Chapter 23: Of the Civil Magistrate

Question 1.

Has God armed the Civil Magistrate with the power of the sword, for the defense and encouragement of those who are good, and for the punishment of evildoers?

Yes. (Romans 13:1-4; 1 Peter 2:13-14.)

Well then, do not the Socinians err, who maintain that it is not the duty of the Civil Magistrate to punish the guilty with death?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because God has expressly commanded that transgressing idolaters be put to death. (Deuteronomy 17:7; Deuteronomy 19:21.) (2) Because it belongs to the office and duty of the Magistrate to punish the guilty with death. (Romans 13:4; 1 Peter 2:14.) (3) Because the capital punishment of evildoers makes others stand in awe and fear to offend. (Deuteronomy 13:11; Deuteronomy 19:20.) (4) Because if the Magistrate shall neglect to inflict due punishment, the Lord himself will be avenged on that Magistrate. (1 Kings 20:42; Numbers 25:4.) (5) Because he that strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death. (Exodus 21:12.) (6) Because all that take the sword shall perish by the sword — namely, without a lawful call or order for it. (Matthew 26:52.) They shall perish by order and command of the Magistrate, to whom the Lord has given the sword for this very end: to punish evildoers with death. (Genesis 9:6; Romans 13:4.)

Question 2.

Is it the duty of the Civil Magistrate to take order that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed, all abuses in worship and discipline reformed, and all idolaters, gainsayers, and other obstinate dissenters be obliged and forced to quit their tenets and opinions, and conform themselves to the true worship and service of God according to his law?

Yes. (Isaiah 49:23; 2 Chronicles 15:12-13; 2 Chronicles 34:33; 2 Kings 18:4; 2 Kings 23:1-26; Ezra 7:23-28; Leviticus 24:16.)

Well then, do not the Quakers and other sectaries err, who judge it Antichristian and the practice of the Church of Rome that the Civil and Supreme Magistrate, with the assistance of the Church and her censures, should by his coercive power force and oblige all his subjects to a reformation of religion and to a conformity to the true worship, sound doctrine, and discipline of the Church?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because it is foretold by the prophet Isaiah that in the days of the gospel, kings shall be nursing fathers and queens nursing mothers to the Church of God. (Isaiah 49:23.) (2) Because Artaxerxes, who was but a heathen king, was very careful to make a decree that whatever was commanded by the God of heaven should be diligently done for the house of the God of heaven, and that whoever would not obey the law of God and the king, judgment was to be executed speedily upon him, whether by death, banishment, confiscation of goods, or imprisonment — for which singular mercy Ezra blessed the Lord God of his fathers, who had put such a thing in the king's heart. (Ezra 7:23-28.) So did Nebuchadnezzar make a decree that if any people, nation, or language should speak anything amiss against the God of heaven, they should be cut in pieces and their houses made a dunghill. (Daniel 3:29.) The like we read of Darius, who made a decree that all men should tremble and fear before the God of Daniel. (Daniel 6:26.) (3) From the example of Hezekiah, who removed the high places and broke the images and cut down the groves and broke in pieces the brazen serpent, to which the Israelites did burn incense. (2 Kings 18:4.) (4) From the example of Josiah, who made a thorough reformation and made all Israel serve the Lord their God — the word in the original signifying that he in a manner forced and compelled them to the pure worship and service of God, as a servant is forced and compelled to his work. He by his royal power and authority kept them in order, forbidding idolatry and commanding them to serve God no otherwise than according to his word. (2 Chronicles 34:33; 2 Chronicles 15:12-13.) They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul, and that whoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death, whether great or small, man or woman. (5) Because whoever blasphemed the name of the Lord was surely put to death. (Leviticus 24:16.) This blaspheming was a piercing through or stabbing the name of the Lord, as the original word properly signifies — which may be done not only after this manner, but by maintaining blasphemous errors and heresies. (6) Because the Supreme Magistrate is Custos utriusque Tabulae, a keeper of both tables of the law of God — as well of the first table, which relates to religion and our duty to God, as of the second, which relates to righteousness and our duty to our neighbor. If then he may punish evildoers who offend against the second table and force and compel them to obedience by the sword of justice which God has put into his hand, much more may he punish idolaters and blasphemers who offend against the first table and force and compel them to obedience, seeing there are many sins against the first table which are more heinous and odious than the sins against the second table. And though it be the sinful practice of the Church of Rome to force men and women to be of their religion, which is superstitious and idolatrous, yet it is not so for others who have the true religion among them. And though our blessed Savior and his Apostles did not use such means for propagating the gospel, reserving the glory of conquering souls to himself and the power of his Spirit, yet he has taught nothing to the contrary — but that kings and magistrates, whom he has made nursing fathers to his Church, may according to the laudable examples of the good kings of Judah improve their power for reformation and maintenance of his own religion. And though religion has been much advanced by suffering, yet it will not follow that a Christian prince has no power to reform his own subjects or extirpate blasphemers and heretics.

