It would be easy at this point to give one of the standard answers and say that God does not care what type of government is ruling in a particular area. And, there is quite some truth to that. A quite good case can be made that God is more interested in the behavior of the government than in the structure of the government. Even Plato, who lived several centuries before Christ, argued that a truly benevolent dictator would be the best form of government. He argued that one who was influenced only by a desire to do the good would be more efficiently and more truly good than a mass of people trying to accomplish the same goals.
In Micah, the prophet states, “And what does the LORD require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God?” So, one possible answer to the style of government question is that God has no preference whatsoever other than what Micah tells us, a behavioral preference rather than a structural preference. However, this is not a case in favor of democracy. That is, if all that God cares about is a behavioral preference, then why are we about the business of exporting a particular type of democracy to all countries? Would it not be better to export a moral outlook rather than a political system? After all, if we are using Micah, then Plato might very well be correct in stating that a benevolent dictator might be a better form of government than a democracy.
But a more important question might be if there are any hints in Scripture that God prefers one type of government over another. Well, in centuries prior to the American Revolution there were indeed arguments that were made regarding the type of government. Have you ever read of the Doctrine of the Two Swords or the Doctrine of the Two Powers? Pope Gelasius I (492-496 AD) said in a letter to the Emperor Anastasius:
There are two powers, august Emperor, by which this world is chiefly ruled, namely, the sacred authority of the priests and the royal power. Of these that of the priests is the more weighty, since they have to render an account for even the kings of men in the divine judgment. You are also aware, dear son, that while you are permitted honorably to rule over human kind, yet in things divine you bow your head humbly before the leaders of the clergy and await from their hands the means of your salvation… And if it is fitting that the hearts of the faithful should submit to all priests in general who properly administer divine affairs, how much the more is obedience due to the bishop of that see [Rome] which the Most High ordained to be above all others, and which is consequently dutifully honored by the devotion of the whole Church.
Notice that the authority of both the Bishop of Rome and the Royal Power are called a sacred authority. The East emphasized cooperation with the Emperor significantly more than authority over the Emperor in certain matters. And, the East did not recognize the claims of the Bishop of Rome. Nevertheless, both East and West agreed that the authority of the Emperor was a sacred authority and not merely a secular authority. This is not surprising since St. Paul says in Romans 13:
Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.
Finally, please note that each and every Christian is a member of the oldest hereditary monarchy in existence. We tend to forget what it means that Our Lord Jesus Christ is King. The Gospel writers were quite clear in making sure to define both his divine and his earthly geneology. He is the eternal Son who is the Son of Man. He is the eternally begotten from the Father and he is also descended from the royal lineage of King David in fulfillment of the Scriptures. The rule of Our Lord is for our best, but is truly absolute. He is not and was never elected, save by His Father. He sits on a throne and expects the reverence and worship due a King, but serves us as the lowliest of servants, which itself is class terminology. And, someday He will exercise absolute and unappealable judgment over us.
Certainly that would seem to argue for God being in favor of monarchy rather than other forms of government, but is that all there is in Scripture? Well, no it is not.
===MORE TO COME===
God is much more concerned about His Kingdom than ours.
That is what Jesus told Pilate.
Notice how muct time Jesus spends speaking of the ills of the Roman occupiers of his time.
Not much.
So, what happens when Christians become a majority in any given country? Are there any guidelines for them?
One answer is that the only guideline for Christians is to behave morally when they participate in the government.
Another answer has been that Christians do not belong in the government at all.
But, let’s say one is doing some nation-building, like our founders did in 1776, or a Berlin Wall falls and suddenly you have to rebuild an entire corrupt government. What stance, if any, should Christians take? Or, are Christians free to institute any government they wish, a monarchy or an oligarchy or a benevolent presidency-for-life or a democracy or . . . ?
Remember that I quoted Romans 13 about God’s relationship to human governments. St. Paul, after the death of Jesus, and as Christianity expanded and began to grow, and as he was in the capital of the Empire, had to answer some questions about the relationship of Christians to government.
Good questions.
I think we are free to exercise our best judgment about what is best for our countrymen and our neighbors and respecting their God given rights to freedom and property.
Like Luther, “I would rather be ruled by a smart Turk, than a stupid Christian.”
Amen!
… ‘So, what happens when Christians become a majority in any given country?’…..well ..that depends on your definition of “christians”…the republican party in this country along with its capitalist interests have managed to hijack the right-wing of Christendom and now “speak” for God and His people…NOT…. …im ready to give socialism a try..its interesting how we americans have been conditioned to grimace when we even hear that word………ok im through.
Well, I was thinking of typical Christians who had truly accepted the Lord. I was not thinking of saints or martyrs. I was not thinking of perfect people, but people who were honestly trying to live out a Christian faith in a practical life.
I do agree that this country has taken the word socialism and made it something that it is not. As a result, there is a particular blindness to the socialist programs we already have in place, such as Social Security, Medicare, WIC, etc., and (to a certain extent) some types of unemployment insurance, which is not truly insurance at all. Moreover, most people are not aware of the different types of socialism that have been proposed anymore than they are aware that there is more than one type of capitalism.
I really like that quote from Luther!!!!
I could go on ad nauseum about Romans 13, but I’ll limit my comment to just a few points. The only authority I see given in ch. 13 is one of punishment for evil. This is not the same as license to legislate, with subsequent punishment based on that, which is what most interpretations I’m familiar with do.
We should also be careful of the artificial chapter divisions here. I see Rom 13 in the Rom 12 context of not taking revenge. Let the authority punish for violation of person and property, not whether somebody smokes a joint or drives 66 mph on the freeway.
I also believe it no accident that Rom 14 on Christian liberty follows Rom 13 as a serious limitation to civil authority.