Part 27
purpose: that idolatry, blasphemies against the name of God and his truth, and other public offenses against religion may not be openly promoted and spread among the people; that public tranquility may not be disturbed; that everyone may be preserved in possession of what belongs to him; and that men may conduct their affairs together without fraud or injury.
In sum, its purpose is that a public form of religion may exist among Christians and that humanity may be maintained among men.
Nor should it seem strange that I now assign to civil government the duty of properly ordering religion, a responsibility which I appeared above to remove from the authority of men. For I no more permit men here to devise laws according to their own pleasure concerning religion and the manner of worshiping God than I did before. I do, however, approve of a civil order that takes care that the true religion contained in the law of God is not publicly violated and polluted with impunity.
If we consider each part of civil government separately, the following order will help readers understand what judgment should be formed concerning the whole.
Civil government consists of three parts. The first is the magistrate, who is the guardian and preserver of the laws. The second is the law, according to which the magistrate governs. The third is the people, who must be governed by the laws and obey the magistrate.
Let us therefore consider first the office of the magistrate: whether it is a lawful calling approved by God, what duties belong to it, and how extensive its authority is. Second, we shall consider by what laws a
Christian commonwealth ought to be governed. Finally, we shall consider in what manner the people may make use of the laws and what obedience they owe to their rulers.
As for the office of magistrates, our Lord has not only testified that it is acceptable to him, but has also adorned it with honorable titles and thereby commended its dignity to us in a singular manner.
To state the matter briefly, all those established in positions of authority are called "gods." This title must not be regarded as insignificant, for it demonstrates that they have received their commission from God, are authorized by him, and in some measure represent his person as his deputies.
I have said, "You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High."
—Psalm 82:6
This is not an interpretation of my own devising, but Christ's own explanation:
If Scripture called those gods to whom the word of God came—
—John 10:35
What does this mean except that they have received a charge and commission from God to serve him in their office and, as Moses and Jehoshaphat said to the judges they appointed over the cities of Judah, to administer justice not in the name of men but in the name of God?
You shall not show partiality in judgment, but shall hear the small as well as the great. You shall not fear the face of man, for the judgment is God's.
—Deuteronomy 1:17
Take heed what you do, for you judge not for man but for the Lord, who is with you in judgment.
—2 Chronicles 19:6
To the same purpose belongs what the Wisdom of God declares through the mouth of Solomon: that by him kings reign, counselors administer justice, princes maintain their authority, and the judges of the earth judge equitably.
By me kings reign, and rulers decree justice. By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth.
—Proverbs 8:15–16
This is equivalent to saying that kings and other rulers do not obtain their power upon earth merely through human perversity, but through the providence and holy ordinance of God, who is pleased to govern human society in this manner.
Saint Paul plainly demonstrates the same thing when he numbers governing among the gifts of God, which, being distributed in different ways among men, must be employed for the edification of the Church.
He who governs, let him do so with diligence.
—Romans 12:8
In that passage, however, he speaks of the council of elders appointed in the primitive Church to preside over public discipline, an office which he calls "governments" in the Epistle to the Corinthians.
God has appointed in the Church . . . helps and governments.
—1 Corinthians 12:28
Nevertheless, since we see that civil authority is directed toward the same end, there is no doubt that he commends to us every kind of lawful preeminence. He shows this still more clearly when he enters into a direct discussion of the subject. For he teaches that every such authority is an ordinance of God, and that none exist which have not been established by him. He further declares that rulers are ministers of God, appointed to honor those who do good and to execute the vengeance of his wrath upon those who do evil.
To the same purpose we should also consider the examples of the holy men, some of whom received kingdoms, such as David, Josiah, and Hezekiah; others held positions of government and high office under kings, such as Joseph and Daniel; while still others were entrusted with the leadership of a free people, such as Moses, Joshua, and the judges. From these examples we know that their station was acceptable to God, as he himself declared. We must not doubt, therefore, that civil authority is a calling not only holy and lawful before God, but also most sacred and honorable among all callings.
Magistrates ought continually to keep this in mind, since such a consideration may serve both as a powerful spur to urge them to perform their duty and as a wonderful consolation, enabling them patiently to bear the difficulties and vexations that attend their office. For to what great integrity, prudence, clemency, moderation, and innocence ought they to conform and regulate themselves when they know that they have been appointed ministers of divine justice? With what confidence would they dare admit any injustice into their tribunal when they understand it to be the throne of the living God? With what boldness would they pronounce an unjust sentence with the mouth which they know has been appointed to serve as an instrument of God's truth? With what conscience would they sign any wicked ordinance with the hand which they know has been appointed to write the judgments of God?
In short, if they remember that they are God's representatives, they must devote all their effort and care to presenting to men, in all their conduct, something like an image of God's providence, protection, goodness, gentleness, and justice. Moreover, they must always keep before their eyes that, if all those are accursed who perform the work of God deceitfully when it concerns the execution of vengeance, then much more are those accursed who act deceitfully in so just a calling.
Therefore, when Moses and Jehoshaphat wished to exhort their judges to perform their duty, they could find nothing better to stir their hearts than what we have just related: "Consider what you do, for you do not exercise judgment on behalf of men, but in the name of God, who is with you in judgment. Now therefore, let the fear of God be upon you. Take care what you do, for there is no injustice with the Lord our God." In another place it is said that God has taken
his place in the assembly of the gods and that in the midst of the gods he executes judgment. This ought deeply to affect the hearts of rulers, for by it they are taught that they are, as it were, God's lieutenants, and that they must give an account to him of the charge entrusted to them.
And rightly should this warning sharply prod them. For if they commit any wrong, they not only injure the people whom they unjustly oppress, but also offend God, whose sacred judgments they defile. Yet they may also receive abundant consolation from considering that their calling is neither profane nor foreign to a servant of God, but is a most holy office, since they perform and execute the very office of God.
On the contrary, those who are not satisfied with so many testimonies of Scripture, but still condemn this sacred calling as something wholly contrary to Christian religion and piety—what else do they do but mock God himself, upon whom fall all the reproaches directed against his ministry? Indeed, such people do not reject rulers merely so that they may not reign over them; rather, they reject God altogether. For if this was truly said by our Lord concerning the people of Israel, because they had rejected the rule of Samuel, why should it not also be said today of those who take the liberty of speaking evil against all the authorities ordained by God?
