The Clash Over the Judicial Laws of Moses in England in the 1570s

The debate over theonomy was heated during the 1570s, where English Prelates clashed with Puritans for holding that rulers are only authorized to rule by the judicial laws of Moses. 

The Puritan Thomas Cartwright was in the middle of this, whose advocacy of the regulative principle of the state we've already discussed. According to a one Bishop Sandys, this was the position of a number of Puritans. Kenneth L. Parker summarizes the situation:

While [John] Whitgift and [Thomas] Cartwright agreed that the moral law endured and the ceremonial law was abrogated, they clashed over the application of Old Testament judicial laws and penalties in English society. … Whitgift argued that these laws were established by God for one nation in a particular time and place. They did not bind the Christian magistrate or limit his power to make laws and assign penalties. The seventh of the 39 Articles affirmed that 'the Law given from God by Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites do no bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth.' But in the 1570s, Cartwright and others objected to this teaching. Bishop Sandys of London complained to Bullinger in August 1573 that 'foolish young men' were disturbing the peace of the Church, and outlined their presbyterian programme. Among the points of contention was that 'the judicial laws of Moses are binding upon christian princes, and they ought not in the slightest degree to depart from them.'[1]

While Cartwright claimed that some parts of the judicial law were limited to the Jews, he denied that 'any magistrate can save the life of blasphemers, contemptuous and stubborn idolaters, murderers, adulterers, incestuous persons, and such like, which God by his judicial law hath commanded to be put to death.' [2]  The death penalty also applied to sabbath-breakers. Humphrey Roberts complained that 'if one do steal, or comit murder, the laws of the Realm doth punish with death. But for Idolatry, swearing, and breaking the Sabbath day, there is no punishment. And yet, the same God which said: Thou shalt not steal, said also … Thou shalt remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.' [3] While Charles George dismissed this adherence to the judicial laws as 'one of Carthwright’s wildest anachronisms', this view attracted a surprising number of adherents and influenced the legal codes in the colonies.[4]

Notes

________________________________

[1] Hastings Robinson, ed., The Zurich Letters (Cambridge, 1842), pp. 295-6.

[2] John Whitgift, Works, volume 1 (Cambridge, 1851), p. 270.

[3] Humphrey Roberts, An Earnest Complaint of Divers Vain, Wicked, and Abused Exercises, Now Commonly Practised on the Sabbath Day (London, 1572), sig.B2V.

[4] Kenneth L. Parker, The English Sabbath: A Study of Doctrine and Discipline from the Reformation to the Civil War (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 57-58.

Edward Dering and the Regulative Principle of the State

Edward Dering (or Deering) (1540-1576), English Reformer, Puritan divine

Dering and Ruler Qualifications

In advocating ruler qualifications, Dering appeals to the Old Testament:

But now, touching this calling in magistrates and officers of our commonwealth, I will lay no more, but in one word, as the Scripture speaketh. God calleth him unto his dignity, who is orderly appointed, and is a man of courage, fearing God, dealing truly, having no respect of persons, and hating covetousness ... [1] 

All Laws must Conform to the Equity of the Law of Moses

Deering believed that rulers must base all laws on the equity of the law of Moses:

We are sure that the law of Moses, was, to the people of Israel, an absolute and a most perfect rule of justice; so that all laws ought to be made according to its equity.[2]

Notes
__________________________

[1] Edward Dering, "The three and twenty lecture, upon the 4, 5, and 6 verses," in Dering, Twenty-seven Lectures, Or Readings, Upon Part of the Epistle Written to the Hebrews, (London: Thomas Woodcocke, 1590). Digital version in Google books without page number. Retrieved October 20, 2014 from http://books.google.com/books?id=3Uk7AQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&vq=%22fearing+god%22#v=onepage&q=%22fearing%20god%22&f=false. We have modernized the text.
[2] Cited in Benjamin Brook, The Lives of the Puritans: Containing a Biographical Account of Those Divines who Distinguished Themselves in the Cause of Religious Liberty, from the Reformation Under Queen Elizabeth, to the Act of Uniformity in 1662: Volume 1 (London: James Black, 1813), 206.

Johannes Brenz and the Regulative Principle of the State

Johannes Brenz (1499-1570), Influential Lutheran Theologian

(note: we do not endorse the Lutheran view of the sacraments)

Brenz and Old Testament Civil Law

In discussing laws proper for the Christian community, Brenz appeals to the Old Testament to show how the state should deal with one who either commits fornication with a virgin (with the virgin's consent), or who rapes a virgin (Exodus 22:16, 17; Deuteronomy 22:23-27). He likewise appeals to the law of Moses in advocating punishments for blasphemy and adultery (citing Deuteronomy 22:22 for the latter).[1] 

Moreover, just as in the Old Testament false worship was to be suppressed, for Brenz, so should it be today:

[I]f a Christian prince desires to perform his office diligently and to preserve secular decency, as is proper, he can do this in no more effective way than by establishing and ordering true divine worship in the place of ungodly worship, so that true divine peace before God and piety in worship will overflow into everyday civic life and lead both prince and subjects to God's grace, favour,and salvation.[2] 

Since Civil Authority Comes from God, the State should only Rule According to God's Word

Brenz affirms that civil government is an institution established by God. As such, God, and God alone, should be the state's source of law:

It is therefore necessary that every Christian government should promote and protect the word of God and devote all its power to it. For since the power of government comes solely from God, as Christ says in John 19[:11] and Paul in Rom. 13[:1], so it is always proper, indeed necessary, that one conduct oneself according to the will of him that created the office of government and to rule according to the word that creates, maintains, and rules all creatures. For the reason that the secular sword has been established is to keep its subjects in peace. But how can temporal, secular peace be better maintained than through the word of peace which pacifies the sinner, the great enemy of God, the highest good? And how can external peace be maintained if one does not have peace of mind and heart toward God, which only happens through the word of God that incorporates us into the one Christ by the one Holy Spirit? For this reason the Holy Spirit has bestowed upon government the majestic title of "gods," Exod. 22: "You shall not revile the gods," which title gives sufficient indication of what the Lord demands of government, namely that it should rule according to the word of God, not according to its own reason or opinion. ... Furthermore, God sternly commands through Moses, Deut. 17[:18-19], saying: When you choose a king and he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall have written for him a book of this divine law. "And it shall be with him and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, by keeping all the words of this law." Behold, God commands the government to take the book of God's law in hand, to be occupied with God's word, and to wield the sword in accordance with that law. And it has always been the case that that government conducted according to the word of God has been long-lasting and left in peace, although many troubles were wakened against it, as was the case of the government of Kings David and Hezekiah. To be sure, they suffered affliction; but because they trusted faithfully in the word of God, all their enemies had to retire in shame. 

Therefore, if a government desires to fulfil its office in the best possible manner, this can be begun, carried out, and completed on no better foundation than by promoting the word of the Lord, who established the office. For where his word is absent, there can be nothing else than rebellion, envy, hatred, dissension, war, and all plagues, as Levit. 26[:14-39] and Deut. 28[:15-68] teach. But where his word is, there is also peace, amity, and all love, because the word brings peace and Christian love with it.[3] 

Ruling Solely by the Word Assumes People are not the State's Property

For Brenz, subjects are not a ruler's property, but a trust from God. As such, the regulative principle of the state is a given. In a section of writing titled, "That the people, because they belong not to the ruler but to God, are to be governed according to God's will,"[4] he writes:

For just as children are not the property of their father but God's gift to him, that he might exercise his faith and love on them, Gen. 33[:5], so also the people are not the property of the rulers but a trust from God, whose will is to be worked upon them. Consequently it is easy to understand in what manner and form the people are to be governed. For since the people are a trust and gift from God, they must be ruled in no other way than according to the will and out of the word of God, not of men, whether emperor or pope. 

The people that are so ruled belong not at all to the emperor but rather to God, and thus must also be ruled according to the will of God, Deut. 1[:17]: "You shall not respect persons in judgment, [...-SH] for judgment is God's." Again Exod. 23[:2]: "You shall not follow the multitude to do evil; nor shall you bear witness in a suit, turning aside after a multitude, so as to pervert justice." Acts 5[:29]: "We must obey God rather than men."[5]

Apply the Regulative Principle of the State—Even if all Men Oppose it

Brenz understood that the regulative principle of the state is not always popular among men, and so he writes the following under a section titled "One must rule according to the will of God, regardless of what people think"[6]:

To sum up briefly: power comes from God, John 19[:11], Rom. 13[:1]. It must, therefore, be used according to God's will and word, even if all the world is opposed.[7]

Notes
____________________________

[1] Johannes Brenz, Godly Magistrates and Church Order: Johannes Brenz and the Establishment of the Lutheran Territorial Church in Germany, 1524-1559, ed. and trans. James Martin Estes (Canada: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2001),89, 90.
[2] Ibid., 97, 98.
[3] Ibid., 45, 46. 
[4] Ibid., 42.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid., 43.

[7] Ibid.

  

The True Confession of 1596 and the Regulative Principle of the State

Background

The True Confession of 1596 was a Separatist confession thought to be written by Francis Johnson and Henry Ainsworth. The following summarizes its background:

Two leaders of a young Separatist church, Henry Barrowe and John Greenwood, were imprisoned [in England - SH] in 1586, but in 1589 they sent from prison a simple church creed called A Trve Description ovt of the Word of God, of the visible Church.  The creed did not concern itself with doctrinal matters since the congregation was already of one mind in holding Calvinistic views. 

In the summer of 1593 there was a change of policy on the part of the government toward the Separatists.  While their leaders remained in prison, the dissenters left England for Holland.  Most of the emigrants reached Holland in 1595 where the church was re-gathered.  Desiring to make clear its doctrinal position and its ecclesiology, in view of the threats of attacks, the church prepared in 1596 a new creed, the shortened title of which is A Truve Confession.  The seven Particular Baptist Churches of London used this confession as a model when they drew up their earliest confession in 1644.  Thus, the Separatist Confession entered into Baptist life.[1]   

(We must note that this confession was not properly Baptistic, since it adhered to infant baptism.)

On this confession, Williston Walker writes:

The creed itself consists of forty-five articles, treating some of doctrine, others of polity. In matters of belief they are in substantial harmony with the positions of the Calvinistic churches of the Continent, and with the Puritan wing of the Church of England. On these heads their creed is but little more than a re-affirmation of the current beliefs of a vast majority of the Protestant churches at that day.[2]

This confession was adhered to by the Separatists who went on to settle in the famous Plymouth Colony (the Pilgrims). Donald Burke shows this by pointing out that in the church they attended in Leiden (the Netherlands) prior to coming to America, the confession was affirmed by its members.[3]

Article 39: Rulers Should Destroy Idolatry, Defend the True Church, and Rule According to Scripture

According to Article 39 of the confession, rulers have a duty to suppress false ministries, false religions, and idolatry. By contrast, they are to protect the church, and to protect and maintain the good in general. Moreover, as God's lieutenants, they must punish and restrain evil according to God's word:

39. That it is the office and duty of princes and magistrates, who by the ordinance of God are supreme governors under Him over all persons and causes within their realms and dominions, to suppress and root out by their authority all false ministries, voluntary religions and counterfeit worship of God, to abolish and destroy the idol temples, images, altars, vestments, and all other monuments of idolatry and superstition and to take and convert to their own civil uses not only the benefit of all such idolatrous buildings and monuments, but also the revenues, demesnes, lordships, possessions, glebes and maintenance of any false ministries and unlawful ecclesiastical functions whatsoever within their Dominions. And on the other hand to establish and maintain by their laws every part of God's word His pure religion and true ministry to cherish and protect all such as are careful to worship God according to His word, and to lead a godly life in all peace and loyalty; yea to enforce all their subjects whether ecclesiastical or civil, to do their duties to God and men, protecting and maintaining the good, punishing and restraining the evil according as God hath commanded, whose lieutenants they are here on earth.[4] 

This section includes the following prooftexts from both the Old and New Testament: 1 Romans 13:3, 4; 1 Peter 2:3 [should be 13], 14; 2 Chronicles 19:4. etc. and chapters 29 and 34; Judges 17:5, 6; Matthew 22:21; Titus 3:1; 2 Kings 23:5, etc.; Psalm 110; Deuteronomy 12:2, 3 with 17:14, 18-20; 2 Kings 10:26-28; 2 Chronicles 17:6; Proverbs 16: 12 and 25:2-5; Acts 19:27; Revelation 17:16; Deuteronomy 17:14, 18-20; Joshua 1:7, 8; 2 Chronicles 17:4, 7-9 and 19:4 etc. and chapters 29 and 30; Daniel 6:25, 26; Psalm 2:10-12 and 72:1 etc.; Isaiah 49:23; Revelation 21:24; Ezra 7:26.

Deuteronomy 17:18-20 and Joshua 1:7, 8, cited as a prooftexts, forbid rulers from turning from God's word to the right hand or the left. The former reads:

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statutes, and doing them, that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, either to the right hand or to the left, so that he may continue long in his kingdom, he and his children, in Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:18-20)

Notes
___________________________

[1] "English Separatist-Baptist Confessions," The Reformed Reader. Retrieved October 27, 2014 from http://www.reformedreader.org/ccc/esbc.htm

[2] Williston Walker, The Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism (NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1893), 44, 45. 

[3] Donald Burke, New England New Jerusalem: The Millenarian Dimension of Transatlantic Migration. A Study in the Theology of History (Detroit, MI: ProQuest, 2006), 133.

[4] Cited in Walker, The Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism, 71, 72. We have modernized the spelling. Regarding defending the church, Article 41 also reads: "That if God incline the magistrates' hearts to the allowance and protection of them therein they account it a happy blessing of God who granteth such nursing fathers and nursing mothers to His church, and be careful to walk worthy so great a mercy of God in all thankfulness and obedience." Ibid., 72.

Thomas Cartwright and the Regulative Principle of the State

Thomas Cartwright (1535-1603), Puritan Leader, "The Father of English Presbyterianism"

Thomas Cartwright affirmed the abiding validity of the judicial laws which were not particular to Israel:

[T]hose judicial laws of Moses, which are merely politic, and without all mixture of Ceremonies, must remain; [such] as those which hinder not the atonement of Jews and Gentiles with God, or of one of them with another. Beside that, it being manifest that our Savior Christ came not to dissolve any Good government of commonwealth, he can least of all be thought to come to destroy that which himself had established.[1]

Cartwright understood Zechariah 13 to favorably prophecy the state punishing false prophets in the New Covenant era:

of that place of Zechariah ... that the same severity of punishments that was used against false prophets then, ought to be used now under the gospel, against false teachers, comparing one parson and circumstance with another.[2] 

For Cartwright, those apostatize and attempt to draw others away from God should be executed according to Deuteronomy 13.[3] He adds:

If this be bloody and extreme, I am content to be so counted with the Holy Ghost ... And although in other cases of idolatry, upon repentance life is given ... yet in this case of willing sliding back, and moving others to the same, and other some cases, which are expressed in the law as of open and horrible blasphemy of the name of God: I deny that upon repentance, there ought to follow any pardon of death, which the judicial law doth require.[4] 

On the magistrate's duty to prohibit Sabbath breaking, Cartwright writes:

[The magistrate must] see that all within his gates keep the Lord’s day; even strangers (though Turks, and Infidels) causing them to cease from labour, and restraining them from all open and public Idolatry, or false worship of God ... [5]

Applying the Equity of the Judicial Law 

On applying the equity of the judicial law, Cartwright says this in debate with a one John Whitgift:

And, as for the judicial law, forasmuch as there are some of them made in regard of the region where they were given, and of a people to whom they were given, the prince and magistrate, keeping the substance and equity of them (as it were the marrow), may change the circumstances of them, as the times and places and manners of the people shall require. But to say that any magistrate can save the life of blasphemers, contemptuous and stubborn idolaters, murderers, adulterers, incestuous persons, and such like, which God by his judicial law hath commanded to be put to death, I do utterly deny, and am ready to prove, if that pertained to this question. And therefore, although the judicial laws are permitted to the discretion of the prince and magistrate, yet not so generally as you seem to affirm, and, as I have oftentimes said, that not only it must not be done against the word, but according to the word, and by it.[6]

God's Word gives Direction in all Things

Also in debating Whitgift, Cartwright writes this while defending the abiding validity of the judicial law of Moses and its equity:

My former assertion was, That we have a word of God for our direction in all things which we have to do. My reason illustrating this truth was this, That otherwise our estate should be worse then the state of the Jews, who had direction (as is on all hands confessed) out of the Law, even for the least things; And whereas it is the virtue of a good law, to leave as little undetermined, and without the compass of the Law, as can be, my adversary D. W. [Dr. Whitgift] imagining that we have no word for divers things, wherein the Jews had particular direction, supposeth a greater perfection in the Law given to the Jews, than in that which is left to us.

That this is a principal virtue of the Law, may be seen and evidenced thus; First, because conscience that is well instructed and touched with the fear of God, will seek direction from the light of God's word, even in the smallest actions. Secondly, common reason will urge it, the masters whereof give this rule [a word in another language is given], &c. Arist. [to] Theod. viz. It greatly behoveth those laws which are well made, as much as can be to determine of all things, and to leave as few things as  may be to the discretion of the judge.[7]

Notes
_______________________________

[1] Thomas Cartwright, The Second Replie of Thomas Cartwright: agaynst Maister Doctor Whitgiftes second answer touching the Churche Discipline (1575), 97. 

[2] Cited in A. F. Scott Pearson, Thomas Cartwright and Elizabethan Puritanism 1535-1603 (Cambridge, UK: University Press, 1925), 91.

[3] Ibid. 

[4] Cited in Ibid.

[5] Thomas Cartwright, A treatise of Christian religion. Or the whole body and substance of divinity (London, 1616), 115-16.

[6] Cited in John Whitgift, The Works of John Whitgift, D. D., the First Portion, Containing the Defence of the Answer to the Admonition, Against the Reply of Thomas Cartwright: Tractates I-VI. (Cambridge: The University Press, 1852), 270.

[7] Thomas Cartwright, Helps for Discovery of the Truth in Point of Toleration (London: Thomas Banks, 1647), 1. We have modernized the spelling.

