I was reading Calvin
and what he has written has strike me as unthinkable considering the injustice
and tyranny he and his countrymen has suffered. Below is Calvin’s
view in which we may be disagreeable, but it is certainly worthwhile to ponder
the arguments of this great reformer. May the Lord grant more years of peace to
my countrymen and mercifully restore peace elsewhere.
Calvin, J. (2011).
Institutes of the Christian Religion (J. T. McNeill, Ed., F. L. Battles,
Trans.) Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
Inst 22.Vol 4 ChptXX Sec 22 Deference
(Obedience, with reverence, due even unjust
rulers, 22–29)
aThe first duty of subjects
toward their magistrates is to think most honorably of their office,45 which they recognize as a
jurisdiction bestowed by God, and on that account to esteem and reverence them
as ministers and representatives of God. For you may find some who very
respectfully yield themselves to their magistrates and desire somebody whom
they can obey, because they know that such is expedient for public welfare;
nevertheless, they regard magistrates only as a kind of necessary evil. But
Peter requires something more of us when he commands that the king be honored
[1 Peter 2:17]; as does Solomon when he teaches that God and king are to be
feared [Prov. 24:21]. For Peter, in the word “to honor”
includes a sincere and candid opinion of the king. Solomon, yoking the king
with God, shows that the king is full of a holy reverence and dignity. There is
also that famous saying in Paul: that we should obey “not
only because of wrath, but because of conscience” [Rom.
13:5, cf. Vg.]. By this he
means that subjects should be led not by fear alone of princes and rulers to
remain in subjection under them (as they commonly yield to an armed enemy who
sees that vengeance is promptly taken if they resist), but because they are
showing obedience to God himself when they give it to them; since the rulers’
power is from God.
eI am not discussing the men
themselves, as if a mask of dignity covered foolishness, or sloth, or cruelty,
as well as wicked morals full of infamous deeds, and thus acquired for vices the
praise of virtues; but I say that the order itself is worthy of such honor and
reverence that those who are rulers are esteemed among us, and receive
reverence out of respect for their lordship.
23. Obedience
aFrom this also something else
follows: that, with hearts inclined to reverence their rulers, the subjects
should prove their obedience toward them, whether by obeying their
proclamations, or by paying taxes, or by undertaking public offices and burdens
which pertain to the common defense, or by executing any other commands of
theirs. “Let every soul,” says
Paul, “be subject to the higher powers.…
For he who resists authority, resists what God has ordained.”
[Rom. 13:1–2, Vg.] “Remind
them,” he writes to Titus, “to
be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready for
every good work.” [Titus 3:1, cf. Vg.] And Peter says, “Be
subject to every human creature45x
(or rather, as I translate it, ordinance) afor the Lord’s
sake, whether it be to the king, as supreme, or unto governors who are sent
through him to punish evildoers, but to praise doers of good.”
[1 Peter 2:13–14.]46 Now, in order that they may
prove that they are not pretending subjection, but are sincerely and heartily
subjects, Paul adds that they should commend to God the safety and prosperity
of those under whom they live. “I urge,”
he says, “that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and
thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings, and all that are in authority,
that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, with all godliness and honesty.”
[1 Tim. 2:1–2, cf. Vg.]
Let no man deceive
himself here. For since the magistrate cannot be resisted without God being
resisted at the same time, even though it seems that an unarmed magistrate can
be despised with impunity, still God is armed to avenge mightily this contempt
toward himself.
Moreover, under this
obedience I include the restraint which private citizens ought to bid
themselves keep in public, that they may not deliberately intrude in public
affairs, or pointlessly invade the magistrate’s
office, or undertake anything at all politically. If anything in a public
ordinance requires amendment, let them not raise a tumult, or put their hands
to the task—all of them ought to keep their hands bound in
this respect—but let them commit the matter to the judgment
of the magistrate, whose hand alone here is free. I mean, let them not venture
on anything without a command. For when the ruler gives his command, private
citizens receive public authority. For as the counselors are commonly called
the ears and eyes of the prince,47 so may one reasonably speak
of those whom he has appointed by his command to do things, as the hands of the
prince.
