-
- Thread starter Joshua
- Start date
- Status
Pilgrim Standard
Puritan Board Sophomore
I agree.
Without detracting from Joshua's point...
...I'd like to point out
that for some reason, whenever we're discussing the matter of society, we seem to gravitate to discussions of government and focus so much less on our actual duties as ordinary citizens. And yes, our first and regular duty is to submit, even to powers that oppress us. I'm amazed at how many Christians balk at what is, in fact, a fairly straightforward reading of Scripture.
What is worse, we often run to (yes, very important and significant) Reformed writers, like CALVIN, in order to pull quotes to justify our apparently a priori conviction: that whenever we happen to feel that our rights/privileges/allowances (however you wish to characterize them) are threatened, this justifies even the most extreme means of defending them.
We must recall that Calvin preaches TO the magistrates in the pews before him, or reading his Institutes; as much as he is preaching to anyone. So of course, he's going to have some material for them. But he has as much or more to say to the private Christian citizen, which does not read exactly the same.
I would have us to please remember how robust is Calvin's doctrine of suffering as divine and loving discipline. I am most greatly disturbed by how LITTLE Christians in the USA are prepared to advocate for any sort of patient suffering that the church in particular, or the nation in general, should be prepared to endure, even at the hands of those who would try to disturb our domestic tranquility--be they terrorists or tyrants. No, but we Christians are too often among the FIRST to grab for the sword and buckler! We will not suffer ANYTHING! The least slight, and we are for sabre-rattling, or MORE.
We sound like LAMECH, Gen. 4:23-24. Shame on us. Disgraceful.
Well, I think Calvin's WHOLE presentation on social-relations, citizens/magistrates, resistance/dissent/rebellion, needs to be considered. And LONG before we get to "higher" concerns of doctrines like "interposition," Christians quoting Calvin should have mastered Calvin on the duties of ordinary, Christian citizens.
Consider these passages (and I could MULTIPLY them by the hundreds):
Gen.31:42 -
God has seen my affliction, and the labor of my hands. This was spoken from a pious feeling that God would bring help to him when afflicted, if he should conduct himself with fidelity and honesty. Therefore, in order that the Lord may sustain us with his favor, let us learn to discharge our duty rightly; let us not flee from our proper work; and let us not refuse to purchase peace by submitting to many inconveniences. Further, if they from whom we have deserved well treat us severely and unjustly, let us bear our cross in hope and in silence, until the Lord shall succor us: for he will never forsake us, as the whole Scripture testifies.
31:13 -
Let the faithful, also, at this day, feel that he is the same towards them; and if, in any way, the wicked tyrannically oppress them by unjust violence, let them bear it patiently, until at length, in due time, he shall avenge them.
Exodus 2:12 -
12. And he looked this way and that way. Hence it more evidently appears that Moses came with the design of succouring his unhappy brethren, and of relieving and aiding them with his help, since, by killing the Egyptian, he avenged the injury done indeed to an individual, but having a bearing on the whole nation. But although he was inspired by the Holy Spirit with special courage for the performance of this act, still it was accompanied with an infirmity, which shews that he did not undertake without hesitation what he yet, knew to be his vocation. For Stephen (Act.7:25) bears witness that Moses was not impelled by a rash zeal to stay the Egyptian, but because he knew that he was divinely appointed to be the avenger and deliverer of his nation.
Still he looked about to see whether any one saw him, and dared not punish the wrong-doer, except by a secret blow. Thus we perceive that he was not altogether so bold as he should have been, and that he had to strive against his timidity. Again, we gather from his hesitation that his faith was weak, so that we must not suppose that it was thus praised by the Apostle because it was absolutely perfect. In the first place, then, let us conclude that Moses did not rashly have recourse to the sword, but that he was armed by God’s command, and, conscious of his legitimate vocation, rightly and judiciously assumed that character which God assigned to him.
