Skip to main content

Calvin on the Role of the Magistrate

This continues my series on John Calvin's political theology

* * * * *

Calvin divided political order into the magistrate, who rules the people by law; the laws, by which the magistrate rules the people; and the people, ruled legally by the magistrate. When these three elements work together harmoniously, they would create a healthy civil society, where all people could flourish. This visible, peaceful civil society would be both an expression of Christian piety, and an analogical witness to the gospel’s invisible, internal peace and harmony.

Contra the Anabaptists, Calvin affirmed the legitimacy of political office, going as far as to call it ‘the highest gift of his beneficence to preserve the safety of men’. God providentially raises up civil rulers as his ministers, carrying out God’s judgements. God gives this authority to the magistrates, not to feed their own lusts, but to serve him, though serving the people and enhancing the common good. While rulers are primarily accountable to God, because God invests them with authority for the people’s sake, not for their own, they should also consider themselves accountable to the people.

Godly rulers use the law to establish true religion and care for the people. They exhibit modesty, both in the pomp of their office, and in the burdens they put on the people, including tax. They establish wholesome civil behaviour, through achieving the right balance in promulgating and enforcing the law, avoiding both severity and undue clemency. Tyrants, in contrast, contradict the rightful relationships of magistrates, laws and people. Instead of using the law to serve the people and advance God’s kingdom, tyrants serve themselves, break the law, oppress the people, and often explicitly oppose God.

Comments

jeltzz said…
'Contra the Anabaptists' doesn't mean anything unless it's given content. Otherwise they're still being used as a foil to the Magisterial reformers.

Popular posts from this blog

A better understanding of nonbelief

The Nones Project is an ongoing study into the belief systems of people who call themselves non-religious. A few weeks ago one of the project leaders,  Ryan Burge  of Washington University,  posted some really interesting preliminary results  on his Substack.  1. We've probably heard of people who are spiritual but not religious (SBNRs). SBNRs were "the largest group of nones" in the sample. They believe in the supernatural realm but not necessarily in "a God." They are "deeply skeptical of religion but highly interested in spirituality," therefore individualistic and anti-institutional.  2. But this study differentiated SBNRs from people they called Nones In Name Only, NiNos. They different to SBNRs by being religious about their spiritual. They believe not just in the supernatural but in "God." And they tend to engage in traditional communal religious practices while SBNRs practice individualised eclectic bespoke spiritual practices. The s...

The different distractions of secularity and spirituality

There has been a lot of discussion about the recent 'vibe shift' away from radical atheism back towards an openness to the supernatural. I don't think this new spirituality is necessarily an openness to the unique claims of Christ. It will more probably replace one set of commonly-accepted misunderstandings about Jesus with another.  Under radical atheism, people dismissed the Biblical claims about Jesus' resurrection because they 'knew' that it was impossible. Jesus hadn't really died. He just passed out (after being beaten and whipped and crucified) and then woke up in the tomb (and rolled away the stone himself and overcame several guards). Or the disciples hallucinated that they saw him (even though Jewish beliefs of the time didn't expect one person to rise possessing eternal life himself; they expected a general resurrection at the end of time - see John 11:24 ). Or something else.  The so-called 'explanations' of Jesus' non-resurrectio...
TGC Australia recently published an analysis by Dr Sarah Quicke of whether we are experiencing a 'quiet revival' of interest in and/or conversion to Christianity  here in Australia. It does it a good job of describing the difficulties involved in both gathering and interpreting data about religious beliefs and behaviours, e.g. the difference between the 44% who (still) call themselves Christian and the 8% of people aged 18-35 who actually "believed and lived out the gospel."  Quicke refers to the very insightful McCrindle report An Undercurrent Of Faith , released in March 2025, which uses an analytical method called cohort analysis to try and work out how a particular group of people tend to behave over time. The purpose of this post is to draw attention to one element of that report which agrees with Quicke's analysis but also adds some detail to it.  Here is what the cohort analysis showed about different age groups' identification with Christianity:  As y...