but have been placed there by the Lord’s hand. And by mentioning every soul, he removes every exception, lest any one should claim an immunity from the common duty of obedience.

For there is no power, etc. The reason why we ought to be subject to magistrates is, because they are constituted by God’s ordination. For since it pleases God thus to govern the world, he who attempts to invert the order of God, and thus to resist God himself, despises his power; since to despise the providence of him who is the founder of civil power, is to carry on war with him. Understand further, that powers are from God, not as pestilence, and famine, and wars, and other visitations for sin, are said to be from him; but because he has appointed them for the legitimate and just government of the world. For though tyrannies and unjust exercise of power, as they are full of disorder, (ἀταξίας) are not an ordained government; yet the right of government is ordained by God for the wellbeing of mankind. As it is lawful to repel wars and to seek remedies for other evils, hence the Apostle commands us willingly and cheerfully to respect and honor the right and authority of magistrates, as useful to men: for the punishment which God inflicts on men for their sins, we cannot properly call ordinations, but they are the means which he designedly appoints for the preservation of legitimate order.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(1) Every soul.—A Hebraism for “every person,” though at the same time here, as in Rom_2:9, there is a slight stress upon the fact that man is a conscious and intelligent being, capable of moral relations, and it is especially with reference to these relations that the phrase is used.

Higher powers.—Authorities, i.e., magistrates, the abstract for the concrete.

There is no power.—It is strange that the Apostle seems to go almost out of his way to include even usurped and tyrannical power. He is, however, evidently speaking of the magistracy in its abstract or ideal form. It is the magistrate quâ magistrate, not quâ just or unjust magistrate. In this sense, not only is the human system of society a part of the divinely-appointed order of things, but it partakes more especially in the divine attributes, inasmuch as its object is to reward virtue and to punish vice. It discharges the same functions that God himself discharges, though in a lower scale and degree. Hence Bishop Butler feels himself justified in taking the principles which regulate civil society as an analogy for those which will regulate the ultimate divine disposition of things. “It is necessary to the very being of society that vices destructive of it should be punished as being so—the vices of falsehood, injustice, cruelty—which punishment, therefore, is as natural as society; and so is an instance of a kind of moral government, naturally established, and actually taking place. And, since the certain natural course of things is the conduct of Providence or the government of God, though carried on by the instrumentality of men, the observation here made amounts to this, that mankind find themselves placed by Him in such circumstances as that they are unavoidably accountable for their behaviour, and are often punished and sometimes rewarded under His government in the view of their being mischievous or eminently beneficial to society.” In other words, the machinery of civil society is one of the chief and most conspicuous instruments by which God carries out His own moral government of mankind in this present existence. It may be said to be more distinctly and peculiarly derived from Him than other parts of the order of nature, inasmuch as it is the channel used to convey His moral approbation, or the reverse.

The powers that be.—Those that we see existing all around us.

XIII.

(1-7) Subject unto the higher powers.—Looking impartially at the passage which follows, it would seem at first sight—and perhaps not only at first sight—that the Apostle distinctly preaches two doctrines, both of which are now discredited, the doctrines of divine right and of passive obedience. The duty of obedience is grounded upon the fact that the power wielded by the magistrate is derived from God, and that duty itself is stated without qualification.

What are we to understand by this? Are we to say, for instance, that Hampden was wrong in refusing the payment of ship-money? Or if he was not wrong—and the verdict of mankind has generally justified his act—what are we to think of the language that is here used by St. Paul?

1. In the first place it should be noticed that though the duty of obedience is here stated without qualification, still the existence of qualifications to it is not therefore denied or excluded. Tribute is to be paid to whom tribute is due. But this still leaves the question open, whether in any particular case tribute is rightfully due or not. There may possibly be a conflict of rights and duties, and the lower may have to yield to the higher. All that is alleged is that, primâ facie, the magistrate can claim the obedience of the subject. But supposing the magistrate calls upon the subject to do that which some other authority co-ordinate with that of the magistrate forbids—supposing, for instance, as in the case of Hampden, under a constitutional monarchy, the king commands one thing, and the Parliament another—there is clearly a conflict of obligations, and the decision which accepts the one obligation is not necessarily wrong because it ignores the other. There will always be a certain debatable ground within which opposite duties will seem to clash, and where general principles are no longer of any avail. Here the individual conscience must assume the responsibility of deciding which to obey.

We are not called upon to enter into the casuistry of the subject. It may only be well to add one caution. Any such seemingly direct collision of duties must be at the very lightest a most serious and difficult matter; and though the burden of deciding falls ultimately on the individual, still he must be careful to remember that his particular judgment is subject to that fallibility to which, all individual judgments are liable. Where the precept is appealed to, “Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,” one man will say that the particular point in question comes under the first head, another that it comes under the second. In either case a great responsibility is assumed, and it is especially desirable that the judgment of the individual should be fortified by the consent of others, if possible by the suffrages of the majority of those who are in a position to judge. It is one thing to say that a conflict of duties may arise, and that the higher is to be obeyed. It is another thing to say that in a certain given case such conflict has arisen, and that the duty which commends itself to the individual is the higher of the two. Whatever the decision arrived at, it ought not to be made in a spirit of levity, nor ought it to be supposed that the dictum of the single conscience bears anything like the same validity as the universal principles of morals. And there will be the further drawback, that in such cases the individual usually acts as judge in his own cause, where his conscience is pretty sure to be biased. There is therefore a very strong onus probandi thrown upon the person who takes upon himself to overrule what is in itself a clear obligation.

2. But the question of political obedience cannot be rightly considered without taking into account the relation of Christianity to political life generally, neither can this isolated passage in an Epistle of St. Paul’s be considered apart from other teaching upon the same subjects in the rest of the New Testament. Very similar language, it will be remembered, is found in 1Pe_2:13-17. And going back to the fountain-head of Christian doctrine, we find, indeed, no express statements, but several significant facts and some important intimations. When He was arrested by the civil power, and unjustly tried and condemned, our Lord made no resistance. Not only so, but when resistance was made on His behalf, He rebuked the disciple who had drawn the sword for Him. When the didrachma was demanded of Him, which it was customary for the Jew to pay towards the repair and maintenance of the Temple, He, though as Lord of the Temple He claimed exemption, nevertheless, for fear of putting a stumbling-block in the way of others, supplied the sum required by a miracle. On another occasion, when a question was asked as to the legitimacy of the Roman tribute, He replied in words already quoted, “Render to Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s, and to God the things which are God’s.” And, lastly, when appeal was made to Him to settle a disputed inheritance, He refused, saying to His petitioner, “Man, who made Me a judge or a divider over you?” Here we have really the key to the whole question. So far as His practice was concerned, our Lord pursued a course of simple obedience; into the theory of political or civil obligation He absolutely refused to enter. The answer, “Render to Cæsar,” &c., left matters precisely as they stood, for the real question was, “What was Cæsar’s, and what was not?” The ambiguity of the reply was intended. It was practically a refusal to reply at all.

The significance of this comes out very strikingly when it is contrasted with the state of feeling and opinion current among the Jews at the same time. With them politics and religion were intimately blended. They carried into the former sphere the fanaticism natural to the latter. Their religious hopes took a political form. The dominion of the Messiah was to be not a spiritual, but a literal dominion, in which they, as a people, were to share.

