Beza believed that this natural law of sovereignty had been evident in the Jewish monarchies of the Old Testament and was borne out in contemporary European politics. He placed several caveats on this principle, however: first, the king must be guilty of extreme tyranny, having broken the fundamental laws of the kingdom; second, though resisting a tyrant might be permissible in theory, it was not expedient in every situation. Finally, like Hotman, Beza stressed that initiating resistance against a king was never the prerogative of private persons; far better for the people to suffer patiently under tyranny than to allow the twin ‘monsters’ of sedition and rebellion to be unleashed in a kingdom.

Beza’s chief contribution to sixteenth-century resistance theory was his systematic defense of the role of ‘lesser magistrates.’ These magistrates of the kingdom—including nobles such as dukes, counts, and barons, as well as city officers such as mayors, consuls, syndics, and aldermen—received their authority from the people, not from the king, and were under obligation to protect the public welfare. Read more»

Scott M. Manetsch | Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace in France, 1572–1598 (2000), 68.

RESOURCES

• Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
• The Heidelblog Resource Page
• Heidelmedia Resources
• The Ecumenical Creeds
• The Reformed Confessions
• The Heidelberg Catechism
• Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
• Why I Am A Christian
• What Must A Christian Believe?
• Heidelblog Contributors
• Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to

Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

Post authored by:

• Heidelblog

  

  The Heidelblog has been in publication since 2007. It is devoted to recovering the Reformed confession and to helping others discover Reformed theology, piety, and practice.

  More by Heidelblog ›