Question 3.

Is it lawful for a Christian to accept and execute the office of a Magistrate when called to do so?

Yes. (Proverbs 8:15-16; Romans 13:1-2, 4.)

Well then, do not the Anabaptists err, who maintain that it is not lawful for Christians to carry the office of a Magistrate?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, there is no power but of God, and the powers, which are, are ordained of God (Romans 13:1). (2) Because, Solomon says, by me (that is by the Lord) Kings reign, and Princes decree justice (Proverbs 8:15). (3) Because, the Magistrate exercises, and executes God's judgments (Deuteronomy 1:17). (4) Because, the Magistrate receives all things from God, which are necessary, for the performance of his office (Numbers 11:17). (5) Because, the Lord has promised, that Magistrates under the Gospel, shall be nursing fathers to his Church (Isaiah 49:23). And shall make the Whore desolate, naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire (Revelation 17:16).

Quest. 4.

May the Civil Magistrate, now under the New Testament wage war upon just and necessary occasion?

Yes (Luke 13:14; Matthew 8:9-10; Revelation 17:14, 16; Acts 10:1-2).

Well then, do not the Quakers, Anabaptists and Socinians err, who maintain, that it is altogether unlawful, now under the New Testament, to wage war?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, God appointed, and commanded lawful war (Numbers 31:2). For it is said, the Spirit of the Lord came upon Gideon, when he was to fight the battles of the Lord, against the Midianites, and Amalekites (Judges 6:34). Indeed, the Lord himself prescribes the manner, and way of making of war (Numbers 10:9; Numbers 31:27; Deuteronomy 20:2). And gives knowledge, and skill, to his Generals, and Heroes, to fight his own battles (Psalm 18:34; Psalm 144:1). All which are in no wise abrogated, and taken away, under the New Testament. (2) Because, the Centurion, that was converted to the Faith, did not lay down his office of a Captain of a hundred; which surely, he would have done, if to war under the New Testament, had been unlawful (Acts 10:1, 2, 47). The same may be said of the believing Centurion (Matthew 8:8-10). (3) Because, the office of a soldier, is not reprehended, and reproved, by John the Baptist, but rather approved (Luke 3:14). (4) Because, opposition, and defense, against unjust violence which often times cannot be done, without war, is the very law of nature. (5) Because, it is foretold, that the kings of the earth, shall make war against the Beast (Revelation 17:14, 16).

Quest. 5.

May the Civil Magistrate, assume to himself, the administration of the Word, and Sacraments, or the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven?

No (2 Chronicles 26:18; Matthew 18:17; Matthew 16:19; 1 Corinthians 12:28-29; Romans 10:5; Hebrews 5:4).

Well then, do not the Erastians err, who maintain, that the Civil Magistrate has in himself all Church power; and so may administer the Sacraments, and preach the Word, and may exercise the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ has given no such power to Magistrates: as evidently appears, from all those places of Scripture, where mention is made of the keys. There is not in them, one syllable, of the Civil Magistrate (Matthew 18:17; Matthew 16:19). (2) If the power of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, agree to the Magistrate, as a Magistrate, then ought it to agree, to every Magistrate, though the Magistrate were an Infidel, or a Woman, which is absurd. (3) A Magistrate, as a Magistrate is not a Minister of the Church, as is evident, from all the catalogues of the Ministers of the Church. For in them, you will not find any mention of the Magistrate (Ephesians 4:11; Romans 12:7-8; 1 Corinthians 12:8-10). (4) Because, before ever there was a Christian Magistrate in the world, the Church exercised all acts of Church Jurisdiction, and Government. The Church ordained Ministers and Pastors (1 Timothy 4:14). And inflicted the Censure of Excommunication (1 Corinthians 5:5). And relaxed the Penitent from this Censure. Called a Synod, and stigmatized Heretics (Acts 15). (5) Because, God has put a difference, between the Church Government and the Civil, and has appointed distinct Governors to them (2 Chronicles 19:8-11). (6) Because, God did severely punish Saul, and Uzziah for presuming to offer sacrifice, which was proper to the Priests only (1 Samuel 13:9-10, 13; 2 Chronicles 26:16, 19).

Quest. 6.

Does the Civil Magistrate have power to call Synods, to be present at them, and to provide, that whatever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God?

Yes (2 Chronicles 19:8-11; 2 Chronicles 29-30; Matthew 2:4-5).

