Occasion. The twenty-fifth and last of the twenty-five Public Disputations printed in the Opera and in Nichols's English, defended under Arminius by the respondent whom Nichols prints as John Le Chantre. It follows the disputation on the Invocation of Saints, and is Syntagma XLVII, the last of the fourth cycle.
The doctrinal move. The first thesis distinguishes the word "magistracy" in the abstract, as the power and function itself, from the concrete sense of the person who administers it, and says the abstract is treated first because it lays down the law to the concrete (I). The second defines magistracy as a pre-eminent and administrative power, instituted and preserved by God so that men may lead a quiet and peaceable life in godliness and honesty, and announces that the definition will be explained by its object, its efficient cause and end, and its matter and form (II). Theses III to VII take these in turn: the object, which is the multitude of mankind living in society, and for whose benefit the power exists (III); God as efficient cause, through his power, his will (four kinds of love) and his capability (IV); the end, which is both an animal and a spiritual good, so that the two may not be divided (V); the matter, three classes of acts, namely legislation, the appointing and oversight of delegated duties, and the removal or warding off of evils, even by war (VI); and the form, the power itself, subject to God alone, with authority to require tribute and other burdens (VII). The eighth thesis holds that this power would have had a place even before sin, had a large number of men been propagated (VIII), and the ninth that it is the same power whatever the number of its holders or the manner of its conferral, unless a limitation has been added, which binds both parties (IX). The next three set out its limits. The Prince is less than the state, whose good is to be preferred even at the cost of his life, while every member is bound to defend him in a lawful manner (X). He may not enact laws contrary to God's laws, and the people must obey God in preference, but subject to two cautions (XI). Nor may he neglect the essential functions at will, subject to a two-fold distinction (XII). The last two theses conclude that a Christian can with a good conscience hold the office, and that a legitimate magistracy exists also among non-Christian nations (XIII), and that every soul, lay or clerical, up to the Roman Pontiff, is subject to it by divine right, the Prince himself being unable to grant immunity from such obedience (XIV).