“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.”
Ps. 119:105
“Ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.”
Matt 23:23
.
.
Subsections
Expositions of 10 Commandments
Expositions of Beatitudes Mt. 5
Reformed vs. Aquinas
Bioethics
.
.
Order of Contents
Articles 8+
Books 40+
Quotes 3
Dictionaries
How Obligations derive from Existence 4
Commentaries on Aristotle & Seneca 3
Human Affections 2
Moral Dilemmas
History
. Surveys
. Reformed History
. Individuals
Bibliography 1
Latin
. Disputations 14+
. Books 44+
. Commentaries on Aristotle
Rule to All Actions
Elicited vs. Commanded Acts
Some Ethical Duties are Stronger than Others
Different Degrees of Moral Necessity
Distinguishing Ends
What if a Superior Commands Something Not Right
Lesser Evil may Not be Done to Avoid Greater Evil
Greater Good
Benefit vs. Inconvenience
Avoiding the Greater Evil 6+
Human Will as the Source of Evil
Love of God, Self & Neighbor
Christian Hedonism
Moderation
.
.
Articles
1500’s
Vermigli, Peter Martyr – The Common Places… (d. 1562; London: Henrie Denham et al., 1583)
pt. 1
1. ‘Of the Ends of Good & Evil among the Christians’ 1-10
14. ‘Of Felicity in General and of the chiefest good, out of the commentaries upon Aristotle’s Ethics’ 132
‘Of Pleasure, and wherein it may concur with the chiefest good’ 134
‘Of Honor’ 141
‘Of Riches, beauty, nobility and such like’ 145
‘Of Contemplation’ 149
‘That Virtue is not the chief good’ 176
‘The Causes of Felicity’ 154
15. ‘Whether any man can be counted happy while he lives here’ 158
pt. 2
‘The Sixth Precept’
‘Of Shamefastness’ 411
‘Of Temperance’ 412
‘Of Mercy, & the Affect called ‘Nemesis’’ 412
‘Of Cruelty’ 414
‘Of Envy’ 416
‘Of Emulation’ 417
‘Of Revenge’ 417
‘The Eight Precept’
‘Of Gentleness & Affability’ 528
pt. 3, ch. 12, ‘Of Liberality & Magnificence’ 269
‘Of Fortitude, Mortification, Enduring the Cross & Affliction’ 270-87
Du Moulin, Pierre – ‘Ethical Theses on the Blessed Life & Virtue’ trans. David S. Sytsma (Leiden, 1594)
Du Moulin was a French reformed minister.
.
1600’s
Laurent, Gaspard – ‘Theses from Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics on the Supreme End of Humanity’ tr. David Sytsma (Geneva: Stoer, 1600; 2021)
Sytsma: “Laurent (1556-1636) was professor of Greek at Geneva from 1597. According to the 1559 statutes of the Academy, the Greek professor was tasked with explaining a philosophical book on ethics—“a book of Aristotle or Plato or Plutarch or of some Christian philosopher”. Laurent produced a number of ethical disputations, and among the first is the work translated here. This disputation consists largely in an exposition of Aristotle on happiness from books I and X of Nicomachean Ethics.”
Perkins, William
How to Live, & that Well in all Estates Times, Specially when Helps & Comforts Fail (Cambridge, 1601)
Ε’ΠΙΕΙ’ΚΕΙΑ, or a Treatise of Christian Equity & Moderation. Delivered Publicly in Lectures (Cambridge, 1604)
The Whole Treatise of the Cases of Conscience… (Cambridge: Legat, 1606), bk. 3
Ch. 1, Of the Nature & Differences of Virtue
Ch. 2, Prudence
Question 1, How a man should practice Prudence or Wisdom?
Question 2, Whether a man may lawfully and with good conscience, use Policy in the affairs of this life?
Ch. 3, Clemency
Question 1, How may a man carry himself in respect of injuries and offences done unto him?
Question 2, When Anger is a virtue, and so good and lawful, and when it is a vice, and consequently evil and unlawful?
Sect. 1, When anger is a virtue and lawful
Sect. 2, When anger is a vice and unlawful
Question 3, What is the Remedy of unjust Anger?
Sect. 1, Meditation
Sect. 2, Remedies in Practice
Ch. 4, Temperance
Section 1
Question 1, How far a man may with good conscience proceed in the desiring and seeking of riches?
Question 2, How a man may with good conscience possess and use riches
Section 2
Question 1, Whether there be any difference in the use of Meats and Drinks now in the times of the New Testament?
Question 2, How we may rightly use meats and drinks in such sort as our eating may be to God’s glory and our own comfort?
Sect. 1, Before our eating
Sect. 2, While in using them
Sect. 3, Afterwards
Section 3
Question 1, Whether ornaments of gold, silver, precious stones, silks and velvets, etc. may not lawfully be used?
Question 2, What is the right, lawful, and holy use of apparel
Sect. 1, In the right Preparation of our apparel, two Rules are propounded in Scripture for our direction
Sect. 2, The wearing and putting of it on
Section 4
Question 1, Whether Recreation be lawful for a Christian man?
Question 2, What kinds of recreations and sports, are lawful and convenient, and what be unlawful and inconvenient?
Question 3, How are we to use recreations?
Ch. 5, Of Liberality
Section 1
Question 1, Who or what persons must give Alms?
Question 2, To whom must alms be given?
Question 3, How much relief must every man give?
Question 4, How many ways is a man to give alms?
Question 5, How should alms be given that they may be good works and pleasing unto God?
Section 2, The Fruit of the Remedy [in giving Alms]: ‘And all things shall be clean unto you’
Ch. 6, Of Justice
Question 1, What is that judgement which men are to give, and hold, one to and of another?
Question 2, How one man should honor another?
Sect. 1, Honoring superiors
Sect. 2, Honoring Equals
Sect. 3, Honoring Inferiors
Sect. 4, Honoring Oneself
Pasor, Georg – ‘Christian Ethics, Collected from the Holy Writings’ tr. David Sytsma (Herborn, 1610; 2021) 15 pp.
Sytsma: “Pasor (1570-1637) began teaching at the [German reformed] Herborn Academy in 1597, and was successively professor of Hebrew at Herborn (1607-1626) and Greek at the University of Franeker (1626-1637). He is famous for his Lexicon Graeco-Latinum (Herborn, 1619), which remained in print for over 150 years. While at Herborn he produced the work translated here.
In this work, Pasor provides a sketch of Christian virtues and duties. The work is characterized both by voluminous biblical references and integration of philosophical virtues. This harmonization of biblical sources and philosophical virtues is seen not only in specific virtues such as justice, where Pasor approves the familiar Aristotelian division between distributive and commutative justice, but also on the title page itself, where Pasor states that James 1:22 agrees substantially with Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics 1.3.”
Coppen, Bartholomaeus – ‘Ethical Theses on Virtues in General, & on those Four Called Cardinal in Particular’ (Heidelberg, 1610)’ tr. David S. Sytsma (2021) 8 pp. parallel columns of Latin & English
Colonius, Daniel – ‘Ethical Propositions on Moral Virtue’ (Leiden, 1622) tr. David Sytsma 3 pp.
Abstract of Sytsma: “Daniel Colonius (1566-1635) is well known for his Analysis paraphrastica of Calvin’s Institutes (1636). He studied at Geneva with Theodore Beza and was a participant at the Synod of Dordt (1618-1619). This is an English translation of Daniel Colonius (praes.), Positiones ethicae de virtue morali [resp. Petrus Reghemoorterus] (Leiden: Isaac Elzevier, 1622). It is a short disputation representing an early seventeenth-century theologian’s view of ethics. Colonius is clearly favorable toward virtue ethics and Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics in particular.”
Ames, William – Book 2 of The Marrow of Sacred Divinity Buy (1623) This work has been reprinted.
Wolleb, Johannes – Book 2 of Abridgment of Christian Divinity Buy (1626)
This work has been translated in ‘Reformed Dogmatics: Seventeenth-Century Reformed Theology’, ed. John Beardslee.
Dalrymple of Stair, James – ‘Ethical Theses’ (Glasgow, 1646) tr. David Sytsma
Abstract of Sytsma: “James Dalrymple of Stair [1619-1695] is famous for his Institutions of the Law of Scotland (1681). This is a translation of his “Theses ethicae”, part of a larger set of philosophical theses in 1646. Dalrymple taught ethics and other philosophical disciplines at Glasgow from 1641 until 1648.”
Leigh, Edward – ‘Some Special Graces Deciphered’ in A System or Body of Divinity… (London, A.M., 1654), bk. 7, pp. 584-605
.
1800’s
Hodge, Charles – ‘The Theology of the Intellect & that of the Feelings’, originally published in the Princeton Review of Oct., 1850. It was subsequently published in Hodge’s Essays & Reviews (NY: Robert Carter, 1857). This was a review of an article by Edwards A. Park (a professor at Andover Theological Seminary) titled “The Theology of the Intellect & That of the Feelings”, 1850
.
2000’s
Fentiman, Travis – Theses on the Ethics of Civil Voting (RBO, 2024) 39 pp.
Who may a Christian morally vote for in civil elections? A booklet by a committee of the RPCNA, Christ Centered Voting (2019), maintains only a Christian “publicly committed to scriptural principles of civil government.” These 64 theses delineate the ethical foundation of voting and demonstrate that this restriction is contrary to Scripture and natural ethics. The theses defend the due extent of God-glorifying voting according to the will of God for the purpose of making further reformation in our land unto the standard held forth to us in Scripture and the glory of God.
.
.
Books
Ancient
Aristotle
For background, see Wikipedia. For a summary of Aristotle’s ethics, see ‘Aristotle’s Ethics’ at Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
For background, see Wikipedia. This work is considered to be the main source for Aristotle’s ethics.
.
Early Church
Augustine
Enchiridion: On Faith, Hope, and Love
This is in NPNF, vol. 3. Other ethical material follows in that volume.
Of the Morals of the Catholic Church
This was written against the Manichaeans. This work and the two below are in Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. 4, pp. 37-89 & 346-65.
Of the Morals of the Manichaeans
Concerning the Nature of Good, Against the Manichaeans
.
Medieval
Thomas – Part Two of Summa Theologica (HTML)
Thomas of Aquinas (d. 1274)
.
1500’s
Calvin, John – Of the Life or Conversation of a Christian man, a right godly treatise… (London, 1549) 160 pp.
de la Place, Pierre – The Right Use of Moral Philosophy in Sources in Early Modern Economics, Ethics, and Law Buy (d. 1572; CLP Academic, 2021) 136 pp.