Thence it follows, that private persons would act improperly, and would be by no means countenanced by his example, if they sought to repress wrong by force and arms. Thus far we should imitate Moses in rendering aid to the suffering and oppressed, as far as our means go, and in caring not to incur the ill-will of the wicked, when we oppose ourselves to their oppressions; but we must leave it to the judges, who are invested with public authority, to draw the sword of vengeance.
If these do not afford their aid to the innocent when they are unjustly treated, all we can do is to murmur; as not even Moses would have been allowed to proceed further, unless he had been the appointed avenger and deliverer of the people. As to the fear, by which he betrayed his pusillanimity and his present unpreparedness for fulfilling his office, let us learn that the obedience of the saints, which is stained by sin, is still sometimes acceptable with God through mercy; and therefore, although the weakness of the flesh is a draw-back to us in the performance of our duty, still let us cease not to struggle against it; for our assurance of this ought to have no small effect in animating us, when we are persuaded that there is pardon ready for our hesitation, if we do not yield to it.
Dan.8:1 -
The chief object of this vision is to prepare the faithful to bear patiently the horrible tyranny of Antiochus, of which the Prophet treats in this chapter... And at this day this prophecy is useful to us, lest our courage should fail us in the extreme calamity of the Church, because a perpetual representation of the Church is depicted for us under that calamitous and mournful state. Although God often spares our infirmities, yet the Church is never free from many distresses, and unless we are prepared to undergo all contests, we shall never stand firm in the faith. This is the scope and explanation of the prophecy.
8:10 -
Although the sons of God are pilgrims on earth, and have scarcely any dwelling-place here, becoming like castaways before men, yet they are nevertheless citizens of heaven. The usefulness of this teaching to us is apparent, by its inducing us to bear it patiently whenever we are often thrown prostrate on the ground, and whenever tyrants and the despiser’s of God look down upon us with scorn. Meanwhile our seat is laid up in heaven, and God numbers us among the stars, although, as Paul says, we are as dung and the offscouring of all things.
1Pet. 2:14 -
14Or unto governors, or, Whether to presidents. He designates every kind of magistrates, as though he had said, that there is no kind of government to which we ought not to submit. He confirms this by saying that they are God’s ministers; for they who apply him to the king, are greatly mistaken. There is then a common reason, which extols the authority of all magistrates, that they rule by the command of God, and are sent by him. It hence follows (as Paul also teaches us) that they resist God, who do not obediently submit to a power ordained by him.
For the punishment. This is the second reason why it behoves us reverently to regard and to respect civil authority, and that is, because it has been appointed by the Lord for the common good of mankind; for we must be extremely barbarous and brutal, if the public good is not regarded by us. This, then, in short, is what Peter means, that since God keeps the world in order by the ministry of magistrates, all they who despise their authority are enemies to mankind.
Now he assumes these two things, which belong, as Plato says, to a commonwealth, that is, reward to the good and punishment to the wicked; for, in ancient times, not only punishment was allotted to evil-doers, but also rewards to the doers of good. But though it often happens that honors are not rightly distributed, nor rewards given to the deserving, yet it is an honor, not to be despised, that the good are at the least under the care and protection of magistrates, that they are not exposed to the violence and injuries of the ungodly, that they live more quietly under laws and better retain their reputation, than if every one, unrestrained, lived as he pleased. In short, it is a singular blessing of God, that the wicked are not allowed to do what they like.
It may, however, be objected here and said, that kings and magistrates often abuse their power, and exercise tyrannical cruelty rather than justice. Such were almost all the magistrates, when this Epistle was written. To this I answer, that tyrants and those like them, do not produce such effects by their abuse, but that the ordinance of God ever remains in force, as the institution of marriage is not subverted though the wife and the husband were to act in a way not becoming them. However, therefore, men may go astray, yet the end fixed by God cannot be changed.
Were any one again to object and say, that we ought not to obey princes who, as far as they can, pervert the holy ordinance of God, and thus become savage wild beasts, while magistrates ought to bear the image of God. My reply is this, that government established by God ought to be so highly valued by us, as to honor even tyrants when in power. There is yet another reply still more evident, — that there has never been a tyranny, (nor can one be imagined,) however cruel and unbridled, in which some portion of equity has not appeared; and further, some kind of government, however deformed and corrupt it may be, is still better and more beneficial than anarchy.
