Chapter 19.

19. Of Christian Liberty.

    The three divisions of this chapter are,—I. Necessity of the
doctrine of Christian Liberty, sec. 1. The principal parts of this
liberty explained, sec. 2-8. II. The nature and efficacy of this
liberty against the Epicureans and others who take no account
whatever of the weak, sec. 9 and 10. III. Of offense given and
received. A lengthened and not unnecessary discussion of this
subject, sec. 11-16.
    
Sections.

1. Connection of this chapter with the previous one on
    Justification. A true knowledge of Christian liberty useful and
    necessary. 1. It purifies the conscience. 2. It checks
    licentiousness. 3. It maintains the merits of Christ, the truth
    of the Gospel, and the peace of the soul.
2. This liberty consists of three parts. First, Believers renouncing
    the righteousness of the law, look only to Christ. Objection.
    Answer, distinguishing between Legal and Evangelical
    righteousness.
3. This first part clearly established by the whole Epistle to the
    Galatians.
4. The second part of Christian liberty, viz., that the conscience,
    freed from the yoke of the law, voluntarily obeys the will of
    God. This cannot be done so long as we are under the law.
    Reason.
5. When freed from the rigorous exactions of the law, we can
    cheerfully and with much alacrity answer the call of God.
6. Proof of this second part from an Apostle. The end of this
    liberty.
7. Third part of liberty, viz., the free rise of things indifferent.
    The knowledge of this part necessary to remove despair and
    superstition. Superstition described.
8. Proof of this third part from the Epistle to the Romans. Those
    who observe it not only use evasion. 1. Despisers of God. 2.
    The desperate. 3. The ungrateful. The end and scope of this
    third part.
9. Second part of the chapter, showing the nature and efficacy of
    Christian liberty, in opposition to the Epicureans. Their
    character described. Pretext and allegation. Use of things
    indifferent. Abuse detected. Mode of correcting it.
10. This liberty maintained in opposition to those who pay no regard
    to the weak. Error of this class of men refuted. A most
    pernicious error. Objection. Reply.
11. Application of the doctrine of Christian liberty to the subject
    of offenses. These of two kinds. Offense given. Offense
    received. Of offense given, a subject comprehended by few. Of
    Pharisaical offense, or offense received.
12. Who are to be regarded as weak and Pharisaical. Proved by
    examples and the doctrine of Paul. The just moderation of
    Christian liberty. necessity of vindicating it. No regard to be
    paid to hypocrites. Duty of edifying our weak neighbors.
18. Application of the doctrine to things indifferent. Things
    necessary not to be omitted from any fear of offense.
14. Refutation of errors in regard to Christian liberty. The
    consciences of the godly not to be fettered by human traditions
    in matters of indifference.
15. Distinction to be made between Spiritual and Civil government.
    These must not be confounded. How far conscience can be bound
    by human constitutions. Definition of conscience. Definition
    explained by passages from the Apostolic writings.
16. The relation which conscience bears to external obedience;
    first, in things good and evil; secondly, in things
    indifferent.

    1. We are now to treat of Christian Liberty, the explanation
of which certainly ought not to be omitted by any one proposing to
give a compendious summary of Gospel doctrine. For it is a matter of
primary necessity, one without the knowledge of which the conscience
can scarcely attempt any thing without hesitation, in many must
demur and fluctuate, and in all proceed with fickleness and
trepidation. In particular, it forms a proper appendix to
Justification, and is of no little service in understanding its
force. Nay, those who seriously fear God will hence perceive the
incomparable advantages of a doctrine which wicked scoffers are
constantly assailing with their jibes; the intoxication of mind
under which they labour leaving their petulance without restraint.
This, therefore, seems the proper place for considering the subject.