“The early French reformer Pierre de la Place (ca. 1520-1572) is usually remembered more for his martyrdom than for his life or work. La Place was, however, a significant figure in the French reform movement who made contributions through both civil service and writing. Appearing here in English for the first time, his Du droict usage de la philosophie morale avec la doctrine chrestienne is an early Reformed introduction to moral philosophy. The work begins with praise for the science of ethics, turns to a discussion of the highest good, and then expounds topics such as the will, habit, and virtue.
Throughout the book La Place argues for a distinction between the disciplines of ethics and theology, and he illustrates how the confusion of these disciplines leads to error. Yet his overall purpose is to show how moral philosophy may be rightly related to theology for the benefit of civil society. Written by an often overlooked leader of the Huguenots, this work will be of interest to scholars and students of ethics, theology, and the history of the Reformation.
Case, John – A View of Moral Questions trans. Dana Sutton (1585)
Case (c.1540-1600) was a reformed (according to Svensson & Sytsma), Church of England writer on Aristotle.
Fulbecke, William – A Book of Christian Ethics or Moral Philosophy, Containing the True Difference and Opposition of the Two Incompatible Qualities, Virtue and Voluptuousness (London, 1587)
Fulbecke was a (1560-1603?) was an Anglican writer.
Taffin, Sr., Jean – The Amendment of Life, Comprised in Four Books (1594; London, 1595)
Taffin (1529-1602) was a Pietist born in modern day Belgium whose works had a great influence in the movement of reformed pietism. His, Of the Marks of the Children of God, has been translated and reprinted. Some scholars have seen him as the first promoter of the Dutch Further Reformation (Nadere Reformatie).
.
1600’s
Hall, Joseph
Characters of Virtues & Vices, in Two Books (London, 1608)
Bolton, Robert – A Discourse about the State of True Happiness, Delivered in Certain Sermons in Oxford… (London: 1611) 155 pp. EEBO
Burges, Cornelius – A Chain of Graces: Drawn out at length for Reformation of Manners. Or, A Brief Treatise of Virtue, Knowledge, Temperance, Patience, Godliness, brotherly-kindness, charity. So far forth as they are urged by the Apostle in 2 Pet. 1:5-7 (London: 1622)
Ames, William – Book 2 of The Marrow of Sacred Divinity Buy (1623)
Grotius, Hugo – The Rights of War & Peace, including the Law of Nature & of Nations… ed. A.C. Campbell (1625; Dunne, 1901)
Grotius (1583-1645) was a Dutch humanist, diplomat, lawyer, Arminian, Erastian and Latitudinarian theologian, and a jurist.
“Grotius’ concept of natural law had a strong impact on the philosophical and theological debates and political developments of the 17th and 18th centuries. Among those he influenced were Samuel Pufendorf and John Locke, and by way of these philosophers his thinking became part of the cultural background of the Glorious Revolution in England and the American Revolution… Both Biblical revelation and natural law originated in God and could therefore not contradict each other.” – Wikipedia
“Grotius has also contributed significantly to the evolution of the notion of rights. Before him, rights were above all perceived as attached to objects; after him, they are seen as belonging to persons, as the expression of an ability to act or as a means of realizing something.” – Wikipedia
“The great writers of all ages are cited [by Grotius] with a superfluous lavishness… as to give a historic catholicity to his doctrine by showing that the laws he is endeavoring to formulate have, in fact, been accepted in all times and by all men.” – Intro, p. 10
Ames, William – Technometry 1651 This has been translated from the Latin and reprinted.
Herle, Charles
Worldly Policy and Moral Prudence: The Vanity & Folly of the One, the Solidity and Usefulness of the Other: in a Moral Discourse (London: 1654)
Wisdom’s Tripos, or rather its Inscription, Detur Sapienti [May one be given to wisdom], in Three Treatises: I. Worldly Policy. II. Of Moral Prudence. III. Of Christian Wisdom. The Vanity of the First, the Usefulness of the Second, the Excellency of the Third. Ref (1655)
Ball, John – The Power of Godliness, both doctrinally & practically handled, wherein the nature, comprehensiveness, parts & properties of a godly life are discovered by Scripture-evidence, and authority… (d. 1640; London, 1657)
Burgersdijk, Francis – An Idea of Philosophy, both Moral & Natural [only Moral here], or, a Concise Epitome of both, excerpted from Aristotle & Methodically Arranged trans. AI by Josh Smith (Oxford: W.H., 1667) 123 pp. no ToC
ToC
1. Definition, Certainty, Student & Division of Moral Philosophy 2
2. Good in General 6
3. Opinions on Happiness 10
4. True Opinion on Happiness 15
5. Involuntary & Voluntary 20
6. Principles of Voluntary Actions 24
7. Affects in General 29
8. Affects in Particular 34
9. Pleasure & Pain 39
10. Intellectual Virtues, especially Prudence 45
11. Nature of Moral Virtue in General 50
12. Efficient Cause of Moral Virtue 56
13. Piety 61
14. Fortitude 65
15. Temperance 70
16. Liberality & Magnificence 74
17. Magnanimity & Modesty 79
18. Gentleness 83
19. Truthfulness 89
20. Courtesy & Urbanity 93
21. Universal Justice & Law 98
22. Particular Justice 105
23. Continence, Tolerance & Heroic Virtue 114
24. Friendship 119-23
Shelton, William – Moral Virtues Baptized Christian: Or the Necessity of Morality Among Christians (London, 1667) 185 pp.
Shelton (d. 1699) was a reformed Anglican.
More, Henry – An Account of Virtue, or, Dr. Henry More’s Abridgment of Morals IA (London: 1690/1701) This is a translation of More’s, Enchiridion Ethicum (1668)
More (1614-1687) was an Arminian, Latitudinarian Anglican clergyman and a philosopher of (what was later called) the Cambridge Platonist school.
Pufendorf, Samuel – Of the Law of Nature & Nations, 8 Books (1672; London, 1729)
Pufendorf (1632-1694) was a German jurist, political philosopher, economist and historian.
“Among his achievements are his commentaries and revisions of the natural law theories of Thomas Hobbes and Hugo Grotius. His political concepts are part of the cultural background of the American Revolution. Pufendorf is seen as an important precursor of Enlightenment in Germany. He was involved in constant quarrels with clerical circles and frequently had to defend himself against accusations of heresy, despite holding largely traditional Christian views on matters of dogma and doctrine…
John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Denis Diderot all recommended Pufendorf’s inclusion in law curricula, and he greatly influenced Blackstone and Montesquieu…
Pufendorf and Leibniz shared many theological views, but differed in their philosophical foundation, with Pufendorf leaning toward Biblical fundamentalism.” – Wikipedia
Pufendorf was Erastian in his understanding of the Church.
Ferguson, Robert – A Sober Inquiry into the Nature, Measure & Principle of Moral Virtue, its Distinction from Gospel-Holiness… (London, 1673)
Ferguson (c.1637-1714) was a Church of Scotland minister and Anglican clergyman who was ejected in the Great Ejection of 1662. He was also a political pamphleteer and conspirator, known as “the Plotter”.
Baxter, Richard – A Christian Directory: a Sum of Practical Theology and Cases of Conscience, vols. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Buy (1673) See the table of contents.
This work, with his Latin work, Method of Christian Theology, was intended to comprise a whole body of divinity (the theological in Latin and the practical in English). This work includes four parts: (1) Christian Ethics (Private Duties), (2) Christian Economics (Family Duties), (3) Christian Ecclesiastics (Church Duties), and (4) Christian Politics (Corporate/Civic Duties). These volumes do not contain Baxter’s errors on justification found in other works of his.
“The most outstanding pastor, evangelist and writer on practical and devotional themes that Puritanism produced.” – J.I. Packer
Traherne, Thomas – Christian Ethics, or, Divine Morality, Opening the Way to Blessedness by the rules of Virtue & Reason (London: 1675) ToC
Traherne (c.1637-1674) was an Anglican clergyman, religious writer and poet.
Rachel, Samuel – Dissertations on the Law of Nature and of Nations trans. John Bate (1676; Washington D.C., 1916)
Rachel (1628-1691) was a German professor of ethics and of natural and international law.
“…Samuel von Pufendorf denied the existence of a positive jus gentium (Law of Nations), distinct from the jus naturale [natural law]. He maintained therein that States were universally subject to the Law of Nature only; in addition there were, of course, rights based upon treaties, and also customs observed between civilized States, but (said he) these treaty rights were valid only between the States that had concluded the treaty, and a State might at any time renounce these customs; such conduct would admittedly expose the State to evils–such as reprisals and censure–but Pufendorf does not seem to attach great importance to these evils, and… they at different times have failed to deter governments and generals…
Accordingly, to attack this doctrine, which favored arbitrariness and based the Law of Nations solely upon the principles of Natural Law established by a priori reasoning, and at the same time to show that by the side of the jus naturae there also exists a positive Law of Nations–this was a signal service. It was left to Rachel to render that service.” – Intro, pp. 7a-8a
For how Rachel’s theory of the Law of Nations differed from that of Grotius, see the Intro, p. 11a.
Scott, John – The Christian Life, from its Beginning to its Consummation in Glory: together with the several means and instruments of Christianity conducing thereunto: with directions for private devotion and forms of prayer fitted to the several states of Christians (London, 1681)
Scott (1639-1695) was an English clergyman, known as a devotional writer and as a defender of Anglican orthodoxy in his preaching.
Allestree, Richard – The Whole Duty of Man, Laid Down in a Plain and Familiar Way for the Use of All, but especially the Meanest [Lowliest] Reader… (rep. London, 1841) Table of Contents
Allestree (c.1621-1681) was a royalist Anglican (not necessarily reformed), and a professor of divinity at Oxford.
Kettlewell, John – Of Christian Prudence, Or Religious Wisdom, Not Degenerating Into Irreligious Craftiness in Trying Times (London: 1691) 290 pp. ToC
Kettlewell (1653-1695) was an Anglican clergyman, non-juror and devotional writer.
Abbadie, Jacques – The Art of Knowing Oneself, or, An Inquiry into the Sources of Morality (London, 1695)
Abbadie (c.1654-1727) was a French Protestant minister and writer. He became Dean of Killaloe, in Ireland.
