Darrow Miller and Friends

Civil Disobedience: When Law-abiding Citizens Should Break the Law

Three times in my life I have broken the law and been arrested. The charge? Trespassing. The offense? Rescuing unborn babies from being killed and their mothers from being objectivized and brutalized. I was exercising civil disobedience.

The first time, I was arrested with about 120 others. They were teenagers to couples to grandparents, and mostly Christians. I had never felt so alive, so certain of the legitimacy of my actions. But many of my friends thought I had crossed a line. They asked me, “How could a law abiding citizen break the law? How could a Christian break the law?”

It’s an important question.

Two people have profoundly shaped my thinking on this subject: Dr. Francis Schaeffer and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

MLK modelled civil disobedienceOn Good Friday 1963, Dr. King was in jail in Birmingham. Fellow clergy had been asking him the same question: How could he, a minister, break the law? His reply is one of the clearest arguments for civil disobedience I have ever seen.

One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”

Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.

The principle: A just law is a man-made law that squares with the law of God. More on this can be found here.

In his book A Christian Manifesto, Francis Schaeffer deals with the issue of civil disobedience. He lays the foundation for Christians disobeying unjust laws.

John Knox modelled civil disobedience
John Knox

Whereas Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin had reserved the right to rebellion to the civil rulers alone, [Scottish Reformer John] Knox went further. He maintained that the common people had the right and duty to disobedience and rebellion if state officials ruled contrary to the Bible. To do otherwise would be rebellion against God.

To see Schaeffer’s thoughts on civil disobedience unpacked more thoroughly, watch the video here.

Every Good Friday we observe Christ’s death. At one level, Jesus died because he was a trouble maker. He challenged the culture and confronted the religious and political leaders of the day. He stood for justice in a world filled with injustice.  He became such a thorn in the side of the political and religious leaders of the day they had him crucified. The cross was the price Jesus paid for the ultimate act of civil disobedience. Christ chose to die to pay the ransom for my sin. And he died to pay for being a trouble maker.

This message is a call for Christians to be the most law-abiding citizens in their nations, and, when necessary, to stand against unjust law to  demonstrate obedience to the laws of God. A faithful disciple may need to exercise civil disobedience against the injustices in his own society.

Christ paid the price for us. What are you willing to pay to follow him?

– Darrow Miller

print this page Print this page

Darrow is co-founder of the Disciple Nations Alliance and a featured author and teacher. For over 30 years, Darrow has been a popular conference speaker on topics that include Christianity and culture, apologetics, worldview, poverty, and the dignity of women. From 1981 to 2007 Darrow served with Food for the Hungry International (now FH association), and from 1994 as Vice President. Before joining FH, Darrow spent three years on staff at L’Abri Fellowship in Switzerland where he was discipled by Francis Schaeffer. He also served as a student pastor at Northern Arizona University and two years as a pastor of Sherman Street Fellowship in urban Denver, CO. In addition to earning his Master’s degree in Adult Education from Arizona State University, Darrow pursued graduate studies in philosophy, theology, Christian apologetics, biblical studies, and missions in the United States, Israel, and Switzerland. Darrow has authored numerous studies, articles, Bible studies and books, including Discipling Nations: The Power of Truth to Transform Culture (YWAM Publishing, 1998), Nurturing the Nations: Reclaiming the Dignity of Women for Building Healthy Cultures (InterVarsity Press, 2008), LifeWork: A Biblical Theology for What You Do Every Day (YWAM, 2009), Rethinking Social Justice: Restoring Biblical Compassion (YWAM, 2015), and more. These resources along with links to free e-books, podcasts, online training programs and more can be found at Disciple Nations Alliance (https://disciplenations.org).


  1. N.A.

    January 7, 2014 - 7:07 am

    In my opinion (and probably others too) the law is unjust if it forced people like me to treat people who I lack interest in the exact way I treat people who’re of interest to me. The law may be within reason to expect me to be civil to people who I don’t relate to and people who appall or irritate me but the law ain’t fair to force me to treat these people the exact way I treat folks who personally appeal to me. Furthermore and truth be told the law would be unjust if it forced me to form attachment,be “truly” interactive and “bend over backwards” to please kids who I don’t connect with but worse kids who tend to be a handful,however, I pretty much understand if I have to be civil to them.

    Finally to sum things up if such a ridiculous law I mentioned were to exist I believe such a law deserves disobedience but then again maybe there’s no worries all because such a law is probably non-existant where lawmakers and or politicians would not approve of such a law because they’d agree this law is ludicrous and unjust.