The final chapter of the Institutes of the Christian Religion (the final 1559 edition), by John Calvin, is an analysis of the Calvin’s understanding of the relationship between Church and State, of the responsibility of the Magistrate to the Church and his subjects, and of the responsibility of the subjects in relation to the Magistrate. His analysis is divided into three main sections considering each of the three key parts of any given State: The Magistrate, the Law, and the People.[1] Key to his approach to civil government are: (1) the two swords or two kingdoms theory, in which “the spiritual kingdom of Christ and civil government are things very widely separated.”[2] (2) the 3-fold division of the Mosaic law: Moral, Ceremonial, and Judicial.[3] The Moral law just is Natural law: “it is evident that the law of God which we call moral, is nothing else than the testimony of natural law, and of that conscience which God has engraven on the minds of men.”[4] (3) When discussing the ideal situation, Calvin assumes that the civil magistrates are Christian, or, at very least, are inclined to accept Christian morals. However, he does discuss the fact that many magistrates are neither Christians, nor inclined to even submit to natural morality. (4) When he brings up objections to his approach, his primary interlocutors are those amongst the Protestants who would reject all civil government, that is, the Anarchists (which he associates primarily with the Anabaptist movement).
In what follows, we will provide a short
analysis of each of the main sections in Calvin’s analysis, with the purpose of
understanding what he considers to be the right responsibility of Christians in
relation to the State. We will conclude with some observations about how this
might apply to western Christians today.
On Civil Magistrates
The Divine Establishment
In his discussion of the Civil Magistrates,
Calvin first demonstrates, based upon Scriptures, that the “function of magistrates”,
or the “office” of the civil magistrate, is established by God.[5] In
demonstrating this point, Calvin notes that it is not due to sin, or to the
fall, that God has established the necessity of the civil magistrate. It is,
rather, established by divine providence as a sacred and honorable office for human
life. In his own words, “it is not owing to human perverseness that supreme
power on earth is lodged in kings and other governors, but by divine providence.”[6]
Or, again, “Wherefore no man can doubt that civil authority is, in the sight of
God, not only sacred and lawful, but the most sacred, and by far the most
honorable, of all stations in mortal life.”[7]
That God has established the office of the civil magistrate in this manner, and
with such high honors, is sufficient to refute the anarchists. It is also a
clear warning to the civil magistrate, according to Calvin, concerning the
manner of their rule, “In a word, if they remember that they are the vicegerents
of God, it behooves them to watch with all care, diligence, and industry, that
they may in themselves exhibit a kind of image of the divine providence,
guardianship, goodness, benevolence, and justice.”[8]
The civil magistrate, in other words, if they are to rule rightly, must
recognize that they are established by God, and should attempt to imitate God
in their governing as much as is humanly possible.
Forms of Government
Calvin goes on to discuss the forms
of government, suggesting that there is no one form of government which is, per
se, better than any other. Rather, suggests Calvin, particular circumstances,
the natural tendencies of certain ethnic groups, etc., must be taken into
account in determining which forms of Government may be best at a certain time
and in a certain country. He points out, in a manner resembling Aristotle’s
comments in his Politics, that each of the primary forms of government
(government by 1 ruler, government of the many by the few, and government by
the many) are prone to corruption: “Monarchy is prone to tyranny. In an Aristocracy,
again, the tendency is not less to the faction of a few, while in popular
ascendancy there is the strongest tendency to sedition.”[9] Though
he is aware of the other primary forms of government, Calvin is of the opinion
that the best form of government is an Aristocracy, as it avoids the dangerous
vices of Monarchy (the descent into Tyranny) and Democracy.[10] Calvin
goes on to argue that regardless of the form of government in any one country,
2 things remain true: (1) Moderate freedom is important—not unlimited freedom—and
it should be the responsibility of the magistrate to do their best to preserve
and maintain this freedom.[11]
(2) However, freedom is not so important that subjects are entitled to disobey
their government. Rather, as God has sovereignly established the government,
Christians, at very least, and, indeed, all men, owe obedience and honor to
their civil leaders, “For if it has pleased him to appoint kings over kingdoms,
and senates or burgomasters over free states, whatever be the form which he has
appointed in the places in which we live, our duty is to obey and submit.”[12]
In other words, whenever and wherever
we live, regardless of which form of government God has sovereignly established
over our country, we are duty bound (to God and to the providentially established
station of civil leadership) to obey and submit to that Government. More on
this later.