It is more than obvious that Calvin opposes tyranny, and never once sanctions it. Only allowing that even tyrannies have some semblance of order, which is better than anarchy (which he would define as the absence of any "society" or social order).
But Calvin is unutterably hostile to insurrection, private rebellion, anything that in the least sought divine sanction for self-righteous exhibitions of personal privilege--especially to violence. Consider carefully what he writes about Moses above.
We American-Christians seem to be fixated on the sins of the magistrate, or the sins of the State. What about the sins of the nation, for which the Lord of Justice (the King of the Nations) may have already determined to strip us of our vaunted liberties and licenses? As Christian Pilgrims, living in this "foreign land," we too will suffer in part for the sins of the whole. Do we not believe that God will deliver us, as he delivered Daniel and the other believing exiles?
We talk endlessly about how, before we ever get to extremity, we will rise up--violently if necessary--and join "the Patriots" and recover our precious creature-comforts. We claim we know what we would have done (fight, usually) if we had lived through the War of Independence. How many of these "muscular-Christians," whose cause we are being called to join, have any genuine piety? How many of them are mostly anxious to preserve their earthly happiness? Who is leading this rabble? What principles do they espouse? Are there any principles?
The air is thick with something these days, but it isn't the ancient Christian "Just-War-doctrine," which has been cheerfully jettisoned some time ago by politicians and citizens alike. Nor is it "interposition," but some kind of sickly-sweet incense of populist insurrection, exemplified in that lovely phrase, "Yew kin have my gun when yew pry it frum my cold, dead fingers."
For all that he lived in an era of waning "Christendom," Calvin had a far wider, more cosmopolitan view of the potential circumstances Christian's might live under. The constrained European compass in which he operated was incredibly diverse, compared to the typical American outlook. I simply cannot imagine Calvin supporting the idea of a real, violent "popular uprising" in this country on biblical grounds. His first question would be, "On whose authority do these people stand here, waving their pitchforks?" Pointing to the Constitution or Declaration would be insufficient, I suspect, to move him to approve.
We believers may feel constrained to join a protest-movement (or oppose it) once it has taken shape. I do not recommend to any Christian, under the present ungodly climate of the age, to "get in on the ground floor" of a building that is going up without any blueprint, and without any oversight. It's liable to come crashing down with him in it. And whenever he joins it, he better join it with the understanding that he will bear the consequences of any failure, with no right to complain. Let him appeal to the Judge of the whole earth, and rest in his sentence.
And if you prefer to leave "things too high for me" to others, consider David on Ps.131:1
His submission in such matters stands contrasted with the presumption of those who, without any call from God, hurry themselves into unwarrantable undertakings, and involve themselves in duties which properly belong to others. For so long as we have a clear call from God, things cannot be said to be shut up or hidden from us, or too great for us, provided we stand ready for all obedience; and, on the other hand, those who yield themselves up to the influence of ambition will soon lose themselves in a labyrinth of perplexity. We see how God confounds the proud and boasted enterprises of the children of this world. They run the full course of their wild career, they turn the earth upside down at their pleasure, and put forth their hand in every direction; they are filled with complacency at the thought of their own talents and industry, and, in a moment, when all their plans have been fully formed, they are entirely overthrown, because there is no solidity in them.
There are two different forms which the presumption of those takes who will not submit to be humble followers of God, but must needs run before him. Some rush forward with a reckless precipitancy, and seem as if they would build to the skies; others do not so openly exhibit the inordinateness of their desires, are slower in their movements, and cautiously calculate upon the future, and yet their presumption appears no less from the very fact, that, with a total oversight of God, as if heaven and earth were subject to them, they pass their decree as to what shall be done by them some ten or twenty years hereafter. These build, as it were, in the deep sea. But never shall it come to the surface, however extended may be the term of their lives; while those who, like David, submit themselves to God, keeping in their own sphere, moderate in their desires, will enjoy a life of tranquillity and assurance.