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the judgment and care of Religion does not belong to the civil Magistrate?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the custody and keeping of the divine law, is committed by God to the Civil Magistrate (Deuteronomy 17:18). (2) Because, it was foretold, that Kings should be nursing fathers to the Church (Isaiah 49:23). (3) Because, it is the duty of the Magistrate, to take care, that subjects may lead a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness, and honesty (1 Timothy 2:2). (4) From the commendable examples of the good kings of Judah (2 Chronicles 29-30).

Quest. 6.

Does infidelity, or difference in Religion make void the Magistrate's just and legal authority?

No.

Does it free the people from their due obedience to him?

No (1 Peter 2:13; Romans 13:1-4; Titus 3:1).

Well then, do not the Papists, Anabaptists, and others err, who maintain, that subjects ought not to suffer a King that's an infidel, or obey that King in his just commands, that differs from them in Religion? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, we are commanded to submit ourselves to every ordinance of man (1 Peter 2:13), namely in all that they command us, if it be not contrary to God and his command; otherwise, according to Acts 4:19, it is better to obey God than man. And it is said, for the Lord's sake, that is, because it is God's will to govern us by them. (2) Because, the Christians, which were at Rome, were commanded by the Apostle to subject themselves to the higher powers, and that without exception of religion and piety, and even to that heathen the Roman Emperor (Romans 13:1). (3) Because, the same Apostle writing to Titus, bids him exhort the Cretians his hearers, to obey magistrates, whatever manner of ones they be, not only believing ones, but also those that are unbelieving, as then, they were yet most of them (Titus 3:1). (4) Because, when the Apostle Paul was pursued for his life, and charged with matters criminal, he appealed to Caesar (Acts 25:10-11). (5) Because, the Prophet Jeremiah did own the power of Zedekiah, who had turned aside to a false worship, and had despised the oath, which he had made to the King of Babylon (Ezekiel 17:16-17). Now hear I pray you, says the Prophet, O my Lord the King, let my supplication I pray you be accepted before you (Jeremiah 27:20). (6) Because, Christ himself paid tribute to Caesar, though he was free, being both the Son of God by nature, and the Son of David by birth (Matthew 17:26). And he commanded and allowed others to pay (Matthew 22:21; Romans 13:7). (7) Because, Paul did own and acknowledge the power of King Agrippa (Acts 26:2).

Quest. 7.

Is it the duty of people to pray for magistrates and honor their persons?

Yes (1 Timothy 2:1-2; 1 Peter 2:17).

Well then, do not some err, who deny this?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Samuel at the request of Saul, whom he knew the Lord had rejected, returned again after him, and honored him before the people (1 Samuel 15:31). (2) Because, the Lord having appointed magistrates to administer justice and judgment in his name, is so far pleased to honor them, as to call them gods, and the children of the high (Psalm 82:1, 6). (3) Because, the Apostle Peter says, fear God and honor the King, parallel to what Paul says, render to all men their dues; honor to whom honor is due (1 Peter 2:17; Romans 13:7).

(4) Because, even heathen magistrates are called the Lord's anointed (Isaiah 45:1), and the Lord calls Nebuchadnezzar his servant (Jeremiah 27:6). If then such magistrates ought to be honored upon that account, much more Christian magistrates. (5) Because, if we be obliged not to speak evil of dignities (2 Peter 2:11), nor revile the gods (Exodus 22:8), we are obliged to honor dignities, for where a sin is forbidden, the contrary duty is commanded. (6) Because, God commanded his people the Jews to seek the peace of the city — that is, the welfare and prosperity of Babylon — where he had caused them to be carried away captives (Jeremiah 29:7). (7) Because, the Prophet, the man of God, besought the Lord in behalf of Jeroboam, and prayed for him, a man that had made apostasy from the true worship of God, and had made Israel to sin (1 Kings 13:3). (8) Because, our blessed Savior says, render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's (Matthew 22:21), but prayers and supplications are as due to Caesar as custom and tribute (1 Timothy 2:1-2). (9) Because, the Apostle commands us to pray for all that are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life; which is the cause therefore we must pray for magistrates. For in the Apostle's times, and long after, magistrates were persecutors of the Church of God, and hindered the members of Christ to live in peace and godliness (1 Timothy 2:1-2). (9) Because, Moses cried to the Lord in behalf of Pharaoh (Exodus 8:12), Abraham prayed to God for Abimelech (Genesis 20:17), Jacob blessed Pharaoh (Genesis 47:7, 10). (10) Because, many blessed martyrs going to death have prayed for their persecuting magistrates, following the example and command of our blessed Savior (Luke 23:34; Matthew 5:44).

Quest. 8.

Ought any man at his own hand, or at the instigation of other men, to assassinate or kill a magistrate, or any private or public person, under the pretense they are heretics and persecutors of the truth?

No (Exodus 20:13; Proverbs 1:10-11).