24. Obedience is also due the unjust magistrate
aBut since we have so far
been describing a magistrate who truly is what he is called, that is, a father
of his country,48 and, as
the poet expresses it, shepherd of his people,49 guardian of peace, protector
of righteousness, and avenger of innocence—he who does not approve of
such government must rightly be regarded as insane.
But it is the example
of nearly all ages that some princes are careless about all those things to
which they ought to have given heed, and, far from all care, lazily take their
pleasure. Others, intent upon their own business, put up for sale laws,
privileges, judgments, and letters of favor. Others drain the common people of
their money, and afterward lavish it on insane largesse. Still others exercise
sheer robbery, plundering houses, raping virgins and matrons, and slaughtering
the innocent.
Consequently, many
cannot be persuaded that they ought to recognize these as princes and to obey
their authority as far as possible. For in such great disgrace, and among such
crimes, so alien to the office not only of a magistrate but also of a man, they
discern no appearance of the image of God which ought to have shone in the
magistrate; while they see no trace of that minister of God, who had been
appointed to praise the good, and to punish the evil [cf. 1 Peter 2:14, Vg.]. Thus, they also do not
recognize as ruler him whose dignity and authority Scripture commends to us.
Indeed, this inborn feeling has always been in the minds of men to hate and
curse tyrants as much as to love and venerate lawful kings.
But if we look to God’s
Word, it will lead us farther. We are not only subject to the authority of
princes who perform their office toward us uprightly and faithfully as they
ought, but also to the authority of all who, by whatever means, have got
control of affairs, even though they perform not a whit of the princes’
office. For despite the Lord’s testimony that the
magistrate’s office is the highest gift of his beneficence
to preserve the safety of men, and despite his appointment of bounds to the
magistrates—he still declares at the same time that whoever
they may be, they have their authority solely from him. Indeed, he says that
those who rule for the public benefit are true patterns and evidences of this
beneficence of his; that they who rule unjustly and incompetently have been
raised up by him to punish the wickedness of the people; that all equally have
been endowed with that holy majesty with which he has invested lawful power.
I shall proceed no
farther until I have added some sure testimonies of this thing. Yet, we need not
labor to prove that a wicked king is the Lord’s wrath
upon the earth [Job 34:30, Vg.;
Hos. 13:11; Isa. 3:4; 10:5; Deut. 28:29], for I believe no man will contradict
me; and thus nothing more would be said of a king than of a robber who seizes
your possessions, of an adulterer who pollutes your marriage bed, or of a
murderer who seeks to kill you. For Scripture reckons all such calamities among
God’s curses.
But let us, rather,
pause here to prove this, which does not so easily settle in men’s
minds. In a very wicked man utterly unworthy of all honor, provided he has the
public power in his hands, that noble and divine power resides which the Lord
has by his Word given to the ministers of his justice and judgment.
Accordingly, he should be held in the same reverence and esteem by his
subjects, in so far as public obedience is concerned, in which they would hold
the best of kings if he were given to them.
aFirst, I should like my
readers to note and carefully observe that providence of God, which the
Scriptures with good reason so often recall to us, and its special operation in
distributing kingdoms and appointing what kings he pleases. In Daniel, the Lord
changes times and successions of times, removes kings and sets them up [Dan.
2:21, 37]. Likewise: “to the end that the living may know that the
Most High rules the kingdom of men, and gives it to whom he will”
[Dan. 4:17; cf. ch. 4:14, Vg.].
