Chapter 20

Now whereas we have above set two kinds of government in man: and whereas we have spoken enough of the one kind which consists in the soul or in the inward man, and has respect to eternal life: this place requires that we speak somewhat also of the other, which pertains only to the civil and outward righteousness of manners. For the course of this matter seems to be severed from the spiritual doctrine of faith, which I took in hand to treat of: yet the proceeding shall show that I do rightly join them together, indeed that I am of necessity compelled to do it: especially since on the one side, mad and barbarous men do furiously go about to overthrow this order established by God: and on the other side the flatterers of princes, advancing their power without measure, stick not to set it against the empire of God himself. Unless both these mischiefs be met with, the purity of faith shall be lost. Besides that it is no small [reconstructed: benefit] for us, to know how lovingly God has in this behalf provided for mankind, that there may flourish in us a greater desire of godliness to witness our thankfulness. First, before we enter into the thing itself, we must hold fast that distinction which we have above set, lest (as it commonly happens to many) we unwisely mingle these two things together, which have altogether diverse consideration. For when they hear that liberty is promised by the Gospel, which acknowledges among men no king and no magistrate, but has regard to Christ alone: they think that they can take no fruit of their liberty, so long as they see any power to have preeminence over them. Therefore they think that nothing shall be safe, unless the whole world be reformed into a new fashion: where may neither be judgments, nor laws, nor magistrates, nor any such thing which they think to withstand their liberty. But whoever can put difference between the body and the soul, between this present and transitory life, and that life to come and eternal: he shall not hardly understand that the spiritual kingdom of Christ, and the civil government are things far apart. Since therefore that is a Jewish vanity, to seek and enclose the kingdom of Christ under the elements of this world: let us rather thinking, as the Scripture plainly teaches, that it is a spiritual fruit, which is gathered from the benefit of Christ, remember to keep within the bounds thereof this whole liberty which is promised and offered us in him. For, what is the cause why the same Apostle who bids us to stand, and not to be made subject to the yoke of bondage, in another place forbids bondservants to be careful of their state: but because spiritual liberty may very well agree with civil bondage? In which sense also these his sayings are to be taken: In the kingdom of God there is no Jew, nor Greek, no male nor female, no bondman nor freeman. Again, There is no Jew nor Greek, Circumcision, Uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, Bondman, Freeman: but Christ is all in all. Whereby he signifies, that it makes no matter in what state you are among men, nor under the laws of what nation you live: forasmuch as in these things consists not the kingdom of Christ.

Yet does not this distinction tend to this end, that we should think that the whole order of civil affairs is an unclean thing, not pertaining at all to Christian men. So indeed do the frenzied men, that are delighted with unbridled licentiousness, cry out and boast. For since we are dead by Christ to the elements of this world, and being removed into the kingdom of God do sit among the heavenly ones: they think that it is unworthy for us, and far beneath our excellence, to be occupied with these profane and unclean cares that are busied about affairs not pertaining to a Christian man. To what purpose (say they) are laws without judgments and judgment seats? But what has a Christian man to do with judgments themselves? Indeed if it is not lawful to kill, to what end serve laws and judgments among us? But as we have just now given warning, that this kind of government is separate from that spiritual and inward kingdom of Christ: so it is also to be known that they nothing disagree together. For, the Civil government does now begin in us upon earth certain beginnings of the heavenly kingdom, and in this mortal and vanishing life does as it were enter upon an immortal and incorruptible blessedness: but the intent of this spiritual government is, so long as we shall live among men, to cherish and maintain the outward worshipping of God, to defend the sound doctrine of godliness and the state of the Church, to frame our life to the fellowship of men, to fashion our manners to civil righteousness, to bring us into friendship one with another, to nourish common peace and quietness: all which I grant to be superfluous, if the kingdom of God, such as it is now among us, does destroy this present life. But if the will of God be so, that we while we long toward the heavenly country, should be wayfarers from home upon the earth: and since the use of such wayfaring needs such helps: they who take them from man, do take from him his very nature of man. For whereas they allege that there is so great perfection in the Church of God, that her own moderate government suffices it for a law: they themselves do foolishly imagine that perfection which can never be found in the common fellowship of men. For since of wicked men the pride is so great, and the wickedness so obstinate, as can not be restrained with great sharpness of laws: what think we that they will do, if they see unpunished liberty lie open to their wickedness, which can not even with force be sufficiently compelled not to do evil?

But of the order of policy, there shall be another fitter place to treat. Now our meaning is to have this only understood, that to think to drive it away is outrageous barbarity, the use of which is no less among men than of bread, water, the sun, and air, but the dignity much more excellent. For it tends not only to this end (which is the only benefit of all those things) that men may breathe, eat, drink, and be nourished (although indeed it comprehends all these things, while it causes them to live together); yet I say, it tends not to this only: but also that idolatry, sacrileges against the name of GOD, blasphemies against his truth, and other offenses of religion may not rise up and be scattered among the people, that common quiet be not troubled, that every man may keep his own safe and unimpaired, that men may use their affairs together without hurt, that honesty and modesty be kept among them: finally that among Christians may be a common show of religion, and among men may be manly civility. Neither let any man be moved, for I do now refer the care of establishing of religion to the policy of men, which I seem before to have set without the judgment of men. For I do no more here than I did before, give men leave after their own will to make laws concerning religion and the worshipping of God, when I approve the ordinance of policy, which endeavors to this end, that the true religion which is contained in the law of God, be not openly and with public sacrileges freely broken and defiled. But the readers being helped by the very plainness of order, shall better understand what is to be thought of the whole kind of civil government, if we separately treat of the parts thereof. There be three parts of it: the magistrate, which is the governor and keeper of the laws: the laws, according to which he governs: the people, which are governed by the laws, and obey the magistrate. Therefore let us first consider of the office of the Magistrate, whether it be a lawful vocation and allowed of God, what manner of office he has, and how great is his power: then with what laws a Christian civil state is to be ordered: then last of all, what profit of the laws comes to the people, what reverence is due to the Magistrate.

The Lord has not only testified that the office of magistrates is allowed and acceptable to him, but also setting out the dignity of it with most honorable titles, he has marvelously commended it to us. That I may rehearse a few of them. Whereas whoever be in place of magistrates are named gods, let no man think that in that naming is small importance: for thereby is signified that they have commandment from God, that they are furnished with the authority of God, and do altogether bear the person of God, whose stead they do after a certain manner supply. This is not my cavil, but the exposition of Christ. If the Scripture (says he) called them gods to whom the word of God was given — what is this else, but that God has committed his business to them, that they should serve in his office, and (as Moses and Jehoshaphat said to their judges whom they appointed in every several city of Judah) that they should sit in judgment, not for man but for God? To the same purpose makes this that the wisdom of God affirms by the mouth of Solomon, that it is his work, that kings reign, and counselors decree righteous things, that Princes bear principality, and all the judges of the earth execute judgment. For this is all one in effect as if it had been said, that it comes not to pass by the perverseness of men, that the government of all things in earth is in the hand of Kings and other Rulers, but by the providence and holy ordinance of God, to whom it so seemed good to order the matters of men: inasmuch as he is both present and presiding among them in making of laws and in executing uprightness of judgments. Which Paul also plainly teaches, when he reckons governments among the gifts of God, which being diversely distributed according to the diversity of grace, ought to be employed by the servants of Christ to the edification of the Church. For although he there properly speaks of a council of grave men, which in the Primitive Church were appointed that they should have the rule of ordering the public discipline (which office in the Epistle to the Corinthians he calls Government), yet inasmuch as we see that the end of civil power comes to the same point, it is no doubt but that he commends to us all kind of just Government. But he speaks more plainly, where he purposely makes a full discourse of that matter. For he both shows that Power is the ordinance of God, and that there are no powers, but they are ordained of God: and that the Princes themselves are the ministers of God, to the well-doers to praise: to the evil, avengers to wrath. To this may be added also the examples of holy men: of which some have possessed kingdoms, as David, Josiah, Hezekiah: others, lordships, as Joseph and Daniel: others, civil governments in a free people, as Moses, Joshua, and the Judges: whose offices the Lord has declared that he allows. Therefore none ought now to doubt that the civil power is a vocation not only holy and lawful before God, but also the most holy, and the most honorable of all others in the whole life of men.

Those who desire to bring in a state without rulers take exception and say that, although in old time there were kings and judges over the rude people, yet at this day the servile kind of governing does not agree with the perfection which Christ has brought with his Gospel. Wherein they betray not only their ignorance, but also their devilish pride, while they take upon themselves perfection, of which not so much as the hundredth part is seen in them. But whatever kind of men they be, it is easy to refute it: because where David exhorts all kings and rulers to kiss the Son of God, he does not bid them, giving over their authority, to betake themselves to a private life, but to submit the power that they bear to Christ, that he alone may have preeminence above all. Likewise Isaiah, when he promises that kings shall be foster-fathers of the Church, and queens shall be nurses, he does not depose them from their honor: but rather does by an honorable title make them defenders to the godly worshippers of God: for that prophecy pertains to the coming of Christ. I do willingly pass over many testimonies which do everywhere offer themselves, and especially in the psalms wherein all governors have their right maintained. But most clear of all is the place of Paul, where admonishing Timothy that in the common assembly prayers must be made for kings, he by and by adds a reason, that we may under them lead a quiet life with all godliness and honesty: in which words he commits the state of the Church to their defense and safeguarding.

This consideration ought continually to occupy the magistrates themselves, inasmuch as it may put a great spur to them whereby they may be pricked forward to their duty, and bring them a singular comfort whereby they may mitigate the hardnesses of their office, which truly are both many and great. For with how great an endeavor of uprightness, wisdom, mildness, continence, and innocence, ought they to charge themselves, who know themselves to be appointed ministers of the righteousness of God? By what confidence shall they admit injustice to their judgment seat, which they hear to be the throne of the living God? By what boldness shall they pronounce a wrongful sentence with that mouth, which they understand to be appointed an instrument for the truth of God? With what conscience shall they subscribe to wicked decrees with that hand, which they know to be ordained to write the acts of God? In sum, if they remember that they be the vicegerents of God, they must watch with all care, earnestness, and diligence, that they may represent in themselves to men a certain image of the providence, preservation, goodness, good will, and righteousness of God. And they must continually set this before their eyes, that if all they be accursed who execute in deceit the work of the vengeance of God, they are much more grievously accursed who use themselves deceitfully in a rightful vocation. Therefore when Moses and Jehoshaphat minded to exhort their judges to their duty, they had nothing more effectual to move their minds withal, than that which we have before rehearsed: Look what you do, for you sit in judgment not for man but for God, namely he who is near to you in the cause of judgment. Now therefore let the fear of the Lord be upon you. Look and be diligent: because there is no perverseness with the Lord our God. And in another place it is said that God stood in the assembly of the gods, and sits judge in the midst of the gods, that they may be encouraged to their duty when they hear that they be the deputies of God, to whom they must one day yield account of the government of their charge. And worthily this admonition ought to be of great force with them. For if they make any default, they are not only wrongdoers to men whom they wickedly vex, but also slanderers to God himself, whose holy judgments they defile. Again they have also whereon they may singularly comfort themselves, when they consider with themselves that they are not occupied in profane affairs and such as are not fit for the servant of God, but in a most holy office, namely inasmuch as they are the deputies of God.

As for those who are not moved with so many testimonies of Scripture from being bold to rail at this holy ministry, as a thing disagreeing with Christian religion and godliness: what do they else but rail at God himself, the dishonor of whom cannot but be joined with the reproach of his minister? And truly they do not refuse the magistrates, but do cast away God, that he should not reign over them. For if the Lord said this truly of the people of Israel, because they had refused the government of Samuel: why shall it be less truly said at this day of those who give themselves leave to rage against all governments ordained of God? But since the Lord said to the disciples, that the kings of nations bear rule over them, but that among them it is not so, where he that is the first must be made the least: by this saying it is forbidden to all Christians that they should not take kingdoms or governments upon them. O fine expositors! There arose a strife among the disciples, which of them excelled the others: the Lord, to suppress this vain ambition, taught them that their ministry is not like kingdoms, in which one man has preeminence above the rest. I ask you, what does this comparison make to the dishonor of kingly dignity? Indeed, what does it prove at all, but that the ministry of an Apostle is not the office of a king? Moreover, although among the magistrates themselves there be diverse forms, yet there is no difference in this behalf, but that we ought to take them all for the ordinances of God. For Paul also does comprehend them altogether, when he says that there is no power but of God: and that which pleased him best of all is commended with notable testimony above the others, namely the power of one: which because it brings with it a common bondage of all (except that one man, to whose will it makes all things subject) in old time could less be allowed of the noble and the excellent sort of natures. But the Scripture, to meet with their unjust judgments, expressly by name affirms that it is the providence of God's wisdom that kings do reign, and particularly commands the king to be honored.

