The doctrine of forfeiture maintains that it is normally the Christian duty to submit to God-ordained authorities. However, if authorities blatantly transgress the parameters God has established for them—if they move outside of their lawful authority as designed by God—then they forfeit the right to submission. In these cases, it is not the obedient Christian who sins when they do not submit to the authority, but the authority who sins by encroaching another’s domain. 

This is part of a mini-series on foundational building blocks for Bible followers who wish to think about politics in accord with Scripture. As such, this mini-series explores a chapter from the Bible with as much concentrated political core material as any.

Christians wonder about the tactics of those who break the law as an effort to protect innocent life: “Is it appropriate to protest against a law that is contrary to God’s revealed law?” Christians may express their disagreement with laws, and our society protects the right to freely express or protest such matters of conscience. However, Christians have a dual responsibility: they are also to obey the law, unless to do so is to disobey God. As horrible as the law is that allows for the slaughter of the unborn, still no one in our country is legally compelled to seek an abortion. It would be a different question, if a law was passed (e. g., as previously in China) forbidding its citizens to have as many children as they wanted, with abortion being the mechanism to take that life. Mandatory abortion is different from permitted abortion.

As long as one stays within the confines to the law, it is permissible to protest or devise other means to seek to change the law. Even if one wants to change the law, that citizen must work within the law to have it changed by constitutional processes. Biblically speaking, one may express disagreement with aspects of a government, but a Christian must be careful to do so peacefully and lawfully. Disciples are not called by God to resort to ungodly methods, even if attempting to correct ungodly parts of our state. The Christian is called to submit to the laws of the state, unless they mandate something that is opposite of God’s Word.

The same issue can be raised from a different angle. Equally, the state should suppress violence when a mob seeks to prevent a Christian church from having its worship service. In a well-known case, a group of homosexuals protested in front of a church that was hosting a conference on family values, physically preventing worshippers from peacefully attending that service. Sadly, the police sat idly by, because it was not politically correct in that particular community to restrain homosexuals who expressed their opposition to Christian values. The point is, nevertheless, that the state should protect the freedom to worship as one chooses.

If that is so, then Christians should not be involved in illegally preventing others from having a legal abortion. I reluctantly have to agree. The principle is the same, and if in fairness one expects the state to protect the Christian’s civil rights, then he must respect others—even if they seek something that is self-destructive. Christians should be moved to compassion on behalf of the unborn, but they must make sure that their methods are within the bounds of Scripture. Christians must not resort to unbiblical means, even with a righteous end in sight.

The state is limited and not Messianic in its scope. It is to do only that which God had ordered it to do, and recognize that God has also raised up other groups, like the home, the church, and private charity to take care of many things. The state is to be minimal, not maximal; and it is a creation of God, not human accident—nor even justified solely for administrative efficiency.

It is as important to know what Scripture says about the clear duties of Christians as it is to know the limitations of the state. These duties are clear, but the heart of the problem in this area, as with other areas, is selective rebellion. It is tempting to trumpet the inerrancy of Scripture, when one agrees with some portion of Scripture. It is a temptation to love one’s country and submit to the government, if it is in the hands of one party or one group of leaders. A properly balanced approach follows the Scriptures that prescribe our duties regardless of who rules.

Duty #1 is to submit, as long as the government is heeding its proper scope and authority. Flowing from the earlier God-given authority for the state, the corresponding duty is to submit.

There are few words in modern vocabulary that are more out of favor, especially in America. Submission is not the favorite past-time of Americans, nor a virtue quickly associated with our people. Children do not enjoy it, teenagers hate it, and adults may like it less.

Read More