Although Scripture everywhere abounds with such passages, this prophecy
particularly swarms with them. Now it is well enough known what kind of king
Nebuchadnezzar was, who conquered Jerusalem—a strong
invader and destroyer of others. Nevertheless, the Lord declares in Ezekiel
that He has given him the land of Egypt for the service he had done him in
devastating it [Ezek. 29:19–20]. And Daniel said to
him: “You, O king, are a king of kings, to whom the
God of heaven has given the kingdom, powerful, mighty, and glorious; to you, I
say, he has given also all lands where the sons of men dwell, beasts of the
forest and birds of the air: these he has given into your hand and made you
rule over them” [Dan. 2:37–38, cf.
Vg.]. Again, Daniel says
to Nebuchadnezzar’s son Belshazzar: “The
Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar, your father, kingship and magnificence,
honor and glory; and because of the magnificence that he gave him, all peoples,
tribes, and tongues were trembling and fearful before him”
[Dan. 5:18–19, cf. Vg.]. When we hear that a king
has been ordained by God, let us at once call to mind those heavenly edicts
with regard to honoring and fearing a king; then we shall not hesitate to hold
a most wicked tyrant in the place where the Lord has deigned to set him.
Samuel, when he warned the people of Israel what sort of things they would
suffer from their kings, said: “This shall be the right of
the king that will reign over you: he will take your sons and put them to his
chariot to make them his horsemen and to plow his fields and reap his harvest,
and make his weapons. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and
bakers. Finally, he will take your fields, your vineyards, and your best olive
trees and will give them to his servants. He will take the tenth of your grain
and of your vineyards, and will give it to his eunuchs and servants. He will
take your menservants, maidservants, and asses and set them to his work. He
will take the tenth of your flocks and you will be his servants”
[1 Sam. 8:11–17, with omissions; cf. Hebrew]. Surely, the
kings would not do this by legal right, since the law trained them to all
restraint [Deut. 17:16 ff.]. But it was called a right in relation to the
people, for they had to obey it and were not allowed to resist. It is as if
Samuel had said: The willfulness of kings will run to excess, but it will not
be your part to restrain it; you will have only this left to you: to obey their
commands and hearken to their word.
aBut in Jeremiah, especially,
there is a memorable passage, which (although rather long) it will not trouble
me to quote because it very clearly defines this whole question. “I
have made the earth and men, says the Lord, and the animals which are upon the
face of the earth, with my great strength and outstretched arm; and I give it
to him who is pleasing in my eyes. Now, therefore, I have given all these lands
into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar … my servant.…
All the nations and great kings shall serve him …, until
the time of his own land comes.… And it shall be that any
nation and kingdom that will not serve the king of Babylon, I shall visit that
nation with sword, famine, and pestilence.… Therefore, serve the king
of Babylon and live.” [Jer. 27:5–8, 17,
cf. Vg.] We see how much
obedience the Lord willed to be paid to that abominable and cruel tyrant for no
other reason than that he possessed the kingship. But it was by heavenly decree
that he had been set upon the throne of the kingdom and assumed into kingly
majesty, which it would be unlawful to violate. If we have continually present
to our minds and before our eyes the fact that even the most worthless kings
are appointed by the same decree by which the authority of all kings is
established, those seditious thoughts will never enter our minds that a king
should be treated according to his merits, and that it is unfair that we should
show ourselves subjects to him who, on his part, does not show himself a king
to us.50
28. General testimonies of Scripture on the
sanctity of the royal person*
bIt is vain for anyone to
object that that command was peculiar to the Israelites. For we must note with
what reason the Lord confirms it: “I have given,”
he says, “the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar”
[Jer. 27:6, cf. Vg.]. “Therefore,
serve him and live.” [Jer. 27:17, cf. Vg.] Let us not doubt that we
ought to serve him to whom it is evident that the kingdom has been given. And
when once the Lord advances any man to kingly rank, he attests to us his
determination that he would have him reign. For there are general testimonies
of Scripture concerning this. Solomon, in the twenty-eighth chapter of The
Proverbs, says: “Because of the iniquity of the land there are
many princes” [Prov. 28:2 p.]. Likewise, the twelfth
chapter of Job: “He takes away subjection from kings, and girds
them again with a girdle” [Job 12:18 p.]. Once this has been
admitted, nothing remains but that we should serve and live.