The Duties of
Magistrates
Calvin finishes his discussion of the
magistrate by considering a number of the duties of the Civil magistrate, before
God, and in relation to their role in governing a particular people. First
of all, the magistrates are responsible, before God, to uphold and defend both
tables of the Moral Law, that is, the Decalogue.[13] Calvin
argues that as even pagan philosophers recognize this point, Christians should
be ashamed to deny it. They must defend the social and religious order against both
anarchy and false religion. In this way, Calvin is basically reaffirming the age-old
idea that the good ruler governs in such a way as to uphold and protect the common
good. Calvin puts it this way, “We say, therefore, that they are the ordained
guardians and vindicators of public innocence, modesty, honor, and tranquility,
so that it should be their only study to provide for the common peace and safety.”[14]
Secondly, in upholding and
defending the common good, the magistrate may need to wisely use the temporal sword.
This temporal sword is given to the station of the magistrate by God, and, therefore,
it should not be seen as the private vengeance of one human being against
another, which is expressly forbidden in Scriptures, but as the hand of God
bringing judgment against the evil doer. “But if we understand that the
magistrate, in inflicting punishment, acts not of himself, but executes the
very judgments of God, we shall be disencumbered of every doubt.”[15]
This notion is Calvin’s interpretation of scriptures such as Romans 13:4. In
their use of the sword, however, Calvin suggests that they must be careful to
tread carefully between two extremes: (1) being overly severe, and (2) being
overly lax. The first causes the magistrate to fall into inhuman oppression of
his people, the later allows the people to live in lawlessness and to destroy
the peace of society.[16]
Calvin goes on to discuss, briefly,
the question of the justice of waging war, and the right of the magistrate to
impose taxes. One might summarize Calvin’s thought on the duties of the Civil
magistrate as follows: to uphold and protect (from both interior and exterior
threats) the good and peace of their people.
On the Law
This section takes up less place, in
the section on Civil Government, in part because Calvin has already discussed
law in other sections of the Institutes. In this section he first
reminds us of the 3-fold division the Mosaic law, of the fact that the Moral
Law just is the Natural Law, and, therefore, that this Moral/Natural Law should
be the foundation and ultimate goal of the laws of nations.[17]
He then discusses how Christians may use the law in their favour, for example,
in civil lawsuits. He is careful to remind us that though the law is there to
protect the citizen, it can be abused and wrongfully used to harm the citizen.[18] As
such, Christians must ensure that when they enter into a lawsuit, it is only so
that justice may be done, and not to use the law to harm anyone else.
He then reminds us of an important
point concerning the possibility of becoming a victim to an unjust use of the
law, “For verily Christians were to be a class of men born to endure affronts
and injuries, and be exposed to the iniquity, imposture, and derision of
abandoned men, and not only so, but were to be tolerant of all these evils;
that is, so composed in the whole frame of their minds, that, on receiving one
offense, they were to prepare themselves for another, promising themselves
nothing during the whole of life but the endurance of a perpetual cross.”[19]
Though we must be prepared to be treated unjustly, and to endure this injustice
with peace of mind, Christians are still permitted to use the law, when
possible, to defend their rights and the rights of those around them.[20]
This entails, of course, that Christians must so understand the law that they
are able to rightly use it.