And truly it were very vain that it should be disputed of private men, which should be the best state of polity in the place where they live: for whom it is not lawful to consult of the framing of any commonwealth. And also the same could not be simply determined without rashness, forasmuch as a great part of the order of this question consists in circumstances. And if you compare also the states themselves together without circumstances, it shall not be easy to discern which of them outweighs the other in profitableness, they match so equally together. There is an easy way to fall from kingdom into tyranny: but not much harder is it to fall from the rule of the chief men to the faction of a few: but most easy of all, from the people's government, to sedition. Truly, if those three forms of governments which the philosophers set out, be considered in themselves, I will not deny that either the government of the chief men, or a state tempered of it and common government far excels all other: not of itself, but because it most seldom chances that kings so temper themselves, that their will never swerves from that which is just and right, again that they be furnished with so great sharpness of judgment and wisdom that every one of them sees so much as is sufficient. Therefore the fault or default of men makes, that it is safer and more tolerable that many should have the government, that they may mutually one help another, one teach and admonish another, and if any advance himself [reconstructed: higher] than is fitting, there may be overseers and masters to restrain his willfulness. This both has always been approved by experience, and the Lord also has confirmed it with his authority, when he ordained among the Israelites a government of the best men very near to common government, at such time as he minded to have them in best estate, till he brought forth an image of Christ in David. And as I willingly grant that no kind of government is more blessed than this, where liberty is framed to such moderation as it ought to be, and is orderly established to continuance: so I count them also most blessed, that may enjoy this estate: and if they stoutly and constantly labor in preserving and retaining it, I grant that they do nothing against their duty. Indeed the magistrates ought with most great diligence to bend themselves hereto, that they suffer not the liberty of the people, of which they are appointed governors, to be in any part diminished, much less to be dissolved: if they be negligent and little careful therein, they are false faithbreakers in their office, and betrayers of their country. But if they would bring this kind to themselves, to whom the Lord has appointed another form of government, so that thereby they be moved to desire a change, the very thinking thereof shall not only be foolish and superfluous, but also hurtful. But if you bend not your eyes only to one city, but look about or behold the whole world together, or at least spread abroad your sight into farther distances of countries, without doubt you shall find that this is not unprofitably appointed by the providence of God, that diverse countries should be ruled by diverse kinds of government. For as the elements hang together but by an unequal temperature, so countries also are with their certain inequality very well kept in order. However all these things also are spoken in vain to them whom the will of the Lord shall satisfy. For if it be his pleasure, to set kings over kingdoms, senates or officers over free cities, whoever he makes rulers in the places where we are conversant, it is our duty to show ourselves yielding and obedient to them.

Now the office of magistrates is in this place to be declared by the way, of what sort it is described by the word of God, and in what things it consists. If the Scripture did not teach that it extends to both the tables of the law, we might learn it out of the profane writers. For none has treated of the duty of magistrates, of making of laws and of the public welfare, that has not begun at religion and the worshipping of God. And so have they all confessed, that no policy can be happily framed, unless the first care be of godliness: and that those laws be preposterous which neglecting the right of God, do provide only for men. Since therefore with all the Philosophers religion has the first place, and since the same has always been observed by that universal consent of all nations, let Christian princes and magistrates be ashamed of their slothfulness, if they endeavor not themselves to this care. And we have already showed, that this duty is specially enjoined them of God: as it is fitting, that they should employ their labor to defend and maintain his honor, whose vicegerents they be, and by whose benefit they govern. For this cause also chiefly are the holy kings praised in Scripture, for that they restored the worship of God being corrupted or overthrown, or took care of religion, that it might flourish pure and safe under them. But contrariwise the holy history reckons states without governors, among faults, saying that there was no king in Israel, and that therefore every man did what pleased himself. Whereby their folly is confuted, which would have them, neglecting the care of God, only to apply themselves to be judges of law among men. As though God appointed governors in his name to decide controversies, and omitted that which was of much weightier importance, that he himself should be worshipped according to the prescribed rule of his law. But a desire to innovate all things without punishment, moves troublesome men to this point, that they wish all avengers of the breach of peace to be taken away. As for so much as pertains to the second table, Jeremiah warns kings, to do judgment and righteousness, to deliver the forcibly oppressed from the hand of the false accuser, not to grieve the stranger and widow, not to do wrong, and not to shed innocent blood (Jeremiah 22:3). To the same purpose makes the exhortation which is read in the 82nd Psalm, that they should render right to the poor and needy, acquit the poor and needy, deliver the poor and needy from the hand of the oppressor (Psalm 82:3-4). And Moses gives charge to the princes whom he had set in his stead: let them hear the cause of their brethren, and judge between a man and his brother and a stranger, and not know faces in judgment, let them hear as well the little as the great, and be not afraid of any man: because it is the judgment of God (Deuteronomy 1:16-17). But I speak not of these things: that kings should not get to themselves multitudes of horses, not cast their minds to covetousness, not be lifted up above their brethren: that they may be continually busied in studying upon the law of the Lord all the days of their life: that judges swerve not to the one side, nor receive gifts: because in declaring here the office of magistrates, my purpose is not so much to instruct the magistrates themselves, as to teach others what magistrates be, and to what end they are set of God. We see therefore that they be ordained defenders and avengers of innocence, modesty, honesty, and quietness, whose only endeavor should be to provide for the common safety and peace of all men. Of which virtues David professes that he will be an example, when he shall be advanced to the royal seat: that is, that he will not consent to any evil doings, but abhor wicked men, slanderers, and proud men, and get to himself from everywhere honest and faithful men. But since they cannot perform this, unless they defend good men from the wrongs of the evil, let them help the good with succor and defense, let them also be armed with power whereby they may severely suppress open evildoers and wicked men by whose lewdness the common quiet is troubled or vexed. For we thoroughly find this by experience which Solon said, that common wealths consist of reward and punishment, and that when those be taken away, the whole discipline of cities fails and is dissolved. For the care of equity and justice waxes cold in the minds of many, unless there be due honor ready for virtue: neither can the willfulness of wicked men be restrained but by severity and chastisement of pains. And these two parts the Prophet comprehends, when he bids kings and other governors to do judgment and righteousness. Righteousness is, to take into charge of protection, to embrace, to defend, to avenge, to deliver the innocent. Judgment is, to withstand the boldness of wicked men, to repress their violence, to punish their offenses.

But here, as it seems, does arise a high and hard question: If by the law of God all Christians are forbidden to kill: and the Prophet prophesies of the holy mount of God, that is, the Church, that in it they shall not afflict nor hurt; how many magistrates be together both godly and blood-shedders? But if we understand, that the Magistrate in executing of punishments, does nothing of himself, but executes the very same judgments of God, we shall be nothing troubled with this doubt. The law of the Lord forbids to kill: lest manslaughter should be unpunished, the lawmaker himself gives to the ministers the sword in their hand, which they should draw forth against all man-slayers. To afflict and to hurt, is not the doing of the godly: but this is not to hurt, nor to afflict, by the Lord's commandment to avenge the afflictions of the godly. I would to God that this were always present before our minds, that nothing is here done by the rashness of man, but all things by the authority of God that commands, which going before us, we never swerve out of the right way. Unless perhaps there be a bridle put upon the righteousness of God, that it may not punish wicked doings. But if it be not lawful to appoint any law to it, why shall we cavil against the ministers of it? They bear not the sword in vain, says Paul: for they be the ministers of God to wrath, avengers to evildoers. Therefore if Princes and other rulers know that nothing shall be more acceptable to God than their obedience, let them apply this ministry, if they desire to show their godliness, righteousness, and incorruptness allowable to God. With this affection was Moses led, when knowing himself appointed by the power of the Lord to be the deliverer of his people, he laid his hands upon the Egyptian. Again, when by slaying of three thousand men in one day, he took vengeance of the sacrilege of the people. David also, when near to the end of his life he gave commandment to Solomon his son to slay Joab and Shimei. For which reason he also rehearses this among the virtues of a king, to slay the wicked of the land, that all workers of wickedness, may be driven out of the city of God. To which purpose also pertains the praise that is given to Solomon, "You have loved righteousness and have hated wickedness." How does that mild and gentle nature of Moses burn out into so great cruelty, that being sprinkled and stained with the blood of his brethren, he runs throughout the camp to new slaughters? How does David, a man of so great gentleness in all his life, among his last breathings make that bloody testament, that his son should not bring the hoary head of Joab and Shimei in peace to the grave? But they both when they executed the vengeance committed to them of God, so sanctified with cruel dealing their hands which they had defiled with sparing. It is an abomination with kings, says Solomon, to do iniquity, because his throne is established in righteousness. Again, The king which sits in the throne of judgment, spreads his eyes upon every evil man. Again, A wise king scatters the wicked and turns them upon the wheel. Again, Take away the dross from the silver, and there shall come forth a vessel to the smelter: take away the wicked man from the sight of the king, and his throne shall be firmly set in righteousness. Again, He that justifies the wicked, and he that condemns the righteous, both are abomination to the Lord. Again, A rebellious man purchases evil to himself, and a cruel messenger is sent to him. Again, whoever says to the wicked man, "you are righteous," him peoples and nations do curse. Now if their true righteousness be, with drawn sword to pursue guilty and wicked men: let them put up their sword, and hold their hands pure from blood, while in the meantime desperate men do range with murders and slaughters: then they shall make themselves guilty of most great wickedness, so much less shall they get thereby the praise of goodness and righteousness. Only let there be no harsh and cruel rigorousness, and that judgment seat which may worthily be called the rock of accused men. For I am not one that either favors extreme cruelty, or does think that righteous judgment can be pronounced, but while clemency the best and surest counselor of kings, as Solomon affirms, the preserver of the king's throne is present, which a certain man in old time truly said to be the principal gift of Princes. Yet a magistrate must take heed to both, that he does neither with rigorousness of mind wound rather than heal, or by superstitious affectation of clemency fall into a most cruel gentleness, if with soft and loose tenderness he be dissolute to the destruction of many men. For this was in old time not without cause commonly spoken under the empire of Nerva, that it is indeed evil to live under a prince under whom nothing is lawful, but much worse under whom all things are lawful.

But since sometimes kings and peoples must of necessity take sword in hand to execute such public vengeance, by this reason we may also judge that the wars are lawful which are so taken in hand. For if there be power delivered them, by which they may maintain quiet to their dominion, by which they may keep down the seditious stirrings of unquiet men, by which they may help the forcibly oppressed, by which they may punish evil doings — can they at a fitter season express it, than to suppress his rage which troubles both privately the rest of every man, and the common quiet of all men, which seditiously makes uprisings, which commits violent oppressions and heinous evil doings? If they ought to be preservers and defenders of the laws, they must also overthrow the enterprises of all them by whose wicked doing the discipline of laws is corrupted. Indeed if they worthily punish those thieves whose injuries have extended only to a few: shall they suffer a whole country to be without punishment vexed and wasted with robberies? For it makes no difference whether he be a king or one of the basest of the commonalty, that invades another's country into which he has no right, and spoils it like an enemy: all are alike to be taken and punished for robbers. This therefore both natural equity, and the rule of duty teaches that Princes are armed not only to restrain private wrongs with judicial punishments, but also to defend with war the dominions committed to their charge, if at any time they be in like manner assailed. And such wars the Holy Spirit by many testimonies of Scripture declares to be lawful.

If it be objected against me, that in the New Testament is neither witness nor example which teaches that war is a thing lawful for Christians: first I answer, that the same rule of making war which was in old time remains also at this day, and that on the contrary side there is no cause that may debar magistrates from defending of their subjects. Secondly, that an express declaration of these matters is not to be sought in the writings of the Apostles, where their purpose is not to frame a civil state, but to establish the spiritual kingdom of Christ. Last of all I say that in them also is shown by the way, that Christ has by his coming changed nothing in this behalf. For if Christian doctrine (that I may speak in Augustine's own words) condemned all wars, he would rather have said this to soldiers when they asked counsel of salvation, that they should cast away their weapons, and utterly withdraw themselves from the war. But it was said to them: strike no man, do no man wrong, let your wages suffice you. Whom he taught that their wages ought to suffice them, he did verily not forbid them to be warriors. But all magistrates ought here to take great heed, that they nothing at all follow their own desires: but rather, if they must punish, let them not be born away with a headlong angriness, let them not be violently carried with hatred, let them not broil with unappeasable rigor, indeed let them (as Augustine says) pity common nature in him in whom they punish his private fault. Or if they must put on armor against the enemy, that is, the armed robber, let them not lightly seek occasion thereof, nor take it being offered unless they be driven to it by extreme necessity. For if we ought to perform much more than that heathen man required, which would have war to seem a seeking of peace: truly we ought first to attempt all things before we ought to try the matter by war. Finally in both kinds let them not suffer themselves to be carried with any private affection, but be led only with common feeling. Otherwise they do very ill abuse their power, which is given them, not for their own commodity, but for others' benefit and ministry. Moreover of the same rightful rule of making war hangs the order both of garrisons, and leagues, and other civil fortifications. Garrisons I call those that are placed in towns to defend the borders of the country: Leagues, which are made with Princes adjoining for this covenant that if any trouble happen in their lands they may mutually help them, and join their forces in common together to suppress the common enemies of mankind: Civil fortifications, whose use is in the art of war.

This also I will last of all add, that tributes and taxes are the lawful revenues of princes, which they may chiefly employ to sustain the common charges of their office: which yet they may likewise use to their private royalty which is after a certain manner conjoined with honor of the princely state that they bear. As we see that David, Hezekiah, Josiah, Jehoshaphat, and other holy Kings, and Joseph also and Daniel, according to the state of the person that they did bear, were without offense of godliness sumptuous of the common charge, and we read in Ezekiel that there was a very large portion of land assigned to the kings. Where although he paints out the spiritual kingdom of Christ, yet he fetches the exemplar of his similitude from the lawful kingdom of men. But yet so, that Princes again on their behalves should remember, that their treasure chambers are not so much their own private coffers, as the treasuries of the whole people (for so Paul testifies) which they may not without manifest wrong prodigally waste or spoil: or rather that it is the very blood of the people, which not to spare, is most cruel unnaturalness: and let them think, that their impositions, and subsidies, and other kinds of tributes, are nothing but the supports of public necessity, wherewith to weary the poor commonality without cause, is tyrannical extortion. These things do not encourage Princes to wasteful expense and riot, (as verily there is no need to add a firebrand to their lusts that are of themselves too much already kindled) but since it much behooves that they should with pure conscience before God be bold to do all that they are bold to do, lest with wicked boldness come into despising of God, they must be taught how much is lawful for them. Neither is this doctrine superfluous for private men, that they should not rashly and stubbornly give themselves leave to grudge at any expenses of Princes, although they exceed common and civil measure.

