Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Why Christians should oppose the debt ceiling limit
Why Christians should oppose the debt ceiling limit
Dec 7, 2025 12:23 PM

When es to political policy, Christians in America have a wide-range of opinions about what should be done. Even when we agree on a general principle, we tend to disagree about how that informs our policy choices. We recognize, for instance, that we have an obligation to care for the poor but differ on the type and degree of government involvement.

Such differences can lead us to believe that there is nothing we can agree on. But I don’t believe that’s always true. There are indeed some issues that all Bible-believing Christians should be able to agree on.

One such area of potential agreement is paying debts. The Bible is clear that believers are to pay what we owe. The Apostle Paul tells us, “Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed . . .” (Romans 13:7). Similarly, the Psalmist warns that, “The wicked borrows but does not pay back . . .” (Psalm 37:21). And Proverbs tells us, “Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to do it. Do not say to your neighbor, “Go, e again, tomorrow I will give it”—when you have it with you.” (Proverbs 3:27-28).

The Bible is clear that when an individual incurs a debt they are required, to the best of their ability, to pay what they owe. But does this same principle apply to governments?

Because of the differences in roles and responsibilities not all principles that apply to the individual apply to the state. However, it seems clear this is one principle that clearly applies to both.

In our form of government we elect representatives to act in our behest, including taking on contractual debt obligations. We may not agree with either the levels of spending or the priorities, but these legislators have been duly elected to incur debts on our behalf that we—or our grandchildren—must pay. For this reason I believe we, as Christians, should not support policies that refuse to pay for the legal obligations we have authorized.

In policy terms this means we have two general choices: we can raise the debt limit and borrow money needed to cover our shortfall or we can immediately raise taxes in order to generate the revenues necessary to pay the government’s bills.

If a Member of Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling (or raise taxes) until their ancillary demands are met are acting immorally, since they are refusing to pay the debts they themselves authorized. The same goes for a president who vetoes debt limit raising legislation. Hopefully, no one involved in current debt limit negotiations has any real intention of throwing the country into a financial crisis. But even if they are prevaricating about their true intentions, they are threatening to act immorally if they don’t get their way. As Christians we should find such behavior unacceptable. The fact that they are representing us makes such an action intolerable.

Many of us Christians in America have e jaded and cynical, willing to accept, or at least overlook, dishonest charades that are carried out in our name. Isn’t it time we stop tolerating such nonsense? If we as citizens are to pay taxes to whom taxes are owed, and revenue to whom revenue is owed, shouldn’t the authorities set up as “ministers of God” be expected to do the same?

There are few policy issues on which both the Biblical principle is clear and the issue transcends the political categorization. We shouldn’t waste this opportunity for Christians on the left, right, and center e together to tell Congress to stop this political theater and abolish the debt limit.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Acton Line podcast: Are we in a revolutionary moment?
Since late May, many parts of the United States have grappled with unrest. Anger over George Floyd’s death sparked protests, with looting and violent riots breaking out, as well. Protesters have also been defacing and tearing down statues across the country, including statues of Confederate leaders, as well as monuments to George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant, and even abolitionists. The Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ), also dubbed the Capitol Hill Organized Protest (CHOP), was a six-block area in Seattle where...
Following the crowd: Rene Girard on the denial of Peter
This week, June 29, was the solemn feast of Saints Peter and Paul. The Apostle Peter is remembered for many things: his declaration of Jesus as the Messiah; his boasting of fidelity, followed by his threefold denial of Christ; and his subsequent repentance and heroic martyrdom The late French anthropologist and former Stanford professor Rene Girard has an insightful discussion about the denial of Peter and the problem of scapegoating and contagion. He sees in it an archetype of the...
Acton alumni spotlight: Justin Beene – Developing community and seeking justice
Justin Beene is the director of the Grand Rapids Center for Community Transformation and long-time faculty member of Acton University. He has spoken munity development and poverty several times at Acton events. You can hear his AU talk, “Community and Economic Development,” by clicking the button at the bottom of this interview. I’ve long admired Justin and the work he’s engagedin. Recently, I had the chance to ask Justin several questions about Acton, his work, and the current cultural upheaval...
Eroding judicial activism (more than) one nation at a time
Judicial activism is a transatlantic problem. Thus, it requires a transatlantic analysis. The Acton Institute has helped link English-speaking citizens concerned with preserving the Constitution in a conversation with the world’s 270 million Francophones. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act included sexual orientation and gender identity, paving the way for new rounds of lawsuits and potentially rendering it impossible for some employers to operate their businesses in accordance with their faith. The justices’...
We are rational animals, not racial animals
The problem with bad ideas is that they never remain merely ideas. Once they attract sufficient – not always majority – support, bad ideas e codified into worse laws, which afflict whole societies. We are witnessing that process now over a misguided notion of how important “race,” ethnicity, and other identifiable factors are to the value of the human person. Consider the answer of science and Western civilization to what makes us uniquely human. The noblest part of a creature...
Evolving between two worlds
In the latest issue of The New Yorker Larissa MacFarquhar has a deeply researched and beautifully written story, “How Prosperity Transformed the Falklands.” It chronicles the history of the Falkland Islands from the early settlement of the then-uninhabited islands to the Falklands War between Argentina and the United Kingdom in 1982, as well as the economic transformation after that conflict. It is an economic success story but also a meditation on what makes munity and nation and how rapid economic...
Michael Matheson Miller to Patrick Deneen: Strong towns need strong economies
Among the most influential critics of the free market on the Right is Patrick Deneen, a political science professor at the University of Notre Dame. Acton Institute Senior Research Fellow Michael Matheson Miller has published a response in Law & Liberty to Deneen’s recent plea for a national policy to favor munities (“Thinking Big to Act Small” in the American Compass). Miller writes that he shares Deneen’s belief in decentralization, the problems of individualism, the shallow nature of consumerism, and...
Acton Line podcast: A primer on religious liberty (rebroadcast)
This week we’re rebroadcasting a conversation about religious liberty with Ryan T. Anderson, the William E. Simon senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, that was first released on the podcast in April of 2015. In the intervening five years since we first aired this episode, much has changed in our conversations on religious liberty – but much is still the same. While the focus is no longer on Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act as it was in 2015, religious...
Rand Paul on the fatal conceits of COVID-19 central planning
When the first wave of COVID-19 hit the United States, Americans were generally sympathetic to the various lockdowns. Yes, we were likely to endure significant economic pain, but given how little we knew about the virus and how great the risks could be, we were willing to accept the cost. Now, after months of mismanaged responses, contradictory analyses, and flip-flopping guidance from our esteemed sources, trust in our leaders and institutions is wearing thin. Despite all that we have learned,...
Espinoza v. Montana: A victory for school choice – but for how long?
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue admirably defended religious liberty, school choice, and parental rights. However, the court may have also paved the way for teachers unions and hostile politicians to undermine that victory. On June 30, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that excluding religious schools from a privately-funded, state-established scholarship program is an “infringement on free exercise” of religion and is “fatally underinclusive” by denying benefits to people of faith. “Discrimination against religious...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved