Dominion, Chapter XI

PASSAGES AND EXAMPLES FROM SCRIPTURE CONCERNING THE RIGHTS OF GOVERNMENT, IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT HAS BEEN SAID BEFORE

1 The origin of instituted government in the consent of the people. 2. Judgment and war depend on the will of supreme commanders. 3. Those who hold supreme authority are rightfully beyond punishment. 4. Without a supreme power there is no government, but anarchy. 5. Servants and children owe unconditional obedience to their masters and parents. 6. Absolute authority proved by the clearest passages of the New and Old Testaments.

The origin of instituted government in the consent of the people.

1 In the sixth chapter, second article, we traced the origin of instituted or political government to the consent of the multitude in such a way that it is clear they must all consent or be regarded as enemies. So began God's government over the Jews, instituted by Moses (Exod. xix. 5-8): “If you will indeed obey my voice,” etc. “You shall be to me a kingdom of priests,” etc. “And Moses came and called the elders of the people,” etc. “And all the people answered and said: All that the Lord has spoken we will do.” So too began the power Moses held under God as his representative (Exod. xx. 18-19): “And all the people saw the thunder and lightning, and heard the sound of the trumpet,” etc. “And they said to Moses, Speak to us and we will listen.” Saul's kingdom had a similar beginning (1 Sam. xii. 12, 13): “When you saw that Nahash, king of the children of Ammon, came against you, you said to me, No, but a king shall reign over us, although the Lord your God was your king. Now behold the king whom you have chosen and whom you have desired.” But only the greater part consented, not everyone: certain sons of Belial said (1 Sam. x. 27), “How shall this man save us?” and despised him. Those who did not consent were put to death as enemies. The people said to Samuel (1 Sam. xi. 12): “Who said, Shall Saul reign over us? Bring the men, so that we may put them to death.”

The power to judge and to decide on wars depends on the will of the supreme officer.

2 In the sixth and seventh articles of the same sixth chapter, I showed that all judgments and wars depend on the will and pleasure of whoever bears supreme authority—in a monarchy, the monarch or king. This is confirmed by the people's own declaration, 1 Sam. viii. 20: “We too will be like all the nations, and our king shall judge us, go out before us, and fight our battles.” As to judgments and every other disputed matter of good and evil, it is confirmed by the testimony of King Solomon (1 Kings iii. 9): “Give your servant an understanding heart to judge your people, that I may discern between good and evil.” And by that of Absolom (2 Sam. xv. 3): “There is no man appointed by the king to hear you.”

Those who hold supreme authority are rightfully beyond punishment.

3 King David also confirms what was shown above in the sixth chapter, twelfth article: kings may not be punished by their subjects. Although Saul sought to kill him, David nevertheless kept his hand from killing Saul and forbade Abishai, saying (1 Sam. xxvi. 9): “Do not destroy him; for who can raise his hand against the Lord's anointed and be innocent?” And when David had cut off the edge of Saul's garment, he said (1 Sam. xxiv. 6): “The Lord forbid that I should do this to my master, the Lord's anointed, and raise my hand against him.” He also ordered the Amalekite who had killed Saul for his sake to be put to death (2 Sam. i. 15).

Without a supreme power there is no government, but confusion.

4 What is said in the seventeenth chapter of Judges, sixth verse—“In those days there was no king in Israel, but everyone did what was right in his own eyes”—may be brought forward as evidence of the excellence of monarchy over all other forms of government, as though without monarchy there were only anarchy or universal confusion. That is, unless the word king may be understood to mean not only one man but also a council, provided supreme power resides in it. Even taken in this sense, the passage implies that without a supreme and absolute power, which we endeavored to establish in the sixth chapter, everyone would be free to do whatever he wished, whatever seemed right to him; and this cannot be reconciled with the preservation of humankind. Thus in every government, supreme power is always understood to exist somewhere.

Servants and children owe their masters and parents unconditional obedience.

5 We said in chap. VIII. art. 7 and 8 that servants must give their masters unconditional obedience, and in chap IX. art. 7 that children owe the same obedience to their parents. Saint Paul says the same of servants (Coloss. iii. 22): “Servants, obey your earthly masters in all things, not with eye-service, as those who seek to please people, but with sincerity of heart, fearing God.” And of children (Colos. iii. 20): “Children, obey your parents in all things, for this is pleasing to the Lord.” Now just as by unconditional obedience we mean obedience in all things that are not contrary to God's laws, so in these passages of St. Paul we must understand, after the words all things, an exception for whatever is contrary to God's laws.

The absolute power of princes proved by the clearest testimonies of Scripture, both New and Old.

6 Rather than prove the rights of princes piecemeal, I will now cite testimonies that establish their entire power at once: their subjects owe them absolute and unconditional obedience. First, from the New Testament: Matth. xxiii. 2, 3: “The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat; therefore observe and do all that they tell you to observe.” Whatever they tell you to observe, says Christ—that is, obey without reservation. Why? Because they sit in Moses' seat, the seat of the civil magistrate, not of Aaron the priest. Rom. xiii. 1, 2: “Let every soul be subject to the higher powers; for there is no power but from God; the powers that exist are ordained by God; therefore whoever resists the power resists God's ordinance, and those who resist will bring damnation upon themselves.” Since the powers existing in St. Paul's time were ordained by God, and all kings then required complete and absolute obedience from their subjects, it follows that such power was ordained by God. 1 Peter ii. 13-15: “Submit yourselves to every human ordinance for the Lord's sake, whether to the king as supreme or to governors sent by him to punish wrongdoers and praise those who do well; for this is the will of God.” Again St. Paul says to Titus (chap. iii. 1): “Remind them to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates,” etc. Which principalities? Were they not the principalities of those times, which demanded absolute obedience? Consider, moreover, the example of Christ himself, to whom the kingdom of the Jews belonged by hereditary right derived from David. While he lived as a subject, he both paid tribute to Cæsar and declared that it was owed to him, Matth. xxii. 21: “Give to Cæsar,” he said, “the things that are Cæsar's, and to God the things that are God's.” When he chose to show himself a king, he required complete obedience, Matth. xxi. 2, 3: “Go,” he said, “into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find an ass tied there, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to me; and if anyone says anything to you, say, The Lord needs them.” He did this by right of being lord, or king of the Jews. To take a subject's goods solely on the ground that the Lord needs them is an absolute power. The clearest passages in the Old Testament are these: Deut. v. 27: “Go near and hear all that the Lord our God shall say; then tell us all that the Lord our God shall tell you, and we will hear and do it.” But the word all includes absolute obedience. Again, to Joshua (Joshua i. 16-18): “And they answered Joshua, saying, All that you command us we will do, and wherever you send us we will go. Just as we obeyed Moses in all things, so we will obey you; only may the Lord your God be with you as he was with Moses. Whoever rebels against your commandment and does not obey your words in all that you command him shall be put to death.” And there is the parable of the bramble (Judges ix. 14, 15): “Then all the trees said to the bramble, Come and reign over us. And the bramble said to the trees, If you truly anoint me king over you, come and trust in my shadow; and if not, let fire come out of the bramble and consume the cedars of Lebanon.” The meaning is that we must accept the words of those whom we have truly made our kings, unless we prefer to be consumed by the fire of civil war. But royal authority is described more particularly by God himself in 1 Sam. viii. 9, etc.: “Show them the right of the king who shall reign over them,” etc. “This shall be the right of the king who shall reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and as his horsemen, and some shall run before his chariots,” etc. “And he will take your daughters to be confectioners,” etc. “And he will take your vineyards and give them to his servants,” etc. Is this power not absolute? Yet God himself calls it the king's right. No one among the Jews, not even the high priest, was exempt from this obedience. For when the king, Solomon, said to Abiathar the priest (1 Kings ii. 26, 27): “Go to Anathoth, to your own fields; for you deserve death. But I will not put you to death now, because you carried the ark of the Lord God before David my father, and because you shared in all my father's afflictions.” Thus Solomon removed Abiathar from the priesthood of the Lord. No argument can prove that this act displeased the Lord; nor do we read that Solomon was reproved or that his person was then any less acceptable to God.