But they object that our Lord forbids all Christians to concern themselves with kingdoms or positions of authority when he tells his disciples that the kings of the nations exercise dominion over them, but that it must not be so among them, where he who is first must become the least. What excellent interpreters! A dispute had arisen
among the apostles as to which of them should be regarded as possessing the greatest dignity. Our Lord, in order to restrain this vain ambition, declares that their ministry is not like earthly kingdoms, in which one man holds precedence as head over all the others. But how, I ask, does this comparison diminish the dignity of kings? Indeed, what does it prove at all, except that royal government is not the apostolic ministry?
Furthermore, although there are various forms and kinds of rulers, they do not differ in this respect: we must receive them all as ministers ordained by God. For Paul included all these kinds when he said that there is no authority except from God. And the form least pleasing to men is commended in Scripture in a special manner above all the others—namely, the lordship and dominion of a single ruler. Because it carries with it the common subjection of all except the one man to whose will it subjects everyone else, it has never been agreeable to all men of excellent and lofty spirit. But Scripture, to counter this perversity of human judgment, expressly affirms that kings reign by the providence of divine wisdom and particularly commands that kings be honored.
Indeed, it is a vain occupation for private individuals, who possess no authority to order public affairs, to dispute about which form of civil government is best. Moreover, it is rash to make an absolute determination, since the chief consideration lies in the circumstances. Even if the various forms of government were compared apart from their circumstances, it would not be easy to determine which was most beneficial, so nearly equal are they, each having its own advantages.
Three forms of civil government are commonly reckoned: monarchy, which is the rule of one person, whether he is called a king, duke, or by some other title; aristocracy, which is government administered by the leading and distinguished men; and democracy, which is popular government, in which each member of the people possesses authority.
It is certainly true that a king, or anyone else to whom supreme rule belongs, may easily degenerate into a tyrant. But it is just as easy, when the prominent men possess authority, for them to conspire together to establish an unjust domination. And it is easier still, where the people possess authority, for them to stir up seditions.
Moreover, if we do not fix our eyes upon a single city alone, but look at and consider the whole world together—or even turn our attention to different countries—we shall certainly find that it was not without the providence of God that different regions were governed by different forms of civil government. For just as the elements cannot be held together except by an unequal proportion and tempering, so civil governments cannot be properly maintained except by a certain inequality
Yet there is no need to demonstrate all these things to those for whom the will of God is sufficient reason. For if it is his pleasure to appoint kings over kingdoms and other kinds of rulers over free peoples, it is our duty to submit and render obedience to whatever rulers govern the place where we live.
We must now briefly explain the office of magistrates, as it is described by the Word of God, and show wherein it consists. Jeremiah admonishes kings to execute judgment and justice, to
deliver the oppressed from the hand of the oppressor, not to mistreat strangers, widows, or orphans, to do no injury, and not to shed innocent blood. Again, Moses commands the governors whom he had appointed in his place to hear the causes of their brethren; to render justice to anyone who sought it, whether against his brother or against a stranger; to show no partiality in judgment, but to do justice to the small and the great alike; and not to be turned aside by fear of men, since judgment belongs to God.
I pass over what is written elsewhere: that kings must not multiply horses, set their hearts upon covetousness, or proudly exalt themselves above their brethren, but must diligently meditate upon the law of God throughout their lives. Likewise, judges must turn aside neither to one side nor the other and must accept no gifts. Many similar teachings are commonly read throughout Scripture.
For in undertaking here to explain the office of magistrates, my purpose is not so much to instruct them in what they ought to do as to show others what a magistrate is and for what purpose he has been ordained by God. We see, therefore, that magistrates are appointed as protectors and guardians of public peace, decency, innocence, and good order, and that they must devote themselves to maintaining the common safety and peace of all.
Since they cannot accomplish this unless they defend the good against the injuries of the wicked and come to the aid of those who are oppressed, they are therefore armed with power to restrain and severely punish evildoers, whose wickedness disturbs the public peace. Indeed, experience confirms the saying of Solon that every commonwealth depends upon two things: the rewarding of the good
and the punishment of the wicked. If these two things are removed, the whole order of human society is dissolved and brought to nothing.
For many have little concern to do good unless they see virtue rewarded with some honor. On the other hand, the evil desires of the wicked cannot be restrained unless they see vengeance and punishment ready at hand. These two duties are also included in the prophet's command to kings and other rulers to execute judgment and justice.
Justice consists in receiving the innocent under one's protection: maintaining, defending, supporting, and delivering them. Judgment consists in resisting the boldness of the wicked, restraining their violence, and punishing their offenses.
But here a difficult and weighty question arises: whether all Christians are forbidden to kill. For if God forbids it in his law, and if the prophet foretells concerning the Church of God that within it no one shall hurt or harm another, how can magistrates shed human blood without offending against godliness?
But if, on the other hand, we understand that the magistrate, in punishing, does nothing on his own authority, but merely executes the judgments of God himself, this scruple will not greatly trouble us. It is true that the law of God forbids killing. Yet, so that murderers may not remain unpunished, the Lord places the sword in the hands of his ministers to be used against them. It does not belong to believers to afflict or harm anyone. But to avenge, at God's command, the injuries suffered by the good is neither to harm nor to afflict.
It is therefore easy to conclude that, in this respect, magistrates are not subject to the general law. For although by that law the Lord binds the hands of all men, he does not bind his own justice, which he executes through the hands of magistrates. In the same way, when a prince forbids all his subjects to bear weapons or wound anyone, he does not thereby prevent his officers from executing the justice which he has specifically entrusted to them.
I wish that we would always keep this consideration before our eyes: that in this matter nothing is done through human rashness, but by the authority of God, who commands it to be done. Under his direction one never departs from the right path. For when we consider this, we shall find nothing to condemn in public punishment, unless we intend to prevent the justice of God from punishing crimes. But if we are not permitted to impose a law upon God, why do we slander the ministers of his justice? "They do not bear the sword in vain," says Saint Paul, for they are ministers of God, appointed to serve his wrath and to take vengeance upon those who do evil.
Therefore, if princes and other rulers recognize that nothing is more pleasing to God than their obedience, and if they desire to please him by godliness, justice, and integrity, let them devote themselves to the correction and punishment of the wicked.
Moses was certainly moved by this conviction when, knowing that by the power of the Lord he had been appointed to deliver his people, he put the Egyptian to death. He was moved by it again when he punished the people's idolatry with the death of three thousand men.
David also was moved by such zeal when, near the end of his life, he commanded his son Solomon to put Joab and Shimei to death.
How did the spirit of Moses, so gentle and gracious, become inflamed with such severity that, having stained his hands with the blood of his brethren, he did not cease killing until three thousand had been slain? How did David, a man of such great gentleness throughout his life, make so inhumane a testament with his dying breaths, commanding his son not to allow the gray heads of Joab and Shimei to go down to the grave in peace?
