Seated, good morning. Please turn to Romans chapter 13. We're going to be reading verses 1 through 7. Romans chapter 13, 1 through 7. Hear now the word of God. 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. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. for he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister and avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore, you must be subject, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience sake. For because of this, you also pay taxes, for they are God's ministers attending continually to this very thing. Render, therefore, to all their due, taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor. Thus far the reading of God's word. Let us pray. Father God, we do pray that we would have a proper disposition toward those whom you have ordained to rule over us, that we would grasp, Father, your plan. Help us, Father, to recognize, even as we read in the catechism questions this morning, your divine hand over all things. May that give us peace of soul. At the same time, help us to be wise and know how we are to function in this world where you've called us to behave in such a way as to honor your holy name and to nurture one another. We pray these things in Jesus' name. Amen. Approximately 150 years ago, the principal of Princeton Theological Seminary, Charles Hodge, wrote this. He wrote, experience teaches that where human life is undervalued, it is insecure. That where the murderer escapes with impunity or is inadequately punished, homicides are fearfully multiplied. The practical question, therefore, is who is to die, the innocent man or the murderer? What Hodge is basically stating is that the breakdown of the enforcement of sound laws results in increased crime. It should be obvious. With that, though, comes the temptation to take law into your own hands. If I have no faith that criminals will be dealt with by the state, I'm more inclined to sit on my porch with a shotgun. Now, 200 years before Hodge, the divines of the Westminster Confession addressed the Christians' biblical responsibilities vis-a-vis the civil magistrates. So we'll go back a little further in history to determine the thinking of sound theologians in regard to our relationship to the state. And they wrote this, it is the duty of people to pray for magistrates. By magistrates, we're talking about people in positions of political and civil authority. To honor their persons, to pay them tribute or other dues, to obey their lawful commands and to be subject to their authority for conscience sake. You can see where they were getting the information for this portion of the confession. or difference in religion doth not make void the magistrate's just and legal authority, nor free the people from their due obedience to them. In other words, it's not a matter of whether or not they live up to your theological classification. They have a position of authority that we are called to respect. From which ecclesiastical persons are not exempted, which moves into a discussion about the Pope and what have you, but quite interesting, over the last 30 or 40 years, we've had this issue with Roman Catholic Church where there have been the protection of certain behaviors based upon their inclusion in the church. This is, according to the writers of the Confession, highly unbiblical. In other words, the church shouldn't be able to protect me if I commit a crime. The civil magistrate should be able to come in and arrest me, regardless of my affiliation in whatever church I might be. Now, let's just leave these statements in the background for a second and review. We are in the third talk of this short series on Romans 13, one through seven, which I have entitled God's Ministers. We began this short series speaking on political tranquility. Political discussions, I'm sure many of you, well, I've observed, can be the source of anguish and divisiveness. I've read more than one person unfriending other people. We have narrowly escaped some of us horrifying episodes of political discussion at holiday meals. Holidays aren't over yet. Some people we all know have had meltdowns because things have not gone their way. They wanted it to go a certain way. They had hoped it had gone a certain way. It didn't. And we see rioting taking place. Others may be setting themselves up for a fall by feeling that things finally are going our way. There's a danger on either side of that. But we have to recognize that tranquility or contentment, true contentment, is not found watching election results. And I know some of you stayed up all night It's been commonly and accurately stated that good can be the greatest enemy to best. True, deep, unwavering tranquility comes through yielding our souls to the ordained decrees of a primary decision maker who does all things well. Regardless of the political climate or direction, Our eyes must ever be fixed upon Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith. There's a great temptation to move away from that. We then addressed our natural inclination to resist God's ordination, those whom he has ordained to those positions of authority. In a passage like Romans 13, one through seven, we are tempted to immediately tackle all the exceptions rather than look at the call to subject ourselves to the authorities that God has put into our lives. Right away, we want to go, well, when can we say no to the authority? And we live in a culture that either ignores or detests authority. Now, some may argue that the authority