Next to the magistrate in civil states are laws, the most strong sinews of commonwealths, or (as Cicero calls them according to Plato) the souls, without which the Magistrate can not stand, as they again without the Magistrate have no lively force. Therefore nothing could be more truly said, than that the law is a dumb Magistrate, and that the Magistrate is a living law. But whereas I promised to speak, with what laws a Christian civil state ought to be ordered, there is no cause why any man should look for a long discourse of the best kind of laws, which both should be infinite, and pertained not to this present purpose and place: yet in a few words, and as it were by the way, I will touch what laws it may use godly before God, and be rightly governed by them among men. Which same thing I had rather to have utterly passed over with silence, if I did not understand that many do herein perilously err. For there be some that deny that a commonwealth is well ordered, which neglecting the civil laws of Moses is governed by the common laws of nations. How dangerous and troublesome this sentence is, let other men consider, it shall be enough for me to have shown that it is false and foolish. That common division is to be kept, which divides the whole law of God published into moral, ceremonial, and judicial laws: and all the parts are to be severally considered, that we may know what of them pertains to us, and what not. Neither in the mean time let any man be troubled with this doubt, that judicials and ceremonials also pertain to the moral laws. For although the old writers which have taught this division, were not ignorant that these two later parts had their use about manners, yet because they might be changed and abrogated, the morals remaining safe, they did not call them morals. They called that first part peculiarly by that name, without which can not stand the true holiness of manners, and the unchangeable rule of living rightly.

Therefore the Moral law (that I may first begin [reconstructed: thereat]) since it is contained in two chief points, of which the one commands simply to worship God with pure faith and godliness, and the other to embrace men with unfeigned love, is the true and eternal rule of righteousness, prescribed to the men of all ages and times that will be willing to frame their life to the will of God. For this is his eternal and unchangeable will, that he himself should be worshipped by us all, and that we should mutually love one another. The Ceremonial law was the schooling of the Jews, with which it pleased the Lord to exercise the certain childhood of that people, till that time of fullness come, wherein he would to the full manifestly show his wisdom to the earth, and deliver the truth of those things which then were shadowed with figures (Galatians 4:4). The judicial law given to them for an order of civil state, gave certain rules of equity and righteousness, by which they might behave themselves harmlessly and quietly together. And as that exercise of ceremonies properly pertained indeed to the doctrine of godliness (namely which kept the Church of the Jews in the worship and religion of God) yet it might be distinguished from godliness itself: so this form of judicial orders (although it tended to no other end, but how the self same charity might best be kept which is commanded by the eternal law of God) yet had a certain thing differing from the very commandment of loving. As therefore the Ceremonies might be abrogated, godliness remaining safe and undestroyed: so these judicial ordinances also being taken away, the perpetual duties and commandments of charity may continue. If this be true, verily there is liberty left to every nation to make such laws as they shall foresee to be profitable for them: which yet must be framed after that perpetual rule of charity, that they may indeed vary in form, but have the same reason. For I think that those barbarous and savage laws, as were those that gave honor to thieves, that allowed common copulations, and other both much more filthy and more against reason, are not to be taken for laws: forasmuch as they are not only against all righteousness, but also against natural gentleness and kindness of men.

This which I have said shall be plain, if in all laws we behold these two things as we ought, the making and the equity of the law, upon the reason whereof the making itself is founded and stays. Equity, because it is natural, can be but one of all laws: and therefore one law, according to the kind of matter, ought to be the propounded end to all laws. As for makings of laws, because they have certain circumstances upon which they partly hang, if so that they tend all together to one mark of equity, though they be diverse it makes no matter. Now since it is certain that the law of God, which we call moral is nothing else but a testimony of the natural law, and of that conscience which is engraved by God in the minds of men, the whole rule of this equity whereof we now speak is set forth therein. Therefore it alone also must be both the mark and rule and end of all laws. Whatever laws shall be framed after that rule, directed to that mark, and limited in that end, there is no cause why we should disallow them, however they otherwise differ from the Jewish law or one from another. The law of God forbids to steal. What penalty was appointed for thefts in the civil state of the Jews, is to be seen in Exodus (Exodus 22:1). The most ancient laws of other nations punished theft with recompense of double: the laws that followed afterward, made difference between manifest theft and no manifest. Some proceeded to banishment, some to whipping, some at last to the punishment of death. False witness was among the Jews punished with recompense of equal pain (Deuteronomy 19:18), in some places only with great shame, in some places with hanging, in other some with the Cross. Manslaughter all laws universally do revenge with blood, yet with diverse kinds of death. Against adulterers in some places were ordained severer penalties, in some places lighter. Yet we see how with such diversity all tend to the same end. For with one mouth they all together pronounce punishment against all the offenses which have been condemned by the eternal law of God, as manslaughters, thefts, adultery, false witnessings: but in the manner of punishment they agree not. Neither is the same needful, nor yet expedient. There is some country, which unless it show rigor with horrible examples against manslayers, should immediately be destroyed with murders and robberies. There is some time that requires the sharpness of penalties to be increased. If there arise any trouble in a commonwealth, the evils that are wont to grow thereof must be amended with new ordinances. In time of war all humanity would in the noise of armor fall away, unless there were cast into men an unusual fear of punishments. In barrenness, in pestilence, unless greater severity be used, all things will come to ruin. Some nation is more bent to some certain vice, unless it be most sharply suppressed. How malicious and envious shall he be against the public profit, that shall be offended with such diversity which is most fit to hold fast the observing of the law of God? For, that which some say, that the Law of God given by Moses is dishonored, when it being abrogated, new are preferred above it, is most vain. For neither are other preferred above it, when they are more allowed, not in simple comparison, but in respect of the estate of the times, place, and nation: neither is that abrogated, which was never made for us. For the Lord gave not that law by the hand of Moses, which should be published into all nations, and flourish everywhere: but when he had received the nation of the Jews into his faith, defense, and protection, he willed to be a lawmaker peculiarly to them, and like a wise lawmaker, he had in making of his laws a certain singular consideration of them.

Now it remains that we consider that which we have set in the last place: what profit of laws, judicial orders, and magistrates, comes to the common fellowship of Christians. With which is also coupled another question, how much private men ought to yield to magistrates, and how far their obedience ought to proceed. Many thought the office of magistrate to be superfluous among Christians, because indeed they can not righteously crave their aid, namely since they are forbidden to revenge, to sue in the law, and to have any controversy. But whereas Paul contrariwise plainly testifies, that he is the minister of God to us for good: we thereby understand, that he is so ordained of God, that we being defended by his hand and succors against the maliciousness and injuries of mischievous men, may live a quiet and assured life. If he is in vain given us of the Lord for defense, unless it be lawful for us to use such benefit: it sufficiently appears that he may also without ungodliness be called upon and sued to. But here I must have to do with two kinds of men. For there be many men that boil with so great rage of quarreling at the law, that they never have quiet with themselves unless they have strife with others. And their controversies they exercise with deadly sharpness of hatred, and with mad greediness to revenge and hurt, and do pursue them with unappeasable stubbornness even to the very destruction of their adversary. In the mean time, that they may not be thought to do anything but righteously, they defend such perverseness with color of law. But though it be granted you to go to law with your brother, yet you may not by and by hate him, nor be carried against him with furious desire to hurt him, nor stubbornly to pursue him.

Let this therefore be said to such men, that the use of laws is lawful, if a man does rightly use it. And that the right use both for the plaintiff to sue, and for the defendant to defend, is if the defendant being summoned does appear at an appointed day, and does with such exception as he can, defend his cause without bitterness, but only with this affection to defend that which is his own by law: and if the plaintiff being unworthily oppressed either in his person or his goods, does resort to the defense of the Magistrate, make his complaint, and require that which is equity and conscience, but far from all greedy will to hurt or revenge, far from sharpness and hatred, far from burning heat of contention, but rather ready to yield of his own and to suffer anything, than to be carried with an enemy-like mind against his adversary. Contrariwise when being filled with malice of mind, corrupted with envy, kindled with wrath, breathing out revenge, or finally so inflamed with the heat of the contention, they give over any part of charity, the whole proceeding even of a most just cause can not but be wicked. For this ought to be a determined principle to all Christians, that a controversy though it be never so righteous, can never be rightly pursued of any man, unless he bears as good will and love to his adversary, as if the matter which is in controversy were already concluded and ended by composition. Some man will here perhaps say, that such moderation is so never used in going to law that it should be like a miracle if any such were found. I grant indeed, as the manners of these times be, that there is seldom seen an example of a good contender in law, yet the thing itself being defiled with addition of no evil, ceases not to be good and pure. But when we hear that the help of the Magistrate is a holy gift of God: we must so much the more diligently take heed, that it be not defiled by our fault.

As for them that precisely condemn all contentions at law, let them understand that they do therewith also despise the holy ordinance of God, and a gift of that kind of gifts which may be clean to the clean: unless perhaps they will accuse Paul of wicked doing, who did both put away from himself the slanders of his accusers with declaring also their deceit and maliciousness, and in judgment claimed for himself the prerogative of the city of Rome, and when need was he appealed from an unrighteous governor to the Emperor's judgment seat. Neither does it withstand, that all Christians are forbidden to desire revenge, which we also do drive far away from Christian judgment seats. For, if the contention be about a common case, he goes not the right way that does not with innocent simplicity, commit his cause to the judge as to a common defender, thinking nothing less than to render mutual recompense of evil, which is the affection of revenge: or if any matter of life and death, or any great criminal action be commenced, we require that the accuser be such a one, as comes into the court being taken with no boiling heat of revenge, and touched with no displeasure of private injury, but only having in mind to withstand the enterprises of a mischievous man, that they may not hurt the common weal. But if you take away a revenging mind, there is no offense done against that commandment whereby revenge is forbidden to Christians. But they are not only forbidden to desire revenge, but they are also commanded to wait for the hand of the Lord, which promises that he will be a present revenger for the oppressed and afflicted: but they do prevent all revenge of the heavenly defender, which require help at the Magistrate's hand either for themselves or others. Not so. For we must think that the Magistrate's revenge is not the revenge of man but of God, which (as Paul says) he extends and exercises by the ministry of man for our good.

And no more do we disagree with the words of Christ, by which he forbids to resist evil, and commands to turn the right cheek to him that has given a blow on the left, and to suffer him to take away your cloak that takes away your coat. He truly intends there that the minds of his people should so much abhor from the desire of repaying like for like, that they should sooner suffer double injury to be done to themselves, than desire to requite it: from which patience neither do we also lead them away. For Christians truly ought to be a kind of men made to bear reproaches and injuries, open to the malice, deceits, and mockeries of wicked men: and not that only, but also they must be bearers of all these evils, that is to say so formed with all their hearts, that having received one displeasure they make themselves ready for another, promising to themselves nothing in their whole life but the bearing of a continual cross. In the meantime also they must do good to them that do them wrong, and wish well to those that curse them, and (which is their only victory) strive to overcome evil with good. Being so minded they will not seek eye for eye, tooth for tooth, as the Pharisees taught their disciples to desire revenge, but (as we are taught of Christ) they will so suffer their body to be mangled, and their goods to be maliciously taken from them, that they will forgive and of their own accord pardon those evils as soon as they are done to them. Yet this evenness and moderation of minds shall not withstand, but that the friendship toward their enemies remaining safe, they may use the help of the magistrate to the preserving of their goods, or for zeal of public commodity may sue a guilty and pestilent man to be punished, whom they know that he can not be amended but by death. For Augustine truly expounds that all these commandments tend to this end, that a righteous and godly man should be ready to bear patiently the malice of them whom he seeks to have made good men, that rather the number of the good may increase, not that he should with like malice add himself also to the number of the evil: then, that they more pertain to the preparation of the heart, which is inwardly, than to the work which is done openly: that in secret may be kept patience of mind with good will, but openly that may be done which we see may be profitable to them to whom we ought to bear good will.

But this which is wont to be objected, that contentions in law are altogether condemned of Paul, is also false. It may easily be perceived by his words, that there was an immeasurable rage of striving at law in the Church of the Corinthians: so far forth that they did make the gospel of Christ and the whole religion which they professed, open to the cavilling and evil speaking of the wicked. This is the first thing that Paul blames in them, that by their intemperance of contentions they brought the gospel into slander among the unbelievers. And then this point also, that in such sort they strove among themselves, brothers with brothers. For they were so far from bearing of wrongs, that they greedily gaped one for another's goods, provoked one another, and being unprovoked did hurt. Therefore he inveighs against that rage of contending, and not simply against all controversies. But he pronounces that it is a fault or a weakness, that they did not rather suffer loss of their goods than to labor even to contentions for the preserving of them: namely when they were so easily moved with every damage, and for most small causes did run to the court of law and to controversies, he says that this is a proof that they were of a mind too ready to anger and not well formed to patience. Christians verily ought to do this, that they had always rather to yield of their own right than to go to law, from where they can scarcely get out again but with a mind too much moved and kindled to hatred of their brother. But when a man sees that without loss of charity he may defend his own, the loss whereof should be a sore hindrance to him: if he do so he offends nothing against this saying of Paul. Finally (as we have taught in the beginning) charity shall give every man best counsel, without which whatever controversies are taken in hand, and beyond which whatever do proceed, we hold it out of controversy that they be unjust and wicked.

The first duty of subjects toward their magistrates is, to think most honorably of their office, namely which they acknowledge to be a jurisdiction committed of God, and therefore to esteem them and reverence them as the ministers and deputies of God. For a man may find some, which yield themselves very obedient to their magistrates, and would not that there were not some whom they should obey, because they so know it to be expedient for the common benefit: but of the magistrates themselves they think no otherwise than of certain necessary evils. But Peter requires somewhat more of us, when he commands that the king be honored: and Solomon, when he commands God and the king to be feared. For Peter under the word of honoring contains a sincere and well-deeming estimation: and Solomon joining the king with God, shows that he is full of a certain holy reverence and dignity. This is also a notable commendation in Paul, that we obey not only for wrath but for conscience. By which he means that subjects ought to be led not only with fear of princes and rulers to be held in their subjection (as they are wont to yield to their armed enemy, which sees that vengeance shall readily be taken upon them if they resist) but because the obediences that are shown to them are shown to God himself, forasmuch as their power is of God. I speak not of the men, as if the visor of dignity did cover foolishness, or sluggishness, or cruelties, or wicked manners and full of mischievous doing: but I say that the degree itself is worthy of honor and reverence: that whoever be rulers may be esteemed by us, and have reverence, in respect of their being rulers.