...I'd like to point out
that for some reason, whenever we're discussing the matter of society, we seem to gravitate to discussions of government and focus so much less on our actual duties as ordinary citizens. And yes, our first and regular duty is to submit, even to powers that oppress us. I'm amazed at how many Christians balk at what is, in fact, a fairly straightforward reading of Scripture.
What is worse, we often run to (yes, very important and significant) Reformed writers, like CALVIN, in order to pull quotes to justify our apparently a priori conviction: that whenever we happen to feel that our rights/privileges/allowances (however you wish to characterize them) are threatened, this justifies even the most extreme means of defending them.
We must recall that Calvin preaches TO the magistrates in the pews before him, or reading his Institutes; as much as he is preaching to anyone. So of course, he's going to have some material for them. But he has as much or more to say to the private Christian citizen, which does not read exactly the same.
I would have us to please remember how robust is Calvin's doctrine of suffering as divine and loving discipline. I am most greatly disturbed by how LITTLE Christians in the USA are prepared to advocate for any sort of patient suffering that the church in particular, or the nation in general, should be prepared to endure, even at the hands of those who would try to disturb our domestic tranquility--be they terrorists or tyrants. No, but we Christians are too often among the FIRST to grab for the sword and buckler! We will not suffer ANYTHING! The least slight, and we are for sabre-rattling, or MORE.
We sound like LAMECH, Gen. 4:23-24. Shame on us. Disgraceful.
Well, I think Calvin's WHOLE presentation on social-relations, citizens/magistrates, resistance/dissent/rebellion, needs to be considered. And LONG before we get to "higher" concerns of doctrines like "interposition," Christians quoting Calvin should have mastered Calvin on the duties of ordinary, Christian citizens.
Consider these passages (and I could MULTIPLY them by the hundreds):
Gen.31:42 -
God has seen my affliction, and the labor of my hands. This was spoken from a pious feeling that God would bring help to him when afflicted, if he should conduct himself with fidelity and honesty. Therefore, in order that the Lord may sustain us with his favor, let us learn to discharge our duty rightly; let us not flee from our proper work; and let us not refuse to purchase peace by submitting to many inconveniences. Further, if they from whom we have deserved well treat us severely and unjustly, let us bear our cross in hope and in silence, until the Lord shall succor us: for he will never forsake us, as the whole Scripture testifies.
31:13 -
Let the faithful, also, at this day, feel that he is the same towards them; and if, in any way, the wicked tyrannically oppress them by unjust violence, let them bear it patiently, until at length, in due time, he shall avenge them.
Exodus 2:12 -
12. And he looked this way and that way. Hence it more evidently appears that Moses came with the design of succouring his unhappy brethren, and of relieving and aiding them with his help, since, by killing the Egyptian, he avenged the injury done indeed to an individual, but having a bearing on the whole nation. But although he was inspired by the Holy Spirit with special courage for the performance of this act, still it was accompanied with an infirmity, which shews that he did not undertake without hesitation what he yet, knew to be his vocation. For Stephen (Act.7:25) bears witness that Moses was not impelled by a rash zeal to stay the Egyptian, but because he knew that he was divinely appointed to be the avenger and deliverer of his nation.
Still he looked about to see whether any one saw him, and dared not punish the wrong-doer, except by a secret blow. Thus we perceive that he was not altogether so bold as he should have been, and that he had to strive against his timidity. Again, we gather from his hesitation that his faith was weak, so that we must not suppose that it was thus praised by the Apostle because it was absolutely perfect. In the first place, then, let us conclude that Moses did not rashly have recourse to the sword, but that he was armed by God’s command, and, conscious of his legitimate vocation, rightly and judiciously assumed that character which God assigned to him.
Thence it follows, that private persons would act improperly, and would be by no means countenanced by his example, if they sought to repress wrong by force and arms. Thus far we should imitate Moses in rendering aid to the suffering and oppressed, as far as our means go, and in caring not to incur the ill-will of the wicked, when we oppose ourselves to their oppressions; but we must leave it to the judges, who are invested with public authority, to draw the sword of vengeance.