Scriptural Passages and Examples Supporting the Rights of Government Described Above

1 Government established by agreement begins with the people's consent. 2. Decisions in court and war depend on the will of supreme rulers. 3. Those holding supreme authority cannot lawfully be punished. 4. Without supreme power there is no government, only anarchy. 5. Servants and children owe unconditional obedience to their masters and parents. 6. The clearest passages in both the New and Old Testaments prove absolute authority.

Government established by agreement begins with the people's consent.

1 In the sixth chapter, second article, I traced the origin of government established by agreement, or political government, to the consent of the multitude. It follows that they must all consent or else be regarded as enemies. This is how God's government over the Jews was established through Moses (Exod. xix. 5-8): "If you truly obey my voice, etc. You will be a kingdom of priests to me, etc." Moses came and summoned the elders of the people, etc. All the people answered, "We will do everything the Lord has said." Moses' power under God, as his representative, began in the same way (Exod. xx. 18-19): All the people saw the thunder and lightning and heard the trumpet, etc. They said to Moses, "Speak to us yourself, and we will listen." Saul's kingdom began in much the same way (1 Sam. xii. 12, 13): "When you saw Nahash, king of the children of Ammon, coming against you, you said to me, 'No, a king must rule us,' although the Lord your God was your king. Now look at the king you chose and asked for." But only the majority consented, not everyone. Some wicked men said (1 Sam. x. 27), "How will this man save us?" They despised him. Those who did not consent were sentenced to death as enemies. The people said to Samuel (1 Sam. xi. 12): "Who said, 'Will Saul rule over us?' Bring those men here so we can put them to death."

The power to judge and decide on wars depends on the will of the supreme ruler.

2 In the sixth chapter, sixth and seventh articles, I showed that all judgments and wars depend on the will of whoever holds supreme authority. In a monarchy, that person is the monarch or king. The people's own judgment confirms this, 1 Sam. viii. 20: "We too will be like all the nations. Our king will judge us, go before us, and fight our battles." King Solomon's words confirm that judgment extends to every disputed question of what is good or evil (1 Kings iii. 9): "Give your servant an understanding heart to judge your people, so that I may tell good from evil." Absolom says the same (2 Sam. xv. 3): "The king has appointed no one to hear your case."

Those who hold supreme authority cannot lawfully be punished.

3 King David also confirms what was shown in the sixth chapter, twelfth article: subjects may not punish kings. Although Saul tried to kill David, David refused to kill him and forbade Abishai to do so, saying (1 Sam. xxvi. 9): "Do not kill him. Who can attack the Lord's anointed and remain innocent?" After cutting off a piece of Saul's clothing, he said (1 Sam. xxiv. 6): "May the Lord prevent me from doing this to my master, the Lord's anointed, and attacking him." And he ordered the death of the Amalekite who had killed Saul for David's sake (2 Sam. i. 15).

Without supreme power there is no government, only disorder.

4 Judges, chapter seventeen, verse six, says: "In those days Israel had no king, and everyone did what seemed right to him." This seems to suggest that without a monarchy everything falls into anarchy and disorder, and it could be used to prove that monarchy is better than every other form of government. But perhaps "king" means not only one man but also a council, provided that it holds supreme power. Even if we take it that way, the passage still implies that without supreme and absolute power, which we tried to establish in the sixth chapter, everyone is free to do whatever he likes or thinks right. That freedom cannot coexist with humanity's survival. So every form of government must have supreme power located somewhere.

Servants and children owe their masters and parents unconditional obedience.