Of this then also follows another thing: that with minds bent to the honoring of them, declare their obedience in proof to them: whether it be to obey their proclamations, or to pay tribute, or to take in hand public offices and charges that serve for common defense, or to do any other of their commandments. Let every soul (says Paul) be subject to the higher powers. For he that resists the power, resists the ordinance of God. The same Paul writes to Titus: Warn them that they be subject to rulers and powers, that they obey the magistrates, that they be ready to every good work. And Peter says, Be subject to every human creature (or rather as I translate it, Ordinance) for the Lord's sake, either to the king as most excellent, or to the rulers that are sent by him, to the punishment indeed of evil doers, but to the praise of well doers. Moreover that they should testify that they do not feign subjection, but are sincerely and heartily subject, Paul adds that they should commend to God the safety and prosperity of them under whom they live. I exhort (says he) that there be made prayers, beseeching, intercessions, thanksgivings for all men, for kings, and for all that be set in superiority, that we may live a peaceable and quiet life with all godliness and honesty. Neither let any man here deceive himself. For since the magistrate cannot be resisted, but that God himself must also be resisted: although it may be thought that an unarmed magistrate may freely be despised, yet God is armed, which will strongly take vengeance on the despising of himself. Moreover under this obedience I [reconstructed: include] moderation, which private men ought to bind themselves to keep in cases touching the public state, that they do not of their own head intermeddle in public businesses, or rashly break into the office of the magistrate, and undertake nothing publicly. If any thing shall in a public ordinance be needful to be amended, let not themselves raise uproars, nor put their hands to the doing of it, which they all ought to have fast bound in this behalf: but let them commit it to the judgment of the magistrate, whose hand alone is here at liberty. I mean, that they presume to do nothing uncommanded. For when the commandment of the ruler is adjoined, then are they also furnished with public authority. For as they are accustomed to call the counselors of a king, his ears and eyes: so not unfittingly a man may call them the hands of the prince, whom by his commandment he sets in authority for the doing of things.

Now forasmuch as we have hitherto described a magistrate such as is indeed the same that he is called, namely the father of the country, and (as the poet calls him) the pastor of the people, the keeper of peace, the protector of righteousness, the avenger of innocence: he is worthily to be judged a mad man, that allows not such a government. But whereas this is in a manner the experience of all ages, that of princes some being careless of all things to the foreseeing whereof they ought to have been heedfully bent, do without all care slothfully wallow in delights: other some addicted to their gain, do set out to sale all laws, privileges, judgments, and grants: other some spoil the poor commonalty of money which they may after waste upon mad prodigal expendings: other some exercise mere robberies, in pillaging of houses, defiling of virgins and matrons, murdering of innocents: many cannot be persuaded that such should be acknowledged for princes, whose authority they ought to obey so far as they may. For in so great heinous unworthiness, among doings so much contrary to the duty not only of a magistrate, but also of a man, they behold no form of the image of God which ought to shine in a magistrate: when they see no token of that minister of God, which was given for praise to the good and for vengeance to the evil: so neither do they also acknowledge such a governor, whose dignity and authority the Scripture commends to us. And truly this feeling of affection has always been naturally planted in the minds of men, no less to hate and abhor tyrants, than to love and honor lawful kings.

But if we look to the word of God, it will lead us further, that we be subject not only to the government of those princes which execute their office toward us well and with such faithfulness as they ought, but also of all them, which by whatever means it be, have the dominion in possession although they perform nothing less than that which pertains to the duty of princes. For though the Lord testifies that the magistrate is a special great gift of his liberality for preserving of the safety of men, and appoints to magistrates themselves their bounds: yet he does therewithal declare, that of whatever sort they be, they have not their authority but from him: that those indeed, which rule for benefit of the common weal, are true exemplars and patterns of his bountifulness: that they that rule unjustly and willfully, are raised up by him to punish the wickedness of the people: that all equally have that majesty wherewith he has furnished a lawful power. I will proceed no further, till I have added some certain testimonies for that point. Yet we need not much to labor to prove that a wicked king is the wrath of God upon the earth, forasmuch as I think that no man will say the contrary, and otherwise there should be no more said of a king than of a common robber that violently takes away your goods, and of an adulterer that defiles your bed, of a murderer that seeks to kill you, whereas the Scripture reckons all such calamities among the curses of God. But let us rather tarry upon proving that, which does not so easily settle in the minds of men: that in a most naughty man, and most unworthy of all honor, if so that he have the public power in possession, remains that noble and divine power which the Lord has by his word given to the ministers of his righteousness and judgment: and therefore that he ought by his subjects to be held in as great reverence and estimation, so much as pertains to public obedience, as they would have the best king if he were given them.

First I would have you readers perceive and diligently mark that providence and singular doings of God, which is in the Scripture not without cause so often rehearsed to us, in distributing of kingdoms and making Kings whom it pleases him. In Daniel, it is said: The Lord changes times and courses of times, he casts away and makes Kings. Again: That the living may know that the Highest is mighty in the kingdom of men, and he shall give it to whom he will. With which manner of sentences, whereas the whole Scripture abounds, yet that same prophecy of Daniel specially swarms full. Now what manner of King was Nebuchadnezzar, he that conquered Jerusalem, it is sufficiently known, namely a strong invader and destroyer of others. Yet in Ezekiel the Lord affirms that he gave him the land of Egypt for the service that he had done to him in wasting it. And Daniel said to him: You King are the King of Kings, to whom the King of heavens has given a mighty, and strong, and glorious kingdom: to you, I say, he has given it, and all the lands where dwell the children of men, the beasts of the wood, and fowls of the air: he has delivered them into your hand, and has made you to bear rule over them. Again he said to his son Belshazzar: The highest God has given to Nebuchadnezzar your father kingdom and royalty, honor and glory: and by reason of the royalty that he gave him all peoples, tribes, and languages were trembling and fearful at his sight. When we hear that a King is ordained of God, let us thereof call to remembrance those heavenly warnings concerning the honoring and fearing of a King: then we shall not doubt to account a most wicked tyrant in the same place wherein the Lord has vouchsafed to set him. Samuel, when he gave warning to the people of Israel, what manner of things they should suffer at the hands of their Kings, said: This shall be the right of the king that shall reign over you: he shall take your sons and put them to his chariot, to make them his horsemen, and to plow his land, and reap his crop, and to make instruments of war. He shall take your daughters, that they may be his dressers of ointments, his cooks and bakers. Your lands, your vineyards, and your best olive plots he shall take away and give to his servants. He shall take tithes of your seeds and vineyards, and shall give them to his eunuchs and servants. He shall take away your servants, your bond women and your asses, and set them to his work. Indeed he shall take tithes of your flocks: and you shall be his servants. Verily Kings should not have done this of right, whom the Law did very well instruct to all continence: but it was called a right over the people which it required them of necessity to obey, and they might not resist — as if Samuel had said, The willfulness of Kings shall run to such licentiousness, which it shall not be your part to resist, to whom this only thing shall be left, to obey their commandments and listen to their word.

But chiefly there is in Jeremiah a notable place and worthy to be remembered, which although it be somewhat long, yet I will be content to rehearse, because it most plainly determines this whole question. I have made the earth and men, says the Lord, and the living creatures that are on the surface of the earth in my great strength and stretched out arm, and I will deliver it to him whom it pleases in my eyes. And now therefore I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar my servant, and all nations and great Kings shall serve him, till the time shall come of that land. And it shall be as a nation and a kingdom that has not served the King of Babel, I will visit that nation in sword, famine, and pestilence. Therefore, serve the King of Babel and live. We see with how great obedience the Lord willed that cruel and proud tyrant to be honored, for no other reason but because he possessed the kingdom. And that same was by the heavenly decree, that he was set in the throne of the kingdom, and taken up into kingly majesty, which it was unlawful to violate. If we have this continually before our minds and eyes, that even the worst Kings are ordained by the same decree by which the authority of Kings is established: these seditious thoughts shall never come into our mind, that a King is to be handled according to his deservings, and that it is not fitting that we should show ourselves subjects to him that does not on his behalf show himself a King to us.

In vain shall any man object that this was a peculiar commandment to the Israelites. For it is to be noted with what reason the Lord confirms it. I have given (says he) the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar. Therefore serve him and live. To whoever therefore it shall be certain that the kingdom is given, let us not doubt that he is to be obeyed. And as soon as the Lord advances any man to the royal estate, he therein declares his will to us that he will have him reign. For of that there are general testimonies of Scripture. Solomon in the 28th chapter: Many princes are because of the wickedness of the people. Again, Job in the 12th chapter: He takes away subjection from kings, and girds them again with the girdle. But this being confessed, there remains nothing but that we must serve and live. There is also in Jeremiah the prophet another commandment of the Lord, wherein he commands his people to seek the peace of Babylon, to which they had been led away captive, and to pray to him for it, because in its peace should be their peace. Behold, the Israelites being despoiled of all their goods, plucked out of their houses, led away into exile, and cast into miserable bondage, are commanded to pray for the safety of the conqueror: not as in other places we are commanded to pray for our persecutors: but that the kingdom may be preserved to himself and quiet, that they themselves may also live prosperously under him. So David, being already appointed king by the ordinance of God and anointed with his holy oil, when he was without any of his deserving unworthily persecuted by Saul, yet the head of him that laid wait for his life he esteemed as holy, which the Lord had hallowed with the honor of the kingdom. Far be it from me (said he) that I should before the Lord do this thing to my lord the anointed of the Lord, that I should lay my hand upon him, because he is the anointed of the Lord. Again, My soul has spared you, and I have said, I will not lay my hand upon my lord, because he is the anointed of the Lord. Again, Who shall lay his hand upon the anointed of the Lord, and shall be innocent? As sure as the Lord lives, unless the Lord strikes him, or his day has come that he die, or he goes down into battle: far be it from me that I should lay my hand upon the anointed of the Lord.

Finally we owe this affection of reverence, indeed and devotion, to all our rulers, of whatever sort they may be. Which I do therefore the more often repeat, that we may learn not to search what the men themselves may be, but take this for sufficient, that by the will of the Lord they bear that role, in which the Lord himself has imprinted and engraved an inviolable majesty. But (you will say) rulers owe mutual duties to their subjects. That I have already confessed. But if you thereupon conclude that obedience is to be rendered to none but to just governments, you are a foolish reasoner. For husbands also are bound to their wives and parents to their children with mutual duties. Let parents and husbands depart from their duty: let parents show themselves so harsh and unpleasable to their children, whom they are forbidden to provoke to anger, that with their peevishness they do immeasurably weary them: let husbands most despitefully use their wives, whom they are commanded to love, and to spare them as weaker vessels: shall therefore children be less obedient to their parents or wives to their husbands? But they are subject both to evil parents and husbands and such as do not their duty. Indeed, whereas all ought rather to endeavor themselves not to look behind them to the bag banging at their back, that is, not to inquire one of another's duties, but every man set before him that which is his own duty: this ought chiefly to have place among those that are under the power of others. Therefore if we are mercilessly tormented by a cruel prince, if we are ravenously despoiled by a covetous or riotous prince, if we are neglected by a slothful prince, or finally if we are vexed for godliness's sake by a wicked and ungodly prince: let us first call to mind the remembrance of our sins, which undoubtedly are chastised with such scourges of the Lord. Thereby humility shall bridle our impatience. Let us then also call to mind this thought, that it pertains not to us to remedy such evils: but this only is left for us, that we implore the help of the Lord, in whose hand are the hearts of kings, and the bendings of kingdoms. He is the God that shall stand in the assembly of gods, and shall in the midst judge the gods from whose face all kings shall fall, and be broken, and all the judges of the earth that shall have not kissed his anointed, that have written unjust laws to oppress the poor in judgment, and do violence to the cause of the humble, to make widows a prey, and rob the fatherless.

And here both his marvelous goodness, power, and providence show themselves: for sometimes of his servants he raises up open avengers, and furnishes them with his commandment, to take vengeance on their unjust government, and to deliver his people many ways oppressed out of miserable distress: sometimes he directs to the same end the rage of men that intended and went about another thing. So he delivered the people of Israel out of the tyranny of Pharaoh, by Moses: and out of the violence of Cushan king of Syria, by Othniel: and out of other bondages, by other kings or judges. So he tamed the pride of Tyre, by the Egyptians: the insolence of the Egyptians, by the Assyrians: the fierceness of the Assyrians, by the Chaldeans: the boldness of Babylon, by the Medes, and by the Persians when Cyrus had subdued the Medes. And the unthankfulness of the kings of Judah and Israel, and their wicked obstinacy toward his so many benefits, he did beat down and bring to distress, sometimes by the Assyrians, sometimes by the Babylonians, though not all after one manner. For the first sort of men, when they were by the lawful calling of God sent to do such acts: in taking arms against kings, they did not violate that majesty which is planted in kings by the ordinance of God: but being armed from heaven they subdued the lesser power with the greater: just as it is lawful for kings to punish their lords under them. But these latter sort, although they were directed by the hand of God wherever it pleased him, and they unwittingly did his work, yet purposed in their mind nothing but mischief.

But however the very doings of men be judged, yet the Lord did as well execute his work by them, when he did break the bloody scepters of proud kings, and overthrew their intolerable governments. Let princes hear and be afraid. But we in the mean time must take great heed, that we do not despise or offend that authority of magistrates full of reverend majesty, which God has established with most weighty decrees, although it remain with most unworthy men, and which do with their wickedness, so much as in them is, defile it. For though the correcting of unbridled government be by the vengeance of the Lord, let us not immediately think that it is committed to us, to whom there is given no other commandment but to obey and suffer. I speak always of private men. For if there be at this time any magistrates for the behalf of the people, (such as in old time were the Ephori, that were set against the kings of Lacedaemonia or the Tribunes of the people, against the Roman Consuls: or the Demarchi, against the Senate of Athens: and the same power also which perhaps, as things are now, the three estates have in every realm, when they hold their principal assemblies) I do so not forbid them according to their office to withstand the outraging licentiousness of kings, that I affirm that if they wink at kings willfully raging over and treading down the poor commonalty, their dissembling is not without wicked breach of faith, because they deceitfully betray the liberty of the people, of which they know themselves to be appointed protectors by the ordinance of God.