figures have behaved so poorly that the temptation to belittle them, at least at some level, falls upon their own shoulders. And that may be true at some level. Yet, there is, I don't want to say nothing virtuous, which is what I wrote, but it is certainly less virtuous to properly respond to that which is perfect. The greater virtue and the more difficult endeavor is properly responding to the faults, weaknesses, and imperfections of those in leadership. See, if I as a pastor, or we as elders, or I as a husband, or I as a father, never do anything wrong, that makes it a lot easier. And it certainly should be my goal. It makes it a lot easier for those under my authority to respond well. That's the easier way. It's more difficult to respond well recognizing that there is an infallible God working through fallible leaders. That is tougher, and that is what we see uniformly in terms of our experience as Christians. That is what we deal with all the time. Those in positions of authority at the time, those who Paul and Peter's readers would have naturally considered when reading these words, were evil. If you were at the Church of Rome and you received this or you received Peter's epistle about respecting and honoring the king, the people that your mind would have been swept to would have been more evil than anybody we've ever experienced as Americans. When Pilate appealed to his own authority to either release or crucify Jesus, Jesus did not dismiss Pilate's authority. He didn't say, well, you don't really have any authority, but he rather told him, from whence his authority came. Those in authority, and this is something to make a note of, those in authority may not acknowledge that their authority is from God. They may not acknowledge that, but we should. It's been said believers express their commitment to God in how they relate to rulers and the law of the state. characteristic of our behavior to be law-abiding citizens. There should be a general disposition among Christians that they are not natural rebels against the state, against the governing authorities, or any authority, whether it's work, or family, or church. The general disposition that we should seek to nurture in our own hearts is one of being compliant and submissive, and happily so, joyfully so. The primary weapons of our warfare are not the flesh. We are not militant in that respect. We might be the church militant in one respect, but we're not militant in that respect. Jesus taught that his kingdom is not of this world. Now, he didn't say it's not in this world, and he's not saying it has no effect upon the world. It's just not of this world. Its methods don't come from the world. If my kingdom were of this world, he said, my servants would have been fighting. that I might not be delivered over to the Jews, but my kingdom is not from this world. Now, this is not an argument for pacifism as much as it is an effort to promote the general disposition brought forth in the passage, the one of willing subjection to those in authority. Our peace is found in Christ, and we should never seek to be law-abiding citizens, recognizing God's hand in determining our leaders. All right, that brings us up to date, so let's continue in verses two, three, and four. Therefore, whoever resists the authority, resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same, for he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister and avenger to execute wrath. on him who practices evil. Now let's keep in mind the context for this entire passage, which goes back to Paul's exhortation in chapter 12 that we not avenge ourselves. That's the context leading into 13. Vengeance, justice belongs to the Lord. That's what Paul is teaching as he leads into 13. And at least one way that God brings about his vengeance is through the civil magistrate. Like we tend to think God's vengeance, we think earthquake, lightning, thunder, earth opening up or what have you. What we're learning here is that God has ordained certain individuals to be those who bring about his vengeance, the civil magistrate, the system that we have, the justice system. Twice. We see the word diakonos used. They are God's ministers. You actually see three times in this passage the word minister. Twice it's the word we use for our deacon, a servant. The other one carries more of a public service. But three times God is saying, these people are my ministers. Therefore, don't take vengeance in your own hands. It's their job. to execute justice in the society in which you live, not your job. You should not be sitting on the porch with a shotgun. You should not be the one to enforce these things. It's their job to enforce these types of things. You see, this beckons us back to the quote by Hodge, right, where we're tempted to sit on the porch with a shotgun because we're surrounded by lawlessness. A good government quells that temptation. That at least is the ideal. That's the model that government should view themselves as fulfilling. The passage teaches at least two things. The proper role of civil authority as well as the proper response to civil authority. That's what this passage is teaching. We are not to take it into our own hands. This is their job and our job is to trust them in it, to put ourselves under their care. Now, a breakdown of either will affect the other. We have seen an example of this recently in the controversy surrounding the actions of certain citizens with the police, right? I mean, we had this horrible example right before us of the