I’ve been grappling for several years with the notions of Christian submission under the 4th Commandment (or 5th, in the Protestant numbering tradition), and its interaction with a republican form of governance. Yes, the United States is a constitutional republic, not a democracy, as is so often misstated in public discourse. But, I digress… How ought we navigate this interaction as Christians, or should we at all?
For clarity’s sake, I’ll be speaking here in terms of sin and the commands of God’s law. I’ll also be speaking of things that are speculative in my mind. So, I’ll expend every effort to parse one from another with concrete verbs (will, must, shall, etc.) for the clear understanding of God’s Law, and modal verbs (may, ought, should, etc.) for my own speculation concerning our peculiar system of governance. Additionally, by “submission” or “absolute submission,” I mean that submission, which Christians can in good conscience give to rulers, when there is no conflict with the first 1st Commandment or the other nine. No Christian may obey a ruler’s command to despise the Word of God, its preaching, or the holy day of rest and worship. Nor can we take oaths against the faith in God’s name. And we shall never acknowledge a power or authority over the Triune God.
With that out of the way, regardless of the numbering tradition your readers may understand, by the 4th Commandment, I mean this, “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.” (Exodus 20:12 ESV) All authority in Heaven and on Earth and under the Earth belongs to the Lamb in His kingdom. The Earth, His footstool, is given to temporal rulers, whose authority flows from the 4th Commandment.
Expounding upon the commandments is in keeping with the Lord’s presentation of the 1st and 3rd commandments in Exodus, chapter 20, and Jesus’s exposition on the 5th and 6th commandments in Matthew, chapter 5. Martin Luther teaches it this way in his 1529 Small Catechism. “As the head of the family should teach [the ten commandments] in a simple way to his household … What does this mean? We should fear and love God so that we do not despise or anger our parents and other authorities, but honor them, serve and obey them, love and cherish them” (SC 1:4–emphasis mine). The other authorities bit gives us an understanding of the head of household duty for secular rulers and our duty to them as subjects.
In his 1529 Large Catechism, Dr. Luther spoke this way about civil government. “The same should also be said about obedience to civil government. This (as we have said) is all included in the place of fatherhood and extends farthest from all relations. Here ‘father’ is not one person from a single family, but it means the many people the father has as tenants, citizens, or subjects. Through them, as through our parents, God gives to us food, house and home, protection, and security. They bear such name and title with all honor as their highest dignity that it is our duty to honor them and to value them greatly as the dearest treasure and the most precious jewel upon the earth” (Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions, Readers Edition, Second Edition, © 2005 & 2006, Concordia Publishing House, St. Louis, MO, p. 376, paragraph 150).
These rulers are clearly due our submission in temporal matters. They are here to provide for our good, and rule justly. The dilemma, as I see it, in a republic such as the United States, lies in identifying who wears this hat of 4th commandment authority at which various times. In Luther’s day, there was no functional republic for him to observe or reflect upon. That places the onus upon us to apply his wisdom through that lens.
For Luther and the other reformers, kings & princes, electors & dukes were easily identified. They would often claim a divine right, that is, selection by God, to their governance. This is not entirely untrue. We Christians confess that all rulers, including Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus I, King George, and the President of these United States are placed there by God for our benefit. We owe them our respect, submission, and obedience.
There’s still a rub.
Who’s in charge in a republic?
The right answer is “many people” at various times. Between election cycles, the voters are subjects who shall submit within the bounds of the first commandment. During campaigns and elections, candidates are under the rule of “We The People.” After votes are cast, voters and candidates are submissive under the electors tasked with their duties. When the courts exercise their authority, submission goes to them. When legislators write and pass laws, review appointments, and scrutinize officials, they are to be obeyed. And all are bound to rule justly and in submission a sort of king constraining and conforming the republic.
We do actually have a king, but it’s a document. The constitution is the sole temporal governing authority in the land. This king pays honor to the Lord in recognizing rights in creation that precede itself. And it defines who does what, when, and with what powers.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” (First Amendment of the US Constitution).