On the Duties of Subjects towards their Rulers
In his explanation of the duties of
subjects, Calvin presents only 2 duties, but they are duties which are, so to
say, “easier said than done.” The first duty, which is also discussed in great
detail by Philip Melanchthon, is to honour our magistrate. The second duty,
which is found in the writings of all the Reformers, is to obey the
magistrate. The first duty is summed up in a single section, the second
occupies 9 sections.
Honour your Civil Magistrates
Though it takes up less space in his
exposition of the 2 duties of subjects, honoring the magistrate is
clearly the foundation of the second duty, and the more difficult to truly
perform. It would have been as difficult in Calvin’s time as it is now. Calvin
says, “The first duty of subjects toward their rulers, is to entertain the most
honorable views of their office, recognizing it as a delegated jurisdiction from
God, and on that account receiving and reverencing them as the ministers and ambassadors
of God.”[21]
This is what Peter says, in 1 Peter 2:17, when he implores us to “Honor the emperor.”
This honour, that is due to the office of the magistrate, is an attitude of the
heart which may be lacking even in those who are outwardly obedient, in
all things, to the magistrate. That is, they may obey the magistrate in all
things, all while resenting and hating them. Calvin notes that, by “honor”, he
means “a sincere and candid esteem”, and “a kind of sacred veneration and dignity”.[22] The
type of obedience that Calvin thinks is required by Scriptures, is a sincere
and unfeigned obedience: obeying as much in heart as in actions. For this to be
the case, one must first honor the office of the magistrate, and hold it in the
highest esteem.
Such an idea may seem, to many today,
as entirely repulsive! Calvin clearly was not aware of how idiotic, banal,
immoral, obscene, and petty some magistrates can be. How could we possibly
revere and hold in the highest esteem a leader such as…fill in the blank. On
the contrary, Calvin’s time (and those 1000s of years of human history preceding
Calvin’s time) was filled with civil magistrates as bad as, if not worse than,
any civil leaders we see in office today. Calvin was aware of that fact,
however, he argues that “the station itself is deserving of honor and
reverence, and that those who rule should, in respect of their office, be held
by us in esteem and veneration.”[23] It
is worth the time to engage in some profound self-examination, if our gut
reaction to this thought is to find ways to reject it or rationalize it.
Obey your
Magistrates
The second civil duty of the subject
is obedience, “whether in complying with edicts, or in paying tribute,
or in undertaking public offices and burdens, which relate to the common
defense, or in executing any other orders.”[24]
Calvin supports this claim by calling upon Romans 13:1-2, Titus 3:1, and 1
Peter 2:13. This obedience is to be accompanied by prayer for our Magistrates
(1 Timothy 2:1-2). This obedience also includes, in Calvin’s own words, “the
restraint which private men ought to impose on themselves in public not
interfering with public business, or rashly encroaching on the province of the
magistrate, or attempting anything at all of a public nature.”[25]
This must, of course, be understood in relation to the most common form of
government in Calvin’s day: Monarchies. That being said, it is important to
remember that Calvin’s preferred form of government is the Aristocracy (the rule
of the many by the few), and this principle would apply just as well in the
context of an Aristocracy as in a Monarchy.
In these political contexts, Calvin says, obedience to the
magistrate entails, essentially, that the private citizen should let the
magistrate rule, and obey them. This might be called the “don’t put your nose where
it doesn’t belong” principle. God has established the station of civil leadership,
and has sovereignly bestowed it upon those who are actually occupying it. If
God did not put you in that station, or provide you with civil responsibilities,
then, in other words, your opinion is not needed. Obedience implies, among
other things, not trying to get involved in an affair which you have no control
over, and not undermining the ruler through the spreading of private opinions
about how they are doing things.