breakdown, really, and I'm not going to get into a chicken or the egg thing here, but the disrespect many police officers are experiencing is causing them to do a couple of things. One, draw their weapons early or to simply withdraw from the issue entirely for fear of prosecution. So the disrespect is causing them to behave inappropriately. Conversely, citizens are becoming more fearful in their interaction with the police and they're finding themselves unassisted when they're the victims of crime. So both of them can contribute to the breakdown of the entire system. You see, Romans 13, 1 through 7, nicely addresses that issue. It nicely addresses the means by which this problem can begin to be solved. Leaders should seek to be just and godly and those under them should respect their posts. The cops? They should make it easy for me to respect their position. And I should give them the impression that I respect their position. And we both benefit. And I'm just using that because that's an example where in our own culture, we see the breakdown of respect for authority. And everybody suffers as a result of it. Now, we learn in verse 2 that those who resist these authorities will bring judgment on themselves. Now, this judgment is not to be understood as God's final judgment, but a civil judgment by God's minister who bears the sword. This is the minister of God, the civil magistrate who bears the sword in order to exact justice. So there should be an expectation on our parts that our lawless deeds will be met with civil justice. You do the crime, you do the time. That should be the expectation. Now the apostle then goes on to explain the appropriate role, at least to a certain level, and this is not an exhaustive explanation of the role of government, but it's at least in part an explanation of the role of government. I think it would be maybe beyond our immediate concern to address how governments, and this is, this might get a little political, so. Check our 501c3 tax exempt status or whatever. It might be go, I mean, there's a temptation here, because this is, Romans 13, one through seven, is a proof text for books, and I mean, it's a big passage, so you can get into just war theory, and on and on, you know? And it might just be beyond our immediate concern to address how governments tend to reach beyond what the scriptures teach in terms of the things they're involved in. The appropriate role. the government should look to the word of God to determine what their role should be in the lives of citizens. I mean, that should go without saying, especially those in positions of political leadership who claim to be Christians, right? I mean, that should be obvious, but I would argue that everybody should do that. It's not like it's a good idea for a Christian, but a bad idea for a pagan. Suffice it to say this, I'll just throw this out there and you can bring it up during Q&A if you'd like. The beast in Revelation is a political figure who seeks to control what the population buys and sells. See, this isn't the political figure protecting you from evil, this isn't the political figure who is praising good, this is a political figure who's saying, I'll determine what you buy and I'll determine what you sell and unless you take my mark upon your hand or forehead, which is not a tattoo or a subcutaneous computer chip, it is the way you think and the way you act, your thoughts and behavior and unless you submit to me, You're not going to be able to function in society in such a way that you can even buy food. And you can start adding things in your own mind to that healthcare and what have you, education and on and on. This overreach by the government has become historically devastating. All right. Anyway, that's my little thing there. Verse 3, for rulers are not a terror to good works but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority, do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. I mean, it's fairly self-explanatory, you know, that the civil authority should make it uncomfortable, should instill a sense of fear in those who are lawless. And the civil authority should somehow praise those who do good. I mean, it's kind of a simple message. What's extraordinary here is that Paul is writing this fully aware that Jesus, who had only done good, was crucified by a legitimate authority figure. I mean, I don't know if Paul had Q&A, right? But would that not be the question? Okay, wait a minute. You're saying that rulers are not a terror to good works. I mean, have you not visited the gardens of Nero? Have you not gone to Circus Maximus? Have you not observed the fact that there are people who are being tortured and put to death merely for being Christians, merely for doing that which is right and good in the eyes of God? That's not only true for Jesus, it was true for Paul himself. Paul would be put to death by a legitimate authority figure. Now keep in mind, a legitimate authority figure does not always mean that their decisions are legitimate, but they are legitimate authority figures, and the Apostle Paul is saying here that they are not a terror to good works. And if you want to be unafraid, do what is good. All right, so we don't want to leave that alone. People have ventured all over the place in terms of trying to explain this. I think I had mentioned a few weeks ago You know, I've read one book where the guy just said, look, this only matters if the leaders are Christians. This verse doesn't apply unless the leaders are Christians, and it's our responsibility