Clearly, the relations which our Lord assumed towards politics had especial reference to this attitude of the Jews. He wished to disabuse His disciples once and for all of this fatal confusion of two spheres in themselves so distinct. He wished to purify and to spiritualise their conception of the “Kingdom of Heaven,” which He came to found. And, lastly, He finally submitted to the civil power, as the instrument divinely employed to inflict upon Him those sufferings which were to be the cause of our redemption. Vicit patiendo.

It would seem as if by some intuitive perception the disciples entered into the intention of their Master. Towards the civil power they maintained an attitude of absolute submission. They refused to avail themselves of the elements of fanaticism which existed wherever there were Jews, and at the head of which they might easily have placed themselves. Instead of this, they chose to suffer and die, and their sufferings did what force could never have done—they leavened and Christianised the world.

3. It is an expression of this deliberate policy (if by that name it may be called) which we find in these first seven verses of Romans 13. At the same time, the Apostle may very well have had a special as well as a general object. The Church at Rome was largely composed of Jews, and these would naturally be imbued with the fanatical spirit of their countrymen. The very mention of the Messiah would tend to fan their smouldering passions into flame. The Apostle would be aware of this. His informants at Rome may have told him of excitement prevailing among the Jewish portion of the community. His experience in Palestine would tell him to what unscrupulous acts of violence this might lead. And he forestalls the danger by an authoritative and reasoned description of the attitude which the Christian ought to assume.

It does not necessarily follow that precisely the same attitude is incumbent upon the Christian now. In this section of Christian teaching there was something that was temporary and local, and that had reference to conditions that have now passed away. And yet as a general principle, the injunctions of the Apostle entirely hold good. The exceptions to this principle are few and far between. And he who would assert the existence of such an exception must count the cost well beforehand.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers,.... The apostle having finished his exhortations to this church, in relation to the several duties incumbent upon both officers and private Christians, as members of a church, and with reference to each other, and their moral conduct in the world; proceeds to advise, direct, and exhort them to such duties as were relative to them as members of a civil society; the former chapter contains his Christian Ethics, and this his Christian Politics. There was the greater reason to insist upon the latter, as well as on the former, since the primitive saints greatly lay under the imputation of being seditious persons and enemies to the commonwealth; which might arise from a very great number of them being Jews, who scrupled subjection to the Heathen magistrates, because they were the seed of Abraham, and by a law were not to set one as king over them, that was a stranger, and not their own brother, and very unwillingly bore the Roman yoke, and paid tribute to Caesar: hence the Christians in common were suspected to be of the same principles; and of all the Jews none were more averse to the payment of taxes to the Roman magistrates than the Galilaeans; see Act 5:37. And this being the name by which Christ and his followers were commonly called, might serve to strengthen the above suspicion of them, and charge against them. Moreover, some Christians might be tempted to think that they should not be subject to Heathen magistrates; since they were generally wicked men, and violent persecutors of them; and that it was one branch of their Christian liberty to be freed from subjection to them: and certain it is, that there were a set of loose and licentious persons, who bore the name of Christians, that despised dominion, and spoke evil of dignities; wherefore the apostle judged it advisable especially to exhort the church of Rome, and the members who dwelt there, where was the seat of power and civil government, so to behave towards their superiors, that they might set a good example to the Christians in the several parts of the empire, and wipe off the aspersion that was cast upon them, as if they were enemies to magistracy and civil power. By "the higher powers", he means not angels, sometimes called principalities and powers; for unto these God hath not put in subjection his people under the Gospel dispensation; nor ecclesiastical officers, or those who are in church power and authority; for they do not bear the temporal sword, nor have any power to inflict corporeal punishment: but civil magistrates are intended, see Tit 3:1; and these not only supreme magistrates, as emperors and kings, but all inferior and subordinate ones, acting in commission under them, as appears from Pe1 2:13, which are called "powers", because they are invested with power and authority over others, and have a right to exercise it in a proper way, and in proper cases; and the "higher" or super eminent ones, because they are set in high places, and have superior dignity and authority to others. The persons that are to be subject to them are "every soul"; not that the souls of men, distinct from their bodies, are under subjection to civil magistrates; for of all things they have the least to do with them, their power and jurisdiction not reaching to the souls, the hearts, and consciences of men, especially in matters of religion, but chiefly to their bodies, and outward civil concerns of life: but the meaning is, that every man that has a soul, every rational creature, ought to be subject to civil government. This is but his reasonable service, and which he should from his heart, and with all his soul, cheerfully perform. In short, the sense is, that every man should be subject: this is an Hebraism, a common way of speaking among the Jews, who sometimes denominate men from one part, and sometimes from another; sometimes from the body or flesh, thus "all flesh is grass", Isa 40:6, that is, all men are frail; and sometimes front the soul, "all souls are mine", Eze 18:4, all belong to me; as here, "every soul", that is, every man, all the individuals of mankind, of whatsoever sex, age, state, or condition, ecclesiastics not excepted: the pope, and his clergy, are not exempted from civil jurisdiction; nor any of the true ministers of the Gospel; the priests under the law were under the civil government; and so was Christ himself, and his apostles, who paid tribute to Caesar; yea, even Peter particularly, whose successor the pope of Rome pretends to be. "Subjection" to the civil magistrates designs and includes all duties relative to them; such as showing them respect, honour, and reverence suitable to their stations; speaking well of them, and their administration; using them with candour, not bearing hard upon them for little matters, and allowing for ignorance of the secret springs of many of their actions and conduct, which if known might greatly justify them; wishing well to them, and praying constantly, earnestly, and heartily for them; observing their laws and injunctions; obeying their lawful commands, which do not contradict the laws of God, nature, and right reason; and paying them their just dues and lawful tribute, to support them in their office and dignity:

for there is no power but of God; God is the fountain of all power and authority; the streams of power among creatures flow from him; the power that man has over all the creatures, the fowls of the air, the beasts of the field, and the fishes of the sea, is originally of God, and by a grant from him; the lesser powers, and the exercises of them, in the various relations men stand in to one another, are of God, as the power the husband has over the wife, parents over their children, and masters over their servants; and so the higher power that princes have over their subjects: for it is the God of heaven that sets up kings, as well as pulls them down; he is the King of kings, from whom they derive their power and authority, from whom they have the right of government, and all the qualifications for it; it is by him that kings reign, and princes decree justice.

The powers that be are ordained of God. The order of magistracy is of God; it is of his ordination and appointment, and of his ordering, disposing, and fixing in its proper bounds and limits. The several forms of government are of human will and pleasure; but government itself is an order of God. There may be men in power who assume it of themselves, and are of themselves, and not of God; and others that abuse the power that is lodged in them; who, though they are by divine permission, yet not of God's approbation and good will. And it is observable, that the apostle speaks of powers, and not persons, at least, not of persons, but under the name of powers, to show that he means not this, or the other particular prince or magistrate, but the thing itself, the office and dignity of magistracy itself; for there may be some persons, who may of themselves usurp this office, or exercise it in a very illegal way, who are not of God, nor to be subject to by men. The apostle here both uses the language, and speaks the sentiments of his countrymen the Jews, who are wont to call magistrates, "powers"; hence those sayings were used among them; says Shemaiah (t),

"twvrl edwtt la, "be not too familiar with the power".''

that is, with a magistrate, which oftentimes is dangerous. Again,

"says (u) Rabban Gamaliel, , "take heed of the power" (i.e. of magistrates), for they do not suffer a man to come near them, but in necessity, and then they appear as friends for their own advantage, but will not stand by a man in the time of distress.''