Moreover, though it has already been occasionally adverted to, there
was an advantage in deferring the fuller consideration of it till
now, for the moment any mention is made of Christian liberty lust
begins to boil, or insane commotions arise, if a speedy restraint is
not laid on those licentious spirits by whom the best things are
perverted into the worst. For they either, under pretext of this
liberty, shake off all obedience to God, and break out into
unbridled licentiousness, or they feel indignant, thinking that all
choice, order, and restraint, are abolished. What can we do when
thus encompassed with straits? Are we to bid adieu to Christian
liberty, in order that we may cut off all opportunity for such
perilous consequences? But, as we have said, if the subject be not
understood, neither Christ, nor the truth of the Gospel, nor the
inward peace of the soul, is properly known. Our endeavor must
rather be, while not suppressing this very necessary part of
doctrine, to obviate the absurd objections to which it usually gives
rise.
    2. Christian liberty seems to me to consist of three parts.
First, the consciences of believers, while seeking the assurance of
their justification before God, must rise above the law, and think
no more of obtaining justification by it. For while the law, as has
already been demonstrated, (supra, chap. 17, sec. 1,) leaves not one
man righteous, we are either excluded from all hope of
justification, or we must be loosed from the law, and so loosed as
that no account at all shall be taken of works. For he who imagines
that in order to obtain justification he must bring any degree of
works whatever, cannot fix any mode or limit, but makes himself
debtor to the whole law. Therefore, laying aside all mention of the
law, and all idea of works, we must in the matter of justification
have recourse to the mercy of God only; turning away our regard from
ourselves, we must look only to Christ. For the question is, not how
we may be righteous, but how, though unworthy and unrighteous, we
may be regarded as righteous. If consciences would obtain any
assurance of this, they must give no place to the law. Still it
cannot be rightly inferred from this that believers have no need of
the law. It ceases not to teach, exhort, and urge them to good,
although it is not recognized by their consciences before the
judgment-seat of God. The two things are very different, and should
be well and carefully distinguished. The whole lives of Christians
ought to be a kind of aspiration after piety, seeing they are called
unto holiness, (Eph. 1: 4; 1 Thess. 4: 5.) The office of the law is
to excite them to the study of purity and holiness, by reminding
them of their duty. For when the conscience feels anxious as to how
it may have the favor of God, as to the answer it could give, and
the confidence it would feel, if brought to his judgment-seat, in
such a case the requirements of the law are not to be brought
forward, but Christ, who surpasses all the perfection of the law, is
alone to be held forth for righteousness.
    3. On this almost the whole subject of the Epistle to the
Galatians hinges; for it can be proved from express passages that
those are absurd interpreters who teach that Paul there contends
only for freedom from ceremonies. Of such passages are the
following: "Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being
made a curse for us." "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty
wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with
the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be
circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to
every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole
law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are
justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace," (Gal. 3: 13; 5: 1-
4.) These words certainly refer to something of a higher order than
freedom from ceremonies. I confess, indeed, that Paul there treats
of ceremonies, because he was contending with false apostles, who
were plotting, to bring back into the Christian Church those ancient
shadows of the law which were abolished by the advent of Christ.
But, in discussing this question, it was necessary to introduce
higher matters, on which the whole controversy turns. First, because
the brightness of the Gospel was obscured by those Jewish shadows,
he shows that in Christ we have a full manifestation of all those
things which were typified by Mosaic ceremonies. Secondly, as those
impostors instilled into the people the most pernicious opinion,
that this obedience was sufficient to merit the grace of God, he
insists very strongly that believers shall not imagine that they can
obtain justification before God by any works, far less by those
paltry observances. At the same time, he shows that by the cross of
Christ they are free from the condemnation of the law, to which
otherwise all men are exposed, so that in Christ alone they can rest
in full security. This argument is pertinent to the present subject,
(Gal. 4: 5, 21, &c.) Lastly, he asserts the right of believers to
liberty of conscience, a liberty which may not be restrained without
necessity.
    4. Another point which depends on the former is, that
consciences obey the law, not as if compelled by legal necessity;
but being free from the yoke of the law itself, voluntarily obey the
will of God. Being constantly in terror so long as they are under
the dominion of the law, they are never disposed promptly to obey
God, unless they have previously obtained this liberty. Our meaning
shall be explained more briefly and clearly by an example. The
command of the law is, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all
thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might," (Deut.