Morton, Charles – A System of Ethics. Of Moral Philosophy in General & in Special. (d. 1698; 1708) a manuscript, transcribed by Ebenezer Williams, at Harvard University Library, 8707.394
Morton (bap.1627-1698) was a Cornish (Celtic) nonconformist, puritan minister and founder of an early dissenting academy, later in life associated in New England with Harvard College. Morton was raised with strong Puritan influences in England and attended Oxford (1649-1652). As a result of the English Revolution, he was arrested and excommunicated for promoting progressive education (he was the teacher of Daniel Defoe), forcing his immigration to relative safety in Massachusetts Bay Colony (1685-1686), although he was soon arrested for sedition (and then acquitted) in Boston.
His system of vernacular teaching at Harvard was basically Scholastic/Aristotelian with modern flavors of John Wallis, Robert Hooke, Robert Boyle, and even René Descartes.
Bright, George – Christian Prudence, or, Directions for the Guidance and Conduct of ourselves, in the Case of Judging one another. Being Several Discourses on Mt. 7:1, ‘Judge not, that you be not judged’ (London: 1699)
Bright (d. 1696) was an Anglican.
.
1700’s
Vitringa, Campegius – The Spiritual Life trans. Charles K. Telfer (1716; RHB, 2018)
Vitringa, Sr. (1659-1722) was a professor in Franeker and a Hebraist.
“…Vitringa… maintained a fairly centrist Reformed position… Vitringa and De Moor serve as codifiers and bibliographers of the earlier tradition, the former from a federalist, the latter from a nonfederalist perspective.” – R. Muller
Pictet, Benedict – The Marrow of Christian Ethics tr. Michael Hunter Buy (d. 1724; Independent, 2024) 341 pp.
Pictet (1655-1724) was the Swiss professor of divinity in Geneva after Turretin. He was the last theology professor to hold the orthodox faith there as the Enlightenment was arising.
Butler (1692-1752) was a bishop in the Church of England, a theologian, apologist and a philosopher.
Cudworth, Ralph – A Treatise Concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality (London: 1731)
Cudworth (1617-1688) was a latitudinarian Anglican clergyman, Christian Hebraist, classicist, theologian and philosopher, and a leading figure among the Cambridge Platonists.
Edwards, Jonathan
Charity & its Fruits, or Christian Love as Manifested in the Heart & Life (1736; Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1874) 550 pp.
Two Dissertations: I. Concerning the End for which God Created the World; II. The Nature of True Virtue (d. 1758; Boston, 1765)
Grove, Henry – A System of Moral Philosophy… in Two Volumes, vol. 1, 2 (London, 1749)
Grove (1684-1738) was an English nonconformist minister, theologian, and dissenting tutor, who is classified by PRDL as reformed. For background to the work and a summary of the work itself, see Alan Sell, Philosophy, Dissent & Nonconformity, 1689-1920 (2004), pp. 61-67.
.
1800’s
Alexander, Archibald – Outlines of Moral Science 1852 284 pp.
A systematic treatment of the foundations of Morality.
Bavinck, Herman – Reformed Ethics, vol. 1 (Created, Fallen & Converted Humanity) (Baker, trans. 2019)
Dabney, Robert – The Practical Philosophy: being the Philosophy of the Feelings, of the Will & of the Conscience, with the Ascertainment of Particular Rights and Duties Buy 1897 365 pp. There is no table of contents, though there is an index at the beginning
This is Dabney’s systematic exposition of ethics.
.
2000’s
Holmes, Arthur – Ethics: Approaching Moral Decisions 2nd. ed. (IVP Academic, 2007) 155 pp. ToC
eds. Dorff, Elliot & Jonathan K. Crane – The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Ethics & Morality (Oxford Univ. Press, 2013) ToC
.
Quotes
Order of
Ames
Voet
Grisez & Boyle
.
1600’s
William Ames
Medulla theologica (Amsterdam: Janson, 1634), bk. 1, ch. 2, ‘On the Distribution of Theology’, section 6, pp. 4-5 trans. Charles Johnson This section has been omitted from most English translations (e.g. London, 1642).
“From the remains of these two parts (faith and observance), two theologies sprang forth among some philosophers: metaphysics, and ethics. For metaphysics is the faith of the Aristotelians, and ethics is their observance. Hence, both these disciplines present that which teaches the supreme good of man. This is known to all concerning ethics.
Moreover, concerning metaphysics, which they also call “theology,” this is what Suarez says, Disp. 1, Sect. 5, #43: “The blessedness of man consists in the most perfect act of metaphysics. It contemplates the supreme good and the last end of man simpliciter. Divine contemplation belongs to this science formally, or elicitively.” Therefore, when theology is rightly taught in these parts, their metaphysics and ethics disappears without hesitation, after brilliantly testifying to its distribution.”
.
Paul Voet
First Philosophy Reformed tr. Onku with AI (Utrecht: Johann Waesberg, 1657), ch. 2, sect. 2
“11… Thus vices are treated in ethics per accidens of the opposite; and in vain would one have [them] investigated [in] another discipline in which vices are treated per se, since they are intelligible only by reason of the opposites.”
.
1900’s
Germain Grisez & Joseph Boyle, Jr.
Life & Death with Liberty & Justice: a Contribution to the Euthanasia Debate (Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1979), ch. 11 Grisez and Boyle are Roman Catholic ethicists in the Thomist tradition.
“Thus, the basic requirement of morality is that one choose and act for some human goods, while at the same time one maintain one’s appreciation, openness, and respect for the goods one is not now acting for.
A strong basic requirement which would demand something more specific is impossible in view of the plurality and incommensurability of the goods, and the limitations of human powers and opportunities, which together make choice necessary…
Any sound teleological ethical theory must be consistent with the fact that not every choice is morally evil, yet every choice responds to the appeal of the human goods promised by one possible course of action and leaves unanswered the appeal of the equally basic and incommensurable goods promised by one or more alternatives. That each of these goods is to be realized and protected is a starting point for deliberation about possibilities which would bear upon it. Such a starting point is a principle for practical reasoning about what to choose and to do. Corresponding to the whole set of basic human goods is the whole set of principles of practical reasoning.
This whole set of principles directs that all the goods be realized and protected. But even bad acts depend upon and respond to some of these principles. Therefore, none of the principles of practical reasoning is a moral norm merely by being a practical principle. The underlying assumption that human life ought to be preserved and respected, for example, does not of itself dictate that no one ought ever to be killed.
The distinction between moral good and evil according to the theory we put forth is primarily a distinction between ways in which proposed courses of action are related to all of the principles of practical thinking. Some proposals are consistent with all of these principles, although they hold out the promise of participation in only some of the basic human goods toward which these principles direct human interest and action. Other proposals are consistent with some of the principles of practical thinking–those which direct action to the goods promised by these proposals–but inconsistent with at least one principle of practical thinking. Proposals of the former sort are morally good, while those of the latter sort are morally bad.
…
A morally evil proposed course or action is intelligible and interesting because of the good it promises. It can be adopted if one is prepared to regard the good with which it is inconsistent as a lesser godo than the good it promises. It is possible to regard one basic human good as a lesser good than another precisely because the goods are incommensurable, and so any of them can appear to be lesser goods if they are judged by a standard of goodness specified by another mode of goodness.
However, it also is unreasonable to regard any basic human good as a lesser good than another simply because the goods are incommensurable. If one cares about all of them precisely insofar as they are goods, not insofar as they are particular modes of goodness toward which one has a special bias, then one will never judge any human good by a standard specified by one or more other human goods.
One who is about to choose in a morally right way respects equally all of the basic goods and listens equally to all of the appealsthey make through the principles of practical thinking. Because of the incompatibility of practical alternatives–since one cannot do everything at once–choice is necessary. No single good, nothing promised by any one possible course of action, exhausts human possibilities and realizes the whole potentiality for human kind’s flourishing. But just as two propositions having no common terms cannot be inconsistent with each other, so a proposed course of action is consistent with those principles of practical thinking to which it is merely irrelevant.
Thus, one can choose one possibility which promises certain goods and is irrelevant to other goods promised by an alternative without violating the practical principle which directs action to these other goods. In this case one remains open to these other goods. One does not adopt a restrictive standard of goodness. One’s understanding of the various human goods, one’s appreciation of their special potential contribution to the flourishing of persons, remains the same after the choice as before.
One who is about to choose in a morally wrong way does not respect equally all of the basic human goods and does not listen equally to all of the appeals they make through the principles of practical thinking. The proposal which one is about to adopt involves detriment to some human good. One is tempted to accept this detriment for the sake of the realization of another good which will thereby become possible. Such a proposed course of action is responsive to at least one principle of practical thinking, and it might be merely irrelevant to–and thus consistent with–some others, but it is both relevant to and inconsistent with the principle which directs one to promote and respect that good to which the action will be detrimental. Yet the principle which is to be violated is as basic as the one on which the proposed course of action is based; the good which is to be realized is no more an aspect of the flourishing of persons than the one which is going to be harmed.
A person in adopting such a proposal cannot remain open to the good promised by morally acceptable alternatives, for this good is going to be violated. In choosing to accept this violation one implicitly adopts a restrictive standard of human goodness. The good which is violated is no longer considered equally basic and incommensurable with the good to which it is sacrificed. The good which is violated now becomes a ‘lesser good,’ and the good for which it is violated becomes a ‘greater good.’ The choice, which is partially irrational insofar as it conflicts with some principle of practical thinking, is rationalized by reducing to the extent necessary a basic human good from its status as an intrinsic component of human flourishing to the status of a mere means.
…
If I choose with the attitude that my choicesdefine and limit the good, I shall lack the detachment to appreciate the possibilities of others’ lives, which would complement my own by realizing the values that I cannot. Their good, which I do not choose, will become for me at best a nongood, something to which I shall remain indifferent.
Egoism can decrease only to the extent that I remain open to the embrace of all the goods, those as well as these, yours as well as mine. The attitude of immorality is an unreasonable attempt to reorganize the personal and interersonal universe, so that the center is not the whole range of possibilities in which humankind can share, but the goods I want and actually pursue through my actions. Instead of community immoral choices generate alienation. The conflict of competing immoralities is reflected by incompatible personal rationalizations and social ideologies, each of which seeks to remake the moral universe in accord with its own bias.
…
From a religious point of view any morally evil act, in which the good chosen is made more absolute than it is, will be an instance of implicit idolatry.
These goods each make their intrinsic and irreducible contribution to the flourishing of human persons. They do not transcend persons by subordinating their good to some higher, nonhuman purpose. The various goods only transcend persons as they are by drawing them toward what they are not yet but still can come to be by their creative efforts.