Surely both of them, in executing the vengeance entrusted to them by God, sanctified their hands by that cruelty—if cruelty it ought to be called—whereas they would have defiled them by showing pardon. "It is an abomination for kings to commit wickedness," says Solomon, "for a royal throne is established by justice."
Again, it is said that the king who sits upon the throne of judgment looks upon all the wicked—that is, in order to punish them. Likewise, "A wise king scatters the wicked and turns the wheel over them." Again, "Remove the dross from the silver, and the goldsmith will produce the vessel he desires; remove the wicked man from the presence of the king, and his throne will be established in righteousness." Again, both he who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are an abomination to God. Likewise, the rebellious man brings calamity upon himself, and a messenger of death is sent against him. Again, peoples and nations curse the man who says to the wicked, "You are righteous."
Now, if the true exercise of justice consists in pursuing the wicked with drawn sword, rulers who abstain from all severity and keep
their hands free from blood while the swords of the wicked are drawn to commit murder and violence make themselves guilty of great injustice. Far from deserving praise for justice or goodness, they deserve condemnation.
Nevertheless, I also mean that no excessive or unduly harsh severity should be mixed with this, and that the judgment seat must not become a gallows already erected. For I do not wish to favor any unrestrained cruelty or to say that a good and just sentence can be pronounced without clemency. Clemency must always have a place in the counsel of kings and, as Solomon says, is the true preservation of the royal throne. Therefore, it was well said by one of the ancients that clemency is the chief virtue of princes.
But a magistrate must guard against both extremes: lest by excessive severity he wound more than he heals, or by a foolish and superstitious affectation of clemency become cruel through his kindness, abandoning everything through his indulgence to the great injury of many. For it was not without reason that this saying was formerly used: it is hard to live under a prince who permits nothing, but far worse under one who leaves everything without restraint.
Since it is sometimes necessary for kings and peoples to undertake war in order to execute such justice, we may conclude from the same principle that wars directed toward this end are lawful. For if power has been given to them to preserve the peace of their country and territory, to suppress the seditions of contentious men and enemies of peace, to aid those who suffer violence, and to punish crimes, could they employ it for any better purpose than to break and overthrow the efforts of those who disturb both the private peace of
individuals and the common tranquility of all, and who seditiously stir up riots, violence, oppression, and other crimes?
If rulers are to be the guardians and defenders of the laws, they must break the efforts of all those whose injustice corrupts the order established by law. Indeed, if they rightly punish robbers who have injured only a few people, should they allow an entire country to be ravaged by acts of robbery without intervening? It makes no difference whether the person who invades another's territory, to which he has no right, in order to commit plunder and murder, is a king or a man of low estate. All such persons must be regarded as robbers and punished accordingly.
Here, however, magistrates must take great care not to yield in the least to their own desires. On the contrary, whenever they must administer punishment, they must refrain from anger, hatred, and excessive severity. Indeed, as Saint Augustine says, because of their common humanity they ought to have compassion upon the person whom they punish for his own crimes.
If they must take up arms against enemies—that is, against armed robbers—they must not seek a trivial occasion for doing so. Even when such an occasion presents itself, they must avoid it unless compelled by great necessity. For if we ought to do even better than the pagans taught—and one of them said that war should have no other end than the pursuit of peace—then surely every means must be attempted before resorting to arms.
In short, whenever blood must be shed, magistrates must not allow themselves to be carried away by private passion, but must be governed by concern for the public good. Otherwise, they wickedly
abuse their power, which was not given to them for their private advantage, but to be employed in the service of others.
From this right to wage war it follows that garrisons, alliances, and other military provisions are also lawful. By garrisons I mean armed forces stationed in frontier towns for the protection of the whole country. By alliances I mean confederations formed among neighboring princes so that they may assist one another if trouble should arise within their territories and jointly resist the common enemies of mankind. By military provisions I mean all supplies and preparations pertaining to the conduct of war.
It seems fitting to add one final point: the taxes and revenues received by princes are their lawful income. Nevertheless, they must employ them chiefly in meeting the expenses of their office. They may also lawfully use them to maintain their household dignity with suitable generosity, since this is in some measure connected with the majesty of their office.
Thus we see that David, Hezekiah, Josiah, Jehoshaphat, and the other holy kings—as well as Joseph and Daniel—lived magnificently at public expense, according to the rank in which they had been placed, without offense to their consciences. Moreover, we read in Ezekiel that large possessions were assigned to kings by the ordinance of God. Although in that passage the prophet describes the spiritual kingdom of Christ, he nevertheless takes as his pattern a just and lawful human kingdom.
On the other hand, princes must remember that their domains are not so much private revenues as resources to be applied to the public good of the whole people, as Saint Paul himself testifies. Therefore,
they cannot squander them without injuring the public. Indeed, they ought rather to consider them the very blood of the people, which it would be most cruel and inhuman not to spare.
Furthermore, they must understand that their levies, taxes, and other forms of tribute are nothing other than subsidies for public necessity, and that to burden the poor common people with them without cause is tyranny and robbery.
These observations do not encourage princes to engage in extravagant spending or disorderly generosity. Indeed, there is no need to inflame their desires, which are already far more ardent than they ought to be. But because it is essential that they undertake nothing unless they can do so with a sound conscience before God— and lest, by daring beyond what is lawful, they fall into contempt of God—it is fitting that they understand what they are permitted to do.
Nor is this teaching unnecessary for private individuals, for by it they will learn not to criticize and condemn the expenditures of princes merely because they exceed the measure and custom ordinarily observed by others.
After magistrates come laws, which are the true sinews—or, as Cicero calls them, the souls—of every commonwealth. Without laws magistrates cannot possibly continue, just as laws in turn are preserved and maintained by magistrates. Therefore, nothing could be more aptly said than to call the law a silent magistrate and the magistrate a living law.
When I promised to explain by what laws a Christian commonwealth ought to be governed, I did not mean that I would enter into a
lengthy discussion about which laws would be best. Such a discussion would be endless and would not suit our present purpose. I shall merely indicate briefly and in passing what kinds of laws it may lawfully employ before God and by which it may be justly governed among men.
I would even have omitted this matter altogether had I not seen that many fall into dangerous error concerning it. For some deny that a commonwealth is rightly ordered if, after setting aside the civil polity of Moses, it is governed by the ordinary laws of other nations. I leave it to others to consider how dangerous and seditious this opinion is. It will be sufficient for me at present to show that it is entirely false and foolish.