   

Henry Barrow and the Regulative Principle of the State

Henry Barrow (1550?-1593), Martyr, Separatist Leader, "the Founder of English Congregationalism"

Barrow Defends the Judicial Law in an Inquisitorial Examination 

While under arrest by the English authorities, Barrow underwent an inquisitorial examination. According to Barrow's account, this exam included a question about whether it was lawful to hang ordinary thieves. Barrow denied this, since God's law requires a different punishment:

[T]he judge Anderson asked me, Whether I thought it lawful to hang a thief or no? I answered, that there were many kinds of thieves, as sacrilegious thieves, men-stealers, etc.; that these ought by the laws of God to die. Then, he said, he meant ordinary thieves of goods and chattels. I said, that God in the law had ordained another kind of punishment for such ...[1]

According to Barrow, he was then asked "Whether it be lawful for the prince to alter the judicial law of Moses, according to the state of her country and policy, or no?"[2] Barrow answered,

I ought to be wise in sobriety, and not to answer more than I know. Great doubt and controversy hath been about this question a long time, but for my part, I cannot see that any more of the judicial law was or can be abrogated by any mortal man or country, upon what occasion soever, than belonged to the ceremonial law and worship of the temple, from which we have received other laws and worship in Christ's testament; but that the judgments, due and set down by God for the transgression of the moral law, cannot be changed or altered, without injury to the moral law and God himself.[3]

Wicked Laws Result from Rejecting or Adding To the Judicial Law

Barrow points out that rejecting or adding to the judicial laws of Moses results in the enactment of wicked laws:

In the commonwealth, when they both abrogate all God's judicial laws and cut them off at one blow, as made and belonging to the commonwealth of the Jews only (as though God [had] no regard of the conversation of other Christians his servants also) or else had left some peculiar laws for the manners of the Gentiles, or had left them in greater liberty to be and to make laws and customs unto themselves. Hereupon it commeth to pass, that so many wicked ungodly laws and customs are decreed; that the whole order and course of judgment and justice is constuprate and perverted, that so many capital mischiefs as God punished by death, as blaspheming the name of God, open idolatry, disobedience to parents, are not by law punished at all; incest, adultery, either passed over or punished by some lighter trifling chastisement; willful murder often pardoned; theft (if it be above 13 pence) punished by death; yea, this sin is punished not only in the person of the thief (who that wise king said if he should steal seven times, may yet live and satisfy with his body or goods) but in the persons of all such as this their unjust law judgeth any way accessory; which extendeth so far, as many honest men may for this trifle for buying or receiving part of these stolen goods, be also put to death and forfeit all the lands and goods they have; whereby their wives, children, and families are punished also and utterly undone. And thus by this their policy are many thieves made for one; not to speak of all this guiltles [guilty?] blood that is upon the head of the magistrate, judge, officers, jury, and the whole land by this means: what should I stand to particulate their infinite transgressions of God's laws even in their civil estate, which is in much worse case than many heathen nations which never knew God or his Christ.[4] 

God is the only Lawmaker

Barrow affirms that God, and God alone, has authority to make civil laws. Civil rulers are therefore God's servants, and do not have the liberty to invent their own laws:

Neither will these lymmes [limbs] of the devil be satisfied with any humble acknowledgement of the civil power, or with any Christian submission unto the same; but will extort by oath an allowance and subscription unto this their ungodly power, blasphemous titles, anti-Christian decrees and proceedings, etc. It will not suffice to confess that God hath made the civil magistrate the keeper of the book of the law, to see both the tables thereof observed by all persons both in the church and commonwealth, and so hath power over both church and commonwealth; but they must have this indefinite proposition granted them: that a prince hath power to make laws for the church. ... A godly prince is bound to God's law, made the keeper thereof, not the controller; the servant, not the Lord. God hath in that book made most perfect and necessary laws both for church and commonwealth: he requireth of the king and magistrate to see these laws executed, and not to make new. He that maketh any new laws taketh unto him the office of God, who is the only lawmaker: all men of what estate soever are but God's creatures, servants, and subjects to his law. Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, Hezekiah, made no new laws, but revived and executed the old laws which God had made.[5] 

Notes
_______________________________

[1] George Punchard, History of Congregationalism from about A. D. 250 to the Present Time: Volume III (NY: Hurd and Houghton, 1867), 66, 67.

[2] Ibid., 67

[3] Ibid.
[4] Henry Barrow, The Writings of Henry Barrow: 1587-1590, ed. Leland H. Carlson (Elizabethan Non-Conformist Texts: Volume III) (New York: Routledge, 1962), 599, 600.

[5] Ibid., 601, 602.

Peter Martyr Vermigli and the Regulative Principle of the State

Peter Martyr Vermigli (1499-1562), Italian Theologian, "the International Reformer"

The Authority of the Judicial Law

In The Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Laws of England of 1552, which Vermigli contributed to, blasphemy, idolatry, witchcraft, and adultery—all of which the Old Testament requires the state to punish—are considered crimes.[1] For Vermigli, magistrates should not only punish offenses against the Second Table of the Law, but the First as well:

First, I said that the magistrate is the guardian of the divine law, which includes not only the second table, but the first also.  Therefore he is the guardian of both the one and the other.  I also mentioned the words of Augustine who said that both private men and kings should serve the Lord. It is written in the Psalms, When peoples gather together, and kingdoms, to worship the Lord. In another place, Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth.  Serve the LORD with fear, with trembling. Augustine adds that a private man serves the Lord by confessing His name and living rightly.  This, however, is not sufficient for a king or magistrate.  He should  serve the Lord with his authority and power by punishing those who oppose Him.  Unless he does this, the magistrate appears to give his assent to blasphemy and heresy.  When the king sees and suffers these men, he joins himself to them and promotes their shameful acts.  When Nebuchadnezzar first came to know God, he proposed a decree promising capital punishment for those who should blaspheme against the God of Daniel.  Darius later made a similar decree.  Our magistrate should stamp out all idolatry, blasphemy and superstition. ... The law of God states that blasphemers should be put to death not by a private man or by priests, but by the magistrate. [Leviticus 24:16][2]

Note how in the last sentence, Vermigli, in discussing the death penalty for blasphemy, appeals to the judicial law as authoritative. Naturally, then, Martyr would say this about the execution of Servetus for his blasphemies:

I have nothing to say of him, except that he was the very son of the devil, whose pestilential and frightful doctrine should be everywhere hunted down; and that the magistrate who condemned him to death is not to be blamed, seeing that he gave no sign of improvement, and that his blasphemies were beyond endurance.[3]

The Sufficiency of the Word of God for Civil Rulers

Vermigli holds that God's word applies to all things in general, and to civil government in particular:

[T]he word of God is a common rule, whereby all things ought to be directed and tempered. For it teacheth in what manner the outward sword and public wealth ought to be governed: And generally also it showeth how all things ought to be done of all men. So Ambrose when as Theodosius the Emperor raged too cruelly and without all consideration against ye Thessalonians, persuaded him, that in all punishment of death, there should be xxx. days space after the sentence given, least the magistrate should do those things in a rage and fury, whereof although he afterward repented him, yet they might not be any more remedied. So, many Bishops oftentimes in things most weighty, used their authority, and many times either put away cruel wars, or else pacified them, and even while wars were in hand preached sermons out of the word of God. So that the Ecclesiastical power after this manner comprehendeth all things, because out of the word of God it findeth how to give counsel in all things. For there is nothing in the whole world whereunto the word of God extendeth not itself. Wherefore they are far deceived, which used to cry, what hath a preacher to do with the public weale? What hath he to do with wars? ... But let them tell me: when the minister of the word perceiveth the law of God to be violated in these things, why should he not reprehend them by the word of God? ... [T]he rule of either of them [civil and ecclesiastical powers] is to be taken out of the word of God ... [4] 

And so the English Puritan Thomas Edwards says that for Vermigli,

[I]n the law of Moses [is] the fountain of all punishments of wickedness against the second table, as of transgressions against the first; and therefore if the magistrates' punishing of murder, theft, adultery etc., for the taking away of evil from amongst the people, be an act of love to God and man, a vindication of the glory of God, then the punishing of blasphemy, idolatry, and such like for the taking away of the evil is an act of love to God and our neighbor.[5] 

Notes
_________________________

[1] James C. Spalding, The Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Laws of England, 1552 (Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1992), 82, 100, 130.

[2] Peter Martyr Vermigli, Of a Magistrate, and the Difference Between Civil and Ecclesiastical Power (1561) in W. J. Torrance Kirby, The Zurich Connection and Tudor Political Theology (Leiden, the Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2007), 116-17.

[3] Cited in Paul Henry, The Life and Times of John Calvin, the Great Reformer: Volume II, trans. Henry Stebbing (London: Whittaker and Co., 1849), 234.

[4] Cited in Peter Martyr Vermigli, The Political Thought of Peter Martyr Vermigli: Selected Texts and Commentary, ed. Robert McCune Kingdon (Geneva, Switzerland: Librairie Droz, 1980), 33, 34. We have somewhat modernized the text.

[5] Thomas Edwards, The Casting Down of the Law Stronghold of Satan: A Treatise Against Toleration and Pretended Liberty of Conscience, 67.

Hugh Latimer and the Regulative Principle of the State

Hugh Latimer (1485-1555), English Reformer, Iconoclast, Chaplain to Edward VI, Martyr

Latimer and Old Testament Civil Law 

When arguing for civil sanctions against lechery, Hugh Latimer, appealing to the law of Moses, states:

I would wish that Moses's law were restored for punishment of lechery, and that the offenders therein might be punished according to the prescription of Moses's law.[1] 

Latimer also appeals to the Old Testament for qualifications of civil rulers:

Holy scripture qualifieth the officers , and sheweth what manner of men they should be, and of what qualities, viros fortes, "strong men;" some translations have, viros sapientes, "wise men;" the English translation hath it very well, "men of activity;" that have stomachs to do their office, they must not be milksops, nor white-livered knights; they must be wise, hearty, hardy, men of a good stomach. Secondarily, he qualifieth them with the fear of God. He saith they must be timentis Deum, "fearing God." For if he fear God, he shall be no briber, no perverter of judgment, faithful. Thirdly, they must be chosen officers, in quibus est veritas, " in whom is truth," if he say it, it shall be done. Fourthly, qui oderunt avaritiam, hating covetousness. Far from it; he will not come near it that hateth it. It is not he that will give five hundred pound for an office. With these qualities, God's wisdom would have magistrates to be qualified.[2]

Promoting the English Iconoclasm Movement

Just as the Old Testament supports destruction of idols, so did Latimer. Latimer was an important figure in the English iconoclasm movement:

[I]conoclasm rose to prominence in 1533 when Hugh Latimer ... was invited to public debates in Bristol. Latimer gained notoriety and favor with Thomas Cromwell in 1533 to become the prime propagandist for the reformist policies after he began preaching against images, the veneration of saints, and the doctrine of purgatory.[3] 

On Latimer's iconoclasm, one author writes:

In 1537 Latimer ordered the stripping of Our Lady of Worcester in the priory of St. Mary's, Worcster, in obedience to Cromwell's injunctions. In early 1538 he returned to London to participate in a public condemnation of relics and images, during which the famous Rood of Boxley, the "Rood of Grace in Kent," was smashed and burned at Paul's Cross, while Hilsey preached the sermon. Latimer presided at the degradation of the Rood of Rumsbury, reportedly picking it up and hurling it out the west door of St. Paul's. The intensity of these events is reflected in Latimer's report to Cromwell on [O]ur Lady of Worcester: "She hath been the devil's instrument to bring many (I fear) to eternal fire: now she herself, with her old sister of Wilshingham, her young sister of Ipswich, with their other two sisters of Dorcestor and Pearce, would make a jolly visitor in Smithfield; they would not be all day burning!"[4]  

The Temporal Sword Must Punish According to God's Word

For Latimer, rulers must rule by God's word:

There is no king, emperor, magistrate, and ruler, of what state soever they be, but are bound to obey this God, and to give credence unto his holy word, in directing their steps ordinately according unto the same word: Yea, truly, they are not only bound to obey God's book, but also the minister of the same, "for the word's sake," so far as he speaketh "sitting in Moses' chair;" that is, if his doctrine be taken out of Moses' law. For in this world God hath two swords, the one is a temporal sword, the other spiritual. The temporal sword resteth in the hands of kings, magistrates, and rulers, under him, whereunto all subjects, as well the clergy as the laity, be subject, and punishable for any offence contrary to the same book.[5]

Note how when it comes to the authority of the temporal sword, Latimer does not mention anything beyond God's book (it is by this that rulers must direct their steps ordinately); he only refers to authority to punish "for any offence contrary to the same book," and to rule by the law of Moses.


Notes
____________________

[1] Hugh Latimer, The Sermons of the Right Reverend Father in God, and Constant Martyr of Jesus Christ, Hugh Latimer, Sometime Bishop of Worcester, Now First Arranged According to the Order of Time in which They Were Preached, Collated by the Early Impressions, and Occasionally Illustrated with Notes, Explanatory of Obsolete Phrases, Particular Customs, and Historical Allusions. Volume I., ed. John Watkins (London: James Duncan, 1824), 235.

[2] Ibid., 165, 166.

[3] Brenda Deen Schildgen, Heritage or Heresy: Preservation and Destruction of Religious Art and Architecture in Europe (Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), 47.

[4] Michael Pasquarello III, God's Ploughman: Hugh Latimer, a "Preaching Life" (1485-1555) (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2014), 74. Citation from Chester, Hugh Latimer, 130, 131.

[5] Latimer, The Sermons of the Right Reverend Father in God, 79, 80.

Thomas Becon and the Regulative Principle of the State

Thomas Becon, English Reformer, Chaplain to Archbishop Cranmer

The Law of Moses and Punishing Offenses against the First Table of the Law

In "The Catechism of Thomas Becon," Becon argues that rulers should not only punish violations of the Second Table of the Law, but the First Table as well:

Father. But let me ask thee one question, my son: in punishing the wicked and ungodly, may the temporal rulers also punish the idolaters and false prophets or preachers of corrupt and wicked doctrine? Son. The magistrate hath the sword committed unto him, not only to punish the transgressors of the second table, but also such as offend and break the commandments of the first table. For if the temporal ruler ought not to suffer any person to escape unpunished that offendeth man, much less ought he to suffer any to escape unpunished that offendeth his Lord God, specially by idolatry and false doctrine.[1] 

Here Becon takes for granted the abiding validity of Old Testament civil law. He cites the capital punishment in Deuteronomy 13 for those who would seduce others away from God, after which he adds:

Again God saith: "The prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that speaketh in the name of strange gods, the same prophet shall die" [Deuteronomy 18:20]. Also in another place: "Whosoever curseth his God shall bear his sin. And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, let him be slain; and all the multitude shall stone him to death: whether he be born in the land or a stranger, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, let him be slain" [Leviticus 24:15b, 16].

Can there be a greater cursing of God, than to fall from him which is the alone true God, and to turn unto creatures, and to crave all things of them, as of God? And can there be a more heinous blasphemy done or spoken against the most glorious name of the Lord our God, than to preach and set forth doctrine contrary to God's word; and by this means to bring the people into error, and to lead them from the way of truth unto falsehood, and so finally unto everlasting damnation? ...

But we have not only an expressed commandment to kill and put out of the way all idolaters and false prophets, I mean such as willfully and obstinately resist the truth, and will by no means be reformed; but we read also of divers kings and rulers which did put the same commandment in execution and practice; and God blessed them greatly for it.[2]

Rulers must do all things according to God's Book

For Becon, rulers must be guarded from the ignorance and blindness of ruling by man's ideas instead of solely by God's word in Scripture:

And for this purpose, because he should not be deceived of the wily and subtile hypocrites, which desire above all things to lead the higher powers in ignorance and blindness, that they may do what they list without check, the magistrate is commanded of God to be learned himself in the laws and ordinances of God, that he may do all things according to God's book, and not after his own fancy or will, nor yet after the crafty persuasions of the subtile hypocrites. "The king," saith God, "when he is set upon the seat of his kingdom, he shall write him out a copy of this law in a book. [ ... ] And it shall be with him, and he ought to read therein all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, and to keep all the words of this law," &c. [Deuteronomy 17:18, 19a] And to Josua God said likewise: "Let not the book of this law depart out of thy mouth; but record therein day and night, that thou mayest observe and do according to all that is written therein. For then shalt thou make thy way prosperous, and then shalt thou do wisely." [Joshua 1:8] The prophet David also exhorteth the kings and rulers of the earth to get them understanding, and to be learned in the law of the Lord, yea, and to "kiss the Son," that is to say, to embrace Christ the Son of God and his holy gospel; lest, if they do the contrary, God be angry with them, and so they perish from the right way. [Psalm 2] [3]

Notes
_________________________________

[1] Thomas Becon, The Catechism of Thomas Becon, With Other Pieces, ed. John Ayre (Cambridge: The University Press, 1844), 311. 

[2] Ibid., 311, 312.

[3] Ibid., 303.

   

Thomas Cranmer and the Regulative Principle of the State

Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556), English Reformer & the First Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury

Cranmer and Old Testament Prohibitions

In the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum of 1552, which Cranmer contributed to, blasphemy, idolatry, witchcraft, and adultery—all of which the Old Testament requires the state to punish—are considered crimes.[1] During Edward VI's coronation, Cranmer charges the young king to destroy idolatry as did the Israelite king Josiah, who "turned to the Lord with all his heart, according to all the law of Moses":

"Your majesty is God's vicegerent, and Christ's vicar within your own dominions, and to see, with your predecessor Josiah, God truly worshipped, and idolatry destroyed; the tyranny of the bishops of Rome banished from your subjects, and images removed. These acts are signs of a second Josiah, who reformed the church of God in his days. You are to reward virtue, to revenge sin, to justify the innocent, to relieve the poor, to procure peace, to repress violence, and to execute justice throughout your realms. For precedents on those kings who performed not these things, the old law shows how the Lord revenged his quarrel; and on those kings who fulfilled these things, he poured forth his blessings in abundance. For example, it is written of Josiah, in the book of the Kings, thus: '[And] Like unto him there was no king [before him], that turned to the Lord with all his heart, [and with all his soul, and with all his might,] according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him.' This was to that prince a perpetual fame of dignity, to remain to the end of days.[2]

God's Wisdom versus Man's Inventions

During the reigns of King Edward VI and Queen Elizabeth I, "The Books of Homilies" were created as authorized sermons for the Anglican church. One particular homily on civil government, titled "An Exhortation concerning good Order, and obedience to Rulers and Magistrates," is part of the First Book of Homilies which Cranmer collected and edited,[3] and which he may also have written.[4] 

This homily emphasizes the need for rulers to have "godly proceedings, laws, statutes, proclamations, and injunctions, with all other godly orders"; they must "exercise GOD'S room in judgement," and punish "by good and godly laws."[5] Naturally, then, it is necessary for rulers to "give themselves to knowledge and wisdom" (which presumably is Scripture):

Let us learn also here by the infallible and undeceivable word of GOD, that kings and other supreme and higher officers, are ordained of GOD, who is most highest: and therefore they are here taught diligently to apply and give themselves to knowledge and wisdom, necessary for the ordering of GOD'S people to their governance committed, or whom to govern they are charged of GOD.[6]

The homily also sets God's wisdom and laws in contrast with man's device and invention, favoring the former:

Not Man's Device and Invention, but God's Wisdom, God's Order, Power, and Authority. Or as much as GOD hath created and disposed all things in a comely order, we have been taught in the first part of the Sermon, concerning good order and obedience, that we also ought in all common weales, to observe and keep a due order, and to be obedient to the powers, their ordinances, and laws, and that all rulers are appointed of GOD, for a goodly order to be kept in the world: and also how the Magistrates ought to learn how to rule and govern according to GOD'S Laws ... [7]

The Catechism of Thomas Becon

Also for consideration regarding Cranmer and sola scriptura applied to the state is "The Catechism of Thomas Becon," which very strongly advocates the regulative principle of the state. It was published while Becon served as chaplain to Cranmer, whom the catechism was dedicated to. 

