The magistrate’s right to punish idolatry etc.

” The main question then is, concerning State Toleration. Concerning which some do affirm, That whatever the Church may do in inflicting Church censures on Heriticks, Maintainers of Heterodox Opinions: Yet, Say they, no civil Punishment, such as Death, Imprisonment, Mulcts, or fines, should be inflicted on any Error or Blashemy whatsoever; providing the Maintainers of them carry themselves peaceably, do not trouble the State, or do evil against the Commonwealth in civil Things: We again on the contrary do hold, that it is the duty of the Civil Magistrate to suppress Error, Heresies, and every sin against the First Table, as well as it is his Duty to suppress Adultery, Fornication, Sedition, and other sins against the Second Table: And that he is not only bound to suppress Errors and Blashemies, that are contrary to fundamental Truths, or the Light of Nature; but all Error contrary to other points of Truth.”

81 James Fergusson (1621-1667), A Brief Refutation Of The Errors Of Toleration, Erastianism, Independancy And Separatbn. 1692. pp. 51-52.

These sermons were originally preached in 1652 but published posthumously by his son.

The magistrate’s power to punish blasphemy and heresy

” If it was the approven practice of Kings and Magistrates under the Old Testament to suppress Error, Heresie, and Blasphemy, then Magistrates under the New Testament are bound to do the like.”

ibid., pg. 54.

Later [pp.61-62], Fergusson says That whatever was commanded to be done by Magistrates under the Old Testament as a part of their duty, thus Magistrates under the New Testament are obliged to as a part of their duty also, .”he cites Exod.22.20; Lev.24.15,16;Deut.13.1

“I am very apt to believe, what Mr. Perkins hath, in one of his prefatory pages to his golden chain, that the word, and scriptures of God do contain a short upoluposis, or platform, not only of theology, but also of other sacred sciences, (as he calleth them) attendants, and handmaids thereunto, which he maketh ethics, economics, politics, church-government, prophecy, academy.It is very suitable to God´s all-sufficient wisdom, and to the fullness and perfection of Holy Scriptures, not only to prescribe perfect rules for the right ordering of a private man´s soul to everlasting blessedness with Himself, but also for the right ordering of a man´s family, yea, of the commonwealth too, so far as both of them are subordinate to spiritual ends, and yet avoid both the churches usurpation upon civil jurisdictions, in ordine ad spiritualia, and the commonwealths invasion upon ecclesiastical administrations, in ordine to civil peace, and conformity to the civil state. God´s institutions (such as the government of church and commonwealth be) may be close and compact, and co-ordinate one to another, and yet not be confounded. God hath so framed the state of church government and ordinances, that they may be compatible to any common-wealth, though never so much disordered in his frame. But yet when a commonwealth hath liberty to mold his own frame I conceive the scripture hath given full direction for the right ordering of the same, and that, in such sort as may best maintain the euexia of the church. Mr. Hooker doth often quote a saying out of Mr. Cartwright (though I have not read it in him) that no man fashioneth his house to his hangings, but his hangings to his house. It is better that the commonwealth be fashioned to the setting forth of God´s house, which is his church: than to accommodate the church frame to the civil state. Democracy, I do not conceive that ever God did ordain as a fit government either for church or commonwealth. If the people be governors, who shall be governed? As for monarchy, and aristocracy, they are both of them clearly approved, and directed in scripture, yet so as referreth the sovereignty to himself, and setteth up Theocracy in both, as the best form of government in the commonwealth, as well in the church.”

John Cotton (December 4, 1585 ““ December 23, 1652)
Excerpt from a Copy of a Letter from Mr. Cotton to Lord Say and Seal in the year 1636

Cotton, John cited in Puritan Political Ideas 1558-1794 ed. By Edmund Morgan, 1965, p.170-171

Abstract of the Laws of New England

CHAPTER VII.

Of Crimes. And first, of such as deserve capital punishment, or cutting off from a man’s people, whether by death or banishment.

1. FIRST, blasphemy, which is a cursing of God by atheism, or the like, to be punished with death.

2. Idolatry to be punished with death.

3. Witchcraft, which is fellowship by covenant with a familiar spirit, to be punished with death.

4. Consulters with witches not to be tolerated, but either to be cut off by death or banishment.

5. Heresy, which is the maintenance of some wicked errors, overthrowing the foundation of the christian religion; which obstinacy, if it be joined with endeavour to seduce others thereunto, to be punished with death; because such an heretick, no less than an idolater, seeketh to thrust the souls of men from the Lord their God.

6. To worship God in a molten or graven image, to be punished with death.

7. Such members of the church, as do wilfully reject to walk, after due admonition and conviction, in the churches’ establishment, and their christian admonition and censures, shall be cut off by banishment.

8. Whosoever shall revile the religion and worship of God, and the government of the church, as it is now established, to be cut off by banishment. [i] Cor. 5:5.

11. Profaning of the Lord’s day, in a careless and scornful neglect or contempt thereof, to be punished with death.

Job 31: 26; idolatry

” Vs. 26. // / have looked to the Sun, or moon, when they shined, and my heart hath been secretly enticed or my mouth hath kissed my hand. He gives two reasons why he would riot do this.

[1] Because it is a heinous sin; for as little as folks think of false worship or idolatry; yea, an iniquity to be punished by the judge. Job was not of their religion that plead for toleration. He knew that God’s law gave warrant to them then (and it gives also warrant to us now) to punish idolaters, and the judge ought to do it.”

James Durham 1622 – 1658, Lectures on Job. Edt. by C. Coldwell. (Dallas, Texas; Naphtali Press,1995) p.170.

Note that Durham declares the death penalty decreed by Deut.22:22 to be a moral law. 90 ibid., p. 172

Judicial Law and equity

” 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 the people to whom they were given, the prince and the magistrate, keeping the substance and equity of them ( as it were the marrow), may change the circumstance 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 “.

Thomas Cartwright 1535-1603

“SecondReply” 1575 cited in Worksof John Whitgift,1.270. ParkerSoc. 1851

Note in Cartwright’s quote he appeals to the idea of equity. This is important for many of the R2Kt virus types have suggested that general equity does not allow for the idea of taking the civil law in the OT and making it the norm for today’s magistrates. Cartwright would not have gone for that argument.

Example 3. Hee that blasphemeth the name of God, shall bee put to death, Leuv.24.16. Understand this law of manifest and notorious blasphemies, that pearce through God, as the words import: and then it is a maine fence to the third commaundement. For Gods name may in no wise be abused, and troad under foot: and therefore blasphemers pearcing God, are to be cut off. This is the very law of nature, as appeares by Nabuchadnezzar , who gave in commandement to his people, that whosoever blasphemed the name of the true God should be put to death, Dan.3.29. Here note, that manifest and convicted Atheists, if they bee put to death, have but their deserts.

William Perkins: A Commentarie upon the Epistle to the Galatians. Lon.1617 [ Pilgrim Press, 1989] pp. 202-204.

Note that Perkins connects the first table with the second table all caught up in the ‘very law of nature.’ Even were Perkins to have taught Natural Law he would have insisted that both tables are proclaimed in Natural law and that the magistrate is responsible to enforce both tables.