This protection of political speech isn’t only a right, it guards a fourth commandment responsibility. You, the electorate, have a job concerning your own authority. This responsibility does not begin, nor is not limited to the ballot box. Participation in the entire electoral function is necessary for all Christians. This means Christians ought to engage in public exhibition of their opinion concerning candidates. Christians ought to engage in public discourse concerning their opinions of candidates. Christians ought to share ideas and attempt to convince other people of their opinions, informed and defended by the Christian faith, concerning the candidates up for election.
The “petition for the redress of grievances” is also a Christian’s duty. The electorate, who wears their ruling crown in these instances ought to be willing to file suits against the government for actions outside the bounds of their authority. The redress is not limited individual suits. We also should be engaged in public discourse on the matters, filing of briefs amicii, and financial support of the NPOs in these legal battles. Legals NPOs like the Alliance Defending Freedom is one such group heavily involved in defending the LCMS from such government overreach (point initiated by Rev. Bob Smith, 26 Sep 2024).
Side note on authority: under the 4th commandment, a father or mother shall not abandon their responsibilities as father or mother. Similarly, Christians in the electorate ought not to abandon or abdicate their responsibilities as absolute ruler under the constitution, during seasons of election.
Can a Christian vote for a sinful candidate?
There can be no doubt that every candidate who has ever run for office is a sinner. If we think otherwise, we have a much bigger problem than whether to elect Judy Smalls or Jacob Little. In choosing the sinner among us sinners, we must apply prudence and reason given to us by God to select the candidate who is the least likely to cause harm. In their sin, these men and women will sin in great and small ways while ruling justly over the people. This is no different than each of us. Elections are a zero sum game in our two-party system. A withheld vote is a vote for the winning candidate. With precious few exceptions, a vote for an inconceivable winner against the two major candidates is also a vote for the winning candidate.
This is the unique situation where our primary concern is the first use of the law. The first use, the “curb,” is chiefly the duty of civil government to prevent gross errors and sin from hurting or harming our neighbor. In the political process of a republic, you have a hand in selecting the officials who do or do not prevent this. This is where engagement in the political process is absolutely necessary. Christians ought to know the track record of the people they are electing. Christians should engage in moral triage.
By moral triage, I mean seeking the least evil and least harmful outcomes in civil governance. I don’t understand this to mean a binary moral standard, classifying a candidate as entirely “good” or completely “bad.” I would also suggest that personal life, though important, should take a back seat to the outcomes of governance in curbing great sin and violence with our society.
A potential or returning political candidate’s role is one of enforcing and uplifting the first use, civil law. That means the 10 commandments must be prioritized in our selection of leaders. We may not forget Cyrus, the great of Persia, all the good things done by wicked leaders like him at the Lord’s bidding (Isaiah 45:1-3; 2 Chronicles 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-8).
Using The Ten Commandments to Sharpen Our Focus
While selecting these leaders for their expected behavior in the case of the 10 commandments in the civil realm. In the case of the 1st through 3rd commandments, there is very little that government can do in particular in their first table function. The only thing that they can do is a very bad one. If government ever attempts to curtail religion, this is an evil thing. Pagans must be allowed to be pagans. priorBut more importantly, no activity of the Christian faith and life may ever be limited under constitutional governance. This is already prevalent in our society in varying degrees, and it must be pushed back. Even the rhetoric exposes a change in understanding that is deliberately put in play. At one time, the discussion will only concern itself with the “freedom of religion.”
Sometime around 2008, the language shifted to a different term. Candidates of all sorts began to speak about the “freedom to worship.” This is not concurrent with the language of a constitution that recognizes a previously existing free exercise of religion. The entirety of the Christian life and faith is protected in our republic, as it should be.
The second table of the law is the chief thing here, preventing gross wickedness by the threat of punishment, jail, or death. While a Christian leader would be preferable to a non-Christian leader, that does not mean that a Christian leader is a better selection than a non-Christian leader. This is a hard thing to consider, but the Christianness of the official isn’t a thing that will affect their governance directly. However, their behavior and policy making concerning things that effect their fellow man are directly effective in their capability or incompetence concerning governance.