But in that obedience which we have determined to be due to the authorities of governors, this is always to be excepted, indeed chiefly to be observed, that it do not lead us away from obeying him, to whose will the desires of all kings ought to be subject, to whose decrees all their commandments ought to yield, to whose majesty their maces ought to be submitted. And truly how disorderly were it, for the satisfying of men to run into his displeasure for whom men themselves are obeyed? The Lord therefore is the King of kings: who, when he has opened his holy mouth, is to be heard alone for altogether and above all: next to him we be subject to those men that are set over us: but no otherwise than in him. If they command anything against him, let it have no place and let no account be made of it: neither let us herein at all stay upon all that dignity in which the magistrates excel, to which there is no wrong done, when it is brought into order of subjection in comparison of that singular and truly sovereign power of God. After this reason Daniel denied that he had anything offended against the king, when he obeyed not his wicked proclamation: because the king had passed his bounds, and had not only been a wrongdoer to men, but in lifting up his horns against God he had taken away power from himself. On the other side the Israelites are condemned, because they were too much obedient to the wicked commandment of the king. For when Jeroboam had made golden calves, they forsaking the temple of God, did for his pleasure turn to new superstitions. With like lightness their posterity inclined themselves to the ordinances of their kings. With this the prophet sharply reproaches them, that they embraced the commandments of the king: so far is it from that the pretense of humility may deserve praise, with which the flatterers of the court do cover themselves and deceive the simple, while they say that it is not lawful for them to refuse anything that is commanded them of their princes: as though God had resigned his right to mortal men, giving them the rule of mankind: or as though the earthly power were diminished, when it is made subject to the author of it, before whom even the heavenly powers do humbly tremble for fear. I know how great and how present peril hangs over this constancy, because kings do most reluctantly suffer themselves to be despised, whose displeasure (says Solomon) is the messenger of death. But since this decree is proclaimed by the heavenly herald Peter, that we ought to obey God rather than men, let us comfort ourselves with this thought, that we then perform that obedience which the Lord requires, when we suffer anything rather, whatever it be, than swerve from godliness. And that our courage should not faint, Paul puts also another spur to us, that we were therefore redeemed of Christ with so great a price as our redemption cost him, that we should not yield ourselves in thralldom to obey the perverse desires of men, but much less should be bound to ungodliness.

Praise be to God. T.N.

Since we have previously described two kinds of government in humanity, and since we have already discussed the one that deals with the soul or inner person and concerns eternal life, this section requires us to say something about the other kind -- the one that pertains only to civil affairs and the outward standards of behavior. The topic seems disconnected from the spiritual teaching of faith that I undertook to discuss. Yet the following pages will show that I am right to join them together -- indeed, that I am compelled to do so. On the one hand, deranged and barbarous people furiously try to overthrow this order that God established. On the other hand, the flatterers of princes elevate their power beyond all measure, setting it up against the empire of God Himself. Unless both of these dangers are addressed, the purity of faith will be lost. Besides, it is no small benefit for us to know how lovingly God has provided for humanity in this area. This knowledge should foster in us a greater desire for godliness as we show our gratitude. First, before we get into the subject itself, we must hold firmly to the distinction we set down earlier. We must not unwisely mix these two things together, as many commonly do, since they require entirely different consideration. When some people hear that the Gospel promises a liberty that acknowledges no king or magistrate among people but looks only to Christ, they think they cannot enjoy any fruit of their freedom as long as they see any authority over them. So they think nothing will be safe until the whole world is rebuilt into a new form -- with no courts, no laws, no magistrates, nothing they think stands against their freedom. But whoever can distinguish between body and soul, between this present passing life and the life to come that is eternal, will not have difficulty understanding that the spiritual kingdom of Christ and the civil government are very different things. Since it is a Jewish error to seek and confine Christ's kingdom within the elements of this world, let us rather think, as Scripture plainly teaches, that it is a spiritual fruit gathered from the benefit of Christ. Let us remember to keep within its proper bounds all the liberty promised and offered to us in Him. Why does the same apostle who commands us to stand firm and not submit to the yoke of slavery also, in another place, tell slaves not to worry about their status? Because spiritual liberty can exist perfectly well alongside civil servitude. His other statements should be understood in this same sense: "In the kingdom of God there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither male nor female, neither slave nor free." Again: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave, or free -- but Christ is all and in all." He means that it does not matter what your status is among people or under whose laws you live, because the kingdom of Christ does not consist in such things.

Yet this distinction should not lead us to think that the whole system of civil government is something impure and irrelevant to Christians. That is indeed what the deluded people who delight in unbridled lawlessness shout and boast. Since we have died with Christ to the elements of this world and now sit in the heavenly places as those removed into God's kingdom, they think it is beneath our dignity to be occupied with the mundane and impure concerns of worldly affairs. "What is the purpose of laws without courts and judges?" they say. "And what does a Christian have to do with courts?" "Indeed, if it is not lawful to kill, what use are laws and courts among us?" But just as we warned above that this kind of government is separate from the spiritual and inward kingdom of Christ, so it must also be known that the two do not conflict with each other. Civil government begins in us even now on earth certain foundations of the heavenly kingdom. In this mortal, passing life, it gives us, as it were, a taste of immortal and imperishable blessedness. But the purpose of this civil government, as long as we live among other people, is to nurture and support the outward worship of God, defend sound doctrine and the well-being of the church, shape our lives for human community, form our conduct according to civil righteousness, bring us into harmony with one another, and maintain common peace and order. All of this I grant would be unnecessary if the kingdom of God, as it now exists among us, were to end this present life. But if it is God's will that while we long for our heavenly homeland we should be pilgrims on the earth, and if the journey requires such helps, those who would take them from people are taking away their very humanity. When they claim there is such great perfection in the church of God that its own self-governance serves as law, they foolishly imagine a perfection that can never be found in any human community. Since the pride and wickedness of evil people are so great that they cannot be restrained even by the full force of the law, what do we think they would do if they saw unpunished freedom open to their wickedness -- people who can barely be kept from doing evil even by force?

The proper ordering of civil government will be discussed in another, more fitting place. For now, I only want to establish that attempting to do away with it is outrageous barbarism. Its use among people is no less essential than bread, water, sun, and air -- and its dignity is far greater. It serves not only the purpose that all these things serve (enabling people to breathe, eat, drink, and sustain life -- though indeed it encompasses all of these by enabling people to live together). It also ensures that idolatry, sacrileges against the name of God, blasphemies against His truth, and other religious offenses do not spring up and spread among the people. It keeps public peace undisturbed. It protects each person's property. It allows people to conduct their affairs without harm. It maintains decency and modesty. In short, it upholds a public expression of religion among Christians and civilized behavior among all people. Let no one object that I am now assigning the care of establishing religion to civil governance, when I seemed before to have placed it beyond human judgment. I am not giving people permission to make laws about religion and the worship of God according to their own preferences, any more than I did before. I simply approve of civil governance that works toward this end: that the true religion contained in God's law not be openly violated and defiled with public sacrilege. But with the help of a clear outline, readers will better understand what should be thought about the whole subject of civil government if we treat its parts separately. There are three parts to it: the magistrate, who is the guardian and keeper of the laws; the laws, according to which the magistrate governs; and the people, who are governed by the laws and obey the magistrate. Therefore, let us first consider the office of the magistrate -- whether it is a legitimate calling approved by God, what kind of office it is, and how great its authority is. Then let us discuss what laws should order a Christian civil society. Finally, let us consider what benefit the laws bring to the people and what respect is owed to the magistrate.

The Lord has not only testified that the office of magistrates is approved and acceptable to Him but has also adorned it with the most honorable titles, greatly commending it to us. To mention a few: wherever those who hold the office of magistrate are called gods, let no one think this title carries little significance. It means they have received their commission from God, are equipped with God's authority, and altogether represent the person of God, whose role they in a sense fulfill. This is not my own interpretation but the explanation of Christ. "If Scripture called them gods," He says, "to whom the word of God was given" -- what is this but saying God has entrusted His business to them? They should serve in His office, as Moses and Jehoshaphat told their appointed judges: they should sit in judgment not for man but for God. Solomon's wisdom, speaking through God's mouth, serves the same purpose: it is God's work that kings reign and counselors decree just things, that princes bear authority and all the judges of the earth execute judgment. This amounts to saying that it is not by human perverseness that the government of all things on earth is in the hands of kings and other rulers. It is by the providence and holy decree of God, to whom it seemed good to manage the affairs of humanity in this way, since He is both present among them and presiding over them in making laws and carrying out justice. Paul also teaches this plainly when he lists government among the gifts of God. These gifts, being distributed according to the diversity of grace, should be used by Christ's servants for building up the church. Although he is specifically speaking there of a council of senior leaders appointed in the early church to oversee public discipline (what he calls "government" in his letter to the Corinthians), since the purpose of civil power points to the same end, there is no doubt he is commending every form of just government to us. But he speaks more directly where he makes a full argument about the subject. He shows that governmental power is God's ordinance, that there are no powers except those ordained by God, and that the rulers themselves are God's ministers -- praising those who do good and avenging God's wrath against evildoers. To this we may add the examples of holy men: some held kingdoms, like David, Josiah, and Hezekiah; some held positions of lordship, like Joseph and Daniel; and some held civil offices in a free nation, like Moses, Joshua, and the Judges. The Lord has declared that He approves of all their offices. Therefore, no one should now doubt that civil authority is a calling that is not only holy and lawful before God, but the most sacred and honorable of all callings in the whole of human life.

Those who want to establish a society without rulers object that although in ancient times kings and judges ruled over uncivilized people, today this servile kind of government does not fit with the perfection Christ has brought through His Gospel. In saying this, they expose not only their ignorance but also their devilish pride, claiming for themselves a perfection of which not even the hundredth part is visible in them. Whatever kind of people they are, their position is easy to refute. When David urges all kings and rulers to kiss the Son of God, he does not tell them to give up their authority and retire to private life. Instead, he tells them to submit the power they hold to Christ, so that He alone may have supreme authority. Likewise, when Isaiah promises that kings will be foster fathers of the church and queens will be its nurses, he does not strip them of their honor. Rather, he gives them the honorable title of defenders of God's worshippers. That prophecy refers to the coming of Christ. I gladly pass over many testimonies that appear everywhere, especially in the Psalms, where every ruler's authority is upheld. But the clearest of all is Paul's statement. When instructing Timothy that prayers must be made for kings in public worship, he immediately adds the reason: so that under them we may lead a quiet life in all godliness and dignity. In these words, he entrusts the well-being of the church to their protection and care.

This truth should constantly occupy the minds of magistrates themselves, since it can serve as a powerful spur to drive them forward in their duty and bring them remarkable comfort to ease the many great difficulties of their office. With what great commitment to fairness, wisdom, gentleness, self-control, and integrity should they carry out their work, knowing they have been appointed as ministers of God's justice! How could they allow injustice into their courtroom when they know it is the throne of the living God? How could they pronounce an unjust verdict with mouths they know are appointed as instruments of God's truth? How could they sign wicked decrees with hands they know are ordained to record God's acts? In short, if they remember they are God's representatives, they must watch with all care, earnestness, and diligence to present to people a certain image of God's providence, protection, goodness, kindness, and justice. They must constantly keep this before their eyes: if all who carry out God's work of vengeance in a deceitful way are cursed, those who behave deceitfully in such a righteous calling are cursed far more severely. When Moses and Jehoshaphat wanted to motivate their judges to do their duty, they had nothing more effective to move them than what we have already discussed: "Consider what you are doing, for you judge not on behalf of man but on behalf of God, who is with you in the matter of judgment." "Now let the fear of the Lord be upon you." "Be careful and diligent, because there is no corruption with the Lord our God." And in another place it says that God stood in the assembly of the gods and sits as judge among the gods, so that they may be encouraged to do their duty when they realize they are God's deputies. They must one day give account for how they handled their responsibilities. This warning should carry great weight with them. If they fail in any way, they are not only wronging the people they unjustly oppress but also slandering God Himself, whose holy judgments they corrupt. On the other hand, they also have a source of exceptional comfort when they realize they are not occupied in secular affairs unworthy of a servant of God. They are engaged in a most holy office, serving as God's representatives.

As for those who are not moved by so many testimonies of Scripture and still dare to attack this holy ministry as something incompatible with Christian religion and godliness -- what are they doing but attacking God Himself? The dishonor of God cannot be separated from the contempt of His minister. Truly, they are not merely rejecting magistrates. They are casting away God so that He should not reign over them. If the Lord spoke this truth about the people of Israel when they rejected Samuel's leadership, why would it be less true today of those who rage against all the governments God has established? But some object that since the Lord told His disciples that the kings of the nations lord it over them, but among His followers it should not be so -- the one who would be first must become the least -- this statement forbids all Christians from taking kingdoms or government positions. What fine interpreters! A dispute had arisen among the disciples about which of them was the greatest. To suppress this pointless ambition, the Lord taught them that their ministry is not like earthly kingdoms, where one person has authority over the rest. I ask you: what does this comparison have to do with diminishing the dignity of kingship? Indeed, what does it prove at all, except that the ministry of an apostle is not the office of a king? Furthermore, although there are various forms of government among magistrates, there is no difference in this respect: we must accept them all as God's ordinances. Paul includes all of them when he says there is no power except from God. The form that pleased him least of all is actually commended with notable praise above the others -- namely, the rule of one. Because it brings with it a universal submission of all people (except the one to whose will all things are subject), it was never popular with the more noble and excellent sort of people in ancient times. But Scripture, to counter these unfair judgments, specifically declares that it is by God's wise providence that kings reign and particularly commands that the king be honored.