Calvin goes on to suggest that if
there are injustices, or situations in civil life, which need to be addressed,
and we worry that the civil leader is not doing so appropriately or in a timely
fashion, then, in that case…wait for it… “let them not act tumultuously, or put
their hands to a work where they ought to feel that their hands are tied, but
let them leave it to the cognizance of the magistrate, whose hand alone here is
free.”[26]
One half expects Calvin to say that, if things get really bad, the subject
should get involved. Yet, he does not. Rather, he urges the subject, even in such
a situation, to not attempt to remedy something which it is neither their role
nor responsibility to remedy. God has placed a person in the station of
magistrate, and it is the responsibility of that magistrate to take care of anything
that may need their attention. So long as someone is neither a magistrate, nor
has received a direct order from the magistrate to get involved, they are to keep
their hands off of the plough, so to say. “Leave it to the cognizance of the
magistrate, whose hand alone here is free.”[27]
But, what about unjust leaders and tyrants? In sections 24 to 31, Calvin addresses the question
of unjust leaders and tyrants. He first points out that, up to this point he
has been working with the concept of what we might call the “model magistrate”.
In this ideal state, it seems quite obvious that obedience is not only called
for, but it is, in fact, right. Only a morally vicious person would seriously
consider disobeying the good ruler. However, Calvin also recognizes that the
common experience of humanity throughout history is that the majority of rulers
are far from ideal, some of them don’t even attempt to strive to be the ideal
ruler, and some of them seem to strive to be the worst and most evil ruler
possible. What, then, are we to do?
Calvin’s response may sound very simple, but,
interestingly enough, it is really an outworking of the doctrine of divine
sovereignty. His overall answer is, “But if we have respect to the word of God,
it will lead us farther, and make us subject not only to the authority of those
princes who honestly and faithfully perform their duty toward us, but all
princes, by whatever means they have so become, although there is nothing they
less perform than the duty of princes.”[28]
In other words, regardless of whether or not they fulfill their duties before
God, we, as citizens and subjects, are to fulfill our duties before God. The
duty of the magistrate is to uphold the common good and peace. The duty of the
citizen and subject is to honor and obey the magistrate. The magistrate should
fulfill his duties regardless of whether or not his subjects fulfill theirs,
and vice versa.
The primary and most important reason that Calvin
provides to defend the claim that we are to obey even tyrants is Divine Providence.
As far as Calvin is concerned, regardless of the form of government which is in
your country and regardless of how the current magistrate gained his power
(from the human perspective), it is always and forever true that God, and God
alone, has the power to establish a person in the office of divine magistrate
or to remove them from that office. This is not the role of the church (contrary
to one popular 2 swords theory expounded in the medieval period), nor is it truly
the prerogative of the people (though in some forms of democracy they may have
a chance to vote on who will lead their country). The responsibility of establishing
any person in office is God’s, period. Full stop. “For though the Lord declares
that a ruler to maintain our safety is the highest gift of his beneficence, and
prescribes to rulers themselves their proper sphere, he at the same time
declares, that of whatever description they may be, they derive their power
from none but him.”[29]
To oppose the ruler, then, is to directly oppose God.
If it is the role and responsibility of God, and God
alone, to establish a ruler in power, regardless of how the rule treats those
under them, then the first question we should ask is not, “should I obey even a
tyrant?” As we will see, the answer is clearly “yes”, for to disobey a ruler
established by God is to disobey God Himself. The first question we need to ask,
for Calvin, is, “if it is God who establishes rulers, then why does He establish,
in power, evil and unjust tyrants?” The answer to this question, for Calvin,
is: to bring judgment on the nations concerned. The power of all rulers comes
directly from God, regardless of the form of government, therefore, “Those,
indeed, who rule for the public good, are true examples and specimens of his
beneficence [the “his”, here, refers to God, not the ruler], while those who
domineer unjustly and tyrannically are raised up by him to punish the people
for their iniquity.”[30]
Calvin goes on to note that “We need not labor to prove that an impious king is
a mark of the Lord’s anger, since I presume no one will deny it…since all such
calamities are classed by Scriptures among the curses of God.”[31] So,
if at any point in my life, I get the impression that I all of a sudden find
myself under the thumb of an impious and unjust ruler, my first reaction should
be, according to Calvin, “God is judging my country for its impiety.” One does
not rebel against divine judgment! Like the prophets of the Old Testament, when
God judges a nation, we call for repentance, not revolt! This leads us to the
second question.