aIn Jeremiah the prophet,
there is also another command of the Lord by which he enjoins his people to
seek the peace of Babylon, where they have been sent as captives, and to pray
to the Lord on its behalf, for in its peace will be their peace [Jer. 29:7]. Behold,
the Israelites, divested of all their possessions, driven from their homes, led
away into exile, and cast into pitiable bondage, are commanded to pray for the
prosperity of their conqueror—not as we are commanded in
other passages to pray for our persecutors [cf. Matt. 5:44], but in order that
his kingdom may be preserved safe and peaceful, that under him they too may
prosper. So David, already designated king by God’s
ordination and anointed with his holy oil, when he was persecuted by Saul
without deserving it, still regarded the head of his assailant as inviolable,
because the Lord had sanctified it with the honor of the kingdom. “The
Lord forbid,” he said, “that I should do this
thing before the Lord, to my lord, the Lord’s
anointed, to put forth my hand against him, since he is the Lord’s
anointed.” [1 Sam. 24:6, cf. Vg.] Again: “My
soul has spared you; and I have said, ‘I shall not put forth my
hand against my lord, for he is the Lord’s anointed’ ”
[1 Sam. 24:11, cf. Vg.].
Again: “Who will put forth his hand against the
anointed of the Lord and be innocent?… The Lord lives; unless
the Lord strike him, or the day come for him to die, or he fall in battle, the
Lord forbid that I should put forth my hand against the Lord’s
anointed” [1 Sam. 26:9–11, cf.
Vg.].
29. It is not the part of subjects but of God
to vindicate the right*
aWe owe this attitude of
reverence and therefore of piety toward all our rulers in the highest degree,
whatever they may be like. I therefore the more often repeat this: that we
should learn not to examine the men themselves, but take it as enough that they
bear, by the Lord’s will, a character upon which he has imprinted
and engraved an inviolable majesty.
But (you will say)
rulers owe responsibilities in turn to their subjects. This I have already
admitted. But if you conclude from this that service ought to be rendered only
to just governors, you are reasoning foolishly. For husbands are also bound to
their wives, and parents to their children, by mutual responsibilities. Suppose
parents and husbands depart from their duty. Suppose parents show themselves so
hard and intractable to their children, whom they are forbidden to provoke to
anger [Eph. 6:4], that by their rigor they tire them beyond measure. Suppose
husbands most despitefully use their wives, whom they are commanded to love
[Eph. 5:25] and to spare as weaker vessels [1 Peter 3:7]. Shall either children
be less obedient to their parents or wives to their husbands? They are still
subject even to those who are wicked and undutiful.
Indeed, all ought to
try not to “look at the bag hanging from their back,”51 that is, not to inquire
about another’s duties, but every man should keep in mind
that one duty which is his own. This ought particularly to apply to those who
have been put under the power of others. Therefore, if we are cruelly tormented
by a savage prince, if we are greedily despoiled by one who is avaricious or wanton,
if we are neglected by a slothful one, if finally we are vexed for piety’s
sake by one who is impious and sacrilegious, let us first be mindful of our own
misdeeds, which without doubt are chastised by such whips of the Lord [cf. Dan.
9:7]. eBy this, humility
will restrain our impatience. bLet
us then also call this thought to mind, that it is not for us to remedy such
evils; that only this remains, to implore the Lord’s
help, in whose hand are the hearts of kings, and the changing of kingdoms
[Prov. 21:1 p.].52“He
is God who will stand in the assembly of the gods, and will judge in the midst
of the gods.” [Ps. 82:1 p.] Before His face all kings
shall fall and be crushed, and all the judges of the earth, that have not
kissed his anointed [Ps. 2:10–11], and all those who
have written unjust laws to oppress the poor in judgment and to do violence to
the cause of the lowly, to prey upon widows and rob the fatherless [Isa. 10:1–2,
cf. Vg.].