Moreover, after this manner they explain (w) Pro 5:8,

""remove thy way far from her", this is heresy; "and come not nigh the door of her house", , "this is the power". The gloss on it is, magistrates, because they set their eyes upon rich men to kill them, and take away their substance.''

And a little after it is observed,

""the horse leech hath two daughters, crying, give, give", Pro 30:15, it is asked, what is the meaning of give, give? Says Mar Ukba, there are two daughters which cry out of hell, and say in this world, give, give, and they are heresy, "and the civil power".''

The gloss on this place is,

"Heresy cries, bring a sacrifice to the idol; "Civil Power" cries, bring money, and gifts, and revenues, and tribute to the king.''

Nevertheless, they look upon civil government to be of divine appointment. They say (x), that

"no man is made a governor below, except they proclaim him above;''

i.e. unless he is ordained of God: yea, they allow (y) the Roman empire to be of God, than which no government was more disagreeable to them.

"When R. Jose ben Kisma was sick, R. Chanina ben Tradion went to visit him; he said unto him, Chanina, my brother, my brother, knowest thou not that this nation, (the Romans) , "have received their empire" from God? for it hath laid waste his house, and hath burnt his temple, and has slain his saints, and destroyed his good men, and yet it endures.''

Nay, they frequently affirm (z), that the meanest office of power among men was of divine appointment. This is the apostle's first argument for subjection to the civil magistrate.

(t) Pirke Abot, c. 1. sect. 10. (u) Ib. c. 2. sect. 3. (w) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 17. 1. (x) In Buxtorf. Florileg. Heb. p. 178. (y) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 18. 1. (z) T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 51. 1. Bava Bathra, fol. 91. 2. Jarchi in 1 Chron. xxix. 11.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

Ver. 1. Let every soul be subject] In things lawful only; for else we must answer as those apostles did, Act 4:29, and as Polycarp, who being commanded to blaspheme Christ, and to swear by the fortune of Caesar, peremptorily refused, and said, We are taught to give honour to princes and potentates, but such honour as is not contrary to God’s religion.

Ordained of God] In regard of its institution, though for the manner of its constitution it is of man.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Let every soul - Every person. In the seven first verses of this chapter, the apostle discusses the subject of the duty which Christians owe to civil government; a subject which is extremely important, and at the same time exceedingly difficult. There is no doubt that he had express reference to the special situation of the Christians at Rome; but the subject was of so much importance that he gives it a “general” bearing, and states the great principles on which all Christians are to act. The circumstances which made this discussion proper and important were the following:

(1) The Christian religion was designed to extend throughout the world. Yet it contemplated the rearing of a kingdom amid other kingdoms, an empire amid other empires. Christians professed supreme allegiance to the Lord Jesus Christ; he was their Lawgiver, their Sovereign, their Judge. It became, therefore, a question of great importance and difficulty, “what kind” of allegiance they were to render to earthly magistrates.

(2) The kingdoms of the world were then “pagan” kingdoms. The laws were made by pagans, and were adapted to the prevalence of paganism. Those kingdoms had been generally founded in conquest, and blood, and oppression. Many of the monarchs were blood-stained warriors; were unprincipled men; and were polluted in their private, and oppressive in their public character. Whether Christians were to acknowledge the laws of such kingdoms and of such men, was a serious question, and one which could not but occur very early. It would occur also very soon, in circumstances that would be very affecting and trying. Soon the hands of these magistrates were to be raised against Christians in the fiery scenes of persecution; and the duty and extent of submission to them became a matter of very serious inquiry.

(3) Many of the early Christians were composed of Jewish converts. Yet the Jews had long been under Roman oppression, and had borne the foreign yoke with great uneasiness. The whole pagan magistracy they regarded as founded in a system of idolatry; as opposed to God and his kingdom; and as abomination in his sight. With these feelings they had become Christians; and it was natural that their former sentiments should exert an influence on them after their conversion. How far they should submit, if at all, to heathen magistrates, was a question of deep interest; and there was danger that the “Jewish” converts might prove to be disorderly and rebellious citizens of the empire.

(4) Nor was the case much different with the “Gentile” converts. They would naturally look with abhorrence on the system of idolatry which they had just forsaken. They would regard all as opposed to God. They would denounce the “religion” of the pagans as abomination; and as that religion was interwoven with the civil institutions, there was danger also that they might denounce the government altogether, and be regarded as opposed to the laws of the land,

(5) There “were” cases where it was right to “resist” the laws. This the Christian religion clearly taught; and in cases like these, it was indispensable for Christians to take a stand. When the laws interfered with the rights of conscience; when they commanded the worship of idols, or any moral wrong, then it was their duty to refuse submission. Yet in what cases this was to be done, where the line was to be drawn, was a question of deep importance, and one which was not easily settled. It is quite probable, however, that the main danger was, that the early Christians would err in “refusing” submission, even when it was proper, rather than in undue conformity to idolatrous rites and ceremonies.

(6) In the “changes” which were to occur in human governments, it would be an inquiry of deep interest, what part Christians should take, and what submission they should yield to the various laws which might spring up among the nations. The “principles” on which Christians should act are settled in this chapter.

Be subject - Submit. The word denotes that kind of submission which soldiers render to their officers. It implies “subordination;” a willingness to occupy our proper place, to yield to the authority of those over us. The word used here does not designate the “extent” of the submission, but merely enjoins it in general. The general principle will be seen to be, that we are to obey in all things which are not contrary to the Law of God.

The higher powers - The magistracy; the supreme government. It undoubtedly here refers to the Roman magistracy, and has relation not so much to the rulers as to the supreme “authority” which was established as the constitution of government; compare Mat 10:1; Mat 28:18.

For - The apostle gives a “reason” why Christians should be subject; and that reason is, that magistrates have received their appointment from God. As Christians, therefore, are to be subject to God, so they are to honor “God” by honoring the arrangement which he has instituted for the government of mankind. Doubtless, he here intends also to repress the vain curiosity and agitation with which men are prone to inquire into the “titles” of their rulers; to guard them from the agitation and conflicts of party, and of contentions to establish a favorite on the throne. It might be that those in power had not a proper title to their office; that they had secured it, not according to justice, but by oppression; but into that question Christians were not to enter. The government was established, and they were not to seek to overturn it.

No power - No office; no magistracy; no civil rule.

But of God - By God’s permission, or appointment; by the arrangements of his providence, by which those in office had obtained their power. God often claims and asserts that “He” sets up one, and puts down another; Psa 75:7; Dan 2:21; Dan 4:17, Dan 4:25, Dan 4:34-35.

The powers that be - That is, all the civil magistracies that exist; those who have the “rule” over nations, by whatever means they may have obtained it. This is equally true at all times, that the powers that exist, exist by the permission and providence of God.

Are ordained of God - This word “ordained” denotes the “ordering” or “arrangement” which subsists in a “military” company, or army. God sets them “in order,” assigns them their location, changes and directs them as he pleases. This does not mean that he “originates” or causes the evil dispositions of rulers, but that he “directs” and “controls” their appointment. By this, we are not to infer:

That he approves their conduct; nor, That what they do is always right; nor, That it is our duty “always” to submit to them.