6: 5.) To accomplish this, the soul must previously be divested of
every other thought and feeling, the heart purified from all its
desires, all its powers collected and united on this one object.
Those who, in comparison of others, have made much progress in the
way of the Lord, are still very far from this goal. For although
they love God in their mind, and with a sincere affection of heart,
yet both are still in a great measure occupied with the lusts of the
flesh, by which they are retarded and prevented from proceeding with
quickened pace towards God. They indeed make many efforts, but the
flesh partly enfeebles their strength, and partly binds them to
itself. What can they do while they thus feel that there is nothing
of which they are less capable than to fulfill the law? They wish,
aspire, endeavor; but do nothing with the requisite perfection. If
they look to the law, they see that every work which they attempt or
design is accursed. Nor can any one deceive himself by inferring
that the work is not altogether bad, merely because it is imperfect,
and, therefore, that any good which is in it is still accepted of
God. For the law demanding perfect love condemns all imperfection,
unless its rigor is mitigated. Let any man therefore consider his
work which he wishes to be thought partly good, and he will find
that it is a transgression of the law by the very circumstance of
its being imperfect.
    5. See how our works lie under the curse of the law if they are
tested by the standard of the law. But how can unhappy souls set
themselves with alacrity to a work from which they cannot hope to
gain any thing in return but cursing? On the other hand, if freed
from this severe exaction, or rather from the whole rigor of the
law, they hear themselves invited by God with paternal levity, they
will cheerfully and alertly obey the call, and follow his guidance.
In one word, those who are bound by the yoke of the law are like
servants who have certain tasks daily assigned them by their
masters. Such servants think that nought has been done; and they
dare not come into the presence of their masters until the exact
amount of labour has been performed. But sons who are treated in a
more candid and liberal manner by their parents, hesitate not to
offer them works that are only begun or half finished, or even with
something faulty in them, trusting that their obedience and
readiness of mind will be accepted, although the performance be less
exact than was wished. Such should be our feelings, as we certainly
trust that our most indulgent Parent will approve our services,
however small they may be, and however rude and imperfect. Thus He
declares to us by the prophet, "I will spare them as a man spareth
his own son that serveth him," (Gal. 3: 17;) where the word spare
evidently means indulgence, or connivance at faults, while at the
same time service is remembered. This confidence is necessary in no
slight degree, since without it every thing should be attempted in
vain; for God does not regard any sock of ours as done to himself,
unless truly done from a desire to serve him. But how can this be
amidst these terrors, while we doubt whether God is offended or
served by our work?
    6. This is the reason why the author of the Epistle to the
Hebrews ascribes to faith all the good works which the holy
patriarchs are said to have performed, and estimates them merely by
faith, (Heb. 11: 2.) In regard to this liberty there is a remarkable
passage in the Epistle to the Romans, where Paul argues, "Sin shall
not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under
grace," (Rom. 6: 14.) For after he had exhorted believers, "Let not
sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in
the lusts thereof: Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
unrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as those
that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of
righteousness unto God;" they might have objected that they still
bore about with them a body full of lust, that sin still dwelt in
them. He therefore comforts them by adding, that they are freed from
the law; as if he had said, Although you feel that sin is not yet
extinguished, and that righteousness does not plainly live in you,
you have no cause for fear and dejection, as if God were always
offended because of the remains of sin, since by grace you are freed
from the law, and your works are not tried by its standard. Let
those, however who infer that they may sin because they are not
under the law, understand that they have no right to this liberty,
the end of which is to encourage us in well-doing.