(Constitutional
magistrates, however, ought to check the tyranny of kings; obedience to God
comes first, 30–31)
30. When God intervenes, it is sometimes by
unwitting agents*
bHere are revealed his
goodness, his power, and his providence. For sometimes he raises up open
avengers from among his servants, and arms them with his command to punish the
wicked government and deliver his people, oppressed in unjust ways, from
miserable calamity. Sometimes he directs to this end the rage of men with other
intentions and other endeavors. Thus he delivered the people of Israel from the
tyranny of Pharaoh through Moses [Ex. 3:7–10]; from the violence of
Chusan, king of Syria, through Othniel [Judg. 3:9]; and from other servitudes
through other kings or judges. b(a)Thus 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 arrogance of Babylon by the
Medes and Persians, after Cyrus had already subjugated the Medes. The
ungratefulness of the kings of Judah and Israel and their impious obstinancy
toward his many benefits, he sometimes by the Assyrians, sometimes aby the Babylonians, crushed
and afflicted—although not all in the same way.
For the first kind of
men, when they had been sent by God’s lawful calling to carry
out such acts, in taking up arms against kings, did not at all violate that
majesty which is implanted in kings by God’s ordination; but, armed
from heaven, they subdued the lesser power with the greater, just as it is
lawful for kings to punish their subordinates. But the latter kind of men,
although they were directed by God’s hand whither he pleased,
and executed his work unwittingly, yet planned in their minds to do nothing but
an evil act.
31. Constitutional defenders of the people’s freedom*
aBut however these deeds of
men are judged in themselves, still the Lord accomplished his work through them
alike when he broke the bloody scepters of arrogant kings and when he
overturned intolerable governments. Let the princes hear and be afraid.53
But we must, in the
meantime, be very careful not to despise or violate that authority of
magistrates, full of venerable majesty, which God has established by the
weightiest decrees, even though it may reside with the most unworthy men, who
defile it as much as they can with their own wickedness. For, if the correction
of unbridled despotism is the Lord’s to avenge, let us not at
once think that it is entrusted to us, to whom no command has been given except
to obey and suffer.
I am speaking all the
while of private individuals. For if there are now any magistrates of the
people, appointed to restrain the willfulness of kings (as in ancient times the
ephors were set against the Spartan kings, or the tribunes of the people
against the Roman consuls, or the demarchs against the senate of the Athenians;
and perhaps, as things now are, such power as the three estates exercise in
every realm when they hold their chief assemblies), I am so far from forbidding
them to withstand, in accordance with their duty, the fierce licentiousness of
kings, that, if they wink at kings who violently fall upon and assault the
lowly common folk, I declare that their dissimulation involves nefarious
perfidy, because they dishonestly betray the freedom of the people, of which
they know that they have been appointed protectors by God’s
ordinance.54
32. Obedience to man must not become
disobedience to God
aBut in that obedience which
we have shown to be due the authority of rulers, we are always to make this
exception, indeed, to observe it as primary, that such obedience is never to
lead us away from obedience to him, to whose will the desires of all kings
ought to be subject, to whose decrees all their commands ought to yield, to
whose majesty their scepters ought to be submitted.55And how absurd would it be
that in satisfying men you should incur the displeasure of him for whose sake
you obey men themselves! The Lord, therefore, is the King of Kings, who, when
he has opened his sacred mouth, must alone be heard, before all and above all