Their requirements “may be” opposed to the Law of God, and then we are to obey God rather than man; Act 4:19; Act 5:29. But it is meant that the power is intrusted to them by God; and that he has the authority to remove them when he pleases. If they abuse their power, however, they do it at their peril; and “when” so abused, the obligation to obey them ceases. That this is the case, is apparent further from the nature of the “question” which would be likely to arise among the early Christians. It “could not be” and “never was” a question, whether they should obey a magistrate when he commanded a thing that was plainly contrary to the Law of God. But the question was, whether they should obey a pagan magistrate at “all.” This question the apostle answers in the affirmative, because “God” had made government necessary, and because it was arranged and ordered by his providence. Probably also the apostle had another object in view. At the time in which he wrote this Epistle, the Roman Empire was agitated with civil dissensions. One emperor followed another in rapid succession. The throne was often seized, not by right, but by crime. Different claimants would rise, and their claims would excite controversy. The object of the apostle was to prevent Christians from entering into those disputes, and from taking an active part in a political controversy. Besides, the throne had been “usurped” by the reigning emperors, and there was a prevalent disposition to rebel against a tyrannical government. Claudius had been put to death by poison; Caligula in a violent manner; Nero was a tyrant; and amidst these agitations, and crimes, and revolutions, the apostle wished to guard Christians from taking an active part in political affairs.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Let every soul, or every one, be subject, &c.[1] The Jews were apt to think themselves not subject to temporal princes, as to taxes, &c. and lest Christians should misconstrue their Christian liberty, he here teacheth them that every one (even priests and bishops, says St. John Chrysostom) must be subject and obedient to princes, even to heathens, as they were at that time, as to laws that regard the policy of the civil government, honouring them, obeying them, and their laws, as it is the will of God, because the power they act by is from God. So that to resist them, is to resist God. And every Christian must obey them even for conscience-sake. St. John Chrysostom takes notice that St. Paul does not say that there is no prince but from God, but only that there is no power but from God, meaning no lawful power, and speaking of true and just laws. See hom. xxiii. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Non est potestas, Greek: exousia, nisi a Deo. St. John Chrysostom, Greek: om. kg. p. 189. Greek: ouk eipen, ou gar estin archon ei me upo tou theou, alla peri tou pragmatos dialegetai legon, ou gar estin exousia.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

The former chapter is called by some St. Paul’s ethics, and this his politics. He having said, in the latter end of the foregoing chapter, that Christians must not avenge themselves, but refer all to God, who says, that vengeance is his, and he will repay it; some might infer from hence, that it was not lawful for magistrates to right the wronged, and avenge them of their adversaries; or for Christians to make use of them to such a purpose; therefore, to set us right in this matter, he falls into the following discourse. Others think, that the apostle having spoken in several places concerning Christians’ liberty, lest what he had said should be misconstrued, as if he meant that Christians were freed from subjection to the powers that were over them, he seasonably insists upon the doctrine and duty of obedience to authority; which point is more fully handled in this context than in any other place besides.

Let every soul; i.e. every person. In the first verse of the foregoing chapter the body was put for the whole man; here, the soul; and when he says every person, it is plain that ecclesiastical persons are not exempted.

Be subject: he doth not say, be obedient, but be subject; which is a general word, (as some have noted), comprehending all other duties and services. This subjection must be limited only to lawful things; otherwise, we must answer as they did, Act 4:19; or as Polycarpus did; when he was required to blaspheme Christ, and swear by the fortune of Caesar, he peremptorily refused, and said: We are taught to give honour to princes and potentates, but such honour as is not contrary to true religion.

Unto the higher powers: though he speaks of things, he means persons; and he calls them rulers in Rom 13:3, whom he calls powers in this verse. So in Luk 12:11, Christ tells his disciples, they should be brought before magistrates and powers; it is the same word, and it is plain he means persons in power. Chrysostom notes, that he rather speaks of our subjection to powers, than persons in power; because, that howsoever their power be abused, their authority must be acknowledged and obeyed. He speaks of powers, in the plural number, because there are divers sorts and kinds thereof, as monarchy, aristocracy, democracy: under which soever of these we live, we must be subject thereunto. By higher powers, he means the supreme powers; so the word is rendered, 1Pe 2:13. To them, and to those that are authorized by them, we must submit, for that is all one as if we did it to themselves, 1Ti 2:2; 1Pe 2:14. There are other inferior powers, which are also of God, as parents, masters, &c.; but of these he doth not speak in this place.

For there is no power but of God: this is a reason of the foregoing injunction: q.d. That which hath God for its author, is to be acknowledged and submitted to; but magistracy hath God for its author: ergo. He speaketh not here of the person, nor of the abuse, nor of the manner of getting into power, but of the thing itself, viz. magistracy and authority: and he says, it is of God; he instituted the office, and he appointeth or permitteth the person that executes it. This clause is attested and illustrated by Pro 8:15; Dan 4:32; Joh 19:11.

The powers that be are ordained of God: this passage is an exemplification of the former. Erasmus thinks it was inserted by some interpreter, by way of explanation; but it is found in all ancient copies, therefore that conceit of his is without foundation. The emphasis of this sentence seems to lie in the word ordained; power and civil authority is not simply from God, as all other things are, but it is ordained by him. This word (as one observes) implieth two things; invention, and ratification. God invented and devised this order, that some should rule, and others obey; and he maintaineth and upholdeth it.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vers. 1-8. From admonitions to keep peace, if possible, with all men, whether or not within the Christian circle, and to act honourably and benevolently towards all, the apostle now passes to the duty of Christians towards the civil government and the laws of the country in which they lived. It is well known that the Jews were impatient of the Roman dominion, and that some held it to be unlawful, on religious grounds, to pay tribute to Caesar. (Mat_22:17) Insurrections against the government had consequently been frequent. There had been the notable one under Judas the Gaulonite of Gamala (called o Galilaiov , Act_5:37), who left followers behind him, called Gaulonites, and to whose tenets Josephus attributes all subsequent insurrections of the Jews ("Ant.," 18:1. Recently one had broken out in Rome, which had causedClaudius to order the expulsion of all Jews from the city (Act_17:2; cf. Suetonius, "Claud.," 25; Din Cassius, 60:6). The Christians, being regarded as a Jewish sect, and known for their acknowledgment of a Messiah and their refusal to comply with heathen usages, were not unnaturally confounded with such disturbers of the peace. (cf. Act_17:6, 7 21:37) It was, therefore, peculiarly needful that the Christian communities should be cautioned to disprove such accusations by showing themselves in all respects good, law-abiding subjects. They might easily be under a temptation to be otherwise. Feeling themselves already subjects of Christ"s new kingdom, and regarding the second advent as probably near at hand, they might seem to themselves above the powers and institutions of the unbelieving world, which were so soon to pass away. St. Paul himself condemned resort to heathen tribunals in matters which Christians might settle among themselves; (1Co_6:1, etc.) and many might go so far as to ignore the authority of such tribunals over the saints at all. Peter and John had at the first defied the authority even of the Sanhedrin in matters touching conscience; (Act_4:19) and many might be slow to distinguish between temporal and spiritual spheres of jurisdiction. St. Paul, therefore, lays down the rule that the civil government, in whatsoever hands it might be, was, no less than the Church, a Divine institution for the maintenance of order in the world, to be submitted to and obeyed by Christians within the whole sphere of its legitimate authority. He does not refer to cases in which it might become necessary to obey God rather than man: his purpose hero does not call on him to do so; nor were the circumstances so far such as to bring such cases into prominence; for he was writing in the earlier part of Nero"s reign, before any general persecution of Christians had begun. Nor does he touch on the question whether it may be right in some cases for subjects to resist usurped power or tyranny, or to take part in political revolutions, and even fight for freedom. Such a question was apart from his subject, which is the general duty of obedience to the law and government under which we are placed by Providence. This is the only passage in which he treats the subject at length and definitely. In a doctrinal and practical treatise like this Epistle, addressed as an apologia pro fide sua to the metropolis of the world and the seat of government, it was fitting that he should express clearly the attitude of the Church with regard to the civil order. But his teaching in other Epistles is in accordance with this; as where (1Co_7:21) he bids slaves acquiesce in the existing law of slavery, and (1Ti_2:1, etc.) he desires especially prayers to be made in behalf of kings and rulers. And he himself notably carried out his principles in this regard. (cf. Act_23:5 Act_25:8-11) There is a closely similar passage in the First Epistle of St. Peter. (1Pe_2:12-18)