First, we must observe the common distinction by which the whole law of God given through Moses is divided into three parts: moral, ceremonial, and judicial. Each part must be considered separately so that we may properly understand what does and does not apply to us.
Meanwhile, no one should be troubled by the fact that the judicial and ceremonial laws are themselves included under morality. For although the ancients who devised this distinction were well aware that the ceremonies and judgments related to morals, they nevertheless saw that both could be changed or abolished without corrupting or diminishing good morals. For this reason, they did not call these two parts moral, but reserved that name for the part upon which true moral integrity depends.
We shall begin, then, with the moral law. Since it contains two principal points—the first commanding us to honor God sincerely
with pure faith and piety, and the second commanding us to be united with our neighbor in true love—it is the true and eternal rule of righteousness ordained for all people, in whatever country they may live and at whatever time, if they desire to regulate their lives according to the will of God. For this is his eternal and unchangeable will: that he should be honored by us all and that we should love one another.
The ceremonial law was a form of instruction for the Jews—that is, an elementary teaching which our Lord was pleased to give that people as an exercise during their childhood, until the fullness of time should come, when he would reveal the realities that were then represented in shadows.
The judicial law, which was given to them for their civil government, taught them certain rules of justice and equity by which they might live peaceably together without harming one another. Now, just as the observance of the ceremonies belonged to the doctrine of piety, which is the first part of the moral law, because it nurtured the Jewish Church in the reverence of God, it was nevertheless distinct from true piety itself. In the same way, although their judicial law had no other end than the preservation of that same love commanded in the law of God, it nevertheless possessed its own distinct character, which was not itself contained in the commandment of love.
Therefore, just as the ceremonies were abolished while true religion and piety remained entirely intact, so also those judicial laws may be annulled and abolished without violating the duty of love in any way. If this is true—and certainly it is—then every nation is free to enact
whatever laws it judges beneficial, provided that they are framed according to the eternal rule of love. Thus, although they differ in form, they all arrive at the same end.
I do not mean that we should regard as laws those barbarous and brutish ordinances which, for example, rewarded thieves with a certain prize, permitted indiscriminate sexual relations between men and women, or established other practices still more vile, outrageous, and detestable. Such ordinances are contrary not only to all justice, but also to all humanity.
What I have said will become clear if in every law we consider the following two things: the enactment of the law and the equity upon whose reason the enactment is founded. Equity, because it is natural, is always the same for every people. Therefore, all laws throughout the world, whatever their subject, ought to conform to the same equity.
As for particular statutes or ordinances, because they are connected with circumstances upon which they partly depend, there is no difficulty in allowing them to differ, provided that they all tend toward the same end of equity.
Since the law of God which we call moral is nothing other than a testimony of the natural law and of the conscience which our Lord has impressed upon the hearts of all men, there is no doubt that the equity of which we now speak is fully declared in it. Therefore, this equity alone must be the aim, rule, and end of all laws.
Furthermore, all laws that are framed according to this rule, directed toward this end, and limited by this standard ought not to displease
us, however much they may differ either from the Mosaic law or from one another. The law of God forbids stealing.
In Exodus we may see what penalty was appointed for theft under the civil government of the Jews. The oldest laws of other nations punished thieves by requiring them to repay twice what they had stolen. Later laws distinguished between open and concealed theft. Some proceeded as far as banishment, others to flogging, and still others to death.
The law of God forbids bearing false witness. Among the Jews, a false witness suffered the same penalty that the falsely accused person would have incurred had he been convicted. In some other countries the penalty was merely public disgrace, while in others it was death by hanging.
The law of God forbids murder. All the laws of the world agree in punishing murderers with death, although they employ different forms of execution. Yet amid this diversity they all tend toward the same end. Together they pronounce a sentence of condemnation against the crimes condemned by the eternal law of God—namely, murder, theft, adultery, and false testimony. They differ only in the severity of their penalties, and uniformity in this respect is neither necessary nor expedient.
There are regions that would quickly be overrun by murder and robbery unless they imposed severe punishments upon murderers. There are times that require penalties to be increased. And there are nations that need to be severely corrected for some particular vice toward which they are more inclined than others. Should not anyone who objects to such diversity—which is especially suited to
maintaining obedience to the law of God—be judged exceedingly malicious and hostile to the public good?
Some commonly object that injury is done to the law of God given through Moses when it is abolished and other, newer laws are preferred to it. But this objection is exceedingly frivolous. The laws established by rulers in their respective countries are not simply preferred to the Mosaic law as though they were inherently better, but are adopted according to the conditions and circumstances of the time, place, and nation.
Moreover, the Mosaic law is not thereby abrogated or annulled, since it was never commanded to us Gentiles. For our Lord did not administer it through the hand of Moses in order that it should be proclaimed to every nation and observed throughout the whole earth. Rather, having received the Jewish people under his particular protection, care, guidance, and government, he also chose to be their particular lawgiver. And, as befitted a good and wise lawgiver, he showed particular regard in all these laws for the welfare of that people.
It remains for us now to consider the last matter we proposed: in what way the Christian community may make use of laws, courts, and magistrates; what honor private individuals owe to their rulers; and how far their obedience ought to extend.
Many consider the office of magistrates useless among Christians and maintain that Christians may not appeal to them, since all vengeance, coercion, and litigation are forbidden to them. But since Saint Paul plainly testifies, on the contrary, that magistrates are God's ministers for our good, we understand from this that it is God's
will that by their power and assistance we should be defended against the malice and injustice of the wicked and live peaceably under their protection.
Now, if they would have been given to us by God for our protection in vain unless we were permitted to make use of such a good and benefit, it plainly follows that we may appeal to them and seek their assistance without offense. But here I must deal with two kinds of people.
For there are many who burn with such a passion for litigation that they are never at peace within themselves unless they are contending with others. Moreover, they never begin their lawsuits without deadly hatred and an unrestrained desire to injure and take revenge, and they pursue them with hardened obstinacy until their adversary is ruined. Meanwhile, so that they may appear to do nothing but what is right, they defend such perversity under the pretense of seeking justice.
But it does not follow that, because a person is permitted to compel his neighbor through a court of law to make restitution, he is therefore permitted to hate him, desire to harm him, or pursue him obstinately and without mercy. Let such people therefore learn this principle: legal proceedings are lawful only for those who use them rightly.