men; next to him we are subject to those men who are in authority over us, but
only in him. If they command anything against him, let it go unesteemed. And
here let us not be concerned about all that dignity which the magistrates
possess; for no harm is done to it when it is humbled before that singular and
truly supreme power of God. eOn
this consideration, Daniel denies that he has committed any offense against the
king when he has not obeyed his impious edict [Dan. 6:22–23,
Vg.]. For the king had
exceeded his limits, and had not only been a wrongdoer against men, but, in
lifting up his horns against God, had himself abrogated his power.56Conversely, the Israelites
are condemned because they were too obedient to the wicked proclamation of the
king [Hos. 5:13]. For when Jeroboam molded the golden calves, they, to please
him, forsook God’s Temple and turned to new superstitions [1
Kings 12:30]. With the same readiness, their descendants complied with the
decrees of their kings. The prophet sharply reproaches them for embracing the
king’s edicts [Hos. 5:11]. Far, indeed, is the
pretense of modesty from deserving praise, a false modesty with which the court
flatterers cloak themselves and deceive the simple, while they deny that it is
lawful for them to refuse anything imposed by their kings. As if God had made
over his right to mortal men, giving them the rule over mankind! Or as if
earthly power were diminished when it is subjected to its Author, in whose
presence even the heavenly powers tremble as suppliants! aI know with what great and
present peril this constancy is menaced, because kings bear defiance with the
greatest displeasure, whose “wrath is a messenger of
death” [Prov. 16:14], says Solomon. But since this
edict has been proclaimed by the heavenly herald, Peter—“We
must obey God rather than men” [Acts 5:29]—let
us comfort ourselves with the thought that we are rendering that obedience
which the Lord requires when we suffer anything rather than turn aside from
piety. And that our courage may not grow faint, Paul pricks us with another
goad: That we have been redeemed by Christ at so great a price as our
redemption cost him, so that we should not enslave ourselves to the wicked
desires of men—much less be subject to their impiety [1 Cor.
7:23].[1]
46 Calvin’s
rendering here of 1 Peter 2:13–14 differs considerably
from VG, and in less degree from his own Latin text in the Commentary on 1
Peter. Cf. Geneva Bible and KJV.
48 Homer, Odyssey ii.
234: Odysseus is “gentle as a father to his people”
(LCL OdysseyI. 52 f.); Seneca uses the expression pater patriae
in De dementia I. xiv. 2 (LCL edition, pp. 398 f.); Calvin, Comm.
Seneca De clementia I. xiv (CR V. 106).
49 Homer, Iliad ii.
243: Agamemnon is “a shepherd of his people”
(LCL IliadI. 68 f.); Cicero, Pro Sestio xxx. 65 (LCL edition, pp.
122 f.). Quintilian, in Institutes of Oratory VIII. vi. 17, 18 (LCL
Quintilian III. 310 f.), cautions against this trite metaphor in pleading a
case.
50 Zwingli, Auslegen
und Gründe der Schlussreden (1523), art. xlii (CR Zwingli II. 342 ff.).
Cf. H. Strohl, “Le Droit à la rèsistance
d’après les conceptions protestantes,” Revue
d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses X (1930), 126–144.
51 Cf. Catullus xxii. 21: “Sed non videmus manticae quod in tergo est” (LCL Catullus, p. 26); cf. Horace, Satires II. iii. 298 f. (LCL
edition, pp. 178 f.), reflecting Aesop’s fable of the two
wallets, the one in view containing the faults of others, the one unseen, our
own.
52 To this point Calvin
has recommended to those under bad rulers only patience and prayer. The
previous sentences evidently reflect conditions in France at the time of
writing (1535). The hope of relief, from divine intervention and human agency,
will now find vigorous expression.
53“Audiant principes, et terreantur”—a
startling and powerful phrase: but it does not threaten revolution. It is God
that princes are to fear.