If these do not afford their aid to the innocent when they are unjustly treated, all we can do is to murmur; as not even Moses would have been allowed to proceed further, unless he had been the appointed avenger and deliverer of the people. As to the fear, by which he betrayed his pusillanimity and his present unpreparedness for fulfilling his office, let us learn that the obedience of the saints, which is stained by sin, is still sometimes acceptable with God through mercy; and therefore, although the weakness of the flesh is a draw-back to us in the performance of our duty, still let us cease not to struggle against it; for our assurance of this ought to have no small effect in animating us, when we are persuaded that there is pardon ready for our hesitation, if we do not yield to it.
Dan.8:1 -
The chief object of this vision is to prepare the faithful to bear patiently the horrible tyranny of Antiochus, of which the Prophet treats in this chapter... And at this day this prophecy is useful to us, lest our courage should fail us in the extreme calamity of the Church, because a perpetual representation of the Church is depicted for us under that calamitous and mournful state. Although God often spares our infirmities, yet the Church is never free from many distresses, and unless we are prepared to undergo all contests, we shall never stand firm in the faith. This is the scope and explanation of the prophecy.
8:10 -
Although the sons of God are pilgrims on earth, and have scarcely any dwelling-place here, becoming like castaways before men, yet they are nevertheless citizens of heaven. The usefulness of this teaching to us is apparent, by its inducing us to bear it patiently whenever we are often thrown prostrate on the ground, and whenever tyrants and the despiser’s of God look down upon us with scorn. Meanwhile our seat is laid up in heaven, and God numbers us among the stars, although, as Paul says, we are as dung and the offscouring of all things.
1Pet. 2:14 -
14Or unto governors, or, Whether to presidents. He designates every kind of magistrates, as though he had said, that there is no kind of government to which we ought not to submit. He confirms this by saying that they are God’s ministers; for they who apply him to the king, are greatly mistaken. There is then a common reason, which extols the authority of all magistrates, that they rule by the command of God, and are sent by him. It hence follows (as Paul also teaches us) that they resist God, who do not obediently submit to a power ordained by him.
For the punishment. This is the second reason why it behoves us reverently to regard and to respect civil authority, and that is, because it has been appointed by the Lord for the common good of mankind; for we must be extremely barbarous and brutal, if the public good is not regarded by us. This, then, in short, is what Peter means, that since God keeps the world in order by the ministry of magistrates, all they who despise their authority are enemies to mankind.
Now he assumes these two things, which belong, as Plato says, to a commonwealth, that is, reward to the good and punishment to the wicked; for, in ancient times, not only punishment was allotted to evil-doers, but also rewards to the doers of good. But though it often happens that honors are not rightly distributed, nor rewards given to the deserving, yet it is an honor, not to be despised, that the good are at the least under the care and protection of magistrates, that they are not exposed to the violence and injuries of the ungodly, that they live more quietly under laws and better retain their reputation, than if every one, unrestrained, lived as he pleased. In short, it is a singular blessing of God, that the wicked are not allowed to do what they like.
It may, however, be objected here and said, that kings and magistrates often abuse their power, and exercise tyrannical cruelty rather than justice. Such were almost all the magistrates, when this Epistle was written. To this I answer, that tyrants and those like them, do not produce such effects by their abuse, but that the ordinance of God ever remains in force, as the institution of marriage is not subverted though the wife and the husband were to act in a way not becoming them. However, therefore, men may go astray, yet the end fixed by God cannot be changed.
Were any one again to object and say, that we ought not to obey princes who, as far as they can, pervert the holy ordinance of God, and thus become savage wild beasts, while magistrates ought to bear the image of God. My reply is this, that government established by God ought to be so highly valued by us, as to honor even tyrants when in power. There is yet another reply still more evident, — that there has never been a tyranny, (nor can one be imagined,) however cruel and unbridled, in which some portion of equity has not appeared; and further, some kind of government, however deformed and corrupt it may be, is still better and more beneficial than anarchy.
