Photo by Snappy Shutters on Unsplash

After walking along the shores of Walden Pond in Concord, Massachusetts and visiting the replica of the cabin built by Henry David Thoreau, I entered the Visitor’s Center to view a replica of his diary, to see original pencils manufactured by Thoreau’s family, and to learn about some of his accomplishments. A free-standing sign that caught my attention was titled “Ripples of Inspiration,” talking about how Thoreau inspired other leaders of social movements. 

The first was Martin Luther King, Jr., with this quote: “During my early college days I read Thoreau’s essay on civil disobedience for the first time. Fascinated by the idea of refusing to cooperate with an evil system, I was so deeply moved that I re-read the work several times. I became convinced then that non-cooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this idea across than Henry David Thoreau.”

The second quote was from Mohandas Gandhi: “Thoreau was a great writer, philosopher, poet, and withal a most practical man, that is, he taught nothing he was not prepared to practice in himself… At the time of the abolition of slavery movement, he wrote his famous essay ‘On the Duty of Civil Disobedience.’ He went to gaol [jail] for the sake of his principles and suffering humanity. His essay has, therefore, been sanctified by suffering. Moreover, it is written for all time. Its incisive logic is unanswerable.”

The idea of civil disobedience comes hard to me. I was raised in a “don’t make waves” environment. Be nice. Don’t offend people. Avoid trouble. Strive to have others like you. Skirt around conflict. Respect the law. I could understand civil disobedience on a grand scale, like King’s fight against segregation, Rosa Parks’ refusal to yield to an unjust law, Gandhi’s salt march to protest the British not allowing Indians to sell salt, or the historic Singing Revolution of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania where Baltic citizens joined together to sing and, illegally, wave flags for independence from the Soviet Union. It made sense to me for people to not yield, non-violently, to unjust laws or immoral leadership. Martin Luther King’s words rooted deeply in my soul: “Non-cooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good.”

I could grasp civil disobedience against the great evils of society, but it was not until I served as a draft counselor during the Vietnam War that I was compelled to confront it on a more personal and individual level. Some men I counseled possessed a low lottery number and were invited to appear for their physical prior to induction. Once they stepped over the line, they were duty bound to obey orders, even orders which violated their personal moral values. They had the opportunity to choose conscientious objection for alternative (non-combatant) service, but only if they could swear to oppose all war in any form. Those who opposed selectively the Vietnam War as an unjust war could not avail themselves of that alternative. And so, some of strong moral courage chose the route of civil disobedience – refusing to enter a military force to which they could not in good conscience embrace – knowing full well the consequences: imprisonment. “Sanctified by suffering,” as Gandhi called it. Leaving their homeland permanently was another option to hang tight to their moral imperative, but there were few options available except civil disobedience to those unfortunately entrapped in a system whereby old men sent young boys off to fight their war.

As I grappled with the nature of civil disobedience – inspired by Thoreau, King, and Gandhi – I turned to the New Testament for guidance. There were two significant Scriptures which shed light, although a thoughtful and honest pursuit of biblical exegesis was necessary to see beyond superficial understanding. 

The first is a text which demonstrates a classic example of how a bit of Scripture could be used or abused, to proof-text the arguer’s point of view. It comes from Matthew 22, where Jesus’ adversaries plotted to entrap him by asking a trick question, essentially asking “Should we obey our government or should we obey God?” This is the very essence of civil disobedience. Even today, this is the same question employed by those seeking adherence to the government’s will… and it almost sounds like Jesus condoned it. Should we pay taxes, they asked Jesus. That, by the way, is what got Henry David Thoreau put in jail for civil disobedience. Should we pay taxes to support an unjust leadership, an unjust segregation, an unjust war, an unjust attack on healthy climate, or unjust laws condemning people who are LGBTQ just for existing? What do you say, Jesus? Will you advocate not paying taxes? You know where that will land you. It was a perfect trick question to entrap him. Jesus answered, “Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21).

This “render unto Caesar” response has long justified a morally corrupt status quo. It sounds like a condoning of segregation and slavery, of the suppression of women, of the drowning of witches and the bashing of gays, of the raping of the good earth, the favoring of the wealthy and powerful over those with the least, and the bullying of those on the margin. It could sound like that. But I could imagine a question emerging from the back of the room, asking in innocence, “But what is God’s? Isn’t it all God’s?” echoing Genesis 1:31: “God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.” To those who believe that God is the Creator of all… isn’t it all God’s? That question changes how we look at Matthew 22: Give to God… the things that are God’s. Rather than a confirmation that citizens obey unjust laws and leaders, this story could more likely say that that which is God’s is good, and that which is not good, is not God’s, and is not worthy. Advocate for the good, the just, the right, and the God-like.

The second text about civil disobedience comes a bit later in the Bible, which is significant to note, because the disciples knew full well what Jesus had already taught about giving “to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they grasped that all that is good and all that is just, is God’s. So, when they were forbidden by the law, by the emperor, by the government, by the establishment, by Caesar, to talk about what God had done for them, Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than any human authority” (Acts 5:29). That is a key Christian defense for civil disobedience: I must obey God rather than any human authority.

Civil disobedience against injustice has long been a part of the world’s moral fabric. Sometimes it has come with magnificent public attention, while other times it passed unnoticed when only one person took a stand for what is right, true, just, and God-like. And yet, few will ever know the ripples of inspiration that one person, like Henry David Thoreau, can make or the impact they will radiate for generations to come.