5 In chap. VIII. art. 7 and 8, we said that servants must obey their masters unconditionally. In chap IX. art. 7, we said that children owe their parents the same obedience. Saint Paul says the same about servants (Coloss. iii. 22): "Servants, obey your earthly masters in everything, not merely when they are watching, as people who want to please them do, but sincerely, with reverence for God." Of children he says (Colos. iii. 20): "Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord." By unconditional obedience, we mean obedience in everything that does not conflict with God's laws. So after "everything" in the cited passages from St. Paul, we must understand an exception for anything that conflicts with God's laws.

The clearest passages in both the New and Old Testaments prove the absolute power of princes.

6 Rather than prove the rights of princes one piece at a time, I will cite passages that establish their entire power at once. They show that subjects owe princes absolute and unconditional obedience. First, from the New Testament, Matth. xxiii. 2, 3: "The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat; therefore do and observe everything they tell you to observe." Christ says to observe everything they tell you: in other words, to obey unconditionally. Why? Because they sit in Moses' seat, which belongs to the civil magistrate, not in Aaron's seat as priest. Rom. xiii. 1, 2: "Let everyone be subject to the higher powers, for all power comes from God, and the powers that exist are appointed by God. Whoever resists that power resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will bring condemnation on themselves." The ruling powers of St. Paul's time were appointed by God. Since every king at that time demanded complete and absolute obedience from his subjects, that kind of power must have been appointed by God. 1 Peter ii. 13-15: "For the Lord's sake, submit to every human authority, whether to the king as supreme or to governors sent by him to punish wrongdoers and praise those who do well. For this is God's will." St. Paul also says to Titus (chap. iii. 1): "Remind them to submit to rulers and authorities, to obey magistrates, etc." Which rulers does he mean? Surely the rulers of those times, who demanded absolute obedience. Consider also Christ himself. He inherited the kingdom of the Jews by right through David. Yet while he lived as a subject, he both paid tax to Caesar and declared it due to him, Matth. xxii. 21: "Give Caesar what belongs to Caesar," he said, "and God what belongs to God." When he chose to present himself as a king, he demanded complete obedience, Matth. xxi. 2, 3: "Go into the village opposite you. You will immediately find a donkey tied there, with a colt beside her. Untie them and bring them to me. If anyone says anything to you, say that the Lord needs them." He did this by his right as lord, or king of the Jews. Taking a subject's property simply because the lord needs it, however, is an absolute power. The clearest Old Testament passages are these. Deut. v. 27: "Go near and hear everything the Lord our God says. Tell us everything the Lord our God tells you; we will listen and do it." The word "everything" includes absolute obedience. Again, the people say to Joshua (Joshua i. 16-18): "We will do everything you command us and go wherever you send us. We will listen to you in everything, just as we listened to Moses; only may the Lord your God be with you as he was with Moses. Whoever rebels against your command and does not listen to anything you command him will be put to death." And there is the parable of the bramble (Judges ix. 14, 15): "All the trees said to the bramble, 'Come and rule us.' The bramble said to the trees, 'If you truly appoint me king over you, come and trust in my shade. If not, let fire come from the bramble and consume the cedars of Lebanon.'" This means we must accept the words of those we have truly made our kings, unless we prefer to be consumed by the fire of civil war. God himself gives a more detailed description of royal authority in 1 Sam. viii. 9, etc.: "Tell them the right of the king who will rule over them, etc. This will be the right of the king who rules over you: he will take your sons and assign them to his chariots and cavalry, and some will run ahead of his chariots, etc. He will take your daughters to make sweets, etc. He will take your vineyards and give them to his servants, etc." Is this not absolute power? Yet God himself calls it the king's right. No Jew, not even the high priest, was exempt from this obedience. King Solomon said to Abiathar the priest (1 Kings ii. 26, 27): "Go to your own fields at Anathoth. You deserve to die, but I will not put you to death now, because you carried the ark of the Lord God before David my father and shared all my father's sufferings." Solomon then removed Abiathar from his office as priest of the Lord. No argument can prove that this displeased the Lord. Nor do we read that Solomon was reproved or that God regarded him any less favorably at that time.