God is judging my nation; do I still need to obey
this evil and unjust tyrant? Calvin’s answer is, “even an individual of
the worst character, one most unworthy of all honor, if invested with public
authority,[32]
receives that illustrious divine power which the Lord has by his word devolved
on the ministers of his justice and judgment, and that, accordingly, insofar as
public obedience is concerned, he is to be held in the same honor and reverence
as the best of kings.”[33]
In other words, “yes”, obedience and honor are still owed to even the worst of civil
magistrates, for so long as they hold that office and station. Why? “First, I
would have the reader carefully attend to that divine providence which, not
without cause, is so often set before us in Scripture, and that special act of
distributing kingdoms, and setting up as kings whomsoever he pleases.”[34]
Calvin calls upon Scripture to prove this point, directing the reader to Daniel
2: 21, 37-38; 4:17, 25; 5:18-19; 1 Samuel 8:11-17; Jeremiah 5:12, and Jeremiah 27:5-8.
Faced with the objection that this is only true for Israel, Calvin replies “Let
us doubt not that on whomsoever the kingdom has been conferred, him we are
bound to serve.”[35]
He then provides more passages from Scripture to prove that all kings, wherever
they be, howsoever they rule, are established by God (Proverbs 28:2; Job 12:18;
Jeremiah 29:7; 1 Samuel 24:6-11). We are to obey whichever leader is currently
in power, whomever they may be, in all that they demand (one exception will be
mentioned shortly), because God placed them in power. To illustrate just how
much honor, reverence, and obedience we are to show to those who lead, or even tyrannize
us, Calvin points to Jeremiah 29:7, and says, “Here the Israelites, plundered of
all their property, torn from their homes, driven into exile, thrown into
miserable bondage, are ordered to pray for the prosperity of the victor, not as
we are elsewhere ordered to pray for our persecutors, but that his kingdom may
be preserved in safety and tranquility, that they too may live prosperously
under him.”[36]
Calvin then considers the argument that some might try
to raise against his position, “But what if the rulers, who have divinely given
responsibilities and duties to uphold and defend the good of their people, don’t
fulfill those duties towards their people?” This is another way of saying, but,
if they don’t fulfill their duties, may we then not fulfill ours? To this,
Calvin replies, “if from this you conclude that obedience is to be returned to
none but just governors, you reason absurdly.”[37]
He then calls upon God’s will in relation to two other divine institutions
which are based upon human nature, as with the institution of civil government,
to show that we are to obey even the unjust ruler, “Husbands are bound by
mutual duties to their wives, and parents to their children. Should husbands
and parents neglect their duty; should the latter be harsh and severe to the
children whom they are enjoined not to provoke to anger, and by their severity
harass them beyond measure; should the former treat with the greatest contumely
the wives whom they are enjoined to love and to spare as the weaker vessels;
would children be less bound in duty to their parents, and wives to their
husbands?”[38]
Many, today, would answer “yes.” Calvin’s answer? “They are made subject to the
froward and undutiful. No, since the duty of all is not to look behind them,
that is, not to inquire into the duties of one another, but to submit each to
his own duty, this ought especially to be exemplified in the case of those who
are placed under the power of others.”[39]
In other words, God will not judge us for how our civil leaders fulfilled their
duties towards us; we are held accountable only for how we fulfilled our duties
towards our civil leaders. What are our civil duties? To honor and obey. Thus,
regardless of how our civil leaders treat us or lead their people, we must see
to it that we fulfill our God-given duties towards them.