The proper use of them is as follows. First, with regard to the plaintiff: if he has been unjustly injured and oppressed, whether in his person or his possessions, he may place himself under the protection of the magistrate, present his complaint, and make his just and equitable request—but without any desire for revenge or
injury, without hatred or bitterness, and without contentious passion. On the contrary, he should be more ready to surrender what belongs to him and endure every injury than to conceive anger and hatred against his adversary.
Second, with regard to the defendant: when summoned, he may appear before the court and defend his cause with the best explanations and arguments available to him, without any bitterness, but simply from a desire to preserve in justice what belongs to him.
On the other hand, if their hearts are infected with malice, corrupted by envy, inflamed with indignation, driven by vengeance, or in any way so embittered that love is diminished, then even proceedings in the most just causes in the world cannot be anything but unjust and wicked. For this principle must be firmly settled among all Christians: no one may conduct a lawsuit, however good and equitable his cause may be, unless he bears toward his adversary the same goodwill and love that he would bear if the matter disputed between them had already been amicably settled and brought to peace.
Someone may perhaps object that such moderation and self-restraint are so rarely seen in court that, if they ever appeared, they would be regarded as something extraordinary. I readily confess that, given the perversity of men today, few examples of just litigation can be found. Nevertheless, the thing itself remains good and pure, provided it is not defiled by corrupt additions.
Furthermore, when we hear that the assistance of the magistrate is a holy gift of God, we must take all the greater care not to pollute it by our sin. But those who absolutely and entirely condemn all legal
disputes must understand that they reject a holy ordinance of God and one of those gifts that may be pure to those who are pure—unless they wish to accuse Saint Paul of wrongdoing. For he refuted the lies and false accusations of his accusers, even exposing their deceit and malice. In court he claimed the privilege owed to him as a Roman citizen, and when necessary he appealed from the unjust judgment of the governor to the imperial tribunal of Caesar.
Nor does this conflict with the prohibition laid upon all Christians against harboring any desire for vengeance—a desire which we likewise insist must be excluded from all lawsuits conducted by believers.
For in a civil case, no one proceeds rightly unless he simply commits his cause into the hands of the judge as a public protector, with innocent sincerity, thinking of nothing less than returning evil for evil, which is the desire for vengeance.
Likewise, when a criminal charge is pursued, I approve no accuser except one who comes before the court without being moved in any degree by a passion for revenge or provoked by some private injury, but solely from a desire to restrain the wickedness of the accused and break his power so that he may not harm the public. Once the desire for vengeance is removed, nothing is done contrary to the commandment which forbids Christians to take revenge.
If it is objected that Christians are not only forbidden to seek vengeance, but are also commanded to wait for the hand of the Lord, who promises to assist the afflicted and oppressed, and therefore that those who seek the magistrate's assistance for themselves or others anticipate God's vengeance, I answer that they do not. For we
must understand that the magistrate's vengeance is not man's but God's and that, as Saint Paul says, it is administered by God through the ministry of men.
Nor do we oppose the words of Christ by which he forbids us to resist evil and commands us to turn the right cheek to the person who has struck the left, and to surrender our cloak to the person who has taken our coat. By these words he requires the hearts of his servants to renounce the desire for vengeance so completely that they would rather suffer the injury to be doubled than consider how they might repay it in kind. Nor do we turn them away from such patience.
Christians must indeed be a people born and formed to endure injuries and insults and to be exposed to the malice, deceit, and mockery of the wicked. Nor is that all: they must also bear all these evils patiently. That is, they must so order their hearts that, after suffering one affliction, they prepare themselves to receive another and expect nothing throughout their entire lives but the continual bearing of the cross.
Meanwhile, they must do good to those who wrong them, pray for those who speak evil of them, and strive to overcome evil with good, which is their only victory. When their wills are thus disposed, they will not demand an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth, as the Pharisees taught their disciples to desire vengeance. Rather, as Christ instructs his followers, they will bear injuries to their bodies and possessions in such a manner that they are immediately ready to forgive them.
Nevertheless, this gentleness and moderation of spirit will not prevent them, while preserving sincere goodwill toward their
enemies, from seeking the magistrate's assistance for the protection of their property or, out of concern for the public good, from requesting the punishment of wicked and destructive persons who cannot otherwise be corrected except by being punished.
Finally, the objection commonly made that Saint Paul condemns all lawsuits is entirely false. It is easy to understand from his words that there existed in the Corinthian church a violent and unrestrained passion for litigation, even to the point of giving unbelievers occasion to speak evil of the gospel and of the whole Christian religion.
This is the first thing Saint Paul reproves in them: by the intemperance of their disputes they brought the gospel into disrepute among unbelievers. Moreover, he also condemns the fact that they quarreled among themselves, brother against brother, and were so far from enduring injury that they even coveted one another's possessions, attacked one another, and inflicted harm upon one another.
It is therefore against this furious passion for litigation that he contends, not against all legal disputes without distinction. Yet he declares that it is altogether wrong not to suffer injury and the loss of one's possessions rather than labor to preserve them through contentious disputes.
Christians ought always to seek to surrender their rights rather than begin lawsuits from which they will find it difficult to emerge without an indignant spirit inflamed with hatred against their brother. But when someone sees that he can defend his property without violating or harming love, he does nothing contrary to Saint Paul's teaching by
doing so, especially when the matter is of great importance and the loss would be grievous for him to bear.
In short, as we said at the beginning, love will give everyone the best counsel. It is so necessary in every lawsuit that all proceedings by which it is violated or wounded are unjust and accursed.
The first duty of subjects toward their rulers is to hold their office in high esteem, recognizing it as a commission given by God, and for that reason to render them honor and reverence as God's lieutenants and representatives.
For there are some who render sufficient obedience to their magistrates and would not wish to be without a ruler to whom they must submit, because they recognize that such authority is beneficial to the public good. Nevertheless, they regard the magistrate as nothing more than a necessary evil for mankind.
But Saint Peter requires more of us when he commands us to honor the king, as does Solomon when he commands us to fear God and the king. For under the word honor, Saint Peter includes the favorable judgment and esteem which he intends us to have for kings. And Solomon, by joining the king with God, ascribes to him great dignity and reverence.
Saint Paul also gives rulers a most honorable title when he says that we must be subject to them, not only because of wrath but also for conscience's sake. By this he means that subjects must not be moved to remain under the authority of their rulers merely by fear and dread of being punished by them—as the weaker yields to the strength of his enemy when he sees vengeance prepared against him
if he should resist. Rather, they must maintain this obedience out of the fear of God, as though they were serving God himself, since the authority of their ruler comes from him.
From this follows another duty: having thus honored and reverenced their rulers, subjects must submit to them in all obedience—whether by complying with their ordinances, paying taxes, bearing some public responsibility pertaining to the common defense, or obeying their commands.