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of (rather, from) God: the powers that be are ordained of God. It is of God"s ordering that there should be human governments and human laws. Without them there could be no order, security, or progress among mankind. Imperfect as they may often be, and in some instances oppressive and unjust, still they exist for a purpose of good, and form part of the Divine order for the government of the world. In this sense all are from God, and ordained of God; and in submitting to them we are submitting to God.

Vers. 1-7. Loyalty.

There was danger, in the first age of Christianity, lest the nature of the kingdom of the Lord Jesus should be misunderstood even by its subjects, and misrepresented by those without. A spiritual empire was a new conception, and carnal minds were prone to confound the dominion over souls with civil and political authority. Hence the importance and appropriateness of the admonitions so emphatically addressed by the apostle to the Christians of Rome.

I THE INSPIRED CONCEPTION OF CIVIL AUTHORITY. By this the apostle understood the actually constituted power of the state. The Roman emperor was the head and chief of the greater part of the population of the then known world, and Rome was the centre of political rule and authority. The proconsuls and propraetors represented in the provinces the imperial majesty and sway of senate and of emperor. But it is evident that the view of civil power taken by the apostle was equally applicable to monarchies and to republics. Whatever the form of government, whatever the designation of the ruler, whatever the rank of the administrator of the law, authority was recognized as of Divine origin and right. It has sometimes been deemed a reproach to the apostle that he should have written thus when Nero was on the throne. But this fact rather emphasizes the principle that the authority is Divine, although the person or persons who wield it may be unworthy of the trust. Nero was at this time under the influence of the wise and moderate counsels of Seneca and of Burrhus, yet this language which Paul employed would probably have been unaltered had the apostle been writing during the subsequent and infamous period of the tyrant"s sway. It would be straining this passage to deduce from it "The right Divine of kings to govern wrong, and it would be unjust to argue from it that it is always unlawful to resist and to dethrone a tyrant. But we may learn to regard subordination, rule, subjection, loyalty, as all part of a Divine order imposed upon human society by the Lord of all.

II THE SCOPE OF LOYALTY.

1. Respect and honour are due from the governed to the governor. Even where there is a lack of those qualities which command personal respect, honour may be rendered to the office which is held, and the duties of which are faithfully fulfilled.

2. The payment of taxes and tributes is required. In this precept Paul followed the teaching of his Master, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar"s." Subjects are not responsible for the use made of the money which is exacted from them by just authority. When a king who has no constitutional right to levy taxes without the consent of a parliament demands money upon his own authority, such a demand may be refused without disobedience to the injunction of the text.

3. Obedience and subjection are enjoined. The extent and range of this injunction are very large. "Every soul every intelligent member of society is under an obligation to obey; and resistance to the ruler is resistance to God, and entails just punishment and retribution.

4. Virtue generally is commended as contributive to the well-being of society. Good works are to evince the sincerity of the Christian"s faith. The Roman law was the highest expression the ancient world attained of justice in the relations subsisting between man and man. It has been the foundation of the codes of many civilized Christian nations in modern times. Obedience to the law was the duty of every good citizen, every well-wisher of society, every true member of the human family. For the law was the sanction of virtue and righteousness. Doubtless there have been and are unjust laws; yet it is the duty of the citizen to obey them when obedience does not come into conflict with the higher duty to God.

III THE GROUNDS OF LOYALTY. These, as adduced by St. Paul, are two.

1. Personal considerations are advanced. The wrath of the magistrate is to be feared; rulers are a terror to the evil; they that resist shall receive retribution; the ruler bears not the sword in vain. Such motives are almost the only motives to which the coarse and vicious are accessible. They are motives to which none are altogether superior. The consequences of injustice have to be borne in mind by those who are liable to the passions of cupidity or of revenge

2. Religious motives are presented. Government is an ordinance of God, and rulers are the ministers of God. A had subject, then, cannot be a good Christian. In our own days, individualism is carried to such an extent that authority is often disdained and defied, even by those who are by no means the dregs of society, who make pretensions to intelligence and virtue. It is well, therefore, that the inspired teaching should be pondered which attaches importance so great to order, patriotism, and loyalty.

HOMILIES BY C.H. IRWIN. Vers. 1-7. The Christian as citizen.

The duty of Christians as citizens is in our day not sufficiently recognized. Many Christians keep aloof from public life and the duties of citizenship because of the political corruption and party strife which are so common. Others, again, enter into public duties, but seem to leave their religion behind them. The result is a sad want of Christian statesmanship and of Christian legislation.

I THE CHRISTIAN RECOGNIZES THE NECESSITY OF GOVERNMENT. "There is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God" (ver. 1). This is not to be understood as meaning that every individual ruler is ordained of God. That would make the Divine Being responsible for many acts of despotism and oppression. We might as well say that every minister of religion who had received the form of ordination was therefore chosen of God, no matter what his personal character might be. The meaning rather is that government is an ordinance of God that God has ordained or appointed it, that there should be authority and rulers. Government is necessary:

1. For the protection of life and property.

2. For the repression of crime. "Rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil" (ver. 3). Governors, says St. Peter, are appointed "for the punishment of evil-doers". (1Pe_2:14)

3. For the rewarding and encouraging of virtue. "Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same" (ver. 3). So St. Peter also speaks of governors as "a praise to them that do well." Wise rulers will not only repress crime, but they will seek to encourage well-doing. They will show special favour to those who, by their own character and efforts, promote morality and temperance and honesty, and thus help to make government easy. How often do rulers forget this! How often the Christian people of a nation are ignored or even discouraged, while the godless and the immoral are high in place and favour!

