Urban Leadership Foundation
A hub for leadership training in cities and among the world's 1.4 billion slum-dwellers
"Government is is best which governs least." But it is an expediency, hence "I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government.
A government in which the minority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there be a government win which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward.
A corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience.
A common and natural result of an undue respect for law… the mass of men serve the State thus, not as men mainly but as machines, with their bodies… In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of judgement in the moral sense. A very few, as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the great sense, and men, serve the State with their conscience also, so so necessarily resist it for the most part; and they are commonly treated by it as enemies.
All men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to and the resist the government, when its tyranny or its efficiency are great and unendurable. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison. … locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. But even suppose blood should flow. Is there not a sort of blood shed when the conscience is wounded? Through this wound a man's real manhood and immortality flow out, and he bleeds to an everlasting death. I see this blood flowing now. (He is referring to the Mexican war and the ongoing slavery).
I have contemplated the imprisonment of the offender, rather than the seizure of his goods – though both will serve the same purpose – because they who assert the purest right and consequently are most dangerous to the corrupt state, commonly have not spent much time in accumulating property.
Absolutely speaking, the more money, the less virtue.
They cannot spare the protection of the existing government, and they dread the consequences of disobedience to it to their property and families. This makes it impossible for a man to live honestly and at the same time comfortably. The authority of government, - is still an impure one; to be strictly just it must have the sanction and consent of the governed.
The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress towards a true respect for the individual. Is a democracy as we know it, the last improvement possible in government?
The biblical basis for this oppositonal activity to structural evil may be found in the prophets, and in small ways in Jesus. Abraham Heschel in The Prophets, has one of the most readable analyses of the nature of such prophetic activity.
The biblical canon contains episodes in which protagonists commit acts of what we might call 'civil disobedience.' The midwives' noncompliance in the face of Pharaoh's infanticidal command in Exodus 1 is one well-known example. The disobedience of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in Daniel 3, and also Daniel in Daniel 6 - both in light of idolatrous laws - are further examples. Jesus himself commits acts of what we would contemporarily call civil disobedience, mostly notably in his Sabbath healings and in the clearing of the Jerusalem Temple. There is also the well-known example n Acts 5 of the apostles' disobedience in the face of the command not to teach in the name of Jesus - "We must obey God rather than men." (Anslow 2014:1).
Review this analysis of Romans 13 and Civil Disobedience. Contrast Thoreau with Paul's teachings in Romans 13 about an obedience to civil authorities. Discuss the conflict between these ideas. How does Jesus' relationship to authorities affect your discussion?
Are all authorities limited? How is this reflected in Paul's teaching in Romans 13? Were Hitler, Idi Amin, ISIS, and apartheid all instituted by God and hence to be obeyed unquestionly?
Thoreau, Henry David. (1849). Resistance to Civil Government.
Anslow, Matt. (2014). Romans 13 and Civil Disobedience. Crucible 6:1. November 2014 ISSN: 1836-8794 6:1 (November 2014) www.crucible.org.au
Students will be confident to discuss a theological and theoretical basis of the possibilities, limits and potential consequences of civil disobedience before abusive or unjust authority.