It would be truly pointless for private citizens to debate which form of government is best for the place where they live, since they have no right to decide how any commonwealth should be organized. The question also cannot be simply answered without rashness, since the right answer depends largely on circumstances. If you compare the forms of government against each other without considering circumstances, it is not easy to determine which outweighs the others in usefulness -- they are so evenly matched. The slide from monarchy to tyranny is easy. But the slide from the rule of leading citizens to the faction of a few is not much harder. And the easiest slide of all is from popular government to anarchy. If we consider the three forms of government that philosophers describe in themselves, I will not deny that either the rule of the best citizens, or a system combining their rule with popular government, far excels all others. This is not because of any inherent advantage, but because it rarely happens that kings restrain themselves so that their will never deviates from what is just and right. Nor are they always equipped with such sharp judgment and wisdom that each one sees everything that is needed. Therefore, the weakness and limitations of human beings make it safer and more tolerable for many to share the government. They can help one another, teach and correct one another. And if anyone gets out of line, there are overseers and colleagues to restrain their willfulness. Experience has always confirmed this, and the Lord also validated it with His authority when He established a government of leading citizens among the Israelites -- very close to a representative form -- at the time when He intended them to be in their best condition, until He brought forth an image of Christ in David. I freely grant that no form of government is more blessed than this one, where freedom is balanced with proper restraint and is established for the long term. I also consider those most fortunate who enjoy this condition. If they work courageously and steadfastly to preserve and maintain it, I agree they are doing nothing against their duty. The magistrates especially ought to work with the greatest diligence to ensure that the people's freedom, of which they are appointed guardians, is not diminished or dissolved in any way. If they are negligent about this, they are breaking faith with their office and betraying their country. But if they try to impose this form of government on themselves when the Lord has appointed them a different one -- so that the desire for change motivates them -- such thinking is not only foolish and pointless but harmful. If you do not fix your eyes on just one city but look around the whole world, or at least survey a wider range of countries, you will certainly find that it was not without purpose that God's providence arranged for different countries to be ruled by different forms of government. Just as the elements hang together through an unequal balance, so countries are also very well maintained by a certain inequality of systems. However, all these arguments are wasted on those for whom God's will is sufficient. If it is His pleasure to set kings over kingdoms, or senates and officials over free cities, whatever rulers He establishes in the places where we live, it is our duty to show ourselves obedient and submissive to them.

Now the office of magistrates must be briefly described: what its nature is as the word of God defines it, and what it involves. If Scripture did not teach that it extends to both tables of the law, we could learn this from secular writers. No one who has written about the duty of magistrates, the making of laws, or the common good has begun anywhere other than with religion and the worship of God. They have all acknowledged that no government can be happily ordered if the first concern is not godliness, and that laws which neglect the rights of God and provide only for human affairs are backward. Since religion has always held the first place among all philosophers, and this has been confirmed by the universal agreement of all nations, let Christian princes and magistrates be ashamed of their laziness if they do not devote themselves to this concern. We have already shown that this duty is especially required of them by God, as is fitting. They should use their efforts to defend and maintain His honor, since they are His representatives and govern by His blessing. This is why the holy kings are praised in Scripture: they restored the worship of God when it had been corrupted or overthrown, or they took care that religion would flourish, pure and safe, under their rule. On the other hand, Scripture counts a society without rulers among its faults, saying there was no king in Israel, and therefore everyone did what pleased them. This refutes the foolishness of those who would have magistrates ignore the care of God and only settle legal disputes among people. As if God appointed rulers in His name to decide human controversies while leaving out the far weightier matter of ensuring that He Himself is worshipped according to the prescribed rule of His law. But it is the desire to overhaul everything without consequences that drives troublemakers to wish that all enforcers of the law were removed. As for the second table of the law, Jeremiah warns kings to execute justice and righteousness, to rescue the oppressed from the hand of the oppressor, not to mistreat the foreigner and widow, not to do wrong, and not to shed innocent blood (Jeremiah 22:3). The exhortation in Psalm 82 serves the same purpose: they should defend the rights of the poor and needy, rescue the poor and needy, and deliver them from the hand of the oppressor (Psalm 82:3-4). Moses instructs the leaders he appointed in his place: let them hear the disputes between their brothers and judge fairly between each person, their fellow citizen, and the foreigner. They should show no partiality. They should hear the small and the great alike and not be afraid of anyone, because judgment belongs to God (Deuteronomy 1:16-17). I will not discuss the instructions that kings should not accumulate excessive horses, should not be greedy, should not be arrogant above their brothers, and should study the law of the Lord continually throughout their lives. Nor will I discuss how judges should not show favoritism or accept bribes. In describing the office of magistrates here, my purpose is not so much to instruct the magistrates themselves as to teach others what magistrates are and why God has established them. We see, then, that they are appointed as defenders and protectors of innocence, decency, integrity, and peace. Their sole effort should be to provide for the common safety and well-being of all. David pledged to be an example of these virtues when he took the royal throne: he would not consent to any wrongdoing but would hate wicked people, slanderers, and the proud, and would gather honest and faithful people from everywhere. But since they cannot fulfill this role unless they defend good people from the injuries of the wicked, they must also be armed with power to severely suppress open criminals whose wickedness disturbs the common peace. We have thoroughly confirmed by experience what Solon said: that communities are held together by reward and punishment, and that when these are removed, the whole discipline of society falls apart. The desire for fairness and justice grows cold in many minds unless proper honor awaits virtue, and the willfulness of the wicked cannot be restrained without the severity and pain of punishment. The prophet captures both of these aspects when he instructs kings and other rulers to practice justice and righteousness. Righteousness means taking the innocent under your protection, embracing them, defending them, avenging them, and delivering them. Justice means resisting the boldness of the wicked, suppressing their violence, and punishing their offenses.

But here a great and difficult question seems to arise: if all Christians are forbidden by God's law to kill, and the prophet prophesies about the holy mountain of God (that is, the church) that in it they shall not harm or destroy, how can magistrates be both godly and executioners? But if we understand that the magistrate, in carrying out punishments, does nothing on their own authority but executes God's own judgments, this difficulty disappears. The law of the Lord forbids killing. But to ensure that murder does not go unpunished, the lawgiver Himself places the sword in the hands of His ministers, to be drawn against all murderers. To harm and destroy is not the way of the godly. But to carry out the Lord's command by avenging the afflictions of the godly is not to harm or destroy. I wish this were always before our minds: that nothing is done here by human recklessness, but everything by the authority of God who commands it. As long as we follow His lead, we never stray from the right path. Unless someone wants to put a restraint on God's justice, preventing it from punishing wrongdoing. But if it is not lawful to impose limits on His justice, why should we criticize those who serve as His instruments? "They do not bear the sword for nothing," Paul says. "They are God's servants, agents of wrath against evildoers." Therefore, if princes and other rulers know that nothing will be more pleasing to God than their obedience, let them devote themselves to this work if they want to demonstrate their godliness, righteousness, and integrity. This is the motivation that drove Moses when, knowing he was appointed by God's authority to deliver his people, he struck down the Egyptian. Again, when he executed vengeance for the people's sacrilege by killing three thousand men in a single day. David also, when near the end of his life, he commanded his son Solomon to execute Joab and Shimei. For the same reason, he lists it among the virtues of a king to destroy the wicked of the land, so that all evildoers may be driven from the city of God. The praise given to Solomon also serves this point: "You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness." How did that gentle and mild nature of Moses burst into such severity that, sprinkled and stained with the blood of his brothers, he ran through the camp to carry out more executions? How did David, a man of such great gentleness throughout his life, leave that bloody final testament, commanding that his son not let the gray heads of Joab and Shimei go peacefully to the grave? Both of them, by executing the vengeance God entrusted to them, sanctified their hands through their severity. Those hands would have been defiled by showing mercy. Solomon says: "It is an abomination for kings to do injustice, because their throne is established by righteousness." Again: "A king who sits on the throne of judgment sifts all evil with his eyes." Again: "A wise king scatters the wicked and drives the wheel over them." Again: "Remove the dross from the silver, and a vessel comes out for the refiner. Remove the wicked from the king's presence, and his throne will be firmly established in righteousness." Again: "The one who justifies the wicked and the one who condemns the righteous -- both are an abomination to the Lord." Again: "A rebellious person seeks evil, and a cruel messenger is sent against him." Again: "Whoever says to the wicked, 'You are righteous,' will be cursed by peoples and nations." Now if their true righteousness is to pursue the guilty and wicked with drawn sword, let them instead put away their sword and keep their hands free from blood while ruthless criminals rampage with murders and slaughter. Then they will make themselves guilty of the greatest wickedness, and they will earn no praise for goodness and justice. But let there be no harsh and cruel brutality, and let the courtroom not become a place of terror that could rightly be called the ruin of the accused. I am not one who either favors extreme cruelty or thinks a just sentence can be pronounced without clemency -- the best and surest counselor of kings, as Solomon says, the preserver of the king's throne. As someone rightly said in ancient times, clemency is the principal virtue of princes. Yet a magistrate must guard against two extremes: neither wounding rather than healing through excessive strictness, nor falling into a most cruel gentleness through a misguided show of mercy -- dissolving into soft, loose leniency that leads to the destruction of many. This is why it was commonly said in ancient times under the emperor Nerva that it is indeed bad to live under a ruler who permits nothing, but far worse to live under one who permits everything.

Since kings and peoples must sometimes take up the sword to carry out public justice, we may also conclude by the same reasoning that wars undertaken for this purpose are lawful. If power is given to them to maintain peace in their territories, to suppress the rebellious stirrings of troublemakers, to help the violently oppressed, and to punish wrongdoing, can they put this power to better use than against someone who disturbs the peace of individuals and of the whole community, who stirs up rebellion, who commits violent oppression and serious crimes? If they are to be the preservers and defenders of the laws, they must also defeat the schemes of all those whose wickedness corrupts the order of law. Indeed, if they rightly punish thieves whose crimes affect only a few individuals, should they allow an entire country to be plundered and devastated without punishment? It makes no difference whether it is a king or the lowest commoner who invades another's territory without right and plunders it like an enemy. All such people should equally be considered and punished as robbers. Both natural fairness and the rule of duty teach that princes are armed not only to restrain private wrongs through legal punishments but also to defend the territories entrusted to their care through war, when those territories are attacked in the same way. The Holy Spirit declares such wars to be lawful through many testimonies in Scripture.

If someone objects that the New Testament provides no witness or example showing that war is lawful for Christians, I answer first that the same principle of just warfare that existed in ancient times remains in effect today. Conversely, there is nothing that should prevent magistrates from defending their subjects. Second, an explicit discussion of these matters should not be expected in the apostolic writings, since their purpose was not to establish a civil government but to build up the spiritual kingdom of Christ. Third, even in their writings it is shown in passing that Christ's coming changed nothing in this regard. "If Christian teaching condemned all wars," to use Augustine's own words, "the soldiers who asked for counsel about salvation would have been told to throw away their weapons and completely withdraw from military service." But instead they were told: "Do not harm anyone, do not extort money, and be content with your wages." He who taught them that their wages should be enough certainly did not forbid them from being soldiers. But all magistrates must take great care not to follow their own desires in any way. If they must punish, let them not be carried away by reckless anger, driven by hatred, or consumed by unrelenting severity. As Augustine says, let them pity our common human nature even in the one whose individual fault they punish. If they must take up arms against an enemy -- that is, an armed robber -- let them not seek the occasion lightly or take it up when offered unless they are driven to it by absolute necessity. If we ought to do far more than what one ancient writer required, who said that war should be seen as a search for peace, then we certainly ought to try everything else before resorting to armed conflict. In both situations, let them not allow themselves to be driven by any personal feelings. They must be guided only by concern for the public good. Otherwise, they seriously abuse the power given to them -- power that was not granted for their own benefit but for the benefit and service of others. From this same principle of just warfare comes the proper basis for military garrisons, alliances, and other civil defense measures. By garrisons I mean the troops stationed in cities to defend a country's borders. By alliances I mean the treaties made with neighboring rulers under which, if trouble arises in their lands, they may mutually help one another and combine their forces to suppress the common enemies of humanity. By civil defense measures I mean the provisions used in the art of war.

Finally, I will add this: taxes and tributes are the lawful revenues of rulers. They may use them primarily to fund the common expenses of their office, but they may also use them for their personal dignity, which is in a way connected to the honor of the position they hold. We see that David, Hezekiah, Josiah, Jehoshaphat, and other holy kings -- as well as Joseph and Daniel -- spent from the public treasury according to their position without offending godliness. We read in Ezekiel that a very large portion of land was assigned to the king. Although Ezekiel is portraying the spiritual kingdom of Christ, he draws the pattern for his picture from the lawful kingdom of men. Yet rulers must also remember that their treasuries are not so much their own private funds as the resources of the whole people (as Paul testifies). They may not waste or plunder them without clear injustice. Indeed, these funds are the very blood of the people, and failing to protect them is the cruelest inhumanity. Let them consider that their taxes, fees, and other kinds of revenue are nothing but supports for public needs. To burden the common people with these for no reason is tyrannical extortion. These things are not meant to encourage rulers toward wasteful spending and luxury (there is certainly no need to add fuel to their desires, which are already burning too strongly). But since it greatly matters that they be able to do with pure conscience before God everything they dare to do -- so that they do not fall into a wicked boldness that leads to despising God -- they must be taught what is permissible for them. This teaching is also not pointless for private citizens, so they do not rashly and stubbornly complain about any expenses of their rulers, even those that may exceed ordinary and usual levels.