The 4th commandment: honor your father and mother
A potential government official cannot step outside their own authority. They should submit when submission is required, and rule when ruling is their duty. Malicious prosecution, creation of rules that are not law but act as though they are, laws invented from the judicial bench, executives refusing to enforce the law, and actions like these are just a few examples of 4th commandment actions not in keeping with God’s law.
The 5th commandment: you shall not murder.
A political candidate cannot encourage murder. This does not mean capital punishment, and it never has. By the 4th commandment, the authority to exercise discipline and punishment, including death, is the authority of the civil government.
Murder does, however, include things that cause the death of others, or allow the death of others to be legally permissible. The discussion here begins and ends with abortion. A Christian cannot elect a candidate who approves of, encourages, or propagates abortion. There are two bodies in the decision, and one is granted no choice. God created the life of the unborn.
This also means the likelihood of murder in a particular jurisdiction determines whether the elected officials in that area are abiding by their God-given and irrevocably commanded responsibility concerning the lives of their citizens. If a city has the highest murder rate the nation, they are doing something wrong, and everyone who supports their system of governance is probably on the wrong side of this commandment.
The 6th commandment: you shall not commit adultery.
This one concerns itself less with the personal life of the candidate, which is still a concern, and more with the resultant waves that flow through society. A government that creates systems that discourage marriage and that discourage the union of man and woman in holy matrimony for the procreation and rearing of children is failing in their duty and opposing the 6th commandment. Again, this is on display in many jurisdictions and municipalities throughout the world. The United states where single motherhood is on the rise, marriage rates are on the decline. Government can encourage marriage. Government has encouraged divorce. This is evil. A candidate continuing these sorts of practices is not a suitable candidate to receive a Christian’s to vote. This is not in keeping with God’s law.
This a spot where we may confuse morality of character with a moral society. Even a scoundrel can legally promote the nuclear family unit and the stability it gives to children. This benefits all children under their governance by adding to the safety and stability of society as a whole. This is in keeping with God’s law.
The 7th commandment: you shall not steal.
Let’s just be simple about this one. Encouraging criminality which allows folks to deprive their neighbor of what they have is a thing that grows out of control when prosecutors will not prosecute crime. Those that do not enforce the law are unfit for office and have abandoned their responsibility according to the 4th commandment. They are not fit for office and ought to be removed. This is not in keeping with God’s law.
The 8th commandment: you shall not bear false witness.
This is most prevalent currently in the increasing flow of an intention to censor information that is determined to be seditious, dangerous, or “untrue.” In a society where free speech is a tenant of the function of life, all citizens must have equal and unfettered access to this right. That means allowing speech we don’t like to occur. In the current state of censorship, that speech which is censored is not censored because it is wrong. It is censored because it opposes the political ideology of the party in power. This is a false witness against those who are silenced. This opposes God’s law.
The 9th and 10th commandments you shall not covet.
Covetousness is a little different from theft. The covetous heart seeks to deprive its neighbor of what they have. The deprivation is the thing that makes the thing different from theft. It doesn’t matter to the covetous heart who receives, or if anyone received the spoils of deprivation. The covetous heart simply wants to see its neighbor lose what they have. This is the heart of the wicked evil of wealth envy.
It is statistically guaranteed that a person who has their wealth taken by way of irrational taxation will be deprived of what they have. It is also irrefutable that government waste, fraud, and corruption will destroy that wealth rather than using it. It is to the detriment of the entire society that that wealth should be taken rather than retained by its owner. The owner in a free society uses their wealth to invest, to purchase, and to acquire, which benefits their fellow man who works to provide services and goods that are desired by a wealthy person, or are employed by the same. When government steals, the wealth is simply destroyed. This is not in keeping with God’s law.
Use the reason God gave you, dear Christians. Speak to your friends and neighbors. Share your views, and kindly try to convince them. Wear the ruling crown, when it is yours, and cast it aside, when it is not.
All are one in Christ,
Rev. Jason M. Kaspar
Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church & Preschool
La Grange, TX
©2024 Jason Kaspar. All rights reserved. Permission granted to copy, share and display freely for non-commercial purposes. Direct all other rights and permissions inquiries to cosmithb@msn.com