"Let every soul," says Saint Paul, "be subject to the authorities that hold preeminence, for whoever resists the authority resists the order established by God."
He also writes to Titus in this manner: "Exhort them to remain in subjection to their princes and rulers, to obey their magistrates, and to be ready for every good work."
Likewise, Saint Peter says, "Be subject to every human ordinance for the Lord's sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors sent by him to punish evildoers and praise those who do good."
Furthermore, so that subjects may demonstrate that they obey not hypocritically but willingly, Saint Paul adds that in their prayers they must commend to God the preservation and prosperity of those under whose authority they live. "I exhort," he says, "that prayers, supplications, petitions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings, and for all who are placed in authority, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life in all godliness and dignity."
And let no one deceive himself here. For since magistrates cannot be resisted without resisting God, even though it may seem possible to despise a weak and powerless magistrate without punishment, God is strong and powerful to avenge contempt shown toward his ordinance.
Moreover, under this obedience I include the restraint that all private individuals must exercise concerning public affairs. They must not involve themselves in them on their own initiative, rashly assume the office of the magistrate, or undertake anything at all in public matters.
If there is some defect in the common government that needs correction, they must not therefore stir up a disturbance, undertake to set it right themselves, or put their hands to the work, since their hands are bound in this respect. Rather, they must bring the matter to the attention of the ruler, whose hand alone is free to administer public affairs.
I mean that they must do none of these things without authorization. For when the ruler's command has been given to them, they are invested with public authority. Just as a prince's counselors are commonly called his eyes and ears because he has appointed them to observe on his behalf, so we may call those whom he appoints to execute what must be done his hands.
Thus far we have described the magistrate as he ought to be, truly answering to his title: a father of the country he governs, a shepherd of the people, a guardian of peace, a protector of justice, and a defender of innocence. Anyone who wished to condemn such government would rightly be judged out of his mind.
But since it most often happens that the greater part of rulers depart from the right path—some, having no concern to perform their duty, sleep amid their pleasures and indulgences; others, whose hearts are set upon covetousness, put all laws, privileges, rights, and judgments up for sale; others plunder the poor common people to support their disorderly extravagance; and still others practice outright robbery by sacking houses, violating virgins and married women, and murdering the innocent—it is not easy to persuade many people that such men ought to be acknowledged as rulers and obeyed as far as possible.
For amid vices so enormous and so foreign not only to the office of a magistrate but even to all humanity, subjects see in their rulers no trace of the image of God that ought to shine in a magistrate. Nor do they perceive any appearance of a minister of God appointed to praise the good and punish the wicked. Consequently, they do not recognize in him the ruler whose dignity and authority Scripture commends to us.
Indeed, the inclination has always been rooted in human hearts to hate and detest tyrants no less than to love and reverence just kings. Nevertheless, if we direct our attention to the Word of God, it will lead us further. For it will make us obedient not only to the rule of princes who justly perform their office and faithfully discharge their duty, but also to all who possess any position of authority, even though they do nothing less than what belongs to their office.
For although our Lord testifies that the magistrate is a singular gift of his generosity, given for the preservation and welfare of mankind, and although he prescribes to magistrates what they ought to do, he
likewise declares that, whatever kind of men they may be, they possess their authority from him alone. Thus, those who govern with regard only for the public good are true mirrors and, as it were, representations of his generosity and goodness. On the other hand, those who conduct themselves unjustly and violently are raised up by him to punish the wickedness of the people. Yet both alike possess the dignity and majesty which he has conferred upon lawful rulers.
I shall proceed no further until I have cited some testimonies that firmly prove what I have said. There is no need to labor to show that a wicked king is an expression of God's wrath upon the earth, for I consider this universally acknowledged without dispute. In saying this, we would attribute nothing more to a king than to a thief who steals our possessions, an adulterer who violates our marriage, or a murderer who seeks to kill us, since all such calamities are numbered in the law among the curses of God.
Rather, we must insist upon proving and demonstrating what does not so easily enter the human mind: that in a wicked man, unworthy of all honor, who nevertheless possesses public authority, there remains the same dignity and power which our Lord by his Word has given to the ministers of his justice; and that, with respect to the obedience owed to his authority, subjects must render him the same reverence they would render to a good king, if they had one.
First, I admonish readers diligently to consider and observe the providence of God and the special operation by which he distributes kingdoms and establishes whatever kings he sees fit, of which Scripture frequently makes mention.
Thus it is written in Daniel: "The Lord changes times and seasons; he establishes kings and brings them down." Again: "So that the living may know that the Most High rules over the kingdoms of men, he gives them to whomever he wills." Although such statements occur frequently throughout Scripture, they are repeated with particular frequency in the prophecy of Daniel.
It is well known what kind of king Nebuchadnezzar was, who captured Jerusalem: namely, a great robber and plunderer. Nevertheless, our Lord affirms through the prophet Ezekiel that he gave him the land of Egypt as the reward for the work he had performed in his service by laying waste and plundering it.
And Daniel said to him, "You, O king, are a king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given a kingdom powerful, strong, and glorious. To you, I say, he has given all the lands where the sons of men dwell, together with the wild beasts and the birds of heaven. He has placed them in your hand and made you ruler over them."
Again, Daniel himself said to Nebuchadnezzar's son Belshazzar, "The Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father a kingdom, majesty, honor, and glory. And because of the majesty he gave him, all peoples, nations, and languages feared and trembled before him."
When we hear that he was appointed king by God, we must likewise recall the heavenly ordinance commanding us to fear and honor the king. We shall then not hesitate to render to a wicked tyrant the honor of which our Lord has made him worthy.
When Samuel warned the people of Israel what they would suffer under their kings, he said: "This will be the power of the king who
reigns over you. He will take your sons and assign them to his chariots, make them his horsemen, compel them to cultivate his lands and reap his harvest, and employ them to forge weapons. He will take your daughters to be perfumers, cooks, and bakers. He will take your fields, vineyards, and best gardens and give them to his servants. He will take a tenth of your grain and vineyards and give it to his servants and chamberlains."
"He will take your male servants, female servants, and donkeys and put them to his work. He will even take a tenth of your livestock, and you shall be his servants."
Certainly, kings could not justly do these things, for the law instructed them to observe temperance and moderation in everything. But Samuel called it the king's power over the people because the people would be required to submit to it and would not be permitted to resist. It was as though he had said: "The desires of kings will extend to the commission of all these outrages. It will not be your place to restrain them; all that will remain for you is to heed their commands and obey them."
