will fly from the thought of exercising tyranny over conscience, that
happily they will disclaim the dealing of all with men’s consciences:
yet, if the acts and statutes which are made by them concerning the
worship of God be attended to, their profession—and that out of zeal
according to the pattern of that ceremonial and figurative state of
Israel—to suffer no other religion nor worship in their territories, but
one—their profession and practice to defend their faith from reproach
and blasphemy of heretics by civil weapons, and all that from this very
13th of the Romans—I say, if these particulars and others, be with fear
and trembling, in the presence of the Most High, examined, the wonderful
deceit of their own hearts shall appear unto them, and how guilty they
will appear to be of wresting this scripture before the tribunal of the
Most High.
_Truth._ Again, Calvin, speaking concerning fulfilling of the law
by love, writes thus on the same place: Sed Paulus in totam legem
non respicit; tantum de officiis loquitur, quæ nobis erga proximum
demandantur a lege:—That is, “Paul hath not respect unto the whole
law, he speaks only of those duties which the law commands towards our
neighbours.” And it is manifest, that in this place by our neighbours he
means high and low, magistrates and subjects, unto whom we ought to walk
by the rule of love, paying unto every one their due.
Again, Cæterum Paulus hic tantum meminet secundæ tabulæ, quia de ea
tantum erat quæstio:—“But Paul here only mentioneth the second table,
because the question was only concerning that.”
[Sidenote: Calvin confesseth that the first table, concerning God’s
worship, is not here, in Rom. xiii. touched.]
And again, Quod autem repetit, complementum legis esse dilectionem,
intellige (ut prius) de ea legis parte, quod hominum societatem spectat?
Prior enim legis tabula quæ est de cultu Dei minime hic attingitur:—“But
in that he repeateth, that love is the fulfilling of the law, understand
as before, that he speaks of that part of the law which respects human
society; for the first table of the law, which concerneth the worship of
God, is not in the least manner here touched.”[153]
[Sidenote: Beza upon Rom. xiii.]
After Calvin, his successor in Geneva, that holy and learned Beza,
upon the word ἀνακεφαλαιοῦται, _if there be any other commandment it is
summed up in this, thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself_, writes
thus:[154]—Tota lex nihil aliud quam amorem Dei et proximi præcipet; sed
tamen cum apostolus hoc loco de mutuis hominum officiis disserat, legis
vocabulum ad secundum tabulam restringendam puto. “The whole law,” saith
he, “commands nothing else but the love of God, and yet, nevertheless,
since the apostle in this place discourseth of the duties of men one
toward another, I think this term _law_ ought to be restrained to the
second table.”[155]
CHAP. XLVIII.
_Peace._ I pray now proceed to the second argument from this scripture,
against the use of civil weapons in matters of religions, and spiritual
worship.
_Truth._ The Spirit of God here commands subjection and obedience
to higher powers, even to the Roman emperors and all subordinate
magistrates; and yet the emperors and governors under them were strangers
from the life of God in Christ, yea, most averse and opposite, yea, cruel
and bloody persecutors of the name and followers of Jesus: and yet unto
these, is this subjection and obedience commanded. Now true it is, that
as the civil magistrate is apt not to content himself with the majesty
of an earthly throne, crown, sword, sceptre, but to seat himself in the
throne of David in the church: so God’s people, and it may be in Paul’s
time, considering their high and glorious preferment and privileges by
Jesus Christ, were apt to be much tempted to despise civil governors,
especially such as were ignorant of the Son of God, and persecuted him in
his servants.
[Sidenote: Paul writes not to the Roman governors to defend the truth,
and to punish heretics.]
Now then I argue, if the apostle should have commanded this subjection
unto the Roman emperors and Roman magistrates in spiritual causes,
as to defend the truth which they were no way able to discern, but
persecuted—and upon trust from others no magistrate, not persuaded in his
own conscience, is to take it:—
Or else to punish heretics, whom then also they must discern and judge,
or else condemn them, as the Jews would have Pilate condemn the Lord
Jesus, upon the sentence of others—I say, if Paul should have, in this
scripture, put this work upon these Roman governors, and commanded the
churches of Christ to have yielded subjection in any such matters, he
must, in the judgment of all men, have put out the eye of faith, and
reason, and sense, at once.[156]
CHAP. XLIX.
[Sidenote: Paul’s appeal to Cæsar discussed.]
