|
One of the complaints made against King George III in our Declaration of Independence was this one: "He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance."
Multitude of new offices. Swarms of officers. Harassment from the government. Eating out our substance. Anything sound familiar?
As Christians talk about governmental thieveries, the discussion of these issues in America has an additional layer, and that layer, just like all the others, is unfriendly to tyrants.
I want to argue that property is a God-given thing, and the right to own property is therefore an "unalienable" right, meaning that a man cannot be alienated from it -- unless by a fair trial in which it is shown that a man has, by his own behavior, forfeited that right. In other words, a man being executed for serial murders is about to lose any possibility of owning property in the future, and no injustice is being done to him. But unless a man has violated the law of God in such a way as to make this happen, his property is his, placed in his hands by a gracious God. That property is not placed there by the magistrate.
When God prohibits adultery, He is presupposing an institution (created by Him)
called marriage. If there were no marriage, there could be no adultery. When God prohibits stealing, this assumes the same kind of thing. God created the world in such a way that we are given the gift of owning our goods, and God then commands our neighbors to respect that, just as He commands us to respect their goods. This is one issue that comes up twice in the Ten Commandments. We are told not to take our neighbor's stuff in the eighth commandment, and we are told not even to think about it in the tenth. Property is as much an institution of God as marriage is. It must therefore be handled the way He says to handle it. Property is legitimate because He gave it to us, and taxes are legitimate within the boundaries that He has established.
Against this backdrop, consider this part of the second paragraph of the Declaration.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."
Given what I have said above, it is obvious I believe this sentiment to be correct. But whether it is correct or not, it remains an essential part of the American legal tradition. That means that even those American believers who are dubious about my understanding of Romans 13 can still act as though it were correct, whether it is or not, because it is an essential part of the fabric of our legal tradition. For just one downstream example, the preamble of the Idaho Constitution says that the people have the right to alter their government whenever they feel like it. These are words that can be freely obeyed. Why? Because the Bible says to obey the existing authorities!
So the right to "alter or abolish" "any form of government" that has "become destructive" of our unalienable right to pursue "life, liberty, and happiness" is a right that is not bestowed on us by the government that itself needs to be altered or abolished. That would be a dumb set up. But even if the right to act up in this way did need to be bestowed on us by the government (which it doesn't), we are fortunate to live under a tyrannical government dumb enough to have done just that. Every Fourth of July, countless fireworks are set off in commemoration of this very principle. Right? So yay.
But the only consistent foundation of this understanding is the recognition that God is the only real title company there is. He is the only true basis for one of the foundational human rights -- that of clear title. |