    7. The third part of this liberty is that we are not bound
before God to any observance of external things which are in
themselves indifferent, ("adiafora") but that we are now at full
liberty either to use or omit them. The knowledge of this liberty is
very necessary to us; where it is wanting our consciences will have
no rest, there will be no end of superstition. In the present day
many think us absurd in raising a question as to the free eating of
flesh, the free use of dress and holidays, and similar frivolous
trifles, as they think them; but they are of more importance than is
commonly supposed. For when once the conscience is entangled in the
net, it enters a long and inextricable labyrinth, from which it is
afterwards most difficult to escape. When a man begins to doubt
whether it is lawful for him to use linen for sheets, shirts,
napkins, and handkerchiefs, he will not long be secure as to hemp,
and will at last have doubts as to tow; for he will revolve in his
mind whether he cannot sup without napkins, or dispense with
handkerchiefs. Should he deem a daintier food unlawful, he will
afterwards feel uneasy for using loafbread and common eatables,
because he will think that his body might possibly be supported on a
still meaner food. If he hesitates as to a more genial wine, he will
scarcely drink the worst with a good conscience; at last he will not
dare to touch water if more than usually sweet and pure. In fine, he
will come to this, that he will deem it criminal to trample on a
straw lying in his way. For it is no trivial dispute that is here
commenced, the point in debate being, whether the use of this thing
or that is in accordance with the divine will, which ought to take
precedence of all our acts and counsels. Here some must by despair
be hurried into an abyss, while others, despising God and casting
off his fear, will not be able to make a way for themselves without
ruin. When men are involved in such doubts whatever be the direction
in which they turn, every thing they see must offend their
conscience.
    8. "I know," says Paul, "that there is nothing unclean of
itself," (by unclean meaning unholy;) "but to him that esteemeth any
thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean," (Rom. 14: 14.) By these
words he makes all external things subject to our liberty, provided
the nature of that liberty approves itself to our minds as before
God. But if any superstitious idea suggests scruples, those things
which in their own nature were pure are to us contaminated.
Wherefore the apostle adds, "Happy is he that condemneth not himself
in that which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat,
because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is
sin," (Rom. 14: 22, 23.) When men, amid such difficulties, proceed
with greater confidence, securely doing whatever pleases them, do
they not in so far revolt from God? Those who are thoroughly
impressed with some fear of God, if forced to do many things
repugnant to their consciences are discouraged and filled with
dread. All such persons receive none of the gifts of God with
thanksgiving, by which alone Paul declares that all things are
sanctified for our use, (1 Tim. 4: 5.) By thanksgiving I understand
that which proceeds from a mind recognizing the kindness and
goodness of God in his gifts. For many, indeed, understand that the
blessings which they enjoy are the gifts of God, and praise God in
their words; but not being persuaded shalt these have been given to
them, how can they give thanks to God as the giver? In one word, we
see whither this liberty tends viz., that we are to use the gifts of
God without any scruple of conscience, without any perturbation of
mind, for the purpose for which he gave them: in this way our souls
may both have peace with him, and recognize his liberality towards
us. For here are comprehended all ceremonies of free observance, so
that while our consciences are not to be laid under the necessity of
observing them, we are also to remember that, by the kindness of
God, the use of them is made subservient to edification.
    9. It is, however, to be carefully observed, that Christian
liberty is in all its parts a spiritual matter, the whole force of
which consists in giving peace to trembling consciences, whether
they are anxious and disquieted as to the forgiveness of sins, or as
to whether their imperfect works, polluted by the infirmities of the
flesh, are pleasing to God, or are perplexed as to the use of things
indifferent. It is, therefore, perversely interpreted by those who
use it as a cloak for their lusts, that they may licentiously abuse
the good gifts of God, or who think there is no liberty unless it is
used in the presence of men, and, accordingly, in using it pay no
regard to their weak brethren. Under this head, the sins of the
present age are more numerous. For there is scarcely any one whose
means allow him to live sumptuously, who does not delight in
feasting, and dress, and the luxurious grandeur of his house, who
wishes not to surpass his neighbor in every kind of delicacy, and
does not plume himself amazingly on his splendor. And all these
things are defended under the pretext of Christian liberty. They say
they are things indifferent: I admit it, provided they are used
indifferently. But when they are too eagerly longed for, when they
are proudly boasted of, when they are indulged in luxurious
profusion, things which otherwise were in themselves lawful are
certainly defiled by these vices. Paul makes an admirable
distinction in regard to things indifferent: "Unto the pure all
things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is
nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled" (Tit.