_Peace._ It is said by some, why then did Paul himself, Acts xxv. 11,
appeal to Cæsar, unless that Cæsar, (though he was not, yet) he ought to
have been a fit judge in such matters?
[Sidenote: If Paul had appealed to Cæsar in spiritual things, he had
committed five evils.]
_Truth._ I answer, if Paul, in this appeal to Cæsar, had referred and
submitted simply and properly the cause of Christ, his ministry and
ministration, to the Roman emperor’s tribunal, knowing him to be an
idolatrous stranger from the true God, and a lion-like, bloody persecutor
of the Lord Jesus, the Lamb of God,—I say, let it be considered, whether
or no he had committed these five evils:—
The first, against the dimmest light of reason, in appealing to darkness
to judge light, to unrighteousness to judge righteousness, [to] the
spiritually blind to judge and end the controversy concerning heavenly
colours.
Secondly, against the cause of religion, which, if condemned by every
inferior idolater, must needs be condemned by the Cæsars themselves, who,
Nebuchadnezzar-like, set up their state images or religions, commanding
the world’s uniformity of worship to them.
Thirdly, against the holy state and calling of the Christians themselves,
who, by virtue of their subjection to Christ, even the least of them, are
in spiritual things above the highest potentates or emperors in the world
who continue in enmity against, or in an ignorant, natural state without
Christ Jesus. This honour, or high exaltation have all his holy ones, to
bind, not literally but spiritually, their kings in chains, and their
nobles in links of iron. Ps. cxlix. 8.
Fourthly, against his own calling, apostleship, or office of ministry,
unto which Cæsar himself and all potentates, in spiritual and
soul-matters, ought to have submitted; and unto which, in controversies
of Christ’s church and kingdom, Cæsar himself ought to have appealed,
the church of God being built upon the foundation of the apostles and
prophets. Eph. ii. 20.
[Sidenote: Emperors themselves, if Christians, subject to the apostles
and churches in spiritual things.]
And, therefore, in case that any of the Roman governors, or the emperor
himself, had been humbled and converted to Christianity by the preaching
of Christ, were not they themselves bound to subject themselves unto the
power of the Lord Jesus in the hands of the apostles and churches, and
might not the apostles and churches have refused to have baptized, or
washed them into the profession of Christ Jesus, upon the apprehension of
their unworthiness?
Or, if received into Christian fellowship, were they not to stand at the
bar of the Lord Jesus in the church, concerning either their opinions
or practices? were they not to be cast out and delivered unto Satan by
the power of the Lord Jesus, if, after once and twice admonition, they
persist obstinately, as faithfully and impartially as if they were the
meanest in the empire? Yea, although the apostles, the churches, the
elders, or governors thereof, were poor and mean, despised persons in
civil respects, and were themselves bound to yield all faithful and loyal
obedience to such emperors and governors in civil things.
Were they not, if Christians, bound themselves to have submitted to those
spiritual decrees of the apostles and elders, as well as the lowest and
meanest members of Christ? Acts xvi. And if so, how should Paul appeal in
spiritual things to Cæsar, or write to the churches of Jesus to submit to
them [in] Christian or spiritual matters?
Fifthly, if Paul had appealed to Cæsar in spiritual respects, he had
greatly profaned the holy name of God in holy things, in so improper and
vain a prostitution of spiritual things to carnal and natural judgments,
which are not able to comprehend spiritual matters, which are alone
spiritually discerned. 1 Cor. ii. 14.
[Sidenote: Lawful appeals in civil things to civil magistrates.]
And yet Cæsar, as a civil, supreme magistrate, ought to defend Paul from
civil violence, and slanderous accusations about sedition, mutiny, civil
disobedience, &c. And in that sense, who doubts but God’s people may
appeal to the Roman Cæsar, an Egyptian Pharaoh, a Philistian Abimelech,
an Assyrian Nebuchadnezzar, the great Mogul, Prester John, the great
Turk, or an Indian Sachem?[157]
CHAP. L.
_Peace._ Which is the third argument against the civil magistrates’ power
in spiritual and soul-matters out of this scripture, Rom. xiii.?
_Truth._ I dispute from the nature of the magistrates’ weapons, ver.
4. He hath a sword, which he bears not in vain, delivered to him, as I
acknowledge from God’s appointment in the free consent and choice of the
subjects for common good.
We must distinguish of swords.
[Sidenote: Four sorts of swords mentioned in the New Testament.]
We find four sorts of swords mentioned in the New Testament.
First, the sword of persecution, which Herod stretched forth against
James, Acts xii. 1, 2.