As we have pointed out, the fundamental moral requirement is that one respect and remain open to all of the basic goods. To respect a good is to treat it always as a good…
To diminish in no way the full scope of these basic principles is to maintain an indispensable condition for human flourishing, for it is to preserve the possibility of all actions which might promote this flourishing.
…
The ethical theory which we have articulated, no less than consequentialism, holds that morality is determined by reference to all of the intrinsic aspects of human flourishing.”
.
“In sum, we have articulated four forms of responsibility or modes of moral obligation by which the basic requirement of morality begins to take shape in specific moral judgments. The four are:
[1.] never to act directly against any basic human good,
[2.] to help others when possible,
[3.] to consider impartially actions which will affect others,
[4.] and to respect the rights of those to whom one has duties.
These four modes of obligation are normative principles for the more specific moral norms concerning various kinds of action.”
.
.
Dictionaries
Roberti, Francesco – Dictionary of Moral Theology (Newman Press, 1962) 1,418 pp. Romanist
Dictionary of Scripture & Ethics ed. Joel B. Green (Baker Academic, 2011) 910 pp. ToC Entries are topical in alphabetical order.
.
How Moral Obligations derive from what Exists
Order of
Articles 2
Quotes 2
.
Articles
1900’s
Grisez, Germain & Joseph Boyle, Jr. – Life & Death with Liberty & Justice: a Contribution to the Euthanasia Debate (Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1979), ch. 11 Grisez and Boyle are Roman Catholic ethicists in the Thomist tradition.
E. A Nonconsequentialist Theory: Human Goods 358-61
F. How Morality depends upon the Human Goods 361-68
G. How the Principle of Morality Shapes Obligations 368-72
.
2000’s
Feser, Edward – ch. 13, ‘Being, the Good & the Guise of the Good’ in Neo-Scholastic Essays (South Bend, IN: St. Augustine’s Press, 2015), pp. 297-320
Feser is a Roman Catholic professor of philosophy and an Analytical Thomist.
.
Quotes
Order of
Baxter
Feser
.
1600’s
Richard Baxter
The Unreasonableness of Infidelity (London: R.W., 1655), An Advertisement Explicatory, pp. x-xi. For the relations of positive laws added into this mix, see Baxter’s larger discussion.
“12. The whole law of nature, which was such to innocent man, did necessarily result from the nature of man, as related to God and his fellow-subjects, and as placed in the midst of such a world of objects; and so is legible in rerum natura [in the nature of things]…
13. There are some duties that are founded in the relation of our very rational nature to the holy, perfect nature of God… and some duties that are founded in the relation of our natures one to another, and some from the inseparable, innocent principle of self-love. All these have their necessary original with our natures, by resultancy therefrom…
14. There are some duties of the law of nature founded in natural, but mutable, accidents, relations, moods. These are indispensable duties, while these relations or other accidents remain, which are the foundation of them;”
.
2000’s
Edward Feser
Neo-Scholastic Essays (South Bend, IN: St. Augustine’s Press, 2015), ch. 16, ‘In Defense of the Perverted Faculty Argument’, pp. 383-87
“This example illustrates how an entity can count as an instance of a certain type of thing even if it fails perfectly to instantiate the essence of that type of thing; a badly drawn triangle is not a non-triangle, but rather a defective triangle. It illustrates at the same time how there can be a completely objective, factual standard of goodness and badness, better and worse. To be sure, the standard in question in this example is not a moral standard. But from an Aristotelian-Thomistic point of view, it illustrates a general notion of goodness of which moral goodness is a special case.
What is true of animals in general is true of human beings. Like the other, non-rational animals, we have various ends inherent in our nature, and these determine what is good for us. In particular, Aquinas tells us, “all those things to which man has a natural inclination, are naturally apprehended by reason as being good, and consequently as objects of pursuit, and their contraries as evil, and objects of avoidance” (Summa Theologiae I-II.94.2). It is crucial not to misunderstand the force of Aquinas’s expression “natural inclination” here. By “inclination” he does not necessarily mean something consciously desired, and by “natural” he doesn’t mean something merely psychologically deep-seated, or even, necessarily, something genetically determined. What he has in mind is rather the natural teleology of our capacities, their inherent “directedness” toward certain ends.
Of course, there is often a close correlation between what nature intends and what we desire… Desires are nature’s way of prodding us to do what is good for us, but like everything else in the natural order, they are subject to various imperfections and distortions…
…’Natural’ for the Aristotelian-Thomistic philosopher
does not mean merely “deeply ingrained,” “in accordance with the laws of physics,” “having a genetic basis,”… It has instead to do with the final causes inherent in a thing by virtue of its essence, and which it possesses
whether or not it ever realizes them or consciously wants to realize them. What is genuinely good for someone, accordingly, may in principle be something he or she does not consciously want, like children who refuse to eat their vegetables, or an addict convinced that it would be bad to stop taking drugs. For the “old” natural law theory, knowing what is truly good for us requires taking an external, objective, “third-person” point of view on our-
selves rather than a subjective “first-person” view; it is a matter of determining what fulfills our nature, not our contingent desires.
Aquinas identifies three general categories of goods inherent in our nature. First are those we share with all living things, such as the preservation of our existence. Second are those common to animals specifically, such as sexual intercourse and the child-rearing activities that naturally follow upon it. Third are those peculiar to us as rational animals, such as “to know the truth about God, and to live in society,” “to shun ignorance,” and “to avoid offending those among whom one has to live” (Summa Theologiae I-II.94.2). These goods are ordered in a hierarchy corresponding to the traditional Aristotelian hierarchy of living things (viz. the vegetative, sensory, and rational forms of life, respectively). The higher goods presuppose the lower ones; for example, one cannot pursue truth if one is not able to conserve oneself in existence. But the lower goods are subordinate to the higher ones in the sense that they exist for the sake of the higher ones. The point of fulfilling the vegetative and sensory aspects of our nature is, ultimately, to allow us to fulfill the defining rational aspect of our nature.
Now these various goods have moral significance for us because, unlike other animals, we are capable of intellectually grasping what is good and freely choosing whether or not to pursue it. And that brings us from “natural goodness” (as Foot calls it) to natural law. Aquinas famously held that the fundamental principle of natural law is that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided. All other precepts of the natural law are based upon this,” where the content of those precepts is determined by the goods falling under the three main categories just mentioned (Summa Theologiae I-II.94.2)…
Properly understood, however, Aquinas’s principle is not only not difficult to justify, but is so obviously correct that it might seem barely worth asserting. Aquinas is not saying that it is self-evident that we ought to be morally good. Rather, he is saying that it is self-evident that whenever we act we pursue something that we take to be good in some way and/or avoid what we take to be in some way evil or bad. And he is clearly right. Even someone who does what he believes to be morally bad does so only because he is seeking something he takes to be good in the sense of worth pursuing…
…For like every other natural phenomenon, practical reason has a natural end or goal toward which it is ordered, and that end or goal is just whatever it is the intellect perceives to be good or worth pursuing. Now given what has already been said, human beings, like everything else in nature, have various capacities and ends the fulfillment of which is good for them and the frustrating of which is bad, as a matter of objective fact. A rational intellect apprised of the facts will therefore perceive that it is good to realize these ends and bad to frustrate them.
It follows, then, that a rational person will pursue the realization of these ends and avoid their frustration. In short, practical reason is directed by nature toward the pursuit of what the intellect perceives to be good; what is in fact good is the realization of the various ends inherent in human nature; and thus a rational and correctly informed person will perceive this and, accordingly, direct his actions towards the realization or fulfillment of those ends. In this sense, good action is just that which is “in accord with reason” (Summa Theologiae I-II.21.1; cf. Summa Theologiae I-II.90.1), and the moral skeptic’s question “Why should I do what is good?” has an obvious
answer: Because to be rational just is (in part) to do what is good, to fulfill the ends set for us by nature. Natural law ethics as a body of substantive moral theory is the formulation of general moral principles on the basis of
an analysis of the various human capacities and ends and the systematic working out of their implications. So, to take just one example, when we consider that human beings have intellects and that the natural end or function of the intellect is to grasp the truth about things, it follows that it is good for us—it fulfills our nature—to pursue truth and avoid error…
…But that (2) ‘I do want what is good for me’ is something true of all of us by virtue of our nature as human beings, and is in any case self-evident, being just a variation on Aquinas’s fundamental principle of natural law. These premises yield the conclusion (3) I ought to pursue what realizes my natural ends and avoid what frustrates them… it cannot be otherwise given our nature. Not only the content of our moral obligations but their obligatory force are thus determined by natural teleology. As the Neo-Scholastic natural law theorist Michael Cronin (whose account of obligation has influenced my own presentation) writes, ‘In the fullest sense of the word, then, moral duty is natural. For not only are certain objects natural means to man’s final end, but our desire of that end is natural also, and, therefore, the necessity of the means is natural’…”
.
.
Commentaries on Aristotle 4
On the Topic Generally
Sytsma, David S. – ‘Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics & Protestantism’ (2021) 8 pp. Academia Letters, Article 1650
.
Quote
John Owen
Theologoumena Pantodapa, tr. Dr. David C. Noe
“To be precise, if we may consider frankly the actual system of virtue which Aristotle proposes, by which alone access to happiness is acquired, we will see that it is an arrogant supposition peddling the mere shadow of virtue, rather than that disposition of mind which comports with the human condition and its dependency on the most high God.”
.
Commentaries on Aristotle
Articles
Melanchthon, Philip – ‘Commentary on Aristotle’s Ethics, Book I’ (1546) in A Melanchthon Reader, trans. Ralph Keen (NY: Peter Lang, 1988), pp. 179-201
Walaeus, Antonius – Selections in Cambridge Translations of Renaissance Philosophical Texts, vol. 1, Moral Philosophy, ed. Jill Kraye (Cambridge: 1997), pp. 120-29
.
Commentary on Seneca
Book
1500’s
Calvin, John – Calvin’s Commentary on Seneca’s De Clementia, ed. & trans. Ford Lewis Battles & André Hugo (Brill, 1969)
.
.
On the Human Affections
Article
Sytsma, David – ‘The Logic of the Heart: Analyzing the Affections in Early Reformed Orthodoxy’ in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism (Brill, 2013), pp. 471-488
.
Book
Dabney, Robert L. –
.
.
On Moral Dilemmas
Historical Theology
On the Medieval Church
Dougherty, M.V. – Moral Dilemmas in Medieval Thought from Gratian to Aquinas Pre (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011) 226 pp. ToC
Here is a published review by Richard Cross.