II THE CHRISTIAN RECOGNIZES THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF RULERS. Rulers are here called "ministers of God" (vers. 4, 6). Our sovereign entitles herself "Victoria, by the grace of God." All who are concerned in government have a solemn responsibility, whether they be kings or queens, ministers of state, members of the legislature, judges, magistrates, or jurymen. All must appear one day before a higher tribunal. Then the judge will be asked, "Have you done justice as between man and man?" The juryman will be asked, "Have you rendered a verdict according to the evidence?" The sovereign will be asked. "Have you been faithful to your coronation vows?" Therefore the Christian should pray for rulers. For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty". (1Ti_2:2) The Christian should do all he can to secure good rulers. What we need in our day is less of party politics, and more of Christian polities. Christian people, Christian Churches, should band themselves together, laying aside all political and all ecclesiastical differences, to secure Christian representatives, Christian law- makers for our professedly Christian nation.

III THE CHRISTIAN RECOGNIZES HIS OWN RESPONSIBILITY. There are two duties distinctly specified here for the Christian citizen.

1. Obedience. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers" (ver. 1); "Whosoever resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God" (ver. 2); "Wherefore ye must needs be subject" (ver. 5). If the law is to be upheld, there must be an obedient and submissive spirit on the part of every good citizen. Yet there are limits to all this. We are to interpret this passage in the light of other Bible teaching and the examples which it sets before us. The Bible does not teach the doctrine of passive obedience or nonresistance. At Babylon,.Daniel resisted the reigning power. The royal mandate was issued, but Daniel did not obey it. "He kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime." The Apostles Peter and John declined to obey the Jewish council at Jerusalem when they were commanded to speak no more in the Name of Jesus. They boldly answered, "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot, but speak the things which we have seen and hear. Where the law of a nation or the command of an earthly ruler conflicts with the law of God, then it is clearly the Christian"s duty to obey God rather than men. The English people in their past history have acted upon this principle. Twice under the reign of the Stuart sovereigns the subjects of the realm asserted, on conscientious grounds, their right of revolution and resistance. So also did the Covenanters of Scotland. Yet resistance to constituted authority should ever be a last resort, and is only to be resorted to when all more peaceful means have utterly failed to obtain justice and redress of wrongs.

2. Taxation. "For this cause pay ye tribute also" (ver. 6). This also was the teaching of Christ. No government can be maintained without expense. National defences, public institutions, all of which have for their object the protection and the well-being of all the citizens, require to be kept up. Every citizen is responsible for bearing his share in meeting expenditure for the common good. He may not approve of every item of expenditure, but that is no valid reason for refusing to contribute his share of taxation, where the representatives of the nation have decreed that the expenditure is wise and necessary. This rule, of course, has its exception also in the case of any expenditure which would do violence to the individual conscience.

3. There are other practical duties. The Christian will ever cooperate with rulers in securing and promoting peace and temperance, morality and honesty, truthfulness and justice. All these virtues are necessary to national well-being. Government would be easy if every citizen was a Christian, and if every Christian would realize his duties as a citizen. The words of Sir Arthur Helps ("Friends in Council") may be fittingly quoted here: "He who does not bring into government, whether as governor or subject, some religious feeling, some higher motive than expediency, is likely to make but an indifferent governor or an indifferent subject Without piety there will be no good government. C.H.I.

HOMILIES BY T.F. LOCKYER Vers. 1-7. Christian submission.

We now pass from ecclesiastical to civil relations. Because the Christian has entered upon a new brotherhood in Christ, he does not cease to belong to the old brotherhood of natural society. And as in the spiritual brotherhood humility and love are the twin principles that should regulate all our conduct, so in the natural commonwealth of the state there should be, analogously, submission towards the powers, and a love-inspired justice towards private members of the same. In these verses is inculcated the duty of conscientious submission to state authorities.

I THE REASONABLENESS OF SUBMISSION. The submission to authority is spoken of as of a twofold nature obedience to law generally, and payment of all dues. And the spirit in which such obedient and loyal conduct should be exercised is the spirit of reverence and honour. For even in state duties the heart should be concerned equally with the life.

1. It is reasonable, then, that we:

(1) Obey the laws in general well-doing. For viewed merely as a human institution of a utilitarian nature, the authority of law is for our good, if we obey. "Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise from the same.

(2) And is it not equally reasonable that we pay the dues to constituted authorities? tribute, custom. For here again we are only contributing towards the expenses of our own protection.

2. But our obedience and payment of dues will only be properly rendered by us, and will only tend to the proper rendering of the same by others, if our heart go with our deed. Let there then, as is reasonable, be fear, let there be honour, towards those to whom fear, to whom honour is due.

II THE RIGHTNESS OF SUBMISSION. The natural man, on the grounds of mere reason, then, should submit to authority, with deed and with heart. But surely the Christian man should submit on some higher ground than this? It is not only reasonable, it is divinely right, that such submission be rendered to the powers.

1. It is right that we:

(1) Obey law. For the authority which gives the law is not arbitrarily instituted by man; it is of God"s appointment. Generally: for "there is no power but of God;" i.e. whenever the exigencies of society demand that one shall exercise power over others, these very exigencies show that the exercise of some such power is divinely purposed. Specially: for in his providential governance of the world he has foreseen and ordained the exercise of the power by these very individuals who for the time have authority committed to them. And can a Christian resist God"s" ordinance? In so doing he will not merely be punished by man, but judged by God. The sword is God"s sword; the wrath, God"s wrath.

(2) And so of tribute and custom. This is not merely a payment because of personal interest accruing, but in recognition of their high office as "ministers of God"s service." They fulfil a Divine vocation, and, like the priests in the temple, must be supported as servants of God.

2. So the spirit in which we obey and pay tribute is to be one of reverence and honour, not only on the lower ground of the reasonableness of the same, but because in these human powers we discern God.

Here, then, as in the whole of life, the religious penetrates and sanctifies the natural. There is to be a perpetual transfiguration, in our eyes, of the human with the Divine. This is but an application of the injunction, "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. T.F.L.

HOMILIES BY S.R. ALDRIDGE Vers. 1-6. Submission to constituted authority.

The reception of a new truth requires its adjustment to previously accepted truths. The introduction of a new system like Christianity necessitated an examination of its relationship to existing systems of government. There was a danger of Jewish fanaticism being fanned into heated sedition in Jewish converts to the gospel by the very joy of finding the Messiah and of hopes concerning a literal temporal kingdom. And the novelty of the views opened up before Gentile converts might easily beget in them a feeling of freedom from and superiority to all law and custom. Yet the advice to such, in order to be practical and effective, must be simple and concise. The apostle, therefore, enunciates a principle, and leaves its limitations to be afterwards discovered.

I THE DIVINE FOUNT OF AUTHORITY. Government is traced to its source in God. "Order is Heaven"s first law." Where no order reigns, there is no security, no progress to better things. Absolute equality is impossible amongst men; society has no safeguards, no cohesion, without a recognized tribunal of authority. Whether this authority is taken and exercised as a matter of course by the wisest or strongest, or is the acknowledged result of station conferred by the community, the necessity for such leadership and oversight manifests the will of God, and authority as such is seen to emanate from him. The Creator controls the works of his hands. The camp of Israel maintained a certain disposition of tents and tribes at rest and on the march, because of a Divine ordinance. Disorder would ill have befitted the presence of the Monarch Jehovah. Whatever the forms which government assumes, we are compelled to ascend in thought by rising steps and hierarchies up to him who sitteth on the great white throne, the mighty Arbiter of all events, the Judge of quick and dead. Recall the majestic passage from Hooker: "Of Law there can be no less acknowledged than that her seat is the bosom of God, her voice the harmony of the world: all things in heaven and earth do her homage, the very least as feeling her care, and the greatest as not exempted from her power: both angels and men and creatures of what condition soever, though each in different sort and manner, yet all with uniform consent, admiring her as the mother of their peace and joy.

