Romans 13 is the thirteenth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans in the New Testament of the ChristianBible. It is authored by Paul the Apostle, while he was in Corinth in the mid 50s AD, with the help of an amanuensis, Tertius, who adds his own greeting in. Paul wrote to the Roman Christians because he was "eager to preach the gospel" to them, so as to remind them on "certain subjects". Although he had been hindered from coming to them many times, he longed to encourage the Roman church by reminding them of the gospel, because of his calling to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews. In this chapter, Paul reminds his readers that they should honour and obey the secular authorities. ReformerMartin Luther suggested that "he includes this, not because it makes people virtuous in the sight of God, but because it does insure that the virtuous have outward peace and protection and that the wicked cannot do evil without fear and in undisturbed peace".
This verse alludes to Exodus 20:13–15; Deuteronomy 5:17–19, 21; and Leviticus 19:18. The King James Bible includes "You shall not bear false witness" in the verse because of its presence in the Textus Receptus. The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges suggests that it is "perhaps to be omitted, on documentary evidence".
Non-conformist theologian Matthew Henry calls these verses "a Christian's directory for his day's work". According to the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, "Paul enforces all the preceding precepts by the solemn assertion of the approach of the eternal Day of Resurrection and Glory", "for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed". Many translations, such as the New King James Version and Revised Standard Version, refer to "when we first believed".
Political meaning and use
Many interpreters have claimed that Romans 13 implies that Christians are to obey all public officials under all circumstances. Some interpreters and biblical scholars dispute this view, however. Thomas Aquinas interprets Paul's derivation of authority from God as conditional on the circumstances in which authority is obtained and the manner in which it is used:
The order of authority derives from God, as the Apostle says [in Romans 13:1–7]. For this reason, the duty of obedience is, for the Christian, a consequence of this derivation of authority from God, and ceases when that ceases. But, as we have already said, authority may fail to derive from God for two reasons: either because of the way in which authority has been obtained, or in consequence of the use which is made of it.
According to biblical scholars John Barton and John Muddiman:
Few if any passages in the Pauline corpus have been more subject to abuse than w. 1–7. Paul does not indicate that one is required to obey public officials under all circumstances, nor does he say that every exercise of civil authority is sanctioned by God. No particular government is authorized; no universal autarchy is legitimated. Instead, Paul reiterates the common Jewish view that human governance operates under God's superintendency, that it is part of the divine order and so is meant for human good.
Romans 13 is from time to time employed in civil discourse and by politicians and philosophers in support of or against political issues. Two conflicting arguments are made: that the passage mandates obedience to civil law; and that there are limits to authority beyond which obedience is not required. John Calvin, in Institutes of the Christian Religion took the latter position: "that we might not yield a slavish obedience to the depraved wishes of men". Martin Luther employed Romans 13 in Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants to advocate that it would be sinful for a prince or lord not to use force, including violent force, to fulfil the duties of their office. Theologian Paul Tillich is critical of an interpretation that would cast Romans 13:1–7 in opposition to revolutionary movements:
One of the many politico-theological abuses of biblical statements is the understanding of Paul’s words [Romans 13:1–7] as justifying the anti-revolutionary bias of some churches, particularly the Lutheran. But neither these words nor any other New Testament statement deals with the methods of gaining political power. In Romans, Paul is addressing eschatological enthusiasts, not a revolutionary political movement.
Romans 13 was used during the period of the American Revolution, by loyalists who preached obedience to the Crown; and by revolutionaries who argued for elimination of the unjust authority of the King. Later in US history, Romans 13 was employed by anti-abolitionists to justify and legitimise the keeping of slaves; notably around the time of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 which precipitated debate as to whether the law should be obeyed or resisted. It was also used by the Dutch Reformed Church to justify apartheid rule in South Africa. In June 2018, Romans 13 was used by Jeff Sessions to justify the Trump administration family separation policy, saying: Commenting on the fight to define Romans 13, historian Lincoln Mullen argues that "what the attorney general actually has on his side is the thread of American history that justifies oppression and domination in the name of law and order."