.
.
Surveys of the History of Ethics in General 5
Books
1800’s
Sidgwick, Henry – Outlines of the History of Ethics for English Readers (London: Macmillan, 1886)
.
1900’s
Lecky, William – History of European Morals from Augustus to Charlemagne, vols. 1 (up to Constantine), 2 (Constantine ff.) 3rd ed. rev. (New York, 1917)
Lecky (1838-1903) was an Irish historian, essayist, and political theorist with Whig proclivities. His major work was an eight-volume History of England during the Eighteenth Century.
Brinton, Crane – A History of Western Morals (NY: Harcourt, 1959)
Schneewind, Jerome B. – The Invention of Autonomy: A History of Modern Moral Philosophy (NY: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998)
.
2000’s
Irwin, Terence – The Development of Ethics: A Historical and Critical Study, 3 vols. (Oxford: 2007-2009)
.
.
Surveys of the History of Christian & Reformed Ethics 5
Articles
1800’s
Bavinck, Herman – ‘Historical Overview of Christian Ethics’ in Reformed Ethics (Baker Academic, 2019), vol. 1, pp. 2-16
Geesink, Wilhelm – ‘The History of Reformed Ethics’ (1897) trans. Clarence Bouma in Selected Readings for Course in Reformed Ethics, ed. Clarence Bouma (Grand Rapids, 1941), pp. 226-56 This is a condensed translation of De Ethiek in de Gereformeerde Theologie.
.
1900’s
Sinnema, Donald – ‘The Discipline of Ethics in Early Reformed Orthodoxy’ Calvin Theological Journal 28 (1993), pp. 10-44
.
Books
1800’s
Wuttke, Adolf – Christian Ethics, vol. 1: History of Ethics trans. John P. Lacroix (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1873) ToC vol. 2 exposits his own system of ethics.
.
1900’s
Pinckaers, Servais – The Sources of Christian Ethics trans. Mary Thomas Noble 3rd ed. (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995)
.
.
On the Medieval Church
ed. Williams, Thomas – The Cambridge Companion to Medieval Ethics Pre (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2019) ToC
.
.
On Renaissance Moral Philosophy
Kraye, J. – ‘Moral philosophy’ in eds. C.B. Schmitt et al., The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1988), pp. 303–386
.
.
On the Reformed History of Ethics
Articles
Sebastian Rehnman – ‘Virtue & Grace’ Studies in Christian Ethics 25, no. 4 (2012), pp. 472-93 Abstract
Manfred Svensson – ‘Aristotelian Practical Philosophy from Melanchthon to Eisenhart: Protestant Commentaries on the Nicomachean Ethics 1529–1682′ Reformation & Renaissance Review 21, no. 3 (2019), pp. 218-38 Abstract
Sytsma, David
‘John Calvin & Virtue Ethics: Augustinian & Aristotelian Themes’ in Journal of Religious Ethics 48, no. 3 (2020): pp. 519-556 Also at Wiley Online Library
‘Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics & Protestantism’ in Academia Letters (2021)
Ballor, Jordan – ‘Reformed Virtue After Calvin’ (2020) 7 paragraphs, with a bibliography at the end
.
Book
Kirk M. Summers – Morality After Calvin: Theodore Beza’s Christian Censor & Reformed Ethics Pre (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016) Abstract & ToC
.
Historical Accounts of the Ethics of Individual Figures (Not Reformed)
On Aquinas
Feser, Edward – ch. 5, ‘Ethics’ in Aquinas: a Beginner’s Guide (OneWorld, 2010), pp. 148-62
.
.
Bibliography
Svensson, Manfred & David S. Sytsma – A Bibliography of Early Modern Protestant Ethics (ca. 1520-1750) 2020 75+ pp. Entries are in multiple languages.
.
.
Latin Disputations & Articles
1600’s
Verhel, Arnold – An Inaugural, Ethical Disputation on the Principles of Human Actions (Franeker, 1647)
Verhel (1580-1664) was a professor of philosophy at Franeker.
van Thiel, Cornelius – An Ethical Disputation on Religion (Harderwijk, 1657)
van Thiel (1626-1688) was a professor of practical philosophy, rhetoric and natural morality at Harderwijk.
Puerari, Daniel – Theses Logicae et Ethicae Ref ([Geneva] Gamonet, 1660)
Puerari (1621-1692) was a professor of philosophy at Geneva.
Voet, Gisbert – Select Theological Disputations (Utrecht, 1667), vol. 4, 50. ‘A Syllabus of Questions on the Whole Decalogue’
On civil morals 792
On prudence & imprudence 792
Of honor, dignity & nobility 793
On fortitude and its opposites: timidity & audacity 798
On temperance, continence and modesty 808
On envy, pride, arrogance, rash judgment, presumption and suspicion 822
On loquaciousness, or much-speaking 822
On keeping silent, governing the tongue and defense and vindication of a report 822
Currit, Jeremie – Ethical Theses Containing a Complete Diagramming of the Moral Virtues & Vices ([Bern] 1673)
Currit (1632-1700) was a professor of Greek, morals and theology at Lausanne, France.
Ott, Johann Rudolph
A Gleaning of Ethical and Political Questions (Zurich, 1681) 10 pp.
Philosophical Positions out of Christian Ethics (Zurich, 1682)
Christian Ethics According to the Precepts of the Decalogue, Arisen out of Public Disputations and Contracted into a Compendium (Zurich, 1692) 10 pp.
An Ethical Disputation on the Special Virtues of the 5th & 6th Precepts in the Decalogue (Zurich, 1691)
Ott (1642-1716) was a professor of ethics, history and philosophy at Zurich.
Schweling, Johann Eberhard
The Foundations [Praecognita] of Ethics (Bremen, 1692) 16 pp.
An Ethical Dissertation Agitated about Moral Principles, even the Greatest [Summo] Moral Good (Bremen, 1695) 22 pp.
An Ethical Tract on the Greatest [Summa] Moral Good (Bremen, 1692) 37 pp. This is different from the above.
Schweling (1645-1714) was a professor of physics, law and practical philosophy at Bremen.
Werenfels, Samuel – A Hurried Specimen of Moral Philosophy (Basil, 1693) 6 pp.
Werenfels (1657-1740) was a professor of theology at Basel and was a major figure in the move towards a “reasonable orthodoxy” in Swiss Reformed theology. He was one of the ‘Swiss Triumvirate’.
de Vries, Gerardus – An Ethical Determination on Moral Philosophy (Utrecht, 1697)
de Vries (1648-1705) was a professor of philosophy and theology at Utrecht.
.
1700’s
Lobe, Wilhelmus – An Inaugural Philosophical Disputation on the Vicious Morals (Utrecht, 1703)
Comrie, Alexander – An Inaugural Philosophical Dissertation on the Foundation of Morality and Natural Virtue (Leiden, 1734) 20 pp.
.
.
Latin Books
Medieval
Alcuin – A Book on Virtues & Vices to Widonem Comittem PL 101.613-38
Alcuin of York (c. 735 –804) was a leading English scholar at the Carolingian court, a clergyman, poet and teacher. He was “The most learned man anywhere to be found”, according to Einhard’s Life of Charlemagne; he is considered among the most important architects of the Carolingian Renaissance. Among his pupils were many of the dominant intellectuals of the Carolingian era.
Bartholomaeus – A Sum of Cases of Conscience See another edition
Bartholomaeus of San Concordio (c. 1260-1347) was an Italian Dominican canonist and man of letters.
Astesanus – A Sum of Cases of Conscience c. 1317
Astesanus of Asti (d. c. 1330) was an important Franciscan canon lawyer and theologian, from Asti in Piedmont, Italy.
Antoninus – Summa Theologica Moralis, 4 vols. (Venice: Nicolas Jenson, 1477-1490)
Anthony of Florence (1389–1459) was an Italian Dominican friar, who was an Archbishop of Florence. He is venerated as a saint by the Romanist Church. For background on this significant work, see The Summa Theologica of Antonino Pierozzi: A Book History.
.
1500’s
Melancthon, Philip
Ethics: Elements of Doctrine and Commentary in Five Books of Ethics, to which Questions are Added on Oaths, Excommunication and some other matters (Wittenberg, 1560)
An Ethical Enchiridion: A Compendium of Moral Precepts… to Three Categories of Life: Familial, Scholastic & Political… revised by Martin Heyneccius (Leipzig, 1594) Table of Contents
An Epitome of Moral Philosophy (1538) 167 pp.
Melancthon was the leading Lutheran after Luther.
Daneau, Lambert – Christian Ethics, in Three Books, in which the True Principles of Human Actions are agitated, and also with an explication of the Divine Law, or the Decalogue… (Geneva, 1579)
Strigel, Victor – An Epitome of the Moral Philosophy of Philip Melanchthon… (Harnisch, 1582)
Strigel (1524-1569) was a Philippist [Melanchthon] Lutheran Theologian and Protestant reformer. He accepted the reformed view of the Lord’s Supper around 1567, when he became a professor of ethics and history at Heidelberg.
Polanus a Polansdorf, Amandus
The Divisions of Theology Framed according to a Natural Orderly Method (Basil, 1590; Geneva, 1623) 344 pp. Tables etc. In English: Buy
Table of Contents
Book 2 Of Good Works
64. Of Good Works 256
65. Of things Disagreeing to, & the adjuncts of Good Works: of the Fear of God, of Subjection towards God, of Constancy, of Prudence & of Sanctified Zeal for the Glory of God 265
66. Of the Internal & External Worship of God, & of that which is contrary to it, where is of living faith & hope in God 267
67. Of the invocation of God, where is of prayer, the Lord’s Prayer, of fasting & of the oath 290
68. Of Thanksgiving, where is of the Confession of Truth 298
69. Of Ecclesiastical rites or ceremonies, where is of the pious vow, the sacrifices of the Old Testament; of sacred times, where is of the feasts of the Old & New Testament 299
70. Of virtue, where is of the Study of wisdom, fortitude, temperance, chastity, parsimony, thriftiness, of the study of true glory, the whole ring of virtues, righteousness 304
71. Of Economic Righteousness, where is of Marriage & Divorce 321
72. Of Public Righteousness, where is of the Political Laws, Peace & War
.