There is, however, one passage in Jeremiah more notable than all the others. Although it is somewhat lengthy, it will be useful to cite it here, since it determines this whole question very clearly:
"I," says the Lord, "have made the earth, mankind, and the beasts that are upon the face of the earth. I made them by my great power and outstretched arm, and I give the earth to whomever I please. I have now placed all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar my servant, and all nations, powers, and kings shall serve him until the time of his land comes. And it shall happen that any nation or
kingdom that will not serve him or bow its neck beneath his yoke I will visit with sword, famine, and pestilence. Therefore, serve the king of Babylon and live."
From these words we perceive with how great an obedience our Lord required that this wicked and cruel tyrant should be honored, for no other reason than that he possessed the kingdom. That possession alone showed that he had been placed upon the throne by the ordinance of God and that by this ordinance he had been raised to royal majesty, which it was not lawful to violate.
If this principle is once firmly settled and fixed in our hearts—that by the same ordinance of God through which the authority of all kings is established, wicked kings also come to possess power—then these foolish and seditious thoughts will never enter our minds: that a king ought to be treated according to what he deserves, and that it is unreasonable for us to regard ourselves as subjects of one who does not, on his part, conduct himself toward us as a king.
It would be useless to object that this commandment was given specifically to the people of Israel, for we must observe the reason upon which it is founded. "I have given the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar," says the Lord; "therefore, be subject to him, and you shall live." There is no doubt, then, that to whomever authority is given, subjection is also owed.
Now, whenever the Lord raises someone to sovereign authority, he thereby declares to us that the person reigns by his appointment. Scripture bears general testimony to this, as in the twenty-eighth chapter of Job.
"Because of the iniquity of a land, its rulers are frequently changed." Again, "He removes the bonds imposed by kings and once more exalts them in power." Once this is acknowledged, nothing remains but that we serve them if we desire to live.
There is also in the same prophet another commandment of God, by which he orders his people to seek the prosperity of Babylon, where they were being held captive, and to pray for it, because in its peace they would find their own peace.
Consider what is commanded here of the Israelites. They were to pray for the prosperity of the ruler by whom they had been conquered, even though he had stripped them of all their possessions, driven them from their homes, carried them into exile, and cast them into miserable servitude. Nor were they merely commanded, as we all are, to pray for their persecutors. They were to pray that his kingdom might be preserved in a flourishing and peaceful condition, so that they might live peaceably under his rule.
For the same reason David, although already chosen as king by God's ordinance and anointed with his holy oil, nevertheless regarded Saul's person as holy and sacred, even though Saul unjustly persecuted him without any fault on his part. He did so because the Lord had consecrated Saul by honoring him with royal majesty.
"Far be it from me," David said, "that I should commit such an act against my lord, the Lord's anointed, or put out my hand to harm him, for he is the Christ—that is, the anointed—of the Lord." Again: "My soul spared you, and I said, 'I will not put out my hand against my lord, for he is the Lord's anointed.'" And again: "Who can put out his hand against the Lord's anointed and remain innocent? As the
Lord lives, unless the Lord strikes him, or his day comes and he dies, or he is killed in battle, far be it from me that I should put out my hand against the Lord's anointed."
We owe this same disposition of reverence toward all our rulers for as long as they exercise authority over us, whatever kind of men they may be. I repeat this many times so that we may learn not to scrutinize the character of those whom we are required to obey, but to be satisfied with knowing that by the Lord's will they have been placed in an office upon which he has conferred an inviolable majesty.
But someone will say that rulers also owe a corresponding duty to their subjects. I have already acknowledged this point. Nevertheless, if anyone were to infer from it that obedience is owed only to a just ruler, he would reason perversely.
Husbands and fathers are also bound by certain duties toward their wives and children. But suppose they should perform their duties badly: fathers treating their children harshly and behaving abusively toward them, contrary to the command not to provoke them, and husbands despising and tormenting their wives, whom God commands them to love and protect as weaker vessels. Should their children therefore be less obedient to their fathers, or wives to their husbands?
But by the law of God they remain subject to them, even when they are wicked and unjust toward them.
Therefore, since none of us ought to consider how another person performs his duty toward us, but should remember and keep before
our eyes only what we ourselves are required to do, this principle must apply especially to those who are under the authority of others.
Thus, if we are cruelly oppressed by an inhuman prince, plundered and robbed by one who is covetous or extravagant, neglected and poorly protected by one who is careless, or even afflicted for the name of God by a sacrilegious and unbelieving ruler, let us first recall the offenses we have committed against God, which are undoubtedly corrected by such scourges.
Second, let us set this thought before us: it does not lie within our power to remedy such evils, and nothing remains for us but to implore the assistance of God, in whose hand are the hearts of kings and the changing of kingdoms.
He is the God who sits in the assembly of the gods and exercises judgment over them. At his presence all the kings and judges of the earth who have not kissed his Anointed will stumble and be confounded: those who have enacted unjust laws to oppress the poor in judgment and overthrow the rights of the weak, making widows their prey and plundering orphans.
In this his wonderful goodness, power, and providence are clearly displayed. Sometimes he openly raises up certain servants of his and arms them with his command to punish an unjust government and deliver from calamity a people wickedly oppressed. At other times he turns and directs to this work the fury of those who have different intentions and are devising something else.
In the first manner he delivered the people of Israel through Moses from the tyranny of Pharaoh. Through Othniel he rescued them from
the power of Chushan, king of Syria; and through other kings and judges he set them free from various forms of subjection and servitude.
In the second manner he restrained the insolence of the Egyptians by the Assyrians, the pride of Tyre by the Egyptians, the arrogance of the Egyptians by the Assyrians, the insolence of the Assyrians by the Chaldeans, the presumption of Babylon by the Medes and Persians, and the ingratitude of the kings of Judah and Israel by both the Assyrians and the Babylonians.
All alike were ministers and executors of his justice, yet there was a great difference between them. The former, because they had been called by God through a lawful calling to undertake such actions, did not violate the royal majesty bestowed by God when they rebelled against kings. Rather, they corrected an inferior power by a superior one, just as a king may lawfully punish his lieutenants and officers.
The latter, although directed by the hand of God wherever he pleased and unknowingly accomplishing his work, nevertheless had no intention in their hearts but to do evil.
Thus, although these actions differed greatly with respect to those who performed them—the former acting with the assurance that they were doing right, and the latter being driven by a very different zeal, as we have said—our Lord nevertheless accomplished his work equally through both, breaking the scepters of wicked kings and overthrowing oppressive governments.
