A Christian Framework for Liberty, Law, and Legitimate Authority
When Government Stops Serving
What should Christians think and do when rulers stop serving and start ruling by force? The Bible does not leave the church without a compass. It gives a covenantal vision of authority—rooted in God’s law, bounded by justice, and exercised as service for the people’s good. When rulers reject that calling, Scripture also records how God’s people discern, resist, and sometimes separate.
This article distills the major themes of Biblical Principles for Secession into a clear, multi-part argument. We will define covenantal government, examine the biblical case study in 1 Kings 12, clarify what Romans 13 requires (and does not require), identify markers that justify separation, glean cautionary lessons from Israel’s history, and sketch a constructive blueprint for rebuilding on explicitly Christian foundations.
1) Government Is Covenantal, Not Autonomous
The Bible treats authority as a trust, not an entitlement. Rulers are not gods; they are ministers—servants—who must answer to God for how they wield power.
The covenantal model. When David is anointed, the elders “made a covenant with \[him]… before the LORD” (see 1 Chronicles 11:3). Kingship is bound by a constitution—God’s revealed law—and by the consent of the governed, expressed through covenant.
Why rulers exist. David “perceived that the LORD had established him king… and… exalted his kingdom for His people Israel’s sake” (2 Samuel 5:12). Authority is for the people’s good, not the ruler’s ambition, party, or program.
The ethic of rule. David seals his charge with fourfold emphasis on inspiration before stating the core principle of political ethics: “He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God” (2 Samuel 23:1–3). Justice and the fear of God are non-negotiable.
The ruler’s handbook. Deuteronomy requires every king to make a personal copy of God’s law and read it continually (Deuteronomy 17:18–20), so that rule remains constitutional (covenantal), humble, and righteous.
In short, all government—family, church, and civil—is covenantal. It exists under God, for the people, by a law that limits and directs it.
—
2) What Romans 13 Really Requires
Romans 13 is often read as a blank check for state power. It is not. Paul describes the design of civil authority, not a divine endorsement of every regime’s behavior.
Jurisdiction, not absolutism. “The powers that be are ordained of God” refers to exousiai—jurisdictions or offices God designed, not the personal whims of whoever occupies them.
The job description. Twice Paul calls rulers “ministers of God” (Romans 13:4)—diakonos—deacons. They are to be God’s servant “to thee for good,” “a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” The ruler is God’s exactor of righteousness, not the author of right and wrong.
Conditional obedience. The call to be “subject” (Romans 13:1–2) presupposes rulers doing the good God assigned in verses 3–4. When rulers invert their duty—punishing good, rewarding evil, ruling by theft or terror—they step outside their warrant. The church’s duty to obey God remains (Acts 5:29), and lower authorities may lawfully interpose.
Romans 13 dignifies civil authority while delimiting it. Christians honor the office best when they insist the office obey its King.
3) A Biblical Case Study: Rehoboam and Secession (1 Kings 12)
1 Kings 12 tells a story about governance, not just a palace crisis. It is also the most extensive biblical case of political separation.
The grievance. Israel petitions Rehoboam: “Thy father made our yoke grievous… make… his heavy yoke… lighter, and we will serve thee” (1 Kings 12:4). This is faithful, covenantal politics—seeking lawful relief and promising loyal service if justice returns.
The counsel. The elders advise servant-leadership: “If thou wilt be a servant unto this people… they will be thy servants for ever” (v.7). The young men press for dominance: heavier yoke, harsher punishments, “whips” replaced by “scorpions” (vv. 10–11).
The rupture. Rehoboam answers “roughly,” rejects the people’s lawful request, and equips himself to rule by compulsion (vv. 13–14). Israel declares, “What portion have we in David?… to your tents, O Israel” (v.16). The ten tribes separate.
God’s verdict. Twice the text adds a stunning note: “for the cause was from the LORD” (v.15) and “this thing is from me” (v.24). God used the king’s folly to effect a separation that prevented fratricidal war and checked tyranny.
The lesson: when rulers abandon covenant and pivot to coercion, separation may be not only permitted but providential.
4) When Is Separation Justified? Four Scriptural Markers
From 1 Kings 12 (and the wider witness of Scripture), four markers help Christians discern when it is time to consider secession or its analogs (nullification, interposition, institutional withdrawal).
- Ungodly, Tyrannical Rule
When rulers reject God’s law and govern by pride, cruelty, or idolatry, they have forfeited moral authority. “He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God” (2 Samuel 23:3). A government that punishes righteousness and rewards wickedness has inverted its calling.
- Covenantal Violation
All government is oath-bound. Rehoboam ignored the elder counsel and the people’s lawful petition; he refused to rule within constitutional limits (1 Kings 12:6–11). Scripture and law agree: when one party shatters a covenant, the other is released from the terms (cf. Joshua 2:20). Covenant-breaking rulers cannot demand covenantal obedience.
- Rule by Force Rather than Consent
Political legitimacy rests on consent under God. The Declaration of Independence echoes biblical logic: governments derive “just powers from the consent of the governed.” Rehoboam threatened lash and scorpion—not persuasion—so the people withdrew consent (1 Kings 12:14–16).