In his catechism, Becon states: 

[T]he magistrate is commanded of God to be learned himself in the laws and ordinances of God, that he may do all things according to God's book, and not after his own fancy or will, nor yet after the crafty persuasions of the subtile hypocrites.[8]

Notes
________________________

[1] James C. Spalding, The Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Laws of England, 1552 (Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1992), 82, 100, 130.

[2] Unknown author, Writings of Edward the Sixth, William Hugh, Queen Catherine Parr, Anne Askew, Lady Jane Grey, Hamilton, and Balnaves: Volume 3: of British reformers (London: The Religious Tract Society, 1836), 5, 6.

[3] "The Homilies," The Anglican Library. Retrieved September 18, 2014 from http://www.anglicanlibrary.org/homilies/index.htm.[4] Ross Harrison, Hobbes, Locke, and Confusion's Masterpiece: An Examination of Seventeenth-Century Political Philosophy (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 268.

[5] Short-Title Catalogue 13675. Renaissance Electronic Texts 1.1. copyright 1994 Ian Lancashire (ed.) University of Toronto. Cited in "Homily on Obedience," The Anglican Library. Retrieved September 20, 2014 from http://www.anglicanlibrary.org/homilies/bk1hom10.htm. We have modernized the language.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Thomas Becon, The Catechism of Thomas Becon, With Other Pieces, ed. John Ayre (Cambridge: The University Press, 1844), 303.

   

Henry Bullinger and the Regulative Principle of the State

Heinrich Bullinger (1504 - 1575), Swiss Reformer, Zwingli's Successor

Bullinger and Old Testament Civil Law

In Bullinger's writings we see an appeal to the judicial laws of Moses as the basis for civil law. In the third of his influential "Decades," Bullinger, after mentioning a ruler's requirement to rule by the substance of the judicial laws of Moses, discusses judicial laws pertaining to such things as electing rulers, the office of judges, the treatment of the poor, sexual immorality, divorce, economics, slavery, theft, damages, disease control, and rules of war; as well as punishments for criminals, such as witches, false prophets, apostates, blasphemers, Sabbath-breakers, slanderers, murderers, and incorrigible sons.[1] 

In his second Decade, Bullinger writes:

[I]t is the duty of a christian magistrate, or at leastwise of a good householder, to compel to amendment the breakers and contemners of God’s sabbath and worship. The peers of Israel, and all the people of God, did stone to death (as the Lord commanded them) the man that disobediently did gather sticks on the sabbath-day. Why then should it not be lawful for a christian magistrate to punish by bodily imprisonment, by loss of goods, or by death, the despisers of religion, of the true and lawful worship done to God, and of the sabbath-day? Verily, though the foolish and indiscreet magistrate in this corrupted age do slackly look to his office and duty ... [2]

We see Bullinger's commitment to biblical civil law in action regarding the execution of the vile blasphemer Servetus. In defense of a work of Calvin on punishing heretics, he writes to Calvin,

I know that many have wished that you had not defended this principle; but many also thank you, and among others our church. Urbanus Regius has long ago proved, in a work of his own, and all the ministers of Luneberg agree with him, that heretics, when they are blasphemers, ought to be punished. There are also many other pious men who think the same, and consider that such offenders ought not only to be silenced, but to be put to death. Do not repent therefore of what you have done: the Lord will uphold your righteous efforts. I know that your disposition is not cruel, and that you will favour no barbarity. Who knows not, that a boundary must be set to things of this kind? But how it could be possible to spare such a man as Servetus, that serpent of all heresies, that most obdurate of men, I see not.[3]

The Sin of Neglecting Biblical Capital Punishments

For Bullinger, it is sinful for rulers to neglect to apply biblical capital punishments:

[Magistrates] God commandeth to use authority and to kill, threatening to punish him most sharply, if he neglect to kill the men whom God commandeth to be killed. ... [T]he magistrate killeth at God's commandment, when he putteth to death those which are by law condemned for their offences, or when in defence of his people he doth justly and necessarily arm himself to the battle. And yet the magistrates may offend in those two points two sundry ways. For either they do by law, that is, under the coloured pretence of law, slay the guiltless, to satisfy their own lust, hatred, or covetousness; as we read, that Jezebel slew the just man Naboth, with the Lord's prophets: or else by peevish pity and foolish clemency do let them escape scot-free, whom the Lord commanded them to kill; as Saul and Achab are reported to have sinned in letting go the bloody kings whom God commanded to be slain. And Salomon, in the seventeenth of his Proverbs, doth testify, that the Lord doth as greatly hate the magistrate that acquitteth a wicked person, as him that condemneth an innocent man.[4] 

When rulers submit to Christ they must rule by God's word

In the third and fourth of his "Decades," Henry Bullinger includes a dedication to the godly King Edward VI, where he exhorts the young king to submit himself and his kingdom to Jesus Christ—which entails ruling by God's word: 

Having my warrant therefore out of the word of God, I dare boldly avow, that those kings shall flourish and be in happy case, which wholly give and submit themselves and their kingdoms to Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, being King of kings, and Lord of lords; acknowledging him to be the mightiest prince and monarch of all, and themselves his vassals, subjects, and servants: which, finally, do not follow in all their affairs their own mind and judgment, the laws of men that are contrary to God’s commandments, or the good intents of mortal men; but do both themselves follow the very laws of the mightiest king and monarch, and also cause them to be followed throughout all their kingdom, reforming both themselves and all theirs at and by the rule of God’s holy word.  For in so doing the kingdom shall flourish in peace and tranquillity, and the kings thereof shall be most wealthy, victorious, long-lived, and happy.  For thus speaketh the mouth of the Lord, which cannot possibly lie: “When the king sitteth upon the seat of his kingdom, he shall take the book of the law of God, that he may read in it all the days of his life, that he may do it, and not decline from it either to the right hand or to the left; but that he may prolong the days in his kingdom both of his own life and of his children.” And again, “Let not the book of this law depart out of thy mouth,” (Josue, or thou, whatsoever thou art that hast a kingdom), “but occupy thy mind therein day and night, that thou mayest observe and do according to all that is written therein: for then shalt thou make thy way prosperous, and then shalt thou be happy.”  It is assuredly true, therefore, confirmed by the testimony of the most true God, and in express words pronounced, that the prosperity of kings and kingdoms consisteth in true faith, diligent hearing, and faithful obeying the word or law of God: whereas their calamity and utter overthrow doth follow the contrary.[5]

Bullinger goes on to give examples of rulers who experienced either blessing for ruling by God's word, or calamity for neglecting to rule by God's word.[6] Rulers, then, must set about "reforming both themselves and all theirs" (their subjects)—which can make the difference between prosperity and calamity. 

Basing all matters of justice on God's word

In the same dedication to Edward VI, Bullinger says that all matters of justice must ordered according to the "perfect rule"—God's holy word:

But whereunto doth all this tend? That your royal Majesty, forsooth, may undoubtingly know, and be assuredly persuaded, that true felicity is gotten and retained by faithful study in the word of God: to wit, if you submit yourself altogether and your whole kingdom to Christ, the chief and highest prince; if, throughout your whole realm, you dispose and order religion, and all matters of justice, according to the rule of God's holy word; if you decline not one hair's breadth from that rule, but study to advance the kingdom of Christ, and go on (as hitherto you have happily begun) to subvert and tread under foot the usurped power of that tyrannical antichrist. Not that your Majesty needeth any whit at all mine admonitions or instructions: for you have undoubtedly that heavenly teacher in your mind (I mean, the Holy Ghost), which inspireth you with the very true doctrine of sincere and true religion. Your Majesty hath the sacred Bible, the holiest book of all books, wherein, as in a perfect rule, the whole matter of piety and our true salvation is absolutely contained and plainly set down.[7]

Elsewhere, Bullinger states the following regarding justice in terms of the regulation of civil punishments:

But let not the magistrate execute any man until he know first perfectly, whether he that is to be punished hath deserved that punishment that the judges determine; and whether God hath commanded to punish that offence, that is, whether by God's law that is condemned, which is to be punished.[8] 

The Judicial Law as Sufficient for Civil Government

 For Bullinger, the judicial law is authoritative and sufficient for civil government:

Now although these judicial laws are very few in number, and not to be compared in multitude with the huge volumes of the laws and decrees of emperors, kings, and wisest sages; yet do they in their short breviary contain the chief points of judgment and justice, and, in effect, as much almost as is contained in the books of the laws and constitutions of the emperors and civil lawyers. The good Lord would not by too long and burdensome a pack of laws be too burdenous and troublesome unto his people; neither was it needful over curiously to stick upon every several thought of ill-disposed persons: it is sufficient for all wise men, people, and nations, if every one have so much law as is sufficient for the conservation of peace, civil honesty, and public tranquillity; as all the holy scripture witnesseth that the people of Israel had.  

Now these judicial laws are the most ancient, and very fountains of all other good laws which are to be found almost in all the world. ... [T]he judicial laws of God are commended unto us, not so much for their antiquity, as for the authority which they have of God.[9]

 The judicial law, therefore, is the basis for just judgment:

Now that we may plainly and distinctly discourse upon this matter, ye have to mark, that to judge is an action; and in this treatise is taken for an action done in the courts of judgment: for it signifieth to take up and determine of matters betwixt such as be at variance, or else upon the hearing of a cause to give sentence or judgment. Finally, to judge doth signify, to deliver them that be in danger, to relieve the oppressed, to defend the afflicted, and with punishment to keep under mischievous offenders. Judgment, therefore, is not the sitting or meeting of judges in assizes or sessions; but is rather the very diligent discussing of causes, the giving of sentence according to right and equity by the laws of God, and also the assertion and defence whereby the good are delivered, and the punishment that is executed upon the ill—disposed and wicked offenders. 

The judges are the overseers of judgment and justice; I mean, such as do justly according to the laws give sentence betwixt them that are at discord, which do defend and deliver the good, and punish and bridle the wicked. And so the judicial laws are those which inform the judges how to determine of controversies and questions, how to judge justly, how to punish the wicked, and how to defend the good, that peace, honesty, justice, and public tranquillity may be among all men; which is the end and mark alone whereto both the judge and all the judicial laws do tend and are directed. For God, our good Lord and lawgiver, would have it to go well with man, that we may live happily, civilly, and in tranquillity. And therefore we do not in this treatise exclude the care and defence of pure religion, but do make it one of the especial points which the judicial laws do look unto.[10] 

And so Bullinger's advice to Edward VI is to rule solely by the word and the judicial law of God:

Now I suppose that in this institution of a king all things are contained, which are most largely set out by other authors touching the discipline and education of a prince. And by the way this is especially to be noted; that kings are not set as lords and rulers over the word and laws of God; but are, as subjects, to be judged of God by the word, as they that ought to rule and govern all things according to the rule of his word and commandment.

And here I have to rehearse unto you some of the judicial laws; I mean, not all and every several one, but those alone which are the chief and choicest to be noted: by which ye may consider of the rest, and plainly perceive, that the people of Israel were not destitute of any law which was necessary and profitable for their good state and welfare.[11]

For more on Bullinger and the Regulative Principle of the State, see our post on the Second Helvetic Confession.

Notes
______________________

[1] Henry Bullinger, The Decades of Henry Bullinger: The Third Decade, ed. Thomas Harding, trans. H. I. (Cambridge: The University Press, 1850), 221, 222, 225, 227- 233, 235.

[2] Henry Bullinger, The Decades of Henry Bullinger: The First and Second Decades, ed. Thomas Harding, trans. H. I. (Cambridge: The University Press, 1849), 261, 262.

[3] Cited in Paul Henry, The Life and Times of John Calvin, the Great Reformer: Volume II, trans. Henry Stebbing (London: Whittaker and Co., 1849), 234.

[4] Bullinger, The Decades of Henry Bullinger: The First and Second Decades, 307, 308.

[5] Bullinger, The Decades of Henry Bullinger: The Third Decade, 4, 5.

[6] Ibid., 5-14. 

[7] Ibid., 14.

[8] Bullinger, The Decades of Henry Bullinger: The First and Second Decades, 355.

[9] Bullinger, The Decades of Henry Bullinger: The Third Decade, 218, 219.

[10] Ibid., 219, 220.

[11] Ibid., 223, 224.