Let princes hear these things and tremble. Meanwhile, above all else, we must take care not to despise or violate the authority of rulers.
That authority ought to be full of majesty in our sight, since it is confirmed by so many declarations of God, even when it is possessed by persons utterly unworthy of it, who by their wickedness pollute it as far as lies within their power.
For although the correction of a disorderly government is an act of God's vengeance, it does not follow that it has been entrusted to us, who have received no other command than to obey and endure. I am speaking throughout of private individuals.
For if in our time there were magistrates appointed to defend the people by restraining the excessive desires and license of kings—as the Spartans formerly had those whom they called ephors, the Romans their tribunes of the people, and the Athenians their demarchs, and as perhaps today the three estates possess such authority in each kingdom when they are assembled—I would be so far from forbidding such officers to oppose and resist the intemperance or cruelty of kings according to the duty of their office that, if they remained silent when they saw kings oppressing the poor common people without restraint, I would consider such silence worthy of being charged as perjury. For by it they would wickedly betray the liberty of the people, of which they ought to recognize that they have been appointed guardians by the will of God.
But in the obedience which we have taught is owed to rulers, there must always be one exception—or rather, one rule to be observed above all else: such obedience must never turn us away from obedience to him under whose will it is right that all the desires of kings should be restrained, all their commands should yield to his
ordinance, and all their loftiness should be humbled and brought low beneath his majesty.
Indeed, what perversity would it be, in order to please men, to incur the indignation of him for whose sake we obey men? The Lord, therefore, is the King of kings. As soon as he opens his sacred mouth, he must be heard above all, by all, and before all.
Only after him must we submit to the men who possess authority over us—and then only in him. If they command anything contrary to him, it must be of no account to us. Nor should we have any regard in such a case for the dignity of their office, to which no injury is done when it is subjected and brought into submission beneath the power of God, which alone is true power in comparison with all others.
I know well what danger may arise from the steadfastness I require here, since kings cannot endure being brought low, and their indignation, as Solomon says, is a messenger of death. But since this decree has been pronounced by Saint Peter, the heavenly herald, that we must obey God rather than men, we must console ourselves with this thought: we truly render to God the obedience he requires when we endure anything rather than depart from his holy Word.
And lest our courage fail us, Saint Paul urges us forward with another spur: we were purchased by Christ at so great a price—our redemption cost him so dearly—that we must not give ourselves over as slaves to the wicked desires of men, much less to impiety.
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN
Of the Christian Life
In undertaking to form the life of the Christian, I enter upon a broad and varied subject—one that could fill a large volume if I wished to treat it fully.
We see how extensive are the exhortations of the ancient teachers even when they treat only one particular virtue. This does not arise from excessive verbosity, for whatever virtue one undertakes to praise and commend, the abundance of the subject makes it seem that it has not been adequately treated unless many words have been employed.
My intention, however, is not to extend the doctrine of life which I wish to present so far as to explain every virtue individually and offer lengthy exhortations concerning each one. Such instruction may be obtained from the writings of others, especially from the homilies— that is, the popular sermons—of the ancient teachers.
It will be sufficient for me to present a certain order by which the Christian may be conducted and directed toward the proper goal of ordering his life well. I shall be content, I say, to set forth briefly a general rule to which he may refer all his actions.
Perhaps we shall have an opportunity at another time to compose exhortations like those found in the sermons of the ancient teachers. But the work now before us requires that we present a simple doctrine with the greatest possible brevity.
Just as the philosophers establish certain principles of virtue and uprightness from which they derive particular duties and all virtuous actions, so Scripture has its own method in this matter—a method far better and more certain than that of the philosophers.
There is only this difference: because the philosophers were filled with ambition, they sought the greatest possible clarity in order to display the order and arrangement of their teaching and thereby exhibit their subtlety. The Holy Spirit, by contrast, because he teaches without affectation or display, has not always observed a fixed order and method so strictly. Nevertheless, since he sometimes employs such an order, he thereby indicates that we ought not to disregard it.
The order of Scripture of which we speak consists of two parts. The first is to impress upon our hearts a love of righteousness, toward which we are not naturally inclined. The second is to provide us with a fixed rule that prevents us from wandering here and there or going astray in ordering our lives.
Concerning the first point, Scripture possesses many excellent reasons for inclining our hearts to love what is good. We have already noted several of them in various places and shall touch upon some of them again here.
What better foundation could Scripture lay than by reminding us that we must be sanctified because our God is holy?
You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy.
—Leviticus 19:2
It adds this reason: although we were scattered like wandering sheep and dispersed throughout the labyrinth of this world, God has gathered us together to unite us to himself.
Whenever we hear of our union with God, we must remember that holiness is the bond of that union. This does not mean that through the merit of our holiness we enter into fellowship with God, for we must first cleave to him before we can become holy, so that he may pour his holiness upon us. Rather, since it belongs to his glory to have no fellowship with wickedness or uncleanness, we must resemble him because we belong to him.
Scripture therefore teaches that this is the purpose of our calling, toward which we must continually look if we desire to answer God's call. For what purpose would it serve to have been delivered from the filth and pollution in which we were submerged if we intend to wallow in it throughout our whole lives?
Furthermore, Scripture reminds us that if we wish to belong to the people of God, we must dwell in Jerusalem, his holy city. Since he has consecrated and dedicated it to his honor, it must not be contaminated and polluted by unclean and profane inhabitants.
Hence arise such declarations as these:
He who walks blamelessly and practices righteousness shall dwell in the tabernacle of the Lord.
—Psalm 15:1–2
He who walks righteously and speaks uprightly shall dwell on high.
—Isaiah 33:15–16
To move us still more powerfully, Scripture teaches that just as God has reconciled us to himself in Christ, so he has set Christ before us as the example and pattern to which we must be conformed.
Let those who suppose that only the philosophers have properly and adequately treated moral doctrine show me teaching in their books as excellent as what I have just described. When they desire to exhort us to virtue with all their power, they bring forward nothing more than that we should live according to nature.
Scripture leads us to a far better source of exhortation. It not only commands us to direct our whole life toward God, its Author, but, after reminding us that we have degenerated from the true purpose of our creation, it adds that Christ, who reconciles us to God his Father, has been given to us as an example of innocence whose image must be displayed in our lives.
What could be said with greater force or effectiveness? Indeed, what more could be required?
If God adopts us as his children on the condition that the image of Christ should appear in our lives, then if we do not devote ourselves to righteousness and holiness, we not only forsake our Creator through shameful disloyalty but also renounce him as our Savior.