Secondly, the sword of God’s Spirit, expressly said to be the word of
God, Ephes. vi. [17]. A sword of two edges, carried in the mouth of
Christ, Rev. i. [16], which is of strong and mighty operation, piercing
between the bones and the marrow, between the soul and the spirit, Heb.
iv. [12].
Thirdly, the great sword of war and destruction, given to him that rides
that terrible red horse of war, so that he takes peace from the earth,
and men kill one another, as is most lamentably true in the slaughter of
so many hundred thousand souls within these few years in several parts of
Europe, our own and others.
None of these three swords are intended in this scripture.
[Sidenote: The civil sword.]
Therefore, fourthly, there is a civil sword, called the sword of civil
justice, which being of a material, civil nature, for the defence of
persons, estates, families, liberties of a city or civil state, and the
suppressing of uncivil or injurious persons or actions, by such civil
punishment, it cannot, according to its utmost reach and capacity,
now under Christ, when all nations are merely civil, without any
such typical, holy respect upon them, as was upon Israel, a national
church—I say, cannot extend to spiritual and soul-causes, spiritual and
soul-punishment, which belongs to that spiritual sword with two edges,
the soul-piercing,—in soul-saving, or soul-killing,—the word of God.[158]
CHAP. LI.
[Sidenote: Tribute, custom, &c., merely civil recompences for civil work.]
_Truth._ A fourth argument from this scripture, I take in the sixth
verse, from tribute, custom, &c.: which is a merely civil reward, or
recompence, for the magistrates’ work. Now as the wages are, such is
the work; but the wages are merely civil—custom, tribute, &c.: not
the contributions of the saints or churches of Christ, proper to the
spiritual and Christian state. And such work only must the magistrate
attend upon, as may properly deserve such civil wages, reward, or
recompence.
[Sidenote: Magistrates called by God, _God’s ministers_.]
Lastly, that the Spirit of God never intended to direct, or warrant, the
magistrate to use his power in spiritual affairs and religious worship, I
argue from the term or title it pleaseth the wisdom of God to give such
civil officers, to wit, ver. 6, _God’s ministers_.
Now at the very first blush, no man denies a double ministry.
[Sidenote: The spiritual ministry.]
The one appointed by Christ Jesus in his church, to gather, to govern,
receive in, cast out, and order all the affairs of the church, the house,
city, or kingdom of God, Eph. iv.; 1 Cor. xii.
[Sidenote: The civil ministry or service.]
Secondly, a civil ministry, or office, merely human and civil, which men
agree to constitute, called therefore a human creation, 1 Pet. ii. [13],
and is as true and lawful in those nations, cities, kingdoms, &c., which
never heard of the true God, nor his holy Son Jesus, as in any part of
the world beside, where the name of Jesus is most taken up.
From all which premises, viz., that the scope of the Spirit of God
in this chapter is to handle the matters of the second table—having
handled the matters of the first, in the twelfth:—since the magistrates
of whom Paul wrote, were natural, ungodly, persecuting, and yet lawful
magistrates, and to be obeyed in all lawful civil things: since all
magistrates are God’s ministers, essentially civil, bounded to a civil
work, with civil weapons, or instruments, and paid or rewarded with civil
rewards:—from all which, I say, I undeniably collect, that this scripture
is generally mistaken, and wrested from the scope of God’s Spirit, and
the nature of the place, and cannot truly be alleged by any for the power
of the civil magistrate to be exercised in spiritual and soul-matters.
CHAP. LII.
[Sidenote: What is to be understood by _evil_, Rom. xiii. 4.]
_Peace._ Against this I know many object, out of the fourth verse of this
chapter, that the magistrate is to avenge, or punish, _evil_: from whence
is gathered that heresy, false Christs, false churches, false ministries,
false seals, being evil, ought to be punished civilly, &c.
_Truth._ I answer, that the word κακὸν is generally opposed to civil
goodness, or virtue, in a commonwealth, and not to spiritual good, or
religion, in the church.
Secondly, I have proved from the scope of the place, that here is not
intended evil against the spiritual, or Christian estate handled in the
twelfth chapter, but evil against the civil state in this thirteenth,
properly falling under the cognizance of the civil minister of God, the
magistrate, and punishable by that civil sword of his as an incivility,
disorder, or breach of that civil order, peace, and civility, unto which
all the inhabitants of a city, town, or kingdom, oblige themselves.