1: 15.) For why is a woe pronounced upon the rich who have received
their consolation? (Luke 6: 24,) who are full, who laugh now, who
"lie upon beds of ivory and stretch themselves upon their couches;"
"join house to house," and "lay field to field;" "and the harp and
the viol, the tablet and pipe, and wine, are in their feasts," (Amos
6: 6; Isa. 5: 8, 10.) Certainly ivory and gold, and riches, are the
good creatures of God, permitted, nay destined, by divine providence
for the use of man; nor was it ever forbidden to laugh, or to be
full, or to add new to old and hereditary possessions, or to be
delighted with music, or to drink wine. This is true, but when the
means are supplied to roll and wallow in luxury, to intoxicate the
mind and soul with present and be always hunting after new
pleasures, is very far from a legitimate use of the gifts of God.
Let them, therefore, suppress immoderate desire, immoderate
profusion, vanity, and arrogance, that they may use the gifts of God
purely with a pure conscience. When their mind is brought to this
state of soberness, they will be able to regulate the legitimate
use. On the other hand, when this moderation is wanting, even
plebeian and ordinary delicacies are excessive. For it is a true
saying, that a haughty mind often dwells in a coarse and homely
garb, while true humility lurks under fine linen and purple. Let
every one then live in his own station, poorly or moderately, or in
splendor; but let all remember that the nourishment which God gives
is for life, not luxury, and let them regard it as the law of
Christian liberty, to learn with Paul in whatever state they are,
"therewith to be content," to know "both how to be abased," and "how
to abound," "to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to
suffer need," (Phil. 4: 11.)
    10. Very many also err in this: as if their liberty were not
safe and entire, without having men to witness it, they use it
indiscriminately and imprudently, and in this way often give offense
to weak brethren. You may see some in the present day who cannot
think they possess their liberty unless they come into possession of
it by eating flesh on Friday. Their eating I blame not, but this
false notion must be driven from their minds: for they ought to
think that their liberty gains nothing new by the sight of men, but
is to be enjoyed before God, and consists as much in abstaining as
in using. If they understand that it is of no consequence in the
sight of God whether they eat flesh or eggs, whether they are
clothed in red or in black, this is amply sufficient. The conscience
to which the benefit of this liberty was due is loosed. Therefore,
though they should afterwards, during their whole life, abstain from
flesh, and constantly wear one color, they are not less free. Nay,
just because they are free, they abstain with a free conscience. But
they err most egregiously in paying no regard to the infirmity of
their brethren, with which it becomes us to bear, so as not rashly
to give them offense. But it is sometimes also of consequence that
we should assert our liberty before men. This I admit: yet must we
use great caution in the mode, lest we should cast off the care of
the weak whom God has specially committed to us.
    11. I will here make some observations on offenses, what
distinctions are to be made between them, what kind are to be
avoided and what disregarded. This will afterwards enable us to
determine what scope there is for our liberty among men. We are
pleased with the common division into offense given and offense
taken, since it has the plain sanction of Scripture, and not
improperly expresses what is meant. If from unseasonable levity or
wantonness, or rashness, you do any thing out of order or not in its
own place, by which the weak or unskillful are offended, it may be
said that offense has been given by you, since the ground of offense
is owing to your fault. And in general, offense is said to be given
in any matter where the person from whom it has proceeded is in
fault. Offense is said to be taken when a thing otherwise done, not
wickedly or unseasonably, is made an occasion of offense from
malevolence or some sinister feeling. For here offense was not
given, but sinister interpreters ceaselessly take offense. By the
former kind, the weak only, by the latter, the ill-tempered and
Pharisaical are offended. Wherefore, we shall call the one the
offense of the weak, the other the offense of Pharisees, and we will
so temper the use of our liberty as to make it yield to the
ignorance of weak brethren, but not to the austerity of Pharisees.
