QUESTION 2: Whether it is
lawful to resist a ruler who violates the law of God, or ruins His Church; by
whom, how, and to what extent it is lawful. (cont.)
Whether private individuals may resist by use of arms
“It remains now that we speak of men who
are private persons. First, particulars or private persons are not obligated to
take up arms against any ruler who would compel them to become idolaters. The covenant between God and all the people
who promise to be the people of God does not in any way bind them to that. For,
just as what belongs to the whole body does not belong to any particular
member, so, in like manner, the duty the whole body owes and is bound to
perform cannot by any sensible reason be required of any of the parts --
neither does their duty oblige them to it, for everyone must serve God in that
proper vocation to which he is called. Private individuals have no power or
duly constituted authority, nor any calling to bear the sword in an official
capacity. Therefore, since God has not granted sword-bearing authority to
private individuals, He does not require that they should take it up. It is
said to them, "put up thy sword into thy scabbard." (Jn. 18:11) On
the other hand, the apostles say of the ruling authorities, they carry not the
sword in vain. (Rom. 13:4) If individuals take up the sword, they are violating
the law. If magistrates are slow and negligent to wield it when necessary, they
are likewise justly blameable of negligence in performing their duties, and
equally guilty with the former.”
Whether it is lawful to take up arms in defense of religion
“Although the church cannot be advanced
by arms, it may be justly defended by the means of arms. I say further, that
those that die in so holy a war are no less the martyrs of Jesus Christ than
their brethren who were put to death for religion; nay, they who die in that
war seem to have this disadvantage, that with a free will and well knowing the
risks into which they cast themselves, notwithstanding, do courageously expose
their lives to death and danger, whereas the other do only not refuse the death
that it is necessary for them to suffer. The Turks strive to advance their
religion by force of arms, and if they subdue a country, they immediately
enforce the impieties of Mohammed, who, in the Qu'ran, has so recommended arms,
as they are not ashamed to say it is the ready way to heaven, yet the Turks
constrain no man in matter of conscience. But he who is a much greater
adversary to Christ and true religion, with all those kings whom he has
enchanted, opposes fire and faggots, to the light of the gospel, tortures the
Word of God, compelling by wracking and torments, as much as in him lies, all
men to become idolaters, and finally is not ashamed to advance and maintain
their faith and law by perfidious disloyalty, and their traditions by continual
treasons.”
“Now, on the contrary, those good rulers
and magistrates are said properly to defend themselves, when they surround and
fortify, by all their means and industry, the vine of Christ, already planted,
to be planted in places where it has not yet been, lest the wild boar of the
forest should spoil or devour it. They do this (I say) in covering with their
buckler, and defending with their sword, those who by the preaching of the
gospel have been converted to true religion, and in fortifying with their best
ability, by strong walls, moats, and ramparts, the temple of God built with
living stones, until it have attained the full height, despite all the furious
assaults of its enemies. We have lengthened out this discourse thus far, to the
end we might take away all scruple concerning this question. Set, then, the
estates, and all the officers of a kingdom, or the greatest part of them, every
one established in authority by the people: know, that if they do not contain
within his bounds (or at the least, make every effort to do so) a king who
seeks to corrupt the law of God, or hinders it's reestablishment, that they
offend grievously against the Lord, with whom they have contracted covenants
upon those conditions. Those of a town, or of a province, making a portion of a
kingdom, let them know also, that they draw upon themselves the judgment of God
if they do not drive impiety out of their walls and confines if the king seek
to bring it in, or if they be wanting to preserve by all means, the pure
doctrine of the Gospel, although for the it's defence they suffer banishment
for a time, or any other misery. Finally, more private individuals must be
informed that nothing can excuse them if they obey any command that offends
God, and yet they have no right nor permission of any sort to take up arms by
their private authority, unless it is absolutely clear that they have
extraordinary vocation to do so - which we have confirmed by cogent testimonies
drawn from scripture.”*
Christ, not man, is King!
Dale
*The PDF of this work is available at www.arts.yorku.ca/politics/comninel/courses/3020pdf/vindiciae.pdf. All quoted content was excerpted from this work.
No comments:
Post a Comment