_Peace._ I have heard, that the elders of the New England churches—who
yet out of this thirteenth of Romans maintain persecution—grant[159] that
the magistrate is to preserve the peace and welfare of the state, and
therefore that he ought not to punish such sins as hurt not his peace.
In particular, they say, the magistrate may not punish secret sins in
the soul: nor such sins as are yet handling in the church, in a private
way: nor such sins which are private in families—and therefore, they say,
the magistrate transgresseth to prosecute complaints of children against
their parents, servants against masters, wives against husbands, (and yet
this proper to the civil state). Nor such sins as are between the members
and churches themselves.
And they confess, that if the magistrate punish, and the church punish,
there will be a greater rent in their peace.
_Truth._ From thence, sweet Peace, may we well observe,
First, the magistrate is not to punish all evil, according to this their
confession.
The distinction of private and public evil will not here avail; because
such as urge that term _evil_, viz., that the magistrate is to punish
evil, urge it strictly, _eo nomine_; because heresy, blasphemy, false
church, false ministry, is evil, as well as disorder in a civil state.
[Sidenote: Some give to the magistrate what is not his, and take from him
that which is proper to him.]
Secondly, I observe, how they take away from the magistrate that which is
proper to his cognizance, as the complaints of servants, children, wives,
against their parents, masters, husbands, &c. Families as families,
being as stones which make up the common building, and are properly the
object of the magistrates’ care, in respect of civil government, civil
order, and obedience.[160]
CHAP. LIII.
_Peace._ I pray now, lastly, proceed to the author’s reason[161] why
Christ’s disciples should be so far from persecuting:—that they ought
to bless them that curse them, and pray for them that persecute them,
because of the freeness of God’s grace, and the deepness of his counsels,
calling them that are enemies, persecutors, no people, to become meek
lambs, the sheep and people of God, according to 1 Pet. ii. 10, _You
which were not a people, are now a people_, &c.; and Matt. xx. 6, some
come at the last hour, which if they were cut off because they came not
sooner, would be prevented, and so should never come.
Unto this reason, the answerer is pleased thus to reply.[162]
First, in general; we must not do evil that good may come thereof.
[Sidenote: Toleration discussed.[163]]
Secondly, in particular, he affirmeth, “that it is evil to tolerate
seditious evil doers, seducing teachers, scandalous livers;” and for
proof of this, he quotes Christ’s reproof to the angel of the church
at Pergamos, for tolerating them that hold the doctrine of Balaam; and
against the church of Thyatira, for tolerating Jezebel to teach and
seduce, Rev. ii. 14, 20.
_Truth._ I answer, first, by assenting to the general proposition, that
it is most true, like unto Christ Jesus himself, a sure foundation, 1
Cor. iii. 11. Yet what is built upon it, I hope by God’s assistance to
make it appear, is but hay and stubble, dead and withered, not suiting
that golden foundation, nor pleasing to the Father of mercies, nor
comfortable to the souls of men.
It is evil, saith he, to tolerate notorious evil doers, seducing
teachers, scandalous livers.
In which speech I observe two evils:
First, that this proposition is too large and general, because the rule
admits of exception, and that according to the will of God.
[Sidenote: Evil is always evil, yet permission of it may in case be good.]
1. It is true, that evil cannot alter its nature, but it is alway evil,
as darkness is alway darkness, yet,
2. It must be remembered, that it is one thing to command, to conceal,
to counsel, to approve evil, and another thing to permit and suffer
evil with protestation against it, or dislike of it, at least without
approbation of it.
Lastly, this sufferance, or permission, of evil, is not for its own sake,
but for the sake of good, which puts a respect of goodness upon such
permission.
[Sidenote: God’s wonderful toleration.]
Hence it is, that for God’s own glory’s sake, which is the highest good,
he endures, that is, permits, or suffers, the vessels of wrath, Rom.
ix. 22. And therefore, although he be of pure eyes and can behold no
iniquity, yet his pure eye patiently and quietly beholds and permits all
the idolatries and profanations, all the thefts and rapines, all the
whoredoms and abominations, all the murders and poisonings; and yet, I
say, for his glory’s sake, he is patient, and long permits.
Hence for his people’s sake (which is the next good, in his Son), he is
oftentimes pleased to permit and suffer the wicked to enjoy a longer
reprieve. Therefore he gave Paul all the lives that were in the ship,
Acts xxvii. 24.
Therefore, he would not so soon have destroyed Sodom, but granted a
longer permission, had there been but ten righteous, Gen. xviii. 32.