II THE HUMAN ADMINISTRATORS OF JUSTICE. "The powers that be are ordained of God." Not that he has placed each ruler in office or assents to each judicial function. But the leaders of human society represent the authority of God on earth. They are the "ministers" of God, acting in subordination to him; at least this is the fundamental idea of their position, however overlooked in practice. "They bear the sword" for God, are his vicegerents, and herein lies the honour and accountability of their decisions. Let them recollect that "One higher than the highest regardeth." "He that ruleth over men righteously, ruling in the fear of God, he shall be as the sunny light of a cloudless morning." Cf. Samuel"s account of his judgeship, that he had defrauded none, oppressed none, nor taken a ransom from any. As families are governed by their natural head, the father, so is the universal family named after and ruled by the great Father in heaven, whom earthly parents are to copy. The fact that parents use delegated authority lends weight and responsibility to their behaviour. For the superintendence of Israel the seventy elders received a special donation of the spirit of Moses. How needful that rulers in Church and state, in households and in municipalities, should seek wisdom from him that giveth to all men liberally! Many a riotous subject has become a thoughtful, self-restrained governor when realizing the momentous grandeur and obligations of his office.

III THE GENERAL RULE OF OBEDIENCE. Submission follows the recognition of the Divine authority at the back of magistrates. To rebel, to disobey, is to cast off allegiance to God. Even the apostle, smarting under the illegal order of Ananias, regretted his strong language when informed that he had reviled the high priest. To refuse due honour to rulers and parents is to demoralize society. The Saviour resisted not the officers of justice, though he was unjustly condemned to death. The apostle urged slaves to be quiet, and subject to their froward masters, that by well-doing they might silence malicious accusers of Christianity. This did not signify that the gospel sanctioned slavery and despotism when the time arrived for their peaceful overthrow. Submission to persecution has been mightier, more lasting in its effects than an armed resistance, for it enlightens public opinion without kindling strife, and prepares for a change that shall be virtually unanimous. The two sanctions of the magistrate"s authority are mentioned in ver. 5, viz. "wrath," that is, punishment, and "conscience," that is, the assurance which the peaceable subject has that he has acted in accordance with the mind of God.

IV PARTICULAR EXCEPTIONS. No public edict has a right to coerce any man"s conscience. Let the ruler attempt to promulgate a law that sins against morality, and obedience must be refused at all hazards. When Caesar steps out of his province into the realm of religion, no regard for the "powers that be" can for a moment be suffered to suspend compliance with the felt dictates of the Almighty. The proclamations of Nebuchadnezzar commanding to worship the golden image, and of Darius prohibiting prayer to any save the king, were rightly unheeded by God-fearing men. But let each protester take great care to have his conscience illumined, lest he erect his individual judgment into a law of God. Again, when a government has shown itself incapable of protecting the good and punishing the transgressors, and is notorious for its reversal of the true principles which should guide its action and for its forgetfulness of the intent of its functions, it has put itself outside the pale of respect and submission; it may lawfully be overthrown and another substituted. Allowance must, however, be made for the human infirmities even of kings and councillors. In modern states agitation can effect needed reforms in public administration. It behoves each citizen to think, speak, and vote as he deems will best promote the interests of the state. Indifference, on whatever spiritual grounds, to evils which he can remedy, carelessness respecting the general welfare, this is a crime. It is a refusal to employ a talent which Providence has committed to his care. Modern legislation does not hesitate to withdraw children from the custody of parents who act with cruelty or surround their offspring with deleterious influences. S.R.A.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

St. Paul, writing to the Romans, whose city was the seat of the empire, speaks largely of obedience to magistrates: and this was also, in effect, a public apology for the Christian religion. Let every soul be subject to the supreme powers - An admonition peculiarly needful for the Jews. Power, in the singular number, is the supreme authority; powers are they who are invested with it. That is more readily acknowledged to be from God than these. The apostle affirms it of both. They are all from God, who constituted all in general, and permits each in particular by his providence. The powers that be are appointed by God - It might be rendered, are subordinate to, or, orderly disposed under, God; implying, that they are God's deputies or vicegerents and consequently, their authority being, in effect, his, demands our conscientious obedience.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Of Obedience to the Government, Love toward One’s Neighbor, and the Walk in the Light.

Government powers of God:

v. 1. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God.

v. 2. Whosoever, therefore, resists the power resists the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

v. 3. 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;

v. 4. for he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

The apostle now, in his exhortation, shows the duties which every person owes the government, and in which the Christians will lead all others with a cheerful sense of duty. Since this is the only place in which Paul treats at greater length of the duties toward civil authorities, it is probable that circumstances made it necessary for him to include this information at this point, either to curb the spirit of the Jewish Christians or to prepare all the Christians of Rome for the treatment which they afterward received at the hands of the tyrant Nero. Paul’s statements are very general, and find their application in all ages of the world; they indicate exactly the divine right and the divine dignity of the government, but, at the same time, limit the functions of the civil authorities to matters pertaining to this world, to the physical well-being of the subjects and to the duties of citizenship.

The apostle’s words are all-inclusive: Let every soul subject itself to authorities existing above it. Every person, without exception, within a community, state, or country is spoken of and addressed in this command. He should be subject to, submit himself willingly, without the application of force or restraint, to the existing powers or authorities, to the persons that are invested with power, to the incumbents of the governmental office. The governmental powers vested in these people by virtue of God’s providence or permission gives them a position in which they excel us in dignity and authority; they are our superiors in the sense of the Fourth Commandment. This is expressly brought out: For there does not exist an authority except by God; but those that exist are ordained by God. If a government is actually in power, whether tyrannical or otherwise, its existence cannot be explained but by the assumption that it is due to God’s establishment, either by His providence or by His permission. It would be impossible for any government to keep evil in check if the almighty hand of God were not the sustaining power. "Not only is human government a divine institution, but the form in which that government exists, and the persons by whom its functions are exercised, are determined by His providence. All magistrates of whatever grade are to be regarded as acting by divine appointment; not that God designates the individuals, but that, it being His will that there should be magistrates, every person who is in point of fact clothed with authority, is to be regarded as having a claim to obedience, founded on the will of God. " (Hodge.) This being the case, therefore, whosoever, everyone that, resists the power resists the institution of God. If any person refuses obedience to the government to which he is subject in any point left free by God’s express command or prohibition, he rebels, not only against the lawful authority of the government, but incidentally against God Himself, who established government. And they that resist will receive to themselves judgment, the sentence of condemnation. Not only will they make themselves liable to prosecution and punishment on the part of the government, but they will be looked upon and treated as rebels by God, who will not have the authority vested by Him disregarded. History shows that the visitations of God upon rebellious peoples have been very severe.