What is due to infirmity is fully shown by Paul in many passages.
"Him that is weak in the faith receive ye." Again, "Let us not judge
one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a
stumbling-block, or an occasion to fall, in his brother's way;" and
many others to the same effect in the same place, to which, instead
of quoting them here, we refer the reader. The sum is, "We then that
are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to
please ourselves. Let every one of us please his neighbor for his
good to edification." elsewhere he says, "Take heed lest by any
means this liberty of yours become a stumbling-block to them that
are weak." Again "Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat,
asking no question for conscience sake." "Conscience, I say, not
thine own, but of the other." Finally, "Give none offense, neither
to the Jews nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God." Also in
another passage, "Brethren, ye have been called into liberty, only
use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one
another." Thus, indeed, it is: our liberty was not given us against
our weak neighbors, whom charity enjoins us to serve in all things,
but rather that, having peace with God in our minds, we should live
peaceably among men. What value is to be set upon the offense of the
Pharisees we learn from the words of our Lord, in which he says,
"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind," (Matth. 15:
14.) The disciples had intimated that the Pharisees were offended at
his words. He answers that they are to be let alone that their
offense is not to be regarded.
    12. The matter still remains uncertain, unless we understand
who are the weak and who the Pharisees: for if this distinction is
destroyed, I see not how, in regard to offenses, any liberty at all
would remain without being constantly in the greatest danger. But
Paul seems to me to have marked out most clearly, as well by example
as by doctrine, how far our liberty, in the case of offense, is to
be modified or maintained. When he adopts Timothy as his companion,
he circumcises him: nothing can induce him to circumcise Titus,
(Acts 16: 3; Gal. 2: 3.) The acts are different, but there is no
difference in the purpose or intention; in circumcising Timothy, as
he was free from all men, he made himself the servant of all: "Unto
the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that
are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are
under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being
not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might
gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak that I
might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might
by all means save some" (1 Cor. 9: 20-22.) We have here the proper
modification of liberty, when in things indifferent it can be
restrained with some advantage. What he had in view in firmly
resisting the circumcision of Titus, he himself testifies when he
thus writes: "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was
compelled to be circumcised: and that because of false brethren
unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty
which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into
bondage: to whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour,
that the truth of the gospel might continue with you," (Gal. 2:
3-5.) We here see the necessity of vindicating our liberty when, by
the unjust exactions of false apostles, it is brought into danger
with weak consciences. In all cases we must study charity, and look
to the edification of our neighbor. "All things are lawful for me,"
says he, "but all things are not expedient; all things are lawful
for me, but all things edify not. Let no man seek his own, but every
man another's wealth," (1 Cor. 10: 23, 24.) There is nothing plainer
than this rule, that we are to use our liberty if it tends to the
edification of our neighbor, but if inexpedient for our neighbor, we
are to abstain from it. There are some who pretend to imitate this
prudence of Paul by abstinence from liberty, while there is nothing
for which they less employ it than for purposes of charity.
Consulting their own ease, they would have all mention of liberty
buried, though it is not less for the interest of our neighbor to
use liberty for their good and edification, than to modify it
occasionally for their advantage. It is the part of a pious man to
think, that the free power conceded to him in external things is to
make him the readier in all offices of charity.