to actually rebel against those in positions of leadership who aren't Christians. Well, that is exegetically so far-reaching for the simple reason that, number one, not only would Paul's readers not even consider that, You know, you have a hermeneutic called historical context or original audience. How would the original audience have read this? Would they have been reading this with the founders of America in mind? Or would they have been reading this with Caesar in mind? With the people in Rome who were in positions of authority? And secondly, where on earth ever was there a government that would fit that criteria? I mean, there was not a godly government to be found anywhere. and maybe even arguably ever since. So you have now, if you want to apply it that way, it's an empty set. It doesn't apply. The verse can't even be obeyed, ever. Unless you're a post-millennialist and the end of history, maybe it could be obeyed. No, it's not a matter of kind of going, look, I'm only going to respect your position of authority if you have a credible profession of faith. This goes for other authorities as well, whether it's fathers or husbands of teachers or bosses and so forth. Well, so how do we handle this? I think what the Apostle Paul is doing here, he's speaking in general terms of the value of God-given government. Governments, even poor governments, manned with sinful people are superior to anarchy. Now, you might go, well, wait a minute, you know, some governments have become pretty evil. Well, yeah, why do governments become evil? Because you have citizenry of evil people. So I guess I would, if I were to ask you, would you prefer to live in a society filled with evil people with no government or evil people with a government? You see, if one is surrounded by evil, it is preferable for there to be some societal structure because even evil people want to be protected. Put it this way, madness supervised is better than madness run amok. So there's a general action on the part of civil governments to punish evildoers, even though obviously we see exceptions. Second, the record we have of Jesus, John the Baptist, Stephen and others being put to death for their good deeds serves to instruct us that there are times to disregard that which the civil or other authorities mandate. OK. So now everybody, we get into the exceptions. Now, we get to all be enjoy the rebel in us. You know, it's been from day one, right? Well, when do we say no? It was in response to legitimate rulers and elders and scribes in Acts 4 and in Acts 5, Peter, John, the other apostles answered, whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge. I mean, they weren't really asking them to judge because they knew what the right answer to that kind of rhetorical statement was, or in 529, But Peter and the apostles answered, we must obey God rather than men. So some would argue that this is an act of rebellion on the part of the apostles. What do you think about that? Was this an act of rebellion when the rulers and the scribes and the Pharisees said, you need to stop preaching the gospel? And they said, you know, whether it is right to obey God or man, you be the judge. We have to obey God rather than you. To a legitimate authority figure, was that an act of rebellion? It's not an act of rebellion. You see, the apostles, as should we, understood the hierarchy of authority. I mean, do we understand who our master truly is? I mean, our ultimate, we have under shepherds in the church, Matter of fact, I mistakenly in my notes wrote, you know, that the elders are the head of the church. I could be excommunicated for that. There's only one head of the church, right? So the elders aren't the shepherd. They aren't the chief shepherd. What are they? They're the under shepherds. We always have to keep in mind who the actual shepherd is. There are kings, and we should respect kings. But there's what? There is a king of kings that we need to recognize. although we have and should highly regard those whom God has put in authority. This isn't an opportunity to utterly dismiss authorities. You know, it's a dangerous response. We become like the Anabaptists, you know, the madness of the Reformation and the Anabaptists just kind of like theologians on spring break type of thing. You know, they just went crazy with a lack of authority in terms of the church and what have you. And we see that in our culture today. People got their Bibles in their hands, and they don't have a sola scriptura mentality, they have a solo scriptura mentality. They utterly disregard, as we had our family Bible time last week, or the week before, and we're at the kitchen table, and this question came up, and my teenage kids are asking me, you know, so at what point do we dismiss? the other authority, of course, looking right at me. And I'm thinking, okay, this has got trouble written all over it. You know, this is all, this is some big green light to go, hey, dad, I read a verse in the Bible that said, you know, whatever. Nonetheless, we should highly acknowledge those that God has put an authority over us, yet at the same time, we have to recognize the words of Christ who had all authority in heaven and on the earth. That always has to be in the foreground of our hearts and our foregrounds of our minds. Now, this can be a little bit of a rough forest to hack through, right? At what point is the lesser authority's decision dismissed? You know, I see this happening a lot of times in churches where elders make decisions and people in the congregation