What, then, are we to do when we find ourselves
governed by a tyrant (a ruler who abandons their duty to uphold and protect the
common peace and good, pursuing only their individual good)? “Let us first call
up the remembrance of our faults, which doubtless the Lord is chastising by
such scourges. In this way humility will curb our impatience. And let us
reflect that it belongs not to us to cure these evils, that all that remains
for us is to implore the help of the Lord, in whose hands are the hearts of
kings, and inclinations of kingdoms.”[40]
In other words, we remind ourselves that Tyrants and evil and unjust civil
leaders are established by God to punish a people for their sins (which should drive
us to our knees in humble repentance for our sins), and that it is God’s
prerogative, not ours, to raise up and pull down kings and kingdoms (which
should again drive us to our knees, that God would show mercy, and allow us to
live in peace).[41]
There is, however, one exception to the
otherwise absolute honor and obedience that we owe to our leaders. As we read Calvin’s
explanation of why honour and obedience are due to our leaders, one gets the
impression that he is dialoguing with a child who has his mind set on finding a
way to get away with disobedience. What if the leader (s) is (are) evil and
unjust? What if the leader (s) is (are) tyrannical? What if the leader (s) don’t
fulfill their God-given duties? Every time Calvin responds: Honor and Obedience
are still due to them, for this is YOUR God-given duty. There is, however, one
exception. Calvin finishes his discussion of Civil government with the
reminder, which has been brought up all throughout, that the Civil magistrate only
has a power which is derived from God. God placed them in power (not the Church,
not the people). This means that we owe them obedience in everything, as we
obedience to God, unless they explicitly order us to disobey God. “But in that
obedience which we hold to be due to the commands of rulers, we must always
make the exception, no, must be particularly careful that it is not incompatible
with obedience to Him to whose will the wishes of all kings should be subject,
to whose decrees their commands must yield, to whose majesty their scepters
must bow.”[42]
Insomuch as all civil leaders are established in power
by God, whether they steal power through murder and mischief, obtain through
valiant and virtuous actions, or receive it from the people, they are, therefore,
nothing more than servants of God. This means that they are to be obeyed in
everything except insomuch as they would require us to disobey the one to whom they
also are submitted. “We are subject to men who rule over us, but subject only
in the Lord. If they command anything against him let us not pay the least
regard to it, nor be moved by all the dignity which they possess as magistrates.”[43]
All the reformers, the Anarchistic Anabaptists excepted, are in agreement on
this point.
The question we wish to ask at this point, is, how
do we apply it? What does this actually look like? First, some thoughts
from some of the early Reformers I have already explored: Luther, in his treatise
on Temporal Authority, suggests that we are to obey in everything other
than the command to cease believing the Word of God (the attempt to compel the mind
in questions of belief) or to give up our Bibles. For Luther, the temporal
authority has power over external things such as our money, possessions,
bodies, and honor; but has no power over affairs of the soul, such as
what we believe or what we read. Melanchthon provides the example of the Prophet
Amos who received the order from the King that he was to cease prophesying in Israel
(Amos 7:10-17). The point being that if the magistrate or ruler tells us to stop
preaching the Word of God, our answer is, “No! Our mission to preach the Gospel
is from God Himself.”
Calvin provides a number of examples of Godly men in
the Scriptures who disobeyed the civil magistrate in order to obey God. Daniel,
for example, when he received the order to pray to no God but the King Darius
for 30 days, he went home, opened the window, and prayed to the One true God “on
his knees three times a day…as he had done previously. (Dan. 6:10).” In this,
Daniel did not sin, “because the king had exceeded his limits, and not only been
injurious to men, but, by raising his horn against God, had virtually abrogated
his own power.”[44]
Note, with Daniel, the question was not about when, where, or how often to
pray, but to whom he prayed (God or the King). It was, therefore, a question of
being told to worship a false God. Other examples given are 1 Kings 12:28 (One
should refuse to turn from the true God to false idols, even if the King
demands it.), and Hosea 5:11. The primary point, here, is that even if the
civil leaders wish to force their people to either worship a false God, or to
commit immoral acts, the people are, in the words of Peter, “to obey God rather
than men (Acts 5:29)”. Though the civil government may bear the temporal sword,
God gave it to them, and God can also take it away. It is better to fear Him
who “after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell (Luke 12:5)” than those
who can only “kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do (Luke
12:4)”.