Next to the magistrate in civil society come the laws, which are the strongest sinews of the commonwealth -- or as Cicero (following Plato) calls them, the soul. Without them, the magistrate cannot function, just as they without the magistrate have no living force. Nothing could be more truly said than this: the law is a silent magistrate, and the magistrate is a living law. I promised to discuss what laws should order a Christian civil society. But there is no reason for anyone to expect a lengthy discourse on the best kind of laws, which would be an endless topic and is not relevant to our present purpose. I will simply touch briefly, almost in passing, on what laws a government may use to be godly before God and rightly governed among people. I would have preferred to pass over this entirely in silence, except that I know many people err dangerously on this point. Some deny that a commonwealth is well ordered if it ignores the civil laws of Moses and is instead governed by the common laws of the nations. How dangerous and troubling this idea is, let others consider. It is enough for me to have shown that it is false and foolish. The common division must be maintained: the whole law of God published through Moses is divided into moral, ceremonial, and judicial laws. Each part must be examined separately so we can know what applies to us and what does not. Let no one be troubled by the concern that the judicial and ceremonial laws also relate to morals. The early writers who taught this division were well aware that these two categories had a bearing on moral conduct. But because they could be changed and abolished while the moral law remained intact, they did not call them moral. They reserved that name specifically for the first category, without which true holiness of life and the unchangeable rule of right living cannot exist.

The moral law (to begin there), since it is contained in two main points -- one commanding us to worship God with pure faith and godliness, the other commanding us to embrace all people with genuine love -- is the true and eternal rule of righteousness. It is prescribed for all people of all ages and times who are willing to order their lives according to God's will. This is His eternal and unchangeable will: that He be worshipped by all of us, and that we mutually love one another. The ceremonial law was the education of the Jews, with which it pleased the Lord to train the childhood of that people until the time of fullness came, when He would fully reveal His wisdom to the earth and deliver the reality of the things that were then represented in shadows (Galatians 4:4). The judicial law, given to them as a system of civil order, provided certain rules of fairness and justice by which they could live together peacefully and without harm. Just as the ceremonial practices properly related to the teaching of godliness (keeping the Jewish church in the worship and religion of God) yet could be distinguished from godliness itself, so the judicial laws (although they served no other end than maintaining the charity commanded by the eternal law of God) still had something distinct from the very command to love. Just as the ceremonies could be abolished while godliness remained safe and intact, so these judicial regulations could also be removed while the perpetual duties and commands of charity continued. If this is true, then every nation has the freedom to make whatever laws it foresees will be beneficial for its people. Yet these laws must be shaped by the perpetual rule of charity, so that while they may vary in form, they share the same underlying principle. I believe that barbarous and savage laws -- such as those that honored thieves, allowed promiscuity, and other practices even more disgraceful and contrary to reason -- should not be considered true laws. They violate not only all righteousness but also natural human decency and kindness.

What I have said will be clear if in all laws we examine two things as we should: the enactment of the law, and the principle of fairness on which the enactment is founded. Fairness, because it is natural, can only be one and the same for all laws. Therefore, every law, according to the nature of the matter, should aim at one common goal of fairness. As for the specific enactments of laws, since they depend partly on particular circumstances, they do not all need to be the same, as long as they all aim together at the single standard of fairness. Since the law of God that we call the moral law is nothing other than a testimony of natural law and of that conscience God has engraved in human minds, the entire standard of fairness we are discussing is fully set forth in it. Therefore, it alone must also be the target, rule, and goal of all laws. Whatever laws are framed according to this standard, directed toward this target, and bounded by this goal -- there is no reason for us to reject them, however much they may differ from the Jewish law or from one another. God's law forbids stealing. The penalty appointed for theft in the Jewish civil law can be seen in Exodus (Exodus 22:1). The most ancient laws of other nations punished theft by requiring double repayment. Later laws distinguished between theft caught in the act and theft discovered afterward. Some proceeded to exile, some to whipping, and some eventually to the death penalty. False witness was punished among the Jews by an equal penalty (Deuteronomy 19:18); in some places it was punished only with public shame, in others with hanging, and in still others with crucifixion. Murder is universally punished by all laws with bloodshed, though with various methods of execution. For adultery, some places established harsher penalties, others milder. Yet we see how all these different laws aim at the same end. With one voice they all declare punishment against the offenses that have been condemned by the eternal law of God -- murder, theft, adultery, and false witness. But in the specific manner of punishment, they do not agree. Nor is agreement necessary, or even desirable. Some countries would be destroyed by murders and robberies unless they made terrifying examples of murderers. Some times call for increased severity of penalties. If trouble arises in a commonwealth, the evils that typically grow from it must be corrected with new regulations. In wartime, all humanity would collapse amid the noise of weapons unless an unusual fear of punishment were imposed. In times of famine or plague, unless greater strictness is applied, everything will fall apart. Some nations are more prone to a particular vice, unless it is most firmly suppressed. How spiteful and hostile to the public good would someone be who is offended by such diversity -- the very thing most suited to maintaining the observance of God's law! The claim some make that Moses' law is dishonored when it is set aside and new laws are preferred above it is completely unfounded. Other laws are not preferred above it as though they were inherently superior. They are approved in relation to the particular conditions of time, place, and nation. Nor is Moses' law abrogated, since it was never given to us in the first place. The Lord did not give that law through Moses to be proclaimed to all nations and enforced everywhere. Rather, having taken the Jewish nation into His care, protection, and keeping, He chose to be their specific lawmaker. Like a wise legislator, He crafted His laws with special attention to their particular circumstances.

Now it remains to consider what we placed last: what benefit laws, judicial processes, and magistrates bring to the Christian community. Connected to this is another question: how much private citizens should yield to magistrates, and how far their obedience should extend. Many have thought the office of magistrate is unnecessary among Christians, since they supposedly cannot rightfully seek the magistrate's help -- being forbidden to take revenge, to go to court, and to have any disputes. But since Paul on the contrary clearly testifies that the magistrate is God's servant to us for good, we understand from this that he is ordained by God so that, defended by his hand and help against the malice and injuries of wicked people, we may live in quiet and security. If the magistrate is given to us by the Lord for our defense, and it is lawful for us to make use of this benefit, then it is clear enough that we may also without wrongdoing appeal to him and make our case. But here I must deal with two kinds of people. There are many who burn with such a fever for lawsuits that they are never at peace with themselves unless they are in conflict with others. They pursue their disputes with deadly hatred, with a mad desire for revenge and harm, and they chase them with relentless stubbornness all the way to the destruction of their opponent. Meanwhile, to look righteous, they hide their wickedness behind the cover of the law. But even if the law permits you to sue your brother, you may not therefore hate him, or burn with a furious desire to hurt him, or stubbornly persecute him.

So let this be said to such people: the use of the law is legitimate if a person uses it properly. The right use -- both for the one bringing the case and for the one defending it -- is this: the defendant, when summoned, appears on the appointed day and defends their case with whatever arguments they can, but without bitterness. Their only motive should be to defend what is legally theirs. The plaintiff, when unjustly harmed either in their person or property, turns to the magistrate for protection, makes their complaint, and seeks what is fair and right -- but far removed from any desire to harm or take revenge, far from harshness and hatred, far from the heat of conflict. They should rather be willing to give up something of their own and suffer, than to carry a hostile attitude toward their opponent. On the other hand, when filled with malice, corrupted by envy, inflamed with anger, or breathing revenge -- or when so heated by the conflict that they abandon any part of love -- the entire proceeding, even in the most righteous cause, becomes wicked. This should be a settled principle for all Christians: a dispute, no matter how just, can never be rightly pursued by anyone unless they maintain as much goodwill and love toward their opponent as if the matter in question were already settled by agreement. Someone may say that such restraint is so rarely practiced in litigation that it would be like a miracle to find even one example of it. I admit that in the current state of affairs, a good litigant is rarely seen. Yet the practice itself, when free from any added corruption, remains good and pure. When we hear that the magistrate's help is a holy gift from God, we must be all the more careful not to corrupt it through our own fault.

As for those who flatly condemn all lawsuits, they should understand that they are also despising God's holy ordinance -- a gift that may be pure for those who are pure. Otherwise they must also accuse Paul of wrongdoing, since he both cleared himself of his accusers' slanders by exposing their deceit and malice, and claimed for himself the legal rights of Roman citizenship. When necessary, he appealed from an unjust governor to the emperor's judgment seat. It does not contradict this that all Christians are forbidden to seek revenge. We also drive the desire for revenge far from the Christian courtroom. If the dispute is about a civil matter, the person going the right way does not seek to pay back evil for evil with innocent simplicity. They commit their cause to the judge as a public defender, never even thinking of returning wrong for wrong -- which is the attitude of revenge. Or if a criminal matter involving life and death is brought forward, we require that the accuser come to court without any burning desire for revenge, without personal resentment. They should only want to prevent a dangerous criminal from harming the community. But if you take away the desire for revenge, the commandment forbidding revenge to Christians is not violated. But they are also commanded not only to refrain from revenge but to wait for the hand of the Lord, who promises He will be a ready avenger of the oppressed and afflicted. So by seeking the magistrate's help for themselves or others, are they not getting ahead of the heavenly avenger? Not at all. We must understand that the magistrate's justice is not human vengeance but God's vengeance, which (as Paul says) He carries out and exercises through the ministry of human beings for our good.

Nor do we disagree with Christ's words, by which He forbids resisting evil and commands turning the other cheek to the one who strikes the left, and giving up your cloak to the one who takes your coat. He truly intends there that His people should so deeply hate the desire for retaliation that they would rather endure a double injury than seek to repay it. We do not lead them away from this patience. Christians truly ought to be a kind of people made to endure insults and injuries, open to the malice, deceit, and mockery of the wicked -- and not only that, but also bearers of all these evils. They should be so shaped in their hearts that, having received one offense, they prepare themselves for another. They should promise themselves nothing in their whole life but the bearing of a continual cross. At the same time, they must also do good to those who wrong them and wish well to those who curse them. Their only victory (which is their true victory) should be to overcome evil with good. With this attitude, they will not seek eye for eye and tooth for tooth, as the Pharisees taught their disciples to seek revenge. Instead (as Christ teaches us), they will endure having their bodies struck and their goods maliciously taken, forgiving and spontaneously pardoning those wrongs as soon as they are done. Yet this balance and moderation of mind will not prevent them -- while maintaining their friendship toward their enemies -- from using the help of the magistrate to protect their property, or from seeking punishment for a guilty and dangerous person out of concern for the public good, knowing that the person cannot be reformed except through death. Augustine rightly explains that all these commands are meant to ensure that a righteous and godly person is ready to patiently bear the malice of those they wish to make into better people. This way, the number of the good increases rather than adding themselves to the number of the evil. Furthermore, these commands apply more to the inner preparation of the heart than to outward actions. In secret, patience and goodwill should be maintained, while outwardly, what appears profitable for those we ought to love should be done.

The common objection that Paul completely condemned all lawsuits is also false. Paul's words make it easy to see that there was an extreme obsession with litigation in the Corinthian church. It had gone so far that they were exposing the Gospel of Christ and their whole religion to the ridicule and slander of unbelievers. The first thing Paul criticizes is that their excessive quarreling brought the Gospel into disgrace among the unbelievers. The second is that brothers were fighting against brothers. They were so far from bearing wrongs that they greedily grabbed at each other's goods, provoked one another, and caused harm even when unprovoked. Therefore, Paul attacks this frenzy of litigation, not all disputes in general. But he does declare it a fault or weakness that they did not prefer to suffer loss rather than fight to the point of contention over their possessions. The fact that they were so easily stirred by every setback and ran to court over the smallest issues shows that they were too quick to anger and not well trained in patience. Christians certainly ought to be willing to give up their own rights rather than go to court, from which they can hardly emerge without a mind too agitated and inflamed with hatred toward their brother. But when a person sees that they can defend their property without abandoning charity, and when the loss would seriously harm them -- if they do so, they do not violate Paul's teaching. Finally, as we taught at the beginning, charity will give each person the best counsel. Whatever disputes are pursued without charity, and whatever goes beyond it, we consider to be beyond all controversy unjust and wicked.

The first duty of subjects toward their magistrates is to think most honorably of their office. They should recognize it as a jurisdiction entrusted by God, and therefore esteem and reverence them as ministers and representatives of God. There are some who obey their magistrates readily enough. They would not want to be without someone to obey, since they know it benefits the common good. But they think of the magistrates themselves as nothing more than necessary evils. But Peter requires more of us when he commands us to honor the king. Solomon also requires more when he commands us to fear God and the king. Peter's word "honor" includes a sincere and favorable estimation. Solomon, by joining the king with God, shows that the king's authority carries a certain holy reverence and dignity. Paul also makes a notable point when he says we should obey not only out of fear of punishment but also for the sake of conscience. By this he means that subjects should not be driven to submission merely by fear of rulers and the threat of vengeance (as people yield to an armed enemy when they know punishment will follow if they resist). Rather, the obedience shown to magistrates is shown to God Himself, since their authority comes from Him. I am not speaking about the individuals themselves, as if the mask of their position covered up foolishness, laziness, cruelty, or wicked behavior. I am saying that the office itself is worthy of honor and reverence. Therefore, whoever holds the position of ruler should be esteemed and respected by us simply because of that position.

From this follows another duty: that with hearts inclined to honor them, citizens should demonstrate their obedience in practice -- whether by obeying their decrees, paying taxes, taking on public offices and duties that serve the common defense, or carrying out any other commands. "Let every soul," Paul says, "be subject to the governing authorities." "For whoever resists the authority resists God's ordinance." Paul also writes to Titus: "Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey magistrates, and to be ready for every good work." And Peter says: "Submit yourselves to every human institution" (or as I would translate it, ordinance) "for the Lord's sake -- whether to the king as supreme, or to governors sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do good." Moreover, so that their subjection is not merely pretended but sincere and heartfelt, Paul adds that they should pray to God for the safety and prosperity of those under whom they live. "I urge," he says, "that prayers, requests, intercessions, and thanksgiving be made for all people -- for kings and for all who are in authority, so that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life in all godliness and dignity." Let no one deceive themselves here. Since the magistrate cannot be resisted without also resisting God, even though an unarmed magistrate might seem easy to ignore, God is armed and will take strong vengeance when He Himself is despised. Furthermore, under this obedience I include the restraint private citizens ought to observe regarding public affairs. They should not meddle on their own in public matters, should not rashly intrude into the magistrate's role, and should take on nothing publicly without authorization. If something in a public policy needs to be corrected, private citizens should not start riots or take action themselves. They should leave it to the judgment of the magistrate, whose hand alone is free to act in this area. I mean that they should not presume to do anything without orders. When a ruler's command is given, then they are also equipped with public authority. Just as a king's counselors are commonly called his ears and eyes, so those whom the king appoints to carry out his commands by his authority may not unfittingly be called his hands.