don't like the decisions. And there's this kind of spirit of rebellion and I'll hear what the decision was and I'll be like, that's not really a decision that you as a member of this church should be so up in arms about that you would leave the church, that you should kind of foster this rebellious attitude toward those in leadership. But at what point? has the lesser authority so usurp the authority of God that they should be deposed or rebelled against, as with the founders of our very nation. So you have two questions. One question is, you know what, when has the line been crossed in terms of the lesser authority telling you or me to do something where we need to regard the higher authority over the lesser authority? Where has that line crossed? The next one, which we aren't really going to get into, is at what point have they so crossed the line, have they so usurped the authority of God that they should be dismissed in terms of that position altogether? See, that's what happened with George, King George. Well, the initial, the former, we're probably not going to get into, but the latter. No, the former we will get into and not the latter. And there is maybe a lot of examples but I want to just put forth a principle and then I'll give you maybe one or two examples of this principle of acknowledging the higher over the lower authority. When an authority figure, whether it's state, husband, father, elder, employer, what have you, so imposes its power as to require disobedience to the revealed will of God in scripture, we are to submit to the higher authority and disobey the lower. There have been many terms throughout the years to describe this, you know, civil disobedience and what have you. For example, If your parent or your boss or your elder tells you to lie, cheat, and steal, they are to be disobeyed because the scriptures, the Lord has commanded that you do not lie, cheat, and steal. Pretty obvious, right? I mean, that's probably not rocket science. So the principle is simple. There are a lot of principles that are simple, but applications can get tough. We see that with the regulative principle in worship and what have you. Many read the scriptures and I think rightfully so in many ways, some not in such a way as to place themselves into quite a predicament especially as the government grows and seeks to oversee every aspect of our existence. You know, this becomes tricky. In going back again earlier in the last century in 1922, There was a referendum by the state of Oregon which required, I'm just going to give you an example here. I'm not going to necessarily answer it. I'm just going to throw it out there as an example of where this gets tough. This required in Oregon that all children in the state attend public schools. So there was this mandate that if you are a citizen of the state of Oregon, you are required by the state to attend public school. Now the great 20th century theologian J. Gresham Machen wrote this in response to that. He wrote, when one considers what the public schools of America in many places already are, now keep in mind this was written in 1922, their materialism, their discouragement of any sustained intellectual effort, their encouragement of the dangerous pseudoscientific fads of experimental psychology, when it can only be appalled by the thought of a commonwealth in which there is no escape from such a soul-killing system. You see, here's, I'm presenting a problem. See, it's one thing for the state to maybe do an overreach in even offering education, allowing its citizens within the boundaries of their state to either utilize it or not. That's one thing. It's quite another thing for the state to require it. See, it goes a little further. In our nation, we see in our nation, we are involved in the vicious and horrible sin of legalized abortion. But in China, abortion becomes mandatory, at least, well, they're changing this now, but it became mandatory for those who ventured beyond the legal limit of children. So it wasn't just an option. It was a requirement. See the line being crossed? I mean, one line might be crossed where government's doing its overreach in terms of things that they want to be involved in. The other line is when they say, no, not only is this available for you, you must use it. Most people in history have lived in lands with little regard for the law of God. Disregard for the law of God in an arena as massive as government has dire consequences. I mean, our government puts forth for everybody to see an ethic, a law, and it will affect the way we think and our children think and the way the church thinks. It's great, it is, and it should be with great sorrow that we watch the beast find willing followers placing his mark upon their heads and hands. It should break our hearts. But it takes a very ugly turn when the state begins to require active ungodliness of its citizens. And it's a matter, I would argue, even greater sorrow when we see those who profess the faith. Now let's get into the home here. Those who profess the faith capitulating and altering their standard of ethics influenced by the moaning of their surroundings. Honoring Christ with their lips but having hearts that are far from him. When we see those who profess Christ in huge churches embracing ungodly systems of marriage and of, you were talking about pregnancy termination and so forth. I mean, judgment begins at the household of God. Now, in our next meeting, we're going to discuss a little more detail what happens when the state refuses