How about today? There is always a bit of a danger in
attempting to make an author from the past speak about present issues. Also, it
is important to try to think about these issues in light of contemporary forms
of government.[45]
In any case, keeping these nuances in mind (see fn. 45), based upon what we see
in Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin, we may be able to offer the following reflections:
(1)
Does
the magistrate require you to cease working, to wear certain articles of
clothing (such as masks or gloves)? Does the magistrate require you to “stay
home”, stop visiting friends, stop attending social gatherings, etc.? I would suggest, that Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin
would all agree in saying: Whether these regulations are for the common good or
not, you are required, out of obedience for God, to obey them. Melanchthon
would add that if they are tyrannical commands (that is, it can be conclusively
shown that commands in question are not in any way for the common good, but,
rather, benefit the tyrant directly), then you should still obey them out of
love for your neighbour (Luther would add, in order to be a good example to
your neighbour as well). Melanchthon, but not Luther and Calvin, adds the thought
that, if they are tyrannical commands, and you can disobey them privately and
without public scandal, do so.[46]
(2)
Does
the magistrate require you to wear masks in church and practice social
distancing in church, all while allowing you to continue meeting together (even
though you may need to do multiple services in order to properly social
distance)? It seems to me
that all three of these early Reformers would agree that your God-given duty is
to obey the magistrate.
(3)
Does
the magistrate require you to cease attending church for a period of time, due
to some society wide danger (war, plague, etc.)? This one is more complicated, but, it seems to me
that they would still agree that, given a grave situation in which gathering
together would be potentially dangerous for those gathered (as when an enemy
nation is performing night bombings, and targeting large buildings with the
lights on; or, when an infectious deadly disease is ravaging the country), the
Christian, out of love and good will for their neighbour and fellow citizens
(Melanchthon and Luther), and respect for divine providence (Calvin), must obey
the magistrate. For how long? This is a question that can only be answered by those
ecclesiastical leaders who are placed in a position to make those decisions.
Luther suggests that if there is any doubt, it is better to obey the
magistrates. On this question, individual people might question the gravity of
the situation, but Calvin would appear to say that it is not our place to question
the civil rulers’ policies, only to obey and pray. As of March 2021, some
churches in North America have been closed more often than they have been open.
Some people think that the Government has overstepped its bounds in requiring churches
to close at all. Based on the principles I have presented above, I would suggest
that this is not the case, rather, given the right circumstances (war or
pestilence) a magistrate, who has the God-given responsibility to care for the
well-being of his people, may rightly require all churches to cease worshipping
in social gatherings; and, until the magistrate is certain that the threat is
no longer present. The Christian citizen has the corresponding duty of obeying
the magistrate, praying for the magistrate, and seeking God’s face for the
liberation of His people. Ecclesiastical leaders, and laymen, will need to pray
for wisdom and ingenuity to be able to continue preaching the word of God,
hearing the word of God, and maintaining their Christian disciplines throughout
that period of time, however long it may be. At some point, if it becomes
evident that this is no longer about public safety, but is, in fact, about eliminating
the Church, then the situation would fall under my 4th point.
(4)
Does
the magistrate require you to cease preaching the Gospel publicly, destroy your
Bibles, cease gathering as a church, deny the Deity of Christ, or pray to false
Gods, and, this, for no other reason than that, like many of the Roman
emperors, they desire to destroy the church? All three of these Reformers would agree that you
must obey God rather than man. Continue preaching the Gospel (regardless of how
many people are physically in attendance). Preserve your Bibles (even if you
must memorize them to do so). Meet in secret. Affirm the divinity of Christ.
Pray to God alone. Death before disobedience to God.