Since we have so far described a magistrate who truly lives up to what they are called -- a father of the country, and (as the poet says) the shepherd of the people, the guardian of peace, the protector of justice, the defender of innocence -- anyone who disapproves of such government would rightly be considered a fool. But since it has been the common experience of nearly every age that some rulers are careless about all the things they should diligently attend to and slothfully wallow in pleasures; others are addicted to profit and put everything up for sale -- laws, privileges, judgments, and grants; others plunder the common people of money only to waste it on insane extravagance; others commit outright robbery, violating women, murdering the innocent -- many people cannot be persuaded to acknowledge such individuals as rulers whose authority they are supposed to obey. In the face of such extreme unworthiness, behavior so contrary to the duty not only of a magistrate but of a decent human being, they see no image of God's likeness (which ought to shine in a magistrate). They see no sign of God's minister who was appointed to praise the good and punish the evil. They also cannot recognize such a governor whose dignity and authority the Scripture commends to us. And truly, it has always been a natural human instinct to hate and despise tyrants just as much as to love and honor legitimate kings.

But if we look to the word of God, it will lead us further: we must be subject not only to the government of rulers who faithfully fulfill their office as they should, but also to all those who hold power by whatever means, even if they do the very opposite of what a ruler should do. Although the Lord testifies that the magistrate is an especially great gift of His generosity for preserving human safety, and although He sets boundaries for magistrates themselves, He also declares that rulers of every kind hold their authority from Him alone. Those who govern for the public good are true examples and patterns of His bounty. Those who rule unjustly and tyrannically are raised up by Him to punish the wickedness of the people. All equally possess the majesty with which He has furnished legitimate authority. I will not proceed further until I have added some specific proofs of this point. We do not need to work hard to prove that a wicked king is the expression of God's wrath upon the earth, since no one would deny it. Otherwise, we would have to say nothing more about a king than about a common robber who steals your property, an adulterer who defiles your marriage, or a murderer who tries to kill you, since Scripture counts all such calamities among God's curses. But let us focus instead on proving the point that does not settle easily in people's minds: even in a thoroughly evil person, completely unworthy of any honor, if they hold public power, the noble and divine authority remains that the Lord has bestowed on the ministers of His justice and judgment. Therefore, their subjects must hold them in the same reverence and respect -- as far as public obedience is concerned -- as they would the best king if he had been given to them.

First, I want the readers to notice and carefully consider something Scripture repeats with good reason: God's providence and special hand in distributing kingdoms and appointing kings. In Daniel it says: "The Lord changes times and seasons; He removes kings and sets up kings." Again: "That the living may know that the Most High is ruler over the kingdom of men and gives it to whomever He wishes." The whole of Scripture is full of such statements, but the book of Daniel is especially packed with them. Now what kind of king was Nebuchadnezzar -- the one who conquered Jerusalem? He was, as we well know, a powerful invader and destroyer of others. Yet in Ezekiel the Lord declares that He gave him the land of Egypt as payment for the service he had done in laying it waste. Daniel told him: "You, O king, are the king of kings, to whom the King of heaven has given a mighty, powerful, and glorious kingdom. He has given you all the lands where people live, and the beasts of the field, and the birds of the air. He has placed them in your hand and made you ruler over them all." Again, he said to Nebuchadnezzar's son Belshazzar: "The Most High God gave your father Nebuchadnezzar sovereignty, greatness, honor, and glory. Because of the greatness He gave him, all peoples, tribes, and languages trembled and feared before him." When we hear that a king is ordained by God, let us call to mind those heavenly instructions about honoring and fearing the king. Then we will not hesitate to assign even the most wicked tyrant to the same position where the Lord has placed him. When Samuel warned the people of Israel what kind of things they would endure from their kings, he said: "This will be the right of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and make them serve his chariots and be his horsemen, and they will plow his fields, harvest his crops, and make his weapons of war." "He will take your daughters as perfumers, cooks, and bakers." "He will take your best fields, vineyards, and olive groves and give them to his servants." "He will take a tenth of your grain and wine and give it to his officials and servants." "He will take your servants, your maids, and your donkeys and put them to his work." "He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you will be his servants." Kings certainly should not have done this by right, since the law provided excellent instruction in restraint. But it was called a "right" over the people because the people were required to obey. They could not resist, as if Samuel had said: "The kings' willfulness will run to such excess, and it will not be your place to resist it. The only thing left for you will be to obey their commands and listen to their word."

But there is an especially notable passage in Jeremiah that is worth remembering. Although it is somewhat long, I will gladly quote it because it most clearly settles this entire question. "I have made the earth and the people and the living creatures on the face of the earth by My great strength and outstretched arm, and I will give it to whoever pleases Me." "And now I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar My servant, and all nations and great kings shall serve him, until the time appointed for that land comes." "And whatever nation or kingdom refuses to serve the king of Babylon, I will punish that nation with sword, famine, and plague." "Therefore, serve the king of Babylon and live." We see how great an obedience the Lord required toward this cruel and proud tyrant, for no other reason than that Nebuchadnezzar held the kingdom. By the decree of heaven, he had been placed on the royal throne and elevated to royal majesty, which it was unlawful to violate. If we always keep this before our minds and eyes -- that even the worst kings are placed in power by the same decree that establishes the authority of all kings -- these rebellious thoughts will never enter our minds: that a king should be treated according to what he deserves, and that it is not fitting for us to act as subjects when he does not act as a king toward us.

No one should object that this was a special command given only to the Israelites. We must notice the reason the Lord gives to support it. "I have given the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar," He says. "Therefore serve him and live." Whoever knows for certain that a kingdom has been given to someone should not doubt that person must be obeyed. And as soon as the Lord raises anyone to royal power, He declares His will to us that He wants that person to reign. There are general testimonies of this throughout Scripture. Solomon says in chapter 28: "Because of the wickedness of the people, they have many rulers." Job says in chapter 12: "He takes authority away from kings and then girds them with it again." Once this is accepted, there is nothing left but to serve and live. There is also another command from the Lord through the prophet Jeremiah, where He tells His people to seek the peace of Babylon, the city to which they had been carried as captives, and to pray for it, because in its peace they would find their own peace. The Israelites, stripped of all their goods, torn from their homes, driven into exile, and thrown into miserable slavery, are told to pray for the safety of their conqueror. They were not simply praying for their persecutors (as we are commanded to do elsewhere), but praying that the kingdom might be preserved for the king and kept in peace, so that they themselves might also prosper under him. David, already appointed king by God's decree and anointed with His holy oil, was unjustly persecuted by Saul through no fault of his own. Yet he still regarded the head of the man who sought his life as sacred, because the Lord had consecrated him with the honor of the kingdom. "Far be it from me," he said, "before the Lord, to do this thing to my lord, the Lord's anointed -- to lay my hand on him, because he is the Lord's anointed." Again: "My soul has spared you, and I said, I will not lay my hand on my lord, because he is the Lord's anointed." Again: "Who can stretch out his hand against the Lord's anointed and be innocent?" "As the Lord lives, unless the Lord strikes him, or his day comes to die, or he goes down into battle -- far be it from me to lay my hand on the Lord's anointed."

We owe this attitude of reverence -- indeed, devotion -- to all our rulers, regardless of what kind of people they are. I repeat this so often so that we may learn not to investigate what kind of people they are, but take this as sufficient: by the Lord's will they hold the position in which the Lord Himself has stamped and engraved an inviolable majesty. But (you will say) rulers owe mutual duties to their subjects. I have already acknowledged that. But if you conclude from this that obedience is only owed to just governments, you are reasoning foolishly. Husbands are also bound to their wives, and parents to their children, by mutual duties. What if parents show themselves harsh and impossible to please toward their children (whom they are told not to provoke to anger), wearing them out with their unreasonableness? What if husbands treat their wives with utter contempt (whom they are commanded to love and treat gently as weaker vessels)? Should children therefore be less obedient to their parents, or wives to their husbands? They are still subject to both -- even to bad parents and bad husbands who fail in their duties. Indeed, everyone should be more concerned with looking at their own responsibilities rather than examining the duties others owe to them. This is especially true for those who are under the authority of others. Therefore, if we are cruelly tormented by a brutal ruler, if we are greedily plundered by a covetous or wasteful one, if we are neglected by a lazy one, or if we are harassed for our faith by a wicked and ungodly one, let us first remember our own sins. These are undoubtedly being punished by such scourges of the Lord. Humility will then restrain our impatience. Let us also remember this: it is not our place to remedy such evils. The only thing left for us is to call upon the Lord's help, in whose hand are the hearts of kings and the shifting of kingdoms. He is the God who will stand in the assembly of the gods and will judge among them. Before His face, all kings will fall and be shattered -- all the judges of the earth who have not kissed His Anointed, who have written unjust laws to oppress the poor in judgment, who do violence to the cause of the humble, who make widows their prey, and who rob the fatherless.

And here both His marvelous goodness, power, and providence show themselves. Sometimes He raises up from among His servants open avengers, equipping them with His command to take vengeance on unjust rule and to deliver His people from their miserable oppression. Sometimes He directs the rage of people who intended and planned something entirely different toward the same end. So He delivered the people of Israel from Pharaoh's tyranny through Moses, from the violence of Cushan king of Syria through Othniel, and from other forms of bondage through other kings or judges. So He subdued the pride of Tyre through the Egyptians, the arrogance of the Egyptians through the Assyrians, the ferocity of the Assyrians through the Chaldeans, and the boldness of Babylon through the Medes and Persians when Cyrus had conquered the Medes. He beat down and brought to ruin the ingratitude and wicked stubbornness of the kings of Judah and Israel -- despite His many blessings to them -- sometimes through the Assyrians, sometimes through the Babylonians, though not all in the same way. The first kind of avengers, having been sent to perform these acts by God's legitimate calling, did not violate the majesty established in kings by God's decree when they took up arms against kings. Armed from heaven, they subdued the lesser power with the greater -- just as it is lawful for kings to punish their subordinate lords. But the latter kind, though they were directed by God's hand wherever it pleased Him and unknowingly carried out His work, had nothing but wickedness in their own minds.

But however we judge the actions of these people, the Lord accomplished His work through them: He broke the bloody scepters of proud kings and overthrew their unbearable governments. Let princes hear this and be afraid. But in the meantime, we must take great care not to despise or offend the authority of magistrates -- full of majestic dignity -- which God has established with the weightiest decrees. This authority deserves our reverence even when it resides with the most unworthy people, who do their best to defile it with their wickedness. Although the correction of tyrannical government belongs to the Lord's vengeance, we must not immediately assume that it has been entrusted to us. We have been given no other command but to obey and endure. I am speaking always of private citizens. If there are today any magistrates appointed to represent the people (such as the Ephors who were set against the kings of Sparta in ancient times, or the Tribunes of the people against the Roman Consuls, or the Demarchs against the Athenian Senate -- and perhaps the same kind of authority that the three estates hold in every kingdom when they convene their principal assemblies), I would not forbid these officials from resisting the outrageous tyranny of kings according to their duty. In fact, if they look the other way while kings willfully trample and oppress the common people, I would say their silence involves a wicked breach of faith, because they are deceitfully betraying the people's freedom, of which they know themselves to be the appointed protectors by God's ordinance.

But in the obedience we have established as owed to the authorities of rulers, one exception must always be made -- indeed, it must be given the highest priority: this obedience must never lead us away from obeying the One to whose will all kings' desires ought to submit, to whose decrees all their commands ought to yield, and to whose majesty their symbols of office ought to bow. How disordered it would be, in order to satisfy human beings, to run into the displeasure of the One for whose sake we obey people in the first place! The Lord, therefore, is the King of kings. When He has opened His holy mouth, He must be heard above all others and before all others. After Him, we are subject to the people set over us -- but only under Him. If they command anything against Him, it should carry no weight and no account should be taken of it. We must not be at all concerned about the dignity in which the magistrates excel, since no wrong is done to it when it is brought into its proper place beneath the singular and truly supreme power of God. Following this principle, Daniel denied that he had committed any offense against the king when he disobeyed the king's wicked decree. The king had overstepped his limits. He had not only wronged people but had lifted his horns against God, thereby forfeiting his own authority. On the other hand, the Israelites are condemned for being too obedient to their king's wicked commands. When Jeroboam made golden calves, they abandoned God's temple and, to please the king, turned to new superstitions. Their descendants bent just as easily to the decrees of their kings. The prophet sharply rebukes them for embracing the king's commands. So far from deserving praise, the pretense of humility with which court flatterers deceive the simple -- saying it is not lawful for them to refuse anything their rulers command -- is thoroughly condemned. As if God had given up His rights to mortal men by putting them in charge of humanity! As if earthly power is diminished when it is made subject to its Author -- before whom even the heavenly powers humbly tremble in reverence! I know how great and how immediate the danger is that comes with this kind of resolve, because kings can barely tolerate being challenged. Their displeasure, as Solomon says, is a messenger of death. But since the heavenly herald Peter has proclaimed this decree -- that we must obey God rather than men -- let us comfort ourselves with this thought: we are performing the obedience the Lord requires when we choose to suffer anything rather than turn away from godliness. And so that our courage does not fail, Paul adds another motivation: we were redeemed by Christ at such a great price so that we would not submit ourselves as slaves to the corrupt desires of other people -- much less so that we would be bound to ungodliness.

Praise be to God. T.N.