Therefore, Jer. v. 1, had he found some to have stood in the gap, he
would have spared others. Therefore gave he Jezebel a time, or space,
Rev. ii. 21.
Therefore, for his glory’s sake, hath he permitted longer great sinners,
who afterward have perished in their season, as we see in the case of
Ahab, the Ninevites, and Amorites, &c.
[Sidenote: Deut xxiv.]
Hence it pleased the Lord, not only to permit the many evils against
his own honourable ordinance of marriage in the world, but was pleased,
after a wonderful manner, to suffer that sin of many wives in Abraham,
Jacob, David, Solomon, yea, with some expressions which seem to give
approbation, as 2 Sam. xii. 8, 24.[164]
_Peace._ It may be said, this is no pattern for us, because God is above
law, and an absolute sovereign.
_Truth._ I answer, although we find him sometimes dispensing with
his law, yet we never find him deny himself, or utter a falsehood:
and therefore when it crosseth not an absolute rule to permit and
tolerate—as in the case of the permission of the souls and consciences
of all men in the world—I have shown, and shall show further, it doth
not, it will not, hinder our being holy as he is holy, in all manner of
conversation.
CHAP. LIV.
_Peace._ It will yet be said, it pleaseth God to permit adulteries,
murders, poisons: God suffers men, like fishes, to devour each other,
Hab. i. 14; the wicked to flourish, Jer. xii. 1; yea, sends the tyrants
of the world to destroy the nations, and plunder them of their riches,
Isa. x. [5, 6.] Should men do so, the world would be a wilderness; and
beside we have command for zealous execution of justice, impartially,
speedily.
[Sidenote: Two sorts of commands, both by Moses and Christ.]
_Truth._ I answer, we find two sorts of commands, both from Moses and
from Christ, the two great prophets and messengers from the living God,
the one the type or figure of the later. Moses gave positive rules, both
spiritual and civil; yet also, he gave some not positive but permissive,
for the common good. So the Lord Jesus expoundeth it.
[Sidenote: Matt. xix. 7, 8.]
For whereas, the Pharisees urged it, that Moses commanded to give a bill
of divorcement and to put away, the Lord Jesus expoundeth it, _Moses for
the hardness of your hearts suffered_, or permitted, Matt. xix. 7, 8.
[Sidenote: The permission of divorce in Israel.]
This was a permissive command, universal to all Israel, for a general
good, in preventing the continual fires of dissensions and combustions in
families: yea, it may be murders, poisons, adulteries, which that people,
as the wisdom of God foresaw, was apt, out of the hardness of their
heart, to break out into, were it not for this preventing permission.
Hence it was, that for a further public good sake, and the public safety,
David permitted Joab, a notorious malefactor, and Shimei and Adonijah,
&c. And civil states and governors, in like cases, have and do permit and
suffer what neither David nor any civil governors ought to do or have
done, were it not to prevent the hazard of the whole, in the shedding of
much innocent blood, together with the nocent, in civil combustions.
_Peace._ It may be said, Joab, Shimei, Adonijah, &c., were only, as it
were, reprieved for a time, and proves only that a season ought to be
attended for their punishment.
_Truth._ Answ. I answer, I produce not these instances to prove a
permission of tares—anti-christians, heretics—which other scriptures
abundantly prove, but to make it clear, against the answerer’s
allegation, that even in the civil state permission of notorious evil
doers, even against the civil state, is not disapproved by God himself
and the wisest of his servants in its season.
CHAP. LV.
[Sidenote: Usury in a commonweal, or civil state, lawfully permitted.]
_Truth._ I proceed. Hence it is that some generals of armies, and
governors of cities, towns, &c., do, and, as those former instances
prove, lawfully permit some evil persons and practices. As for instance,
in the civil state, usury: for the preventing of a greater evil in the
civil body, as stealing, robbing, murdering, perishing of the poor, and
the hindrance, or stop, of commerce and dealing in the commonwealth.
Just like physicians, wisely permitting noisome humours, and sometimes
diseases, when the cure or purging would prove more dangerous to the
destruction of the whole, a weak or crazy body, and specially at such a
time.
Thus, in many other instances, it pleased the Father of lights, the God
of Israel, to permit that people, especially in the matter of their
demand of a king, wherein he pleaded that himself as well as Samuel was
rejected.
[Sidenote: Permission of the tares in the field of the world for a
twofold good. 1. Of the good wheat. 2. Of the whole world, the field
itself.]