(5)
Does
the magistrate require you to kill another human in cold blood (regardless of
whether or not they call it a medical treatment), prostitute yourself, lie,
steal, cease worshiping God, or, in fact, break (implicitly or explicitly) any
of the moral commands of the Natural Law? Again, all three of these early Reformers would agree
that you should refuse to break any one of the Natural Laws under the orders of
your magistrate. For it is better to obey God and die at the hands of men (or,
be treated like a fool), than to obey men and sin against God.
[1]John
Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, t. 4, ch. 20, 3, trans.
Henry Beveridge (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2012), 971. For all
quotes from Calvin, I will be using the Beveridge English translation, and referencing
quotes based on tome/book, chapter, and section number.
[3]Calvin,
ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 14.
[4]Calvin,
ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 16.
[5]Calvin,
ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 4.
[6]Calvin,
ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 4.
[7]Calvin,
ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 4.
[8]Calvin,
ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 6.
[9]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 8.
[10]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
8.
[11]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 8.
[12]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
8.
[13]We have
seen the same idea presented in the thought of Luther and Melanchthon.
[14]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
9.
[15]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
10.
[16]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
10.
[17]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
14-16.
[18]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 17-18.
[19]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
20.
[20]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
20.
[21]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
22.
[22]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
22.
[23]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
22.
[24]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
23.
[25]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
23.
[26]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 23.
[27]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
23.
[28]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
25.
[29]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
25.
[30]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
25.
[31]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
25.
[32]Note the
phrase, here, "invested with public authority”. In a government by representation,
the local mayor, regional leaders, and provincial and federal representatives
are all “invested with public authority”. Now, they received that authority by
popular vote from the people, however, once they have received that authority,
it can be rightly said of them that they have been invested with public
authority, and all that follows upon it.
[33]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
25.
[34]Calvin, ICR,
t. 4, ch. 20, 26. I just have to add in here, is there a conspiracy behind the
scenes to put people in power? Even those who hate God, church, and goodness in
general? Yes, absolutely, there is an invisible “conspiracy”. It is the divine wisdom,
unseen, but all powerful, everywhere present, and all-knowing, which “conspires”
behind the scenes to put civil leaders in power. The irony in Scriptures is powerful,
“Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth
set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD and
against his Anointed, saying ‘Let us burst their bonds apart and cast away their
cords from us.’ He who sits in the heavens laughs; The Lord holds them in derision.
Then he will speak to them in his wrath, and terrifying them in his fury,
saying, ‘As for me, I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill.’ (Ps. 2:1-6)” God,
and God alone, is sovereign over all nations, peoples, kings, and rulers. He is
the King of kings, and the Lord of lords.
[35]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
28.
[36]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
28.
[37]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
29.
[38]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
29.
[39]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
29.
[40]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
29.
[41]Calvin goes
on to reminds us that God is sovereign, and that His sovereignty and providence
is magnificently shown in how he raises and pulls down kings and kingdoms. They
are His servants, for His purposes (Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 30.). He
then gives a warning to both rulers and their people, each one according to their
respective duties (Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20, 31.).
[42]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
32.
[43]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
32.
[44]Calvin, ICR, t. 4, ch. 20,
32.
[45]For
example, Canadians do not have a King or Emperor. Rather, we have a representational
government, in which the politicians are supposed to vote in assemblies, in a
way that represents the will of the people they represent. This would be a form
of democracy by representation. In this case, we could either discuss citizen
versus magistrate subjects by talking about the leading of the elected official
versus those whom he was elected to govern; or we could talk about a liberal
democracy, in a manner similar to Rousseau, suggesting that the people, even if
they are governed by elected representatives, are self-governing. Thus, the will
of the people would take the place of the “civil magistrate” in the “magistrate
to citizen” relationship.
[46]Philip Melanchthon, Common
Places : Loci Communes 1521, trans. & ed.
Christian Preus (Saint Louis, MO : Concordia Publishing House, 2014), 187.
No comments:
Post a Comment