54 This packed sentence,
which was to prove powerfully influential, deserves close attention. See
especially Doumergue, Calvin V. 500–502, and cf. Doumergue’s
numerous citations from Calvin’s letters and
commentaries, ibid., pp. 487–494, 499. It is of
interest that Zwingli, in his treatise Der Hirt (The Pastor) (1524),
states that as the Spartans had their ephors, the Romans their tribunes, and
the German towns their guild masters, with authority to check the higher
rulers, so God has provided pastors to stand on guard for the people (CR
Zwingli III. 36). This passage may have been known to Calvin, though
indirectly, since it was in German. From his reiterated warnings against
resistance to tyrants by “private persons,”
Calvin turns here with startling abruptness to approve, and solemnly urge,
action by a constituted magistracy to protect the liberties of the people. As
historical examples of such “populares
magistratus,” he cites, with some justification, the ephors
of Sparta, the tribunes of Rome, and the demarchs of Athens, who were all
elected to office by annual popular vote. Cf. Comm. Micah 5:5: “Hic demum maxime optabilis status populi creari omnibus suffragiis
pastores.” Kingship by hereditary right does not seem to
be in accordance with liberty; a well-ordered government is one derived from
the general vote, “communibus omnium suffragiis” (CR XLIII. 374). “Perhaps,”
he says here, there is a parallel in the three estates of modern nations. The “perhaps”
is natural for his own France where, when he wrote this, the estates had not
met for thirty years, and had still not met when he repeated it in 1559. He
must have been aware that nearly all other national governments, from Spain to
Norway, had representative bodies or parliaments more or less effectively and
regularly functioning, capable of acting to restrain monarchical absolutism or tyranny.
Calvin seems to be summoning them to assume the duty of caring for the people’s
interests, and preserving to the people the “inestimable
boon” of liberty. Cf. CR XXIX. 544; XXX. 185;
McNeill, “The Democratic Element in Calvin’s
Thought,” Church History XVIII (1949), pp. 162–166,
and the studies there cited. The demand for a meeting of the estates of France
became characteristic of Huguenot political writings such as the Franco-Gallia
of Calvin’s friend, Francis Hotman (1573; tr. Lord
Molesworth, 2d ed., 1721); the Defense Against Tyrants (1579), by “Junius
Brutus”—probably a joint work of Hubert Languet and
Philip du Plessis-Mornay (English edition, ed. H. Laski); and Pierre Jurieu’s
Sighs of Enslaved France Aspiring Toward Liberty (1689–1690).
The influence of this passage can also be traced in John Ponet’s
radical Shorte Treatise of Politick Power (1556; see W. S. Hudson’s
edition) in George Buchanan’s De jure regni apud
Scottos (1579) (tr. C. F. Arrowood, The Powers of the Crown in Scotland)
and in the Lex Rexof Samuel Rutherford (1644). Cf. P. Mesnard, L’Essor de la philosophie politique au sixième siècle en France, pp. 330–336, 347–359. The weighty treatise
of Johannes Althusius, Politica methodice digesta (1603), develops the
main political conceptions of Calvin: see especially the Harvard lectures of P.
S. Gerbrandy, National and International Stability: Althusius, Grotius, Van
Vollenhoven. The position of John Knox is well illustrated in his History
of the Reformation in Scotland in the account of his debate with
Lethington, 1564, in which Knox cited the Magdeburg Confession (“Apology
of Marburg”) issued in resistance to Charles V, 1550,
while his fellow minister John Craig presented a document in which the
Dominicans of Bologna defended their resistance to the pope, 1554 (see W. C.
Dickenson’s edition, II. 127–134).
The Magdeburg (Lutheran) statement affirms the duty of armed resistance to a
ruler who violates the law of God. The Dominican thesis, which Craig had heard
successfully defended at the University of Bologna, in more feudal terms
declares that “all rulers, whether supreme or inferior, ought
to be reformed or deposed” when they violate their
sworn promises to their subjects. Knox, in using the Magdeburg document, was in
effect reaffirming an uncompromising doctrine of resistance that had been
expressed in his pamphlet On the Monstrous Regiment of Women (1558).