Vol. 2, Books 8-10 of A System of Theology (Hanau, 1609; 1615) Synopsis Index of Principal Questions Subj. Index Scrip. Index Index of Fathers & Writings
Book 8
Good Works
1 – The Definition and Name of Good Works, the worship of God, the definition and distribution of the obedience that God requires, and the definition of Christian duty and virtue in general 3589
2 – The Efficient Causes of Good Works 3602
3 – The Matter of Good Works 3619
4 – The Form of Good Works 3620
5 – The Final Cause of Good Works 3622
6 – The Effects of Good Works 3626
7 – The Subjects of Good Works 3629
8 – The Adjuncts of Good Works 3637
9 – Defections from Good Works 3659
Human Merit
10 – Human Merits 3667
11 – Good Works Compared 3686
12 – Good and Bad People 3687
Book 9
True Religion
1 – True Religion, or the Definition, Causes, Effects, Subjects and Adjuncts of Piety 3693
2 – Things that Oppose True Religion 3710
3 – False Religion, where it is, and of idolatry and religion compared in general 3718
4 – Irreligion, or Impiety, which is diametrically opposed to true religion and piety 3725
5 – The Comparison, Conjugates and Parts of True Religion, or Piety 3726
Christian Graces
6 – Saving Faith 3727
7 – The True Knowledge of God 3811
8 – Trust in God 3819
9 – Hope in God 3842
10 – Love for God 3851
11 – The Faithful Fear of God 3885
12 – Humility before the Presence of God 3891
13 – Patience 3895
14 – Religious Service 3899
15 – Religious Speech 3902
Of Prayer
16 – Religious Prayer 3905
17 – The Lord’s Prayer 3939
18 – Devout and Holy Fasting 3974
19 – Gestures of Divine Prayers 3980
20 – The Omission of Prayers to God 3983
21 – Idolatrous Prayer 3984
22 – Prayer to the True God, but which is empty 4030
Christian Responses and Encouragements
23 – The Oath 4032
24 – Thankful Actions towards God 4046
25 – The Vow 4055
26 – Zeal for the Glory of God 4059
27 – The True Reward of Heaven 4065
The Ceremonies of the Church
28 – The Honor of the Ecclesiastical Ministry 4072
29 – The Ceremonies of the Church in General 4075
30 – Sacrifices 4080
31 – Sacred Observances 4103
32 – The Use of the Language of the People is a Mark in the Sacred [Ministrations] 4106
33 – The Consecration of the Ministers of the Church 4127
34 – Sacred Places 4130
35 – Sacred Times 4143
36 – Sacred Alters and Tables 4153
37 – Sacred Containers and other Instruments 4160
38 – Sacred Garments 4164
Book 10
Moral Virtues
1 – Moral Virtue in General 4172
2 – Love towards one’s Neighbor in General 4180
3 – A Man’s Love towards Himself 4182
4 – Love towards People in General 4187
5 – Love towards Enemies 4192
6 – Merciful Compassion 4194
7 – Favor or Goodwill 4199
8 – Humanity 4205
9 – Courtesy 4208
10 – Hospitality 4209
11 – Friendship 4210
12 – The Brotherhood of Christians 4217
13 – Mourning for the Dead 4218
14 – Honorable Burial 4219
15 – The Vow for a Blessed Bodily Resurrection 4221
16 – Love towards the Posterity of the Dead 4223
17 – Honor given to Dead Saints 4224
18 – Our Love towards the Holy Angels 4230
19 – The Strength of the Soul 4232
20 – Temperance, in General 4247
21 – Sobriety 4250
22 – Vigilance 4255
23 – Purity and Chastity 4257
24 – Thriftiness 4262
25 – Modesty 4263
26 – Honesty 4265
27 – The Honest Desire of Furnishing a Thing 4266
28 – Self-Sufficiency 4270
29 – Love of Honor [including pride] 4274
30 – Generosity 4282
31 – Modesty 4285
32 – Graciousness 4290
33 – The Nemesis of what is Morally Praiseworthy 4291
34 – Gentleness 4294
35 – Indulgence 4369
36 – Liberality 4370
37 – Grandeur 4373
38 – The Study of Speech is Good and Wholesome 4375
39 – Truthfulness 4376
40 – Docility 4384
41 – Openness 4389
42 – Sincerity in Truth 4395
43 – Constancy in Truth 4397
44 – Affability and Geniality 4398
45 – Urbanity 4401
46 – Frankness 4403
47 – Gravity in the Sermon 4408
48 – Keeping Silent 4409
49 – Manners of Dignity and Courtesy 4412
50 – Righteousness in General 4414
51 – Industriousness 4417
52 – The Distribution of Justice in General 4419
Of Marriage
53 – Marriage 4420
54 – The Righteousness of Marriage Generally in itself 4437
55 – The Divorce of Married Ones 4440
56 – The Duty of the Husband and that which is particular to the wife 4443
Societal Virtues
57 – Economic Offices 4447
58 – The Offices of Lords and Servants 4449
59 – Faith in the Promises and Covenants 4451
60 – Observance 4454
61 – Gratitude 4454
The Civil Magistrate
62 – Honor due to the Magistrate 4461
63 – Commutative Justice 4472
64 – The Origin of the Justice, or the Obtaining of a Magistrate 4479
65 – The Princely Office, or of the Magistrate in Religion 4484
66 – The Righteous Prince, or the Garb of the Magistrate 4490
67 – The Righteous Prince, or the Militant Prince 4502
68 – Public Injustice 4514
Good Works in Heaven
69 – How far the Glorified will have good works after this life in Heaven 4517
.
Du Moulin, Pierre
‘Ethical Theses on the Blessed Life & Virtue’ tr. David Sytsma (Leiden: Raphelengius, 1594) 8 pp.
Sytsma: “Du Moulin (1568–1658) was a famous Huguenot minister. This is an ethical disputation over which Du Moulin presided during his early period at Leiden university. Du Moulin discusses the topics of happiness and virtue. The disputation is of interest since Du Moulin later produced successful systems of ethics in French and Latin: Les elements de la philosophie morale (Sedan, 1624); and Ethicorum seu doctrinae moralis libri undecim (Amsterdam, 1645).”
Philosophical Works: Logical, Physical, Ethical (Amsterdam, 1645)
Books 8 & 9, ‘Of the Soul in General’ & ‘Of the Rational Soul’ in Physics, or the Sciences of Nature, Book 9
Ethics, or the Doctrines of Morality in 11 Books
Taurellus, Nicolaus – Physical-Ethical Emblems [Pictures]… 2nd ed. (1595; Nuremberg, 1602) 315 pp.
.
1600’s
Scultetus, Abraham – Ethics in 2 Books… (Ursellis, 1603) 308 pp.
Scultetus (1566-1625) was a professor of Old Testament at Heidelberg and the court preacher for the Elector of the Palatinate, Frederick V.
Keckermann, Bartholomäus – A System of Ethics, in Three Furnished Books and Public Lectures given in the Gymnasium of Danzig (Hanau, 1607) Table of Contents
Gutberleth, Hendrik – Ethics, One Book, written with a succinct method, and illustrated with elegant sentences and brief histories (Herborne, 1612)
Gutberleth (1572-1635) was a professor of philosophy at Herborne and Deventer.
Aslaksson, Cort – The Second Book, on Christian Ethics, being taken up out of the Third Chapter of Genesis in The Mosaic Physics & Ethics, and that the Oldest, and thus Truly Christian, in Two Books (Hanau, 1613), pp. 449 ff.
Aslaksson (1564-1624) was a professor of Latin, Greek, Hebrew & theology at Copenhagen. He is listed by PRDL as being both Lutheran and Reformed, perhaps at different times.
Donaldson, Walter – Synopses of Moral Philosophy, in Three Books (Sedan, 1621) Table of Contents
Burnath, Gilbert – Ethical Dissertations, in which the Perfect and Solid Idea of Moral Philosophy is Exhibited in the Most Accurate Way (Leiden, 1649) ToC
Burnath (d. 1629) was a Scot teaching as a professor of philosophy in France, at the academy at Montauban.
Alsted, Johann Heinrich – The 21st Book of the Encyclopedia, Propounding Ethics in Vol. 4 of the Encyclopedia, in which is Practical Philosophy, 4 books are represented here: 1. Ethics, 2. Economics, 3. Politics, 4. Academics (1630) Extended ToC
Alsted (1588-1638)
Brief Table of Contents
Intro to Practical Philosophy 1218
An Enchiridion of Epictetus 1219
Ethics
1. Of Man
2. Of the Law of Nature
3. Of Conscience
4. Of the Chief End
5. Of Virtue
6. Of Human Actions
7. Of Spontaneity
8. Of Pre-Election
9. Of the Will
10. Of Things which are in our Power
11. Of the Affections
12. Of Fortitude
13. Of Temperance
14. Of Liberality
15. Of Magnificence
16. Of Honors
17. Of Mildness & Clemency
18. Of Courtesy & Affability
19. Of Veracity
20. Of Baffonery & Jocularity
21. Of Reservedness
22. Of Justice
23. Of Friendship
24. Of Continency
25. Of Tolerance
26. Of Heroic Virtues
27. Of Prudence
28. Of the Occupied Life
Economics
1. Of Social Life
2. Of the Home & Marriage
3. Of the Common Duties of a Husband & Wife
4. The Duty of a Husband to a Wife
5. The Duty of a Wife to her Husband
6. Of Deserting a Wife
7. Of Deserting a Husband
8. Of Slavery
9. Of the Nobility
10. Of Fiefdoms
11. Of the Duty of a Lord to a Servant
12. The Duties of a Servant to a Lord
13. Of the Duty of Parents to Children
14. Of the Duty of Children to Parents
15.
…
Benningh, Johan Bodecher – A Compendium of Ethics, in which Moral Philosophy is clearly propounded by Ten Disputations (Leiden, 1635) 103 pp. ToC
Walaeus, Antonius – A Compendium of Aristotle’s Ethics, Called Back to the Rule of Christian Truth in vol. 2, pp. 257-298 in All the Works (Includes vols. 1 & 2, Leiden, 1643) Table of Contents
Walaeus (1573-1639)
Sinapius, Daniel – Dissertations on Ethics (Leiden, 1645) Table of contents
Sinapius (1589-1638) was a professor of philosophy at Leiden.
Burgersdijck, Franco – The Idea of Familial & Political Doctrine (Leiden, 1649) 129 pp.
Heereboord, Adrian
A Collection of Ethics, in which the whole of Moral Philosophy is explicated by some perspicuous and brief disputations (Leiden, 1649) no ToC
Heereboord (1614-1661) was a professor of philosophy at Leiden.
