I know many make this of Tertullian an argument that men must lay down their necks, and suffer their throats to be cut, if those that are above them will it, and if they cannot obey actively, they must obey passively any thing that is according to the will of such as are over them. Why (say they) did not the Christians so in the Primitive times? Yes, the Christians did so, they though they were under Idolaters, and were commanded to deny Christ, which was utterly unlawful; yet though they could not obey actively, they obeyed passively, they did subject and submit themselves to all their rage; and though they had strength, yet they would not resist. Why should not Christians do so now? You are exceedingly gulled with this argument many times: true, we are bound to obey authority actively or passively, and yet this argument doth not serve the turn. There is a great deal of difference between authority abused, & men that are in authority commanding; here the difference lies not in authority abused, but in that which is no authority ⟨p. 81⟩at all. For there is no authority that we are subject to now, but (as I have said heretofore) according to the Laws and constitutions of the Country where we live.1 Not to the commands & mere wills of men till it be brought to a Law are we bound in conscience to submit, no way, neither actively nor passively; though it be a good thing that is commanded, Conscience doth not bind to it, earatione, to yield to it, because it is commanded, till it be brought to a Law. Now when things are brought into a Law, & be according to the agreements and covenants of the place and country wherein we live. And then suppose this authority be abused, & there be an ill Law made, then I confess (if that Law be of force) we must either quit our selves of the Country or else submit or suffer, for then the power of God is in it, though it be abused, and we are to be subject to all powers. When then it comes once to be a power, to be a Law, it is authority, though abused, and we must yield obedience to it either actively or passively. But we must enquire whether it be a power; It is not because the man that is in authority commandeth it, except he command it by virtue of that authority, which is according to the nature and condition of the fundamental constitutions of the Country where he liveth.
I know many make this of Tertullian an argument that men must lay down their necks, and suffer their throats to be cut, if those that are above them will it, and if they cannot obey actively, they must obey passively any thing that is acording to the will of such as are over them. Why (say they) did not the Christians so in the Primitive times? Yes, the Christians did so, they though they were under Idolaters, and were commanded to deny Christ, which was utterly unlawful; yet though they could not obey actively, they obeyed passively, they did subject and submit themselves to all their rage; and though they had strength, yet they would not resist. Why should not Christians do so now? You are exceedingly gulled with this argument many times: true, we are bound to obey authority actively or passively, and yet this argument doth not serve the turne. There is a great deale of difference between authority abused, & men that are in authority commanding; here the difference lies not in authority abused, but in that which is no authority ⟨p. 81⟩at all. For there is no authority that we are subject to now, but (as I have said heretofore) according to the Laws and constitutions of the Countrey where we live.1 Not to the commands & meer wils of men till it be brought to a Law are we bound in conscience to submit, no way, neither actively nor passively; though it be a good thing that is commanded, Conscience doth not bind to it, earatione, to yeeld to it, because it is commanded, till it be brought to a Law. Now when things are brought into a Law, & be according to the agreements and covenants of the place and countrey wherein we live. And then suppose this authority be abused, & there be an ill Law made, then I confesse (if that Law be of force) wee must either quit our selves of the Countrey or else submit or suffer, for then the power of God is in it, though it be abused, and we are to be subject to all powers. When then it comes once to be a power, to be a Law, it is authority, though abused, and we must yeeld obedience to it either actively or passively. But we must enquire whether it be a power; It is not because the man that is in authority commandeth it, except he command it by vertue of that authority, which is according to the nature and condition of the fundamental constitutions of the Countrey where he liveth.
- 1Answer to the argument from the sufferings of the Primitive times against resisting tyranny.