The apostle now brings another reason for the duty enjoined in the first verse: For the authorities, those that rule, are a terror, a cause for fear, not to the good work, but to the evil. That is the purpose for which God has established government: it is to be a matter of fear, its power is to strike terror into the hearts of the rebellious, just as its dignity is to cause reverence and respect in the minds of all subjects. It is only he that does evil who must fear the civil authorities, not he that does good. He that transgresses the laws of the country, and refuses to live in accordance with the demands of civil righteousness, must expect to be treated as his behavior merits. If, then, a person does not want to live in continual fear of the government in the rightful discharge of its duties, he should be concerned about doing good, about living up to the laws of the country, about doing his duty as a citizen. Then he will have praise from the authority, or government; he will be recognized and treated as a good, dutiful citizen. For the magistrates, the persons in authority that are actually conscious of the responsibility and power vested in them, will then act so that the government will be the servant of God to every good citizen for good. For that purpose the government is established and upheld by God, for the benefit of the citizens that are law-abiding, to protect and defend them against wrong, to seek the welfare of society in every way. But if someone will do wrong, will deliberately transgress the laws of the city, state, or country in which he lives and whose protection he enjoys, then he should fear. Far the government nowhere bears the sword, the symbol of authority, in vain; it is not for nothing that the civil authorities are invested with the right to punish, if necessary, by administering the condemnation of death upon the transgressors of the law. God’s minister the government’s power is, both in protecting and in punishing, and, in the latter case, avenging unto anger, manifesting and exercising revenge and wrath upon him that makes it a practice to do evil. Thus the government, according to God’s will, is the guardian of law and order, including external morality. And this reason is sufficient to keep the Christians peaceful and law-abiding, no matter under what form of government they are living, no matter if the persons in authority are morally corrupt. If the members of God’s kingdom can but lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty and build up the Church of Christ, they are duly thankful to God. And if a hostile government uses tyrannical measures to suppress the work of the Church, Christians will not assume a rebellious attitude, but will try to gain their object by legitimate means, by invoking the statutes and the constitution of their state or country. It is only when the government demands anything plainly at variance with the revealed will of God that the Christians quietly, but firmly refuse to obey, Act 5:29.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe here, 1. The title given to magistrates, they are powers, higher powers, that is, persons invested with power, and placed in supreme authority over us. All mankind is not of one rank, doth not stand upon an equal level. Magistracy is an eminency or superiority of some persons above others.

Observe, 2. The original fountain from whence all power is derived from God, and is to be used for God; the magistrate acts by his authority, and consequently is to act for his interest, honour, and glory. It is agreeable to the will of God, that there should be such a thing as magistracy and government in the world; and it is his appointment that men should be governed by men deriving the power and authority from him: The powers that be are ordained of God.

Observe, 3. The apostle’s strict injunction for subjection unto magistracy, as a divine ordinance: Let every soul be subject, that is, every person, by he of what rank, or in what station he will, high or low, honourable or ignoble, rich or poor, clergy or laity, he must be subject to God’s ordinance.

Where note, That Christ is a friend to Caesar, and Christianity no enemy to loyalty: the best Christians are always the best subjects; none so true to their prince, as they that are most faithful to their God. Obedience to magistrates is both the duty of Christians, and the interest of Christianity.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CIVIL LOYALTY

1-7. Christianity is not calculated to bring upon the earth civil war and revolution, but on the contrary, it is the herald of peace, of “peace on earth and good will to men.” Nero, the Roman Emperor, who sat upon the throne of the world and ruled millions of people in Paul’s day, was the most wicked, incarnate devil whose atrocious crimes have ever blackened the historic page. He filled Rome with innocent blood, ruthlessly slaying all the mighty men of state whose rivalry he suspected, murdering all his consanguinity and not even sparing his own mother. When I was there, my guide pointed me out the old tower on which Nero sat, played his fiddle and sang the destruction of Troy while an ocean of flame rolled over mighty Rome six days and seven nights, himself having ordered the conflagration, as all believed, but evading responsibility by charging it on the Christians, ordering the execution of the entire body. Pursuant to his cruel and bloody edict, Paul was beheaded, Peter crucified, and a general effort made to feed them all to the lions in the Coliseum, burning them at the stake and ruthlessly murdering them in every conceivable way. Even under this kind of government Paul enjoins non-resistance to authority, rendering faithful obedience to all civil officers, as the ministers of God, for such they are permissively and providentially if not volitionally and mandatorily, whenever we can do so conscientiously; on the contrary, patiently and unresistingly suffering persecution for Christ’s sake in whatsoever may accrue to us by way of retribution administered on their part, because of our delinquency, and, as they construe it, disobedience and even rebellion.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Romans Chapter 13

Among themselves Christians are exhorted not to seek the high things of this world, but to walk as brethren with those of low degree: a precept too much forgotten in the assembly of God-to her loss. If the Christian of high degree requires that honour according to the flesh should be paid him, let it be done with good will. Happy he who, according to the example of the King of kings and to the precept of our apostle, knows how to walk in company with those of low degree in their journey through the wilderness. Now love is the fulfilling of the law; for love works no ill to his neighbour, and so fulfils the law.

Another principle acts also on the spirit of the Christian. It is time to awake. The deliverance from this present evil age, which the Lord will accomplish for us, draws nigh. The night is far spent, the day is at hand-God knows the moment. The characteristics which marked its approach in the days of the apostle have ripened in a very different way since then, although God, with a view to those whom He is gathering in, is still even now restraining them. Let us then walk as children of the day, casting off the works of darkness. We belong to the day, of which Christ Himself will be the light. Let our walk be in accordance with that day, putting on Christ Himself, and not being studious of that which is in accordance with the will and the lusts of the flesh.

John Nelson Darby — Synopsis of the Books of the Bible: the New Testament (c. 1857–1862) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1–5. Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. To the established civil government. Why should Paul, in this portion of the epistle devoted to Christian life, give this exhortation to obedience to civil government? Perhaps for several reasons: (1) The Christians at that early period were usually associated by the heathen with the Jews, and the Jews were noted for turbulence. See Acts 18:2. (2) The fires that broke forth a few years later, in the Jewish uprising that led to the destruction of Jerusalem, were already smouldering wherever there were those of Jewish blood. Many Christians were Jews by birth. (3) There was danger that Christians, especially under persecution, should be inclined to make disturbance. (4) Some even held that since Christ's kingdom was established human governments had no rightful existence. There is no power but of God. He is the source of all authority, and he has appointed human governments for the welfare of man. The existing government over us is to be regarded as a divine arrangement.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Paul tells believers how to live under their rulers.

Let every soul be obedient to

Here "soul" is a synecdoche for the whole person. "Every Christian should obey" or "Everyone should obey" (See: Synecdoche)

higher authorities

"government officials"

for

because

there is no authority unless it comes from God

"all authority comes from God"

The authorities that exist have been appointed by God

You can translate this in an active form. AT: "And the people who are in authority are there because God put them there" (See: Active or Passive)

that authority

"that government authority" or "the authority that God placed in power"

those who oppose it will receive judgment on themselves

You can translate this in an active form. AT: "God will judge those who oppose government authority" (See: Active or Passive)

translationWords

soul

obey

authority

God

appoint

command

judge

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

Every soul. Every man. See on ch. Rom 11:3.

Higher powers [εξουσιαις υπερεχουσαις] . Lit., authorities which have themselves over. See on Mr 2:10; Joh 1:12.

The powers that be [αι δε ουσαι] . Lit., the existing. Powers is not in the text, and is supplied from the preceding clause.

Are ordained [τεταγμεναι εισιν] . Perfect tense : Have been ordained, and the ordinance remains in force. See on set under authority, Luk 7:8.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.