Well then, do not those men of the Romish Church err, and others too, who own this dangerous tenet? Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, all sort of murder is expressly forbidden in the sixth command, you shalt not kill (Exodus 20:13), where there is a clear distinction made by the word "You," between a private man and a public magistrate, that does it by divine authority. (2) Because, though Saul was a man rejected of God (1 Samuel 15:26), yet David says to the Amalekite, how were you not afraid to stretch forth your hand, to destroy the Lord's anointed (2 Samuel 1:14; see 1 Samuel 24:5; 1 Samuel 26:9). (3) Because, whatever may be alleged from Phineas's deed (Numbers 25:8), from Ehud's deed in stabbing Eglon (Judges 3:21), from Samuel's deed in killing Agag (1 Samuel 15:33), and from Elijah's deed in killing the priests of Baal (1 Kings 18:40), they will not by any means favor private men's assassinations; for certainly Phineas had a divine motion, as Ehud had, stirring him up, which was evident by the Lord's approving the deed, and rewarding it. Samuel (no doubt) was moved to this by an inward motion and instinct of God, and the conduct of his Spirit, as was Elijah; so that their deeds, and such like were altogether particular, and cannot be abused by imitation, and followed by every one, as rules, whose calling is not properly to use the sword of justice. (4) Because, it would bring a mass of confusion, to the utter ruin of all societies, if every man at his own hand might execute vindictive justice upon offenders, who deserve it, or upon pretence they do deserve it, which is to fight against God, who is the God of order politic, as well, as ecclesiastic, and not of confusion. (5) Because, the wrath of man works not the righteousness of God (James 1:20). (6) Because, it is a contempt of public laws, and public order. It is an usurpation of the magistrate's sword, which God has put into his hand for punishing and protecting; it is an invasion of God's right and prerogative of executing vengeance, which he has so expressly reserved to himself (Psalm 94:1; Romans 12:19; Deuteronomy 32:35; Proverbs 25:21-22). (6) Because, Solomon says, my son, if sinners entice you, consent you not, if they say come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent, walk not you in the way with them (Proverbs 1:10-11). (7) Because, a righteous man regards the life of his beast, much more ought a righteous man to regard the life of his neighbor (Proverbs 12:10). The sin of murder may be many ways aggravated. First, by the quality of the person murdered, whether he be a superior, as a magistrate, or minister, or parent, or whether he be of a near relation, as a brother, or near kinsman. Secondly, from the manner, extreme cruelty being used, or sudden and unexpected death, putting a man into eternity in the twinkling of an eye. To which we may add deliberation and premeditated murder, of which Solomon speaks in the aforementioned place.

Quest. 9.

Are ecclesiastical persons exempted from due obedience to the magistrate?

No (Romans 13:1; 1 Kings 2:26; Acts 25:9-11; 2 Peter 2:1, 10-11; Jude 8-11).

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the clergy (as they call them) and their goods are altogether free, by the law of God from secular powers?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, the command of obedience is general, and universal: let every soul be subject (Romans 13:1). (2) Because, Christ commanded the Pharisees, who were of the clergy, to render to Caesar, the things which are Caesar's (Matthew 22:21). In fact Christ himself paid tribute money, to wit, a stater, in value two shillings, and three pence, which Peter found in the fish's mouth, when he opened it (Matthew 17:27). (3) Because, Paul did acknowledge himself subject to the magistrate, when he appealed to Caesar (Acts 25:11). (4) From the example of the priests who were subject to their kings: did not Abiathar at Solomon's command, go to Anathoth? (1 Kings 2:26).

Quest. 10.

Has the Pope any power, or jurisdiction over magistrates, in their dominions, or over any of their people?

No (Revelation 13:15-17; 2 Thessalonians 2:4).

Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the Pope of Rome, as Pope, has full power by divine right, over the whole world, as well in matters civil as ecclesiastical?

Yes.

By what reasons are they confuted?

(1) Because, Christ expressly discharges his disciples, from taking to themselves, any such power or dominion (Matthew 20:25; Mark 10:42). (2) Because, the kingdom of Christ is not of this world (John 18:36). Neither ought the Pope's kingdom to be of this world, who calls himself the Vicar of Christ — that is, one who supplies Christ's room, and takes pains for him, his deputy here on earth. (3) Because, when the people would have made Christ a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone (John 6:15). (4) Because, the Apostle Peter discharged this dominion (1 Peter 5:1-3). (5) Because, it is never heard, that any of the Apostles did ever use any civil power, or command, or sat as judges in civil matters, but stood always to be judged, by civil powers, as is evident from the history of the Acts. (6) Because, GOD has put a difference, between the government of the church, and the civil government; and has given to each, their own proper, and distinct officers. Neither can the one invade the other without very great sin (2 Chronicles 19:8-11). (7) Because, it is the mark of Antichrist, to exalt himself above all, that is called God (2 Thessalonians 2:4).