Natural, Moral & Rational Philosophy (Leiden, 1654) 225 pp.
Ames, William – Philosophical Things (Amsterdam, 1651) Table of Contents This has been translated into English with the title, Technometry.
Wendelin, Marcus Friedrich – Moral Philosophy (Harderwijk, Netherlands: 1654) Extended Table of Contents
Isendoorn, Gisbert ab – Peripatetic Ethics, in Two Books Given through Succinct Tables and Questions, plus 200 Remains out of Various Authors (Harderwijk, Netherlands: 1659)
Isendoorn (1601-1657) was a professor of philosophy at Deventer and Harderwijk.
Berckringer, Daniel
Institutions Ethical, Economic & Political, or of Mores, the Family & the Republic (Utrecht, 1663) 233 pp.
Institutions & Exercitations on Ethics: Academic, Peripatetic, Stoic & of the Scholastics, bk. 1 (of the Reign of the Blessed Life), bk. 2 (of the Reign of the Upright Life), section 1, sections 2 & 3 (Utrecht, 1668) Table of Contents bks. 1 & 2
van Aelhuysen, Johannes – A Compendium of Ethics, Digested in 4 Books, being Published for the Use of his School ([Tiel], 1667) 54 pp. ToC
Table of Contents
Bk. 1, of the Chief Good
1. Of the Definition of Ethics 1
2. Of the Distribution of Ethics 2
3. Of Good in General 2
4. What is Not the Chief Good 4
5. What & How Many is the Chief Good 4
Bk. 2, of Virtue in General
1. Of the Efficient Cause of Virtue 6
2. Of the Form of Virtue 8
3. Of the Subject of Virtue & thus of the Passions 10
4. Of the Principles of Human Actions 12
5. Of Sponaneity & Unwillingness 18
6. Of the Adjunct of Virtue & thus of Friendship 17
Bk. 3, Of Intellectual Virtue
1. Of the Distribution of Virtue 22
2. Of Speculative, Intellectual Virtue 22
3. Of Practical Intellectual Virtue & thus of Art 23
4. Of Prudence 24
Bk. 4, Of Moral Virtue
1. Of Fortitude 25
2. Of Temperance 30
3. Of Liberality 32
4. Of Magnificence 35
5. Of Modesty 37
6. Of Magnanimity 38
7. Of Justice 41
8. Of Mildness 46
9. Of Affability 49
10. Of Baffonery 50
11. Of Veracity 52
Köhnen, Franciscus – A Dozen Chapters & Aphorisms Together, in which is Briefly and Succinctly Exhibited a Synoptic Teaching of Moral & Civil Philosophy: Ethical, Familial & Political (Bremen, 1670) Click on ‘Inhalt’ for the table of contents
Kohnen (1626-1689) was a professor of theology and moral and civil philosophy at Bremen.
Geulincx, Arnold – Know Thyself, or Ethics (1675; Amsterdam, 1696) ToC
Geulincx (1624-1669) was a professor of philosophy at Leiden. It appears from another book title of his that he had a positive disposition for Cartesian philosophy.
Strimesius, Samuel – Moral Beginnings, or Some Select Dissertations, Embracing the True Fundamentals of Morals… (Frankfurt, 1679) Table of contents
Strimesius (1648-1730) was a professor of philosophy, physics and theology at Frankfurt.
Constant, David – A System of Ethical Theology in 25 Disputations in the Academy of Lausanne (Lausanne, 1695) Table of Contents
Rodolph, Johann Rudolph – Ethics, Comprehended in Two Books… (Amsterdam, 1696) 367 pp. ToC
Rodolph (1646-1718) was a professor of ethics, Hebrew, catechesis and theology at Bern.
Heidegger, Johann Heinrich – Christian Ethics, the First Elements: clearly and perspicuously demonstrated out of sane reason and the Sacred Scriptures… (Frankfurt & Leipzig, 1711) The table of contents can be viewed by clicking on ‘Inhalt’.
Heidegger (1633-1698)
.
1700’s
van Mastricht, Petrus – Prologue & The Idea of Moral Theology in Theoretical and Practical Theology (Utrecht, 1724), pp. 1202-1325
van Mastricht (1630-1706). This article contains a bio of van Mastricht.
.
Table of Contents
The Idea of Moral Theology
Book 1, of the Observance of Faith in General
1. Of the Obedience of Faith, & Obedience 1203
2. Of the Study & the Neglect of the Law 1203
3. Of the Keeping & the Neglect of Conscience 1204
4. Of Knowledge & Ignorance 1205
5. Of Humility & Pride before God 1205
6. Of the Fear & Scorn of God 1206
7. Of Zeal & Lukewarmness 1207
8. Of Sincerity & Hypocrisy 1208
9. Of Virtue & Vice [Vitio] 1209
10. Of Prudence & Imprudence 1210
11. Of Vigilance & Somnolescence 1211
12. Of Fortitude & Infirmity 1212
13. Of Confidence & Timidity 1213
14. Of Constancy & Levity 1214
15. Of Patience & Impatience 1215
16. Of Temperance & Intemperance 1216
17. Of Good & Bad Action 1217
Book 2, of Religion
1. Of Piety & Impiety 1219
2. Of Faith & Unbelief 1221
3. Of the Profession of, & the Denying of the Faith 1222
4. Of Hope & Desperation 1223
5. Of the Love & Hatred of God 1224
6. Of the Hearing of, & the Neglect of the Word of God 1226
7. Of the Exercise & Neglect of Prayer 1228
8. Of the Confession & Suppression of Sins 1230
9. Of the Use & Abuse of Vows 1232
10. Of an Oath & Perjury 1235
11. Of Communion with God & Alienation from Him 1236
12. Of the Institution of Worship, & of Superstition 1238
13. Of the Sanctification & Profanation of the Sabbath 1240
Book 3, of Righteousness & Injury to our Neighbor
1. Of Righteousness to our Neighbor in General, & of Injury 1243
2. Of Love & Ill-will to our Neighbor 1245
3. Of Honor & the Vilification of our Neighbor 1247
4. Of Humanity & Homicide 1249
5. Of Chastity & Luxury 1251
6. Of Commutative Justice & Theft 1253
7. Of Veracity & a Lie 1255
8. Of Contention & Concupiscence 1257
.
A Picture of the Theology of Asceticism,
of the Exercise of Piety
Book 1, of the Practice of Piety in General
1. Of the Nature of the Practice of Piety & Incompetent Spirituality 1260
2. Of Progress in the Practice of Piety, & of Sufficiency 1261
3. Of the Practice of Impiety & its Refusal 1263
Book 2, of the Practice of Piety towards God
1. Of the Knowledge & Rejection of God 1264
2. Of Seeking & Fleeing God 1265
3. Of being Pleased & Displeased with God 1266
4. Of Walking with & Straying from God 1268
5. Of Benevolence & Malevolence to God 1271
6. Of the Private Worship of God in its Glory & Blasphemy 1272
7. Of the Public & Ecclesiastical Worship of God
8. Of Family Worship & its Neglect 1274
9. Of Daily Worship & its Neglect 1275
10. Of the Worship of God in Fasting 1277
11. Of Eucharistic Worship 1278
12. Of the Examination of Oneself & its Neglect 1279
Book 3, of the Practice of Piety towards one’s Neighbor
1. Of the Use & Abuse of Solitude 1281
2. Of Pious & Impious Familiar Intercourse with One’s Neighbor in General 1282
3. Of the Use & Abuse of Feasting 1285
4. Of Just & Unjust Commerce 1286
5. Of Intercourse with the Afflicted by Consolation, & its Neglect 1288
6. Of Reproof of a Fall, & Communion in its Sins 1290
7. Of Intercourse with the Good by Love & Friendship 1293
8. Of Intercourse with the Bad & the Hostile 1294
9. Of Intercourse Between Superiors, Inferiors & Equals 1296
Book 4, of the Practice of Piety towards Oneself
1. Of a Purposed Occupation & Leisure 1300
2. Of the Use & Abuse of Provisions 1302
3. Of the Use & Abuse of Clothing 1304
4. Of the Use & Abuse of Recreations 1305
5. Of the Use & Abuse of Prosperity 1307
6. Of the Use & Abuse of the World & Worldly Things 1308
7. Of the Variety of Human Things 1310
8. Of the Tolerance & Abuse of the Cross 1312
9. Of the Use & Abuse of Trial [or Temptation] 1314
10. Of the Cross of the Body, & its Relief 1317
11. Of the Confoundings & Melancholy of Terrors 1318
12. Of Blasphemous Suggestions 1319
13. Of Spiritual Desertions 1320
14. Of Various General Doubtings 1322
15. Of Offices of Piety about Death 1322
.
Pictet, Benedict – The Marrow of Christian Ethics (Geneva, 1712) 400 pp. See the more detailed table of contents.
Table of Contents
Book 1 – Of Ethics and Christian Duties in General 1
Book 2 – Of Virtues Towards God 27
Book 3 – Of the Virtues and Vices that are Visible to the Neighbor 116
Book 4 – Of the Christian Duties and Virtues Respecting Oneself 227
Book 5 – Of the Affections 273
Book 6 – Of Particular Christian Duties for each Calling and State 342
Ostervald, Jean Frederic – A Compendium of Christian Ethics (London, 1727) ToC
Ostervald (1663-1747) was a Protestant pastor in the reformed tradition (though influenced by the Enlightenment) from Neuchâtel (now in Switzerland). He was one of the ‘Swiss Triumvirate’.
Wyttenbach, Daniel – Moral Theology in A Compendium of Dogmatic and Moral Theology (Frankfurt, 1754), pp. 357-580 Table of Contents
Wyttenbach (1706-1779) was a professor at Bern and Marburg. He was influenced by the philosophical rationalism of Christian Wolff, though, by him “the orthodox reformed tradition was continued with little overt alteration of the doctrinal loci and their basic definitions.” – Richard Muller
Endemann, Samuel
Theological Institutes of Morality, vol. 1, 2 (Frankfurt, 1780)
Endemann was a professor of theology at Marburg and was influenced by the philosophical rationalism of Christian Wolff.
A Compendium of Moral Theology (1784) ToC
.
.
Latin: Commentaries on Aristotle
1500’s
Werdmuller, Otto – On the Dignified Use and Method of Moral Philosophy, as Written by Aristotle to his son Nichomachus (Basil, 1544)
Werdmuller (1511-1552)
Melancthon, Philip – A Commentary on the Ethics of Aristotle in 5 Books in Ethics: Elements of Doctrine and Commentary in Five Books of Ethics, to which Questions are Added on Oaths, Excommunication and some other matters (Wittenberg, 1560), pp. 183-254
Melancthon was a Lutheran.
