How should the church respond when magistrates misbehave? Gavin Beers joins us to discuss Chapter 6 of, “When to Disobey,” Viret makes his case that we ought to understand the office of the magistrate, acknowledge the problems they bring, and how to navigate. Viret is defining and defending the role of civil magistrates. He makes an appeal for godly responses to the civil magistrate. I appreciate how Viret explains the problems that Christians will have with magistrates. Viret explains in careful detail what kinds of sins the people of God will have to endure at their hands.

Well, welcome to the Church and Family Life podcast. Church and Family Life exists to proclaim the sufficiency of Scripture, And we want to do that today using this book, When to Disobey, Case Studies and Insurrection Tyranny and Obedience to God, articles by Pierre Verre, which he wrote out of his practical experience during the Reformation, really to counsel churches for how they ought to respond to often punishing governments of the church. And we're hoping that what V. Ray learned and wrote will be a help to us as we go forward to learn to obey the Lord in the times that we live in. And it's great to have you, Jason.

Here we go again. We're going to talk about Pierre Vire. Thanks for joining us. It's good to be with you and Gavin again. Yeah, Gavin from Cornerstone Presbyterian Church in Mevon, North Carolina, just down the street.

Thanks again, Gavin, for joining us on these. We really appreciate your time to go through this. You know, it's good to have, you know, some of these, you know, Scottish brothers, you know, have a whole different view of the civil magistrate than we do. We kind of grew up Jason and La La Land. You know, Gavin didn't grow up this way.

So anyway, glad to have you here in America though. Well, it's a delight to be back on with you guys as always. So we're going to discuss chapter six of this book entitled The Ministry of the Magistrates. And, you know, he uses biblical language, which is kind of shocking to think that civil magistrates are ministers. Well, that's what Romans 13 says.

They're God's deacons. They're the ministers of God. They are ministers of God for us. So we're always having to adjust our thinking, our natural thinking to the word of God, to think of them rightly. And I hope this chapter will help us think about them rightly.

And Verre makes the point that we need to understand the office of the magistrate. And he, you know, he's typical Verre. He acknowledges the problems that they bring in graphic terms, but also the blessings. But he also teaches us how to navigate through the corridors of their disobedience and also their appointment from God. So it's very interesting.

So he uses this chapter to define the civil magistrate, and he actually is defending the civil magistrate the way that he sees it. So, let's talk about that. Let's talk about the way he defines it. So, you know, he makes, you know, lots of critical statements about that. Let's talk about the way that he describes the civil magistrate.

I'll back up just one step to point to the introduction of the chapter where it says that he was writing this as a defense of the biblical doctrine of the civil magistrate at the age of 25. So, I remember what I was doing at 25, and it wasn't writing a biblical defense of the civil magistrate. But it means clearly he had a really strong understanding of what Scripture was saying, and so he was entrusted with this task. I wonder what kind of family he grew up in to be able to do this at age 25. I think the context that Jason raises is really intriguing because it actually helps you understand the whole of the chapter.

You know, 1536, Lausanne Disputation was key for the Reformation in Switzerland. Calvin had just arrived. Farrell was supposed to be defending certain things. He couldn't do it. Calvin stands up, destroys the Roman Catholic apologists, quoting from the Church Fathers.

And here's Vire at 25 years of age. And the reason that this is so important is because of what's happening in the context. You know, all of these reformers wrote on this subject and all of the early confessions had a chapter or a statement concerning the civil magistrate. And what's behind this is actually three things. I would say the first thing is they're wanting to establish the biblical doctrine of the civil magistrate over against the Roman Catholic view.

So if you look at the end of the chapter, page 88 at the bottom, he talks about those who usurp the authority of the sword, attributing to themselves both temporal and spiritual power. That's the Roman Catholic view of the civil magistrate, that the Pope has temporal and spiritual supremacy. But then there's a radical reformation going on. The Anabaptists are running crazy throughout Europe. And they have a distinct view of the civil magistrate that's very egalitarian.

You know, 1527, a lot of stuff is going on in Switzerland. And so as they want to bring in a Protestant Reformation, Vera is saying, we are not like that. Calvin's doctrine of the civil magistrate is affected by that. And here's one quote from another place. Calvin's strong emphasis on the divine institution of government was definitely conditioned by his controversy with the Anabaptists.

Calvin felt that anarchism lurked behind the anti-government position of the Anabaptists. So Veres dealing with that, And so page 87, page 88, he's talking about those who want to cast off all civil government. And he's saying, here's what the Bible actually teaches. So he's got Romanus sites on the one hand, and he's got the Anabaptist radical Reformation where they all wanted to live in communes and share goods, etc. His sites on the other hand.

Gavin, really early in the chapter on page 80, he's talking about the civil magistrate and civil government, and he uses this phrase, without which the church could not be a church. So, he's making the argument that without a civil government and the structure and disciplines and order that it brings to society that the church is not even in a position to be the church. So he's arguing that it's a really important institution for the other institutions as well. And he speaks about those who want to throw off the government, like as you were saying, the Anabaptists and such. He calls them false servants, And these are the ones who deny the need for a magistrate.

And they also were demanding that the magistrate be a Christian. That was another false teaching that he was attacking. And, you know, Christians want to have a Christian magistrate. Isn't that what every Republican wants, you know? And...

No. It doesn't really work out that well, frankly. But, you know, the Christian wants a Christian magistrate, and you can understand why. But God in His providence does not often supply a Christian magistrate. He does from time to time, and there are blessings that flow.

You see that in the kings of Israel. The blessings flow when you have a holy man in authority, but God hasn't designed it that way, primarily. 10 On page 84, he says, your magistrates are either unbelievers, in which case you have an obligation to relate with them rightly as a gospel witness, or they're believers and you have a double obligation because they're brothers. Really interesting argument. Yeah, It's the tension between the ideal and the reality.

The ideal is we should have Christian magistrates because every man by virtue of being a creature of God is obligated to acknowledge him and serve him. So it's a proper thing to press the demands of the Gospel and the law of God upon the civil magistrate. But it is not requisite that the magistrate be a Christian in order that we might recognize his legitimacy. And that was a huge issue, as you see in the 16th century. It's also an issue in the 17th century.

So if you look at the Westminster Confession chapter on the civil magistrate, it has a clause in it to that effect that the fact that a magistrate be an infidel does not take away our obligation to come under his authority. So they thought it was still a live issue that they would include it in the confessional statement for the church. And even beyond that, Viré points out that there actually is a reason or there are reasons why he gives ungodly magistrates and he explains it. He says that, you know, God sets bad rulers to chastise the church. So we should look to ourselves when we get one.

Don't you love how he describes them on page 81? Insane, drunken, effeminate rulers to torment and afflict us. This was back in the day when men were men when they were writing, you know? But God sends such men as an affliction so that we would humble ourselves under His hand, ultimately. Yeah, and we might ought to just encourage our churches more to do that, to inspect why we have the leaders, why we have the laws, why we have just the craziness that's being embraced, and what do we have to do with it, and what it ought to do for us is to humble us and to recognize that we are these people who have fallen away from the Lord.

And he makes the case from Scripture that it's God that raises up and puts down rulers, that raises up and puts down empires, and he's trying to convince us not to fret. We don't need to fret because God can raise them up or put them down at His pleasure. Yeah. I'll just quote what He says. He says, He has given them to us to exercise the patience of the saints and to humble and chastise us.

So increase our patience to humble us and to chastise us, those three things. We tend to get angry and rail against them when we ought to grow in patience and grow in humility and understand that God is doing something with us. That has a knock on effect even to our obedience to clear commands in Scripture. You know, 1st Timothy chapter 2, first of all the prayers, intercessions, supplications, giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all authority, all in authority over us. I think that conservative Christians in America are more apt to pray against the civil magistrate than to pray for him.

Those two things are legitimate. We can pray for the overthrow of the Lord's enemies. But how much do we genuinely and sincerely pray for these men in office, for their good? That's a challenge to me. It is a challenge to our flesh.

You want to pray the imprecatory Psalms. Verre uses Scripture to try to draw the boundaries for the civil magistrate, for civil government. So, he's setting it forth as legitimate but not boundless, and so he's bringing forth texts of scriptures to try to draw those lines. Gavin, how do you see those lines? Where are the lines for the civil magistrate?

Okay, this is where I would, might not be a surprise to you guys. I would push back against VRA a bit here. And I do think it is helpful to note the context. 1536, 25 years old. The previous chapter, chapter five on the Ten Commandments, is 1564.

You know, he's 30 years older. There are slight nuances and differences between them. But I think it's proper to understand as he emphasizes that the civil magistrate is under God and bound by God's word to require of us what the Lord ultimately would require, render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's. But then he makes this switch and we've all encountered it this year. He throws out the statement, we simply obey the magistrate in everything that doesn't require us to sin.

And he focuses upon idolatry. And then he uses the illustration of the child under the roof of the father. And you've got to be very careful with that illustration because the two things are similar, but not the same. I can require much more from my child than the state can. The state does not have the same degree of regulation over my life the way a father would have over his child.

But if you simply say that we are to obey a father or we are to obey a civil ruler in everything that doesn't require us to sin, then that opens the door for all kinds of unreasonable requirements and tyranny. You know, I could require my child to go and scrub out the septic tank with a toothbrush. It's totally unreasonable. There has to be some other way, some more nuanced way, that we apply those principles, because all kinds of tyranny can happen in a home and in a society by unreasonable requirements and authoritarian abuse of power. And that's where I think move on through the next 150 years and people are starting to crystallize these things a little bit better.

And that's, of course, as you said, that's happened to us as we continue to consider different things, what does it look like when the civil government overreaches its jurisdiction? And of course, you know, our view is that the civil magistrate has a very narrow range of authority, and then the church has a broader range. And then the family has a much broader range. You know, you have this, you know, sort of, you know, ascending authority. When you go through the jurisdictions, You have very little, just authority over very few things with the civil magistrate over many people.

Then you drop down to the church and you have more authority over a larger group of people, and then in the home you have enormous authority over a very small group of people. And that's how God has designed it. So we've had to sort through that, which what is an overreach, for instance, in the government of the church, which is an overreach in the jurisdiction of the family. And so, that's been the process we've all been in the midst of, and I think that's what you're implying in the Reformation. They had to do the same thing as the government continued to do different things.

Mm-hmm. On page 86, Verre talks about offending on one side or the other, giving government too much submission, submission that's not even due to the government or not submitting and rebelling against the government without warrant. I thought this would be worth reading. He says, therefore it is exceedingly necessary for us to prudently beware of offending either on one side or the other. We must take care that we do not attribute to the magistrate what does not pertain to him, fearing and honoring him more than God, or that by rebellion and disobedience we provoke God against ourselves." So I think it was helpful that he sort of puts up these two guardrails and acknowledges that you can miss the mark on both sides.

That's a very accurate statement of the principle. I had it highlighted in my book. Then down the side, I wrote, yes, but what belongs to him? That's the difficult thing to work out. That principle is absolutely correct.

And we're, as the last year has taught us, grappling with where these lines are. And what to do if the civil magistrate steps over the lines. You know, what then is the real question, I think. And it just, I don't think that Verre or any of the reformers was ever arguing that there should be submission without appeal. You know, what form should the appeal take and how should you go about that?

And in a place like America, we have the ability to test the, the authority by bringing it to court. We can disobey. You know, it can be a good thing to disobey in order to challenge an overreach. We don't know what the consequences might be, but we have a duty to challenge the overreaches by being willing to go into the courts over it? He actually deals with that, Scott.

I like the way he started in the Old Testament and then he moves into what Jesus taught and then the apostles. When he's dealing with the apostles in page 84, he said that we are to employ the magistrate as the minister of God. We're to put him to work. And the previous examples before he said that is Paul and Philippi, where he says, you know, I'm a Roman citizen, you come here and deal with the mess that you've made. And then he shows further examples from the Book of Acts.

So believing that the magistrate is a minister of God is not some kind of abstract thing. It's something for us to make practical use of as Christians in the way you say, you know, make our appease, hold them to account both to the constitution of the nation, but also the law of God. I mean, he even goes so far as to say that it's lawful to serve the civil magistrate, even a wicked one. And he gives various examples of that, and of tax collectors and soldiers who come to the Lord, and they're serving their countries. But keeping the jurisdiction straight is always the big challenge and it's the one that's upon us right now.

I mean, my view is that you have the authority of the family, the government has a very limited authority, and when that government steps outside of its range of authority, then the family's not obligated to obey it. And I think that would cover matters of health care and all kinds of things that really are under the jurisdiction of the family. Wives have a head called their husbands And the civil magistrate can come and arrest your wife for a crime, but the government doesn't have the authority to tell your wife what to wear. So these are very difficult matters, because governments tend to change the playing field. And they'll continue to do that.

Well, we'll always have to be struggling and wrestling with what is the overreach and what should we do about it? These things are, they become increasingly problematic when the other legitimate jurisdictions won't enforce their boundaries. In other words, if the church allows for the civil magistrate to encroach on areas which are clearly given to the church or the family by the church or I guess any of the three can encroach on any other three. If the authorities in the other jurisdiction won't stand at the boundary and say, you know, no further than these things tend to escalate because you've given the signal that infringing on your jurisdiction is not going to be a problem and you're not going to resist it. Okay, so there he is.

He's making a case for honoring the authorities to acknowledge both the problems that they bring and trying to help, you know, Christians walk a balanced line, not falling off the horse, you know, on either side. Any final comments, parting shots to everybody about this chapter you think might be helpful? Well, he ends the chapter with a helpful point, always helpful to remember. It's this, because of our remaining corruptions, the civil magistrate is necessary. You won't need a police force in heaven when we've lost all of our inclinations towards things that displease the Lord, but this side of heaven we need it.

I think there's a wonderful picture of the relationship of church and state here actually happening. You know, this is taking place at the Lausanne Disputation. It was called by the Protestant Lords of Bern because they wanted the question of religion settled. And so the church then is afforded the opportunity to go and teach the civil magistrate effectively that's what they're doing. Teach the civil magistrate the biblical position and there were Roman Catholics there, there are Anabaptists in the background, and our forefathers pressed the biblical claims of the word of God before the civil magistrate so that he would understand what the Bible teaches.

It would be wonderful to have that scenario again in the 21st century. Well that's something to pray for. Yeah. It really is. Okay well brothers thank you so much.

So let's pray that God would give us faithful hearts to do the things that God has designed according to the authority that's placed above us to behave properly, not to lose our minds on the one hand, and not to lose our souls on the other. So, well thank you. Thank you so much for joining us at Church and Family Life. And thank you, Jason and Gavin. Again, I really appreciate your comments.

They were very helpful. So Hope to see you next time at the Church and Family Life podcast.