Elizabeth I came to the throne when this fiery pamphlet was newly published,
and it was a cause of her alienation from Geneva. Calvin’s
embarrassment over this incident is shown in his letter to Cecil (winter, 1559)
in which he disapproves the pamphlet and disclaims any prior knowledge of it (Zurich
Letters, 2 ser., pp. 34 ff.). Cf. Doumergue, Calvin V. 486–512;
H. Strohl, “Le Droit à la résistance,”
pp. 131 ff. In general, Calvin carefully guards against any endorsement of
popular revolutionary action, but in some instances his language is less
guarded. See, for example, his Comm. Daniel (1561), lecture xxx, on Dan. 6:22,
where he says: “For earthly princes lay aside their power when
they rise up against God, and are unworthy to be reckoned among the number of
mankind. We ought, rather, utterly to defy them [conspuere in ipsorum capita,
lit., “to spit on their heads”]
than to obey them” (CR XLI. 25).
56 This
sentence begins an addition of 1559, ending with “tremble
as suppliants,”below. Here, referring to Dan. 6:22 (cf. sec.
31, note 54), Calvin does not anticipate the strong phrase of the commentary.
Yet he firmly requires a courageous disobedience to the “impious
edicts” of ungodly rulers. It is his final emphatic
admonition that obedience to the political powers, which he has repeatedly
enjoined, must not deflect the Christian from “piety”
or compromise his obedience to the King of Kings.
[1] Calvin, J. (2011). Institutes of the Christian Religion & 2. (J. T.
McNeill, Ed., F. L. Battles, Trans.) (Vol. 1, pp. 1509–1521).
Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
Because we are finite, we cannot keep all of God’s commandments simultaneously. Often our inability to do this produces false guilt. One sermon tells us to spend hours in prayer, another to feed the hungry, another to study the Bible intensively, another to evangelize our neighborhoods, another to catechize our children, another to become politically active. All of these seem to be based on biblical norms, yet we often feel overwhelmed by such huge demands on us. There simply are not enough hours in the day to do all that we are exhorted to do.
It is helpful here to remember that when God commands us to pray, to evangelize, to help the poor, and so forth, He is speaking primarily to the church as a whole and only secondarily to each of us as individuals. These are works that the church must do. Each individual in the church must contribute toward their fulfillment. But how the individual contributes will depend on his gifts and calling. Not all of us are called to pray six hours a day or to ring doorbells in our neighborhoods or to start political movements. Each one of us, then, must prayerfully, under the guidance of Scripture, devise his own set of priorities among these communal norms. That sounds dangerous. How can there be “priorities” among ultimates? And how can a human being choose for himself what priorities he will give to God’s laws? He can, because Scripture says that he can and must.
基督徒的矛盾。越是跟随主，越是看见自己悖逆主圣洁的律法。Christian Paradox. The more I walk with the Lord, the more I find myself rebellious against His holy law.
罪的律与心中神的律
罗 7:22 因为按著我里面的意思，我是喜欢神的律；23 但我觉得肢体中另有个律和我心中的律交战，把我掳去，叫我附从那肢体中犯罪的律。24 我真是苦啊！谁能救我脱离这取死的身体呢？25 感谢神，靠著我们的主耶稣基督就能脱离了。这样看来，我以内心顺服神的律，我肉体却顺服罪的律了。Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being,23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.
By seeing epistemology as a branch of ethics, we remind ourselves in the most vivid way that knowing is not autonomous; it is subject to God’s authority, as is all of human life. This procedure also reminds us that knowing, thinking, theorizing, and so forth are indeed parts of human life as a whole. （John M Frame)
约8:31 耶稣对信他的犹太人说：「你们若常常遵守我的道，就真是我的门徒；32 你们必晓得真理…, …约 14:15 你们若爱我，就必遵守我的命令。Joh 8:31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples,32 and you will know the truth, … Joh 14:15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
Psa 88:13 But I, O LORD, cry to you; in the morning my prayer comes before you. 14 O LORD, why do you cast my soul away? Why do you hide your face from me?
(those who seems to experience the Lord hiding from them ought to learn from the psalmist to seek the Lord continuously and wait for the Lord .