- Plunder to Sustain Unjust Rule
When rulers use taxation to fund a regime contrary to the people’s conscience and covenant, they cease to be ministers of God and become takers. Adoram, head of tribute, is stoned when sent to extract revenue from those who had separated (1 Kings 12:18). Coerced financing of injustice is a sign of despotism.
These markers are not a checklist for impatience; they are a framework for patient, principled judgment.
5) The Historical Witness: Consent, Law, and Liberty
While Scripture is our rule, history corroborates its wisdom.
Founding-era expectations. Early colonial charters (e.g., New Haven, 1644) assumed “the judicial laws of God… \[would] be a rule” in courts. The Delaware oath of 1776 required public servants to confess the Trinity and the divine inspiration of Scripture. Such norms reflected the conviction that justice requires God’s moral order.
Consent and taxation. The Fairfax Resolves (1774) insisted that taxation without representation is a species of despotism: the right to withhold or grant one’s money is “the only effectual security to a free people.” Where consent dies, tyranny grows.
Cautions from Israel. After seceding, Israel enthroned Jeroboam, whose idolatry plunged the nation into deeper sin. Replacing one humanist regime with another is not reformation—it is relapse.
History’s refrain is steady: Liberty lasts where law is higher than rulers, where consent is real, and where the fear of God checks the fear of man.
6) Objections and Replies
Objection 1: “Isn’t secession just rebellion?”
Not necessarily. Rebellion is revolt against rightful authority. Secession, as portrayed in 1 Kings 12, was a stepping away when the ruler abandoned justice and God Himself declared, “this thing is from me.” Lawful separation can be an act of fidelity to God’s higher order when civil authority collapses its own legitimacy.
Objection 2: “Romans 13 says submit—period.”
Paul commands subjection to God-ordained offices fulfilling God-ordained functions. When rulers punish good and protect evil, they defy the very definition Paul gives of their ministry. Submission to God sometimes requires resistance to men (Acts 5:29). Even Paul lawfully appealed to jurisdictions (Acts 25:11).
Objection 3: “Won’t secession make things worse?”
It can—if we trade a bad for a worse. Israel left Rehoboam but crowned Jeroboam. Separation without reformation simply resets the cycle. The point is not mere exit; it is rebuilding on a righteous foundation.
7) Rebuilding: A Christian Blueprint for Ordered Liberty
If separation becomes necessary, what then? The Bible does not commend a vacuum. It prescribes a framework.
- Confessional Foundations
Public acknowledgment that civil authority is “the minister of God” (Romans 13:4) and that “the fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom” for public justice. This can be articulated in preambles, oaths, and legal canons.
- Constitutional Limits
A written covenant (constitution) that:
Recognizes distinct jurisdictions (family, church, civil).
Enumerates powers (express, limited).
Requires due process, equal weights and measures, and protection of life, property, and worship.
- Covenanted Magistracy
Oaths that bind rulers to uphold God’s moral law, with real mechanisms for removal upon covenantal breach. The king in Deuteronomy 17 is the pattern: copy the law, read it, obey it.
- Consent and Representation
Structures that make consent meaningful: localism, clear fiscal transparency, and the people’s right to grant or withhold funds for specified ends.
- Sanctity of Conscience
Compulsion in worship or compelled subsidy of error is “sinful and tyrannical.” A Christian commonwealth protects liberty of conscience within the bounds of God’s moral law.
- Ministry of Justice, Not Management of Life
Civil government’s calling is narrow but vital: punish objective evil, protect the innocent, secure peace. It is not a surrogate providence. The more it centralizes life, the less it can do justice.
- Pastoral Formation
Free peoples require formed souls. Churches must catechize in law and gospel, cultivate self-government, and model covenantal accountability. As John Winthrop warned, those not ruled by the Bible are eventually ruled by the bayonet.
8) Pastoral Counsel: Hearts Ready for Hard Providence
If a people must separate, they should do so with sobriety, patience, and prayer.
Repentance before resistance. It is easier to denounce tyrants than to forsake our own idols. National sins—bloodshed, theft, false witness, covet-economics—invite oppressive rulers (cf. 1 Samuel 8). Reform begins in the mirror.
Lawful process. Seek redress; exhaust appeals; gather elders (civil and ecclesiastical) to reason from Scripture and law. Disorder is not liberty.
Peaceable posture. “As much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men” (Romans 12:18). Israel’s separation was acknowledged by God and restrained from civil war (1 Kings 12:24). Where possible, pursue nonviolent, institutional means.
Constructive vision. Do not leave without knowing where you’re going. A people that cannot say what justice requires will quickly accept any strongman who promises order.
Conclusion: Do Not Trade a Bad for a Worse
The book of Judges summarizes humanism’s destiny: “Every man did that which was right in his own eyes.” Humanism oscillates between anarchy and totalitarianism. Only the law of God sustains liberty with responsibility.
Secession, then, is not a slogan; it is a sober remedy in the physician’s kit of Christian statecraft—sometimes necessary, never ultimate. The ultimate aim is a polity where rulers are servants, justice is not for sale, consent is meaningful, and Christ is honored as King of kings. If we must step away, let it be toward that order—not merely away from pain.
“He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.” May God grant us rulers and peoples who believe it, churches that preach it, and institutions that embody it—for our children’s good and for the honor of the Lord Jesus Christ.