to bear the sword. We're also going to discuss this. This is going to get a little more controversial. We're going to discuss the standards by which the civil magistrate should govern. Like what is the standard that, the legislator, the justices, the president. What is the standard that they should use in order to govern people? I mean it's funny, I say that's going to be controversial and as I say that I'm like this should be so obvious and yet it's not. And we're going to have to dig into that. But what I want to finish with this morning is I want to appeal to a story in the Gospel of Matthew where we see an interaction between Jesus and a centurion. A centurion is a military figure who's in charge of 100 soldiers. And I like stories where we see that Jesus marvels. I mean, what would have to happen in order for Jesus to marvel? But Jesus marvels at the faith of this centurion and his grasp of authority because that's what we're talking about here, authority. And I can't exegete the whole passage, we'll just get the feel and then we'll finish up. Matthew 8, 5 through 13, we read the story, when he, that is Jesus, entered Capernaum, the centurion came forward to him appealing to him, Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering terribly. And he said to him, I will come and heal him. But the centurion replied, Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word and my servant will be healed. For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. And I say to one, go. And he goes. And to another, come. And he comes. And to my servant, do this. And he does it. When Jesus heard this, he marveled and said to those who followed him, truly I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith. I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into outer darkness. In that place, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. And to the centurion, Jesus said, go, let it be done for you as you have believed. And the servant was healed at that very moment. So we have this centurion who recognizes authority. You know, we, you know, master. We have a distinction in theology. We have a distinction in scripture. We ask this of our upending new members. It's in our membership questions. We make a distinction between trusting in Jesus as Savior and acknowledging him as what? Lord. Lord and Savior. Lord and Savior. It's an important distinction to make. Lord, simply put, means master. where savior means deliverer, preserver, one who rescues from danger. So you get the difference there, right? One is telling you what to do and the other one is the one who's protecting you and saving you. Sometimes it's eternal and sometimes it's just national. This word is used. What may not be so readily apparent is that the one Who we are trusting as our Lord is also, at least in that category and to a certain extent, but certainly with limitations, is the one we are also trusting to be our Savior. Husbands are called to be the head of the household, right? They're the Lord, right? I mean, Abraham, Sarah called Abraham Lord. But they are to use that office to do what? Protect their home. to sanctify their wives. Elders are, here's my mistake, the heads of the church. They are the under shepherds of the church. They are the authority figures in the church. But they are to use that office to do what? Preserve and keep guard over the church that Christ may ever have preeminence. The elders are responsible to make sure that it is always Christ and Christ alone who's the head of the church. So the elders are called to protect Magistrates are the authority figures in the state, and it's their job to see what? That no harm comes to its citizens. You see, the relationship between master and savior, I mean, does it make any sense to say I'm gonna trust you to save me, but I'm not gonna trust you to advise me? Could we say that to Jesus? I'm gonna trust the power of the cross to save me from our sins, but I'm not gonna trust your counsel when it comes to my relationship with other people. I need to go somewhere else to get that kind of advice. No, one is related to the other. One is dependent upon the other. The one whose wisdom we trust is the one whose protection we trust. Now, the centurion, he understood this. That's why he went to Jesus as the one who has all authority and therefore worthy of all faith. The more we grasp the one we trust as savior, and let's consider this as we go to the Lord's table this morning. The more we grasp the one we trust as savior, the more readily apparent it will be how we are to respond to him as Lord. And when we begin to grasp that, we will understand when the line has been drawn between the ultimate authority and those in lesser authority. Let us pray. Father God in heaven, we do thank you that you have so ordained protection for us. We do pray, we do pray for those in authority. We do pray that they, would govern in such a way as to give us peaceful lives. We do pray, Father, that you would circumcise hearts and grant wisdom from above in the decisions that are made around us. But nonetheless, help us not to be dependent upon their political acumen to somehow give us tranquility in our hearts or even the proper response to the decisions that are made. Help us to rise above that. Help us to be a people who demonstrate by our very trust in you what it means and what it looks like to be a proper citizen in the world and in the government and the society that you've deemed it fit to place us. And we pray these things in Jesus' name. Amen.