    13. Whatever I have said about avoiding offenses, I wish to be
referred to things indifferent. Things which are necessary to be
done cannot be omitted from any fear of offense. For as our liberty
is to be made subservient to charity, so charity must in its turn be
subordinate to purity of faith. Here, too, regard must be had to
charity, but it must go as far as the altar; that is, we must not
offend God for the sake of our neighbor. We approve not of the
intemperance of those who do every thing tumultuously, and would
rather burst through every restraint at once than proceed step by
step. But neither are those to be listened to who, while they take
the lead in a thousand forms of impiety, pretend that they act thus
to avoid giving offense to their neighbor, as if in the meantime
they did not train the consciences of their neighbors to evil,
especially when they always stick in the same mire without any hope
of escape. When a neighbor is to be instructed, whether by doctrine
or by example, then smooth-tongued men say that he is to be fed with
milk, while they are instilling into him the worst and most
pernicious opinions. Paul says to the Corinthians, "I have fed you
with milk, and not with meat," (1 Cor. 3: 2;) but had there then
been a Popish mass among them, would he have sacrificed as one of
the modes of giving them milk? By no means: milk is not poison. It
is false then to say they nourish those whom, under a semblance of
soothing they cruelly murder. But granting that such dissimulation
may be used for a time, how long are they to make their pupils drink
that kind of milk? If they never grow up so as to be able to bear at
least some gentle food, it is certain that they have never been
reared on milk. Two reasons prevent me from now entering farther
into contest with these people, first, their follies are scarcely
worthy of refutation, seeing all men of sense must nauseate them;
and, secondly, having already amply refuted them in special
treatises, I am unwilling to do it over again. Let my readers only
bear in mind, first, that whatever be the offenses by which Satan
and the world attempt to lead us away from the law of God, we must,
nevertheless, strenuously proceed in the course which he prescribes;
and, secondly, that whatever dangers impend, we are not at liberty
to deviate one nail's breadth from the command of God, that on no
pretext is it lawful to attempt any thing but what he permits.
    14. Since by means of this privilege of liberty which we have
described, believers have derived authority from Christ not to
entangle themselves by the observance of things in which he wished
them to be free, we conclude that their consciences are exempted
from all human authority. For it were unbecoming that the gratitude
due to Christ for his liberal gift should perish or that the
consciences of believers should derive no benefit from it. We must
not regard it as a trivial matter when we see how much it cost our
Savior, being purchased not with silver or gold, but with his own
blood, (1 Pet. 1: 18, 19;) so that Paul hesitates not to say that
Christ has died in vain, if we place our souls under subjection to
men, (Gal. 5: 1, 4; 1 Cor. 7: 23.) Several chapters of the Epistle
to the Galatians are wholly occupied with showing that Christ is
obscured, or rather extinguished to us, unless our consciences
maintain their liberty; from which they have certainly fallen, if
they can be bound with the chains of laws and constitutions at the
pleasure of men. But as the knowledge of this subject is of the
greatest importance, so it demands a longer and clearer exposition.
For the moment the abolition of human constitutions is mentioned,
the greatest disturbances are excited, partly by the seditious, and
partly by calumniators, as if obedience of every kind were at the
same time abolished and overthrown.
    15. Therefore, lest this prove a stumbling-block to any, let us
observe that in man government is twofold: the one spiritual, by
which the conscience is trained to piety and divine worship; the
other civil, by which the individual is instructed in those duties
which, as men and citizens, we are bold to performs (see Book 4,
chap. 10, sec. 3-6.) To these two forms are commonly given the not
inappropriate names of spiritual and temporal jurisdiction,
intimating that the former species has reference to the life of the
soul, while the latter relates to matters of the present life, not
only to food and clothing, but to the enacting of laws which require
a man to live among his fellows purely honorably, and modestly. The
former has its seat within the soul, the latter only regulates the
external conduct. We may call the one the spiritual, the other the
civil kingdom. Now, these two, as we have divided them, are always
to be viewed apart from each other. When the one is considered, we
should call off our minds, and not allow them to think of the other.