It is more than obvious that Calvin opposes tyranny, and never once sanctions it. Only allowing that even tyrannies have some semblance of order, which is better than anarchy (which he would define as the absence of any "society" or social order).
But Calvin is unutterably hostile to insurrection, private rebellion, anything that in the least sought divine sanction for self-righteous exhibitions of personal privilege--especially to violence. Consider carefully what he writes about Moses above.
We American-Christians seem to be fixated on the sins of the magistrate, or the sins of the State. What about the sins of the nation, for which the Lord of Justice (the King of the Nations) may have already determined to strip us of our vaunted liberties and licenses? As Christian Pilgrims, living in this "foreign land," we too will suffer in part for the sins of the whole. Do we not believe that God will deliver us, as he delivered Daniel and the other believing exiles?
We talk endlessly about how, before we ever get to extremity, we will rise up--violently if necessary--and join "the Patriots" and recover our precious creature-comforts. We claim we know what we would have done (fight, usually) if we had lived through the War of Independence. How many of these "muscular-Christians," whose cause we are being called to join, have any genuine piety? How many of them are mostly anxious to preserve their earthly happiness? Who is leading this rabble? What principles do they espouse? Are there any principles?
The air is thick with something these days, but it isn't the ancient Christian "Just-War-doctrine," which has been cheerfully jettisoned some time ago by politicians and citizens alike. Nor is it "interposition," but some kind of sickly-sweet incense of populist insurrection, exemplified in that lovely phrase, "Yew kin have my gun when yew pry it frum my cold, dead fingers."
For all that he lived in an era of waning "Christendom," Calvin had a far wider, more cosmopolitan view of the potential circumstances Christian's might live under. The constrained European compass in which he operated was incredibly diverse, compared to the typical American outlook. I simply cannot imagine Calvin supporting the idea of a real, violent "popular uprising" in this country on biblical grounds. His first question would be, "On whose authority do these people stand here, waving their pitchforks?" Pointing to the Constitution or Declaration would be insufficient, I suspect, to move him to approve.
We believers may feel constrained to join a protest-movement (or oppose it) once it has taken shape. I do not recommend to any Christian, under the present ungodly climate of the age, to "get in on the ground floor" of a building that is going up without any blueprint, and without any oversight. It's liable to come crashing down with him in it. And whenever he joins it, he better join it with the understanding that he will bear the consequences of any failure, with no right to complain. Let him appeal to the Judge of the whole earth, and rest in his sentence.
And if you prefer to leave "things too high for me" to others, consider David on Ps.131:1
His submission in such matters stands contrasted with the presumption of those who, without any call from God, hurry themselves into unwarrantable undertakings, and involve themselves in duties which properly belong to others. For so long as we have a clear call from God, things cannot be said to be shut up or hidden from us, or too great for us, provided we stand ready for all obedience; and, on the other hand, those who yield themselves up to the influence of ambition will soon lose themselves in a labyrinth of perplexity. We see how God confounds the proud and boasted enterprises of the children of this world. They run the full course of their wild career, they turn the earth upside down at their pleasure, and put forth their hand in every direction; they are filled with complacency at the thought of their own talents and industry, and, in a moment, when all their plans have been fully formed, they are entirely overthrown, because there is no solidity in them.
There are two different forms which the presumption of those takes who will not submit to be humble followers of God, but must needs run before him. Some rush forward with a reckless precipitancy, and seem as if they would build to the skies; others do not so openly exhibit the inordinateness of their desires, are slower in their movements, and cautiously calculate upon the future, and yet their presumption appears no less from the very fact, that, with a total oversight of God, as if heaven and earth were subject to them, they pass their decree as to what shall be done by them some ten or twenty years hereafter. These build, as it were, in the deep sea. But never shall it come to the surface, however extended may be the term of their lives; while those who, like David, submit themselves to God, keeping in their own sphere, moderate in their desires, will enjoy a life of tranquillity and assurance.
Last edited:
- Status