Vermigli, Peter Martyr – Book 1, 2 & the Beginning of the Third in the Ethics of Aristotle to Nichomachus (Zurich, 1582)
.
1600’s
Aidy, Andrew – The Key of Moral Philosophy, or a Commentary on the Nichomachean Ethics of Aristotle (Oppenheim, 1614)
Aidius (d. 1630) was a reformed professor of philosophy at Danzig.
Willius, Balthasar
Ethical & Peripatetic Precepts, Produced out of Aristotle and the Best Old and New Writings, whatever they be, explained by perspicuous comments… (Bremen, 1630) 1,027 pp. being 16 disputations Table of contents
Ethical, Familial & Political Precepts Produced out of Aristotle and the Best Writings, whatsoever they be… (Bremen, 1638) 656 pp. Table of Contents This is different than the above.
Willius (1606-1656) was a professor of practical philosophy and theology at Bremen.
Walaeus, Antonius – A Compendium of Aristotle’s Ethics, Called Back to the Rule of Christian Truth in vol. 2, pp. 257-298 in All the Works (Includes vols. 1 & 2, Leiden, 1643) Table of Contents
Walaeus (1573-1639)
.
Principles & Rule for All Rational Actions
Quote
1600’s
English Presbyterians
Anonymous, English Presbytery, or an Account of the Main Opinions of those ministers and people in England who go under the name of Presbyterians… (London, 1680), p. 2
“…what is necessary to such actions, considered as human acts and common to them with all other human acts, ought to be left at liberty, or so commanded [for public worship] as they may be done without offence to the general rules of holy Writ, by which all human acts are to be guided, viz. so as God may be most glorified, others most edified, and least scandalized.”
.
On Elicited vs. Commanded Acts
Articles
De Moor, Bernardinus – section 5, ‘The Acts of Religion’ in Didactico-Elenctic Theology (Reformation to Reformation Translations, 2018), ch. 3, ‘Concerning Religion’, p. 55
Gillespie, George – Aaron’s Rod
Fentiman, Travis – Circa Sacra
.
.
That Some Ethical Duties have a Stronger Priority upon us, & Overrule Others
Bible Verse
Mt. 23:23
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.”
.
Quotes
1500’s
William Perkins
A Discourse of Conscience... (Cambridge, 1596), p. 16
“3rd Caution. One and the same commandment in some things binds the conscience more straitly, and in doing some other things less: Gal. 6:10, ‘Do good to all men, but specially them that be of the household of faith.’ Hence it arises that though all sins be mortal and deserve eternal death, yet all are not equal, but some more grievous than others.”
.
1600’s
Samuel Rutherford
The Divine Right of Church Government… (1646), Appendix, p. 82
“2nd Rule: If we compare a greater moral necessity with a less moral necessity, the less necessity must yield to the greater. [If] a necessity of mercy must yield to a necessity of sacrificing: If David then should not have eaten the showbread in his providential necessity of famine, [then] he should have been guilty both of [the] active scandalizing [of] the souls of others in killing himself, and should have killed himself; and the less moral necessity ceases and is no necessity when a greater moral necessity intervenes.”
.
Manton, Bates, Case, Baxter, Fairclough, et al.
The Judgment of Non-Conformists of the Interest of Reason in Matters of Religion in which it is Proved against Make-Baits that both Conformists & Non-Conformists, & All Parties of true Protestants are herein really agreed, though unskilful speakers differ in words (London: 1676), pp. 13-14 This was signed by 15 non-conformist English puritans.
“For we are all agreed that there are some parts of Scripture which contain more necessary doctrine than other parts, and some great duties of prime necessity which are the end of many lower duties, and consequently a rule to them as means and as subordinate; and actions otherwise good, become evil when they cross these great final regulating duties:
Such a canon [rule] is the interest of the new creature and unity therein, as to circumcision or uncircumcision, Gal. 5:6 and 6:15. And such a canon is the love, peace and concord of Christians, insomuch as they have attained, while they seek after more, Phil. 3:16; such a canon is edification (and order) as to several modes of worship, and ministerial acts and discipline, 1 Cor. 14:5;12:26; 2 Cor. 10:8 and 12:19 and 13:10; Eph. 4:16.
And the right ordering of a Christian conversation does much consist in discern∣ing by true reason when circumstantiated actions are subservient or cross to these final regulating (canonical) duties, that we may know whether pro hic et nunc [‘for here and now’], they are duties, or sins; Because affirmative precepts bind not, ad semper [‘to all times’] (though no sin must at any time be done); lesser duties when inconsistent with the greater (at that time) are no duties, but sins: and means are no means when they lose their tendency to the end or are against it.
So did Christ teach men to difference between tithing mint, anise and cumin, and the great things of the Law, and between the least and the great commandments; and to judge of observing the Sabbath rest and conversing with publicans and sinners by this rule, ‘I will have mercy and not sacrifice,’ Mt. 9:13 and 12:7. And to leave our gift at the altar and go first and be reconciled to our brother, and then come and offer our gift, Mt. 5. And to cast first the beam out of our own eyes before we take the mote out of our brother’s, Mt. 6.
Thus to try circumstantiated actions by their ends and greater canon-duties, and to try what accidents do preponderate for the time and place, is the great and hourly work of prudent reason, and of exceeding great use to our daily innocency and peace.”
.
On Different Degrees of Moral Necessity
Article
Rutherford, Samuel – Appendix, ‘An Introduction to Scandal’, Question 6, ‘A Further Consideration of Things Not Necessary, and How They be Scandalous Objects’ in The Divine Right of Church Government… (1646), pp. 61-93
.
.
On Distinguishing Ends of Actions
Barth, Paul – ‘Reformed Scholasticism: Distinguishing Ends’ (2017) 17 paragraphs
The main distinction Barth explains is that between the end of the work itself (finis operis), and the end of the working, or of the worker (finis operantis). Others distinctions are included as well.
.
.
What if a Superior Commands One to Do Something that is Not Right?
Samuel Rutherford
The Due Right of Presbyteries... (1644), Ch. 3, Section 3, Question 4, ‘Whether or no is there a necessity of the personal presence of the whole Church in all the acts of Church-censures?’, pp. 41-42
“1st Conclusion… 2. Because by the Law of charity, as they are brethren under one head Christ, they [laymen] are to warn and admonish their Rulers….
2nd. Conclusion. When the sentence of the judge is manifestly unjust, the executioners and lictors [those who execute judicial sentences] are not to execute it; for Doeg the Edomite sinned in killing the Lord’s priests at the command of Saul, and the footmen of Saul did religiously refuse that service, 1 Sam. 22:17. The soldiers who crucified Christ, not only as men, but as lictors, sinned against a principle of the Gospel which they were obliged to believe (Mary’s son is the true Messiah), nor are we to join with a Church excommunicating a man because he confessed Christ, Jn. 9[:22]; nor need we consent to these, that the senate of Venice is excommunicated by Paul the Fifth, anno 1607, and Henricus Borbonius, King of Navarre, by Sixtus V, and Elizabeth of England by Pius V, and Henry IV, by Gregory VII, or Hilderland and Martin Luther by Leo X, anno 1520; the Pope is not the Catholic Church, as many learned Papists, especially, the Parisian Theologues teach.
.
The Divine Right of Church Government... (1646), Appendix, p. 85-6
“But sure, all our jus and right… that captives and servants have to their masters and lords, is jus limitatum, a right ruled, limited, bounded by the Word of God; nor is the work they perform morally indifferent ([though] physically it is)…
But for no cause the most weighty can we choose either to shed innocent blood or to co-operate with the shedding of it, nor to co-operate with the works of darkness, for it is shameful that a servant may lawfully cooperate with and thrust his master in at a window to go to a whore; the jus or dominion of masters to command, and the right of servants to obey is only in the Lord.
…the one kind of action in itself is as indifferent and susceptible of moral lawfulness and unlawfulness as the other. And if the master do cooperate to commit harlotry in climbing in at a window to a whore, and to robbing, in digging through an innocent man’s house in the night, to kill the master of the house, and to steal his goods, then the servant that cooperates in these same physical actions, and also digs through the innocent man’s house and kills himself, is the harlot and the robber by cooperation and participation, no less than the master.
The naked relation of a captive and of a servant cannot make the captive and servant innocent and guiltless cooperators, for then to sin at the command of any conqueror and master, because I am in the condition of a captive and servant, were lawful, though God forbid and inhibit me to do what I do, by the command of my master and conqueror, for in so doing, Utor meo jure, I use my right as a servant. For God forbids me in what relation I be in, servant or captive, to sin at the command of any, or for declining any ill of punishment, though as weighty as the torment of hell, separated from sinful despairing and blaspheming of God.
Now to cooperate with that which I know to be a sin is to partake in other men’s sins, which is forbidden, as a sin, 1 Tim. 5:22; Eph. 5:11. But to run with the thief and to help an arch-robber, Prov. 1:13-14, is a consenting to his robbery and bloodshed.”
.
That a Lesser Moral Evil may Not be Done to Avoid a Greater Evil
Quotes
Order of
Gillespie
Rutherford
.
1600’s
George Gillespie
English Popish Ceremonies (1637), bk. 2, ch. 1, p. 10
“Divines hold absolutely that inter duo vel plura mala culpae [between two or more culpable evils] (such as things scandalous and inconvenient) nullum est eligendum [none are to be chosen]. (Alsted, Theol. Cas., ch. 12, p. 199) That though in evils of punishment we may choose a lesser to shun a greater, yet in evils of fault, election [choosing] has no place, neither may we do a lesser fault to shun a greater: nec ullum admittendum malum, ut eveniat aliquod bonum, sive per se sive per accidens. [Neither ought any evil to be accepted so that it may bring forth some good, either through it or by the occasion of it.] (Paraeus on Rom. 3:8)”
.
Samuel Rutherford
A Dispute Touching Scandal & Christian Liberty, p. 83 in The Divine Right of Church Government (1646)
“…yea there can be no sin eligible [chosen] by such and such a case [of necessary circumstance], as Lot sinned in exposing his daughters to the lust of men, to redeem abstinence from sodomy.
Hence it is clear: we may not do a less, nor counsel another to commit a less sin, to eschew a greater, as the Jesuits wickedly teach. So