For there exists in man a kind of two worlds, over which different
kings and different laws can preside. By attending to this
distinction, we will not erroneously transfer the doctrine of the
gospel concerning spiritual liberty to civil order, as if in regard
to external government Christians were less subject to human laws,
because their consciences are unbound before God, as if they were
exempted from all carnal service, because in regard to the Spirit
they are free. Again because even in those constitutions which seem
to relate to the spiritual kingdom, there may be some delusion, it
is necessary to distinguish between those which are to be held
legitimate as being agreeable to the Word of God, and those, on the
other hand, which ought to have no place among the pious. We shall
elsewhere have an opportunity of speaking of civil government, (see
Book 4, chap. 20.) For the present, also, I defer speaking of
ecclesiastical laws, because that subject will be more fully
discussed in the Fourth Book when we come to treat of the Power of
the Church. We would thus conclude the present discussion. The
question, as I have said, though not very obscure, or perplexing in
itself, occasions difficulty to many, because they do not
distinguish with sufficient accuracy between what is called the
external forum, and the forum of conscience. What increases the
difficulty is, that Paul commands us to obey the magistrate, "not
only for wrath, but also for conscience sake," (Rom. 13: 1, 5.)
Whence it follows that civil laws also bind the conscience. Were
this so, then what we said a little ago, and are still to say of
spiritual governments would fall. To solve this difficulty, the
first thing of importance is to understand what is meant by
conscience. The definition must be sought in the etymology of the
word. For as men, when they apprehend the knowledge of things by the
mind and intellects are said to know, and hence arises the term
knowledge or science, so when they have a sense of the divine
justice added as a witness which allows them not to conceal their
sins, but drags them forward as culprits to the bar of God, that
sense is called conscience. For it stands as it were between God and
man, not suffering man to suppress what he knows in himself; but
following him on even to conviction. It is this that Paul means when
he says, "Their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts
the meanwhile accusing, or else excusing one another," (Rom. 2: 15.)
Simple knowledge may exist in man, as it were shut up; therefore
this sense, which sists man before the bar of God, is set over him
as a kind of sentinel to observe and spy out all his secrets, that
nothing may remain buried in darkness. Hence the ancient proverb,
Conscience is a thousand witnesses. For the same reason Peter also
employs the expression, "the answer of a good conscience," (1 Pet.
3: 21,) for tranquillity of mind; when persuaded of the grace of
Christ, we boldly present ourselves before God. And the author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews says, that we have "no more conscience of
sins," (Heb. 10: 2,) that we are held as freed or acquitted, so that
sin no longer accuses us.
    16. Wherefore, as works have respect to men, so conscience
bears reference to God, a good conscience being nothing else than
inward integrity of heart. In this sense Paul says that "the end of
the commandment is charity, out of a pure heart, and of a good
consciences and of faith unfeigned" (1 Tim. 1: 5.) He afterwards, in
the same chapter, shows how much it differs from intellect when he
speaks of "holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having
put away, have made shipwreck," (1 Tim. 1: 19.) For by these words
he intimates, that it is a lively inclination to serve God, a
sincere desire to live in piety and holiness. Sometimes, indeed, it
is even extended to men, as when Paul testifies, "Herein do I
exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offense toward
God, and toward men," (Acts 24: 16.) He speaks thus, because the
fruits of a good conscience go forth and reach even to men. But, as
I have said, properly speaking, it refers to God only. Hence a law
is said to bind the conscience, because it simply binds the
individual, without looking at men, or taking any account of them.
For example, God not only commands us to keep our mind chaste and
pure from lust, but prohibits all external lasciviousness or
obscenity of language. My conscience is subjected to the observance
of this law, though there were not another man in the world, and he
who violates it sins not only by setting a bad example to his
brethren, but stands convicted in his conscience before God. The
same rule does not hold in things indifferent. We ought to abstain
from every thing that produces offense, but with a free conscience.
Thus Paul, speaking of meat consecrated to idols, says, "If any man
say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for
his sake that showed it, and for conscience sake:" "Conscience, I
say, not thine own, but of the other," (1 Cor. 10: 28, 29.) A
believer, after being previously admonished, would sin were he still
to eat meat so offered. But though abstinence, on his part, is
necessary, in respect of a brother, as it is prescribed by God,
still he ceases not to retain liberty of conscience. We see how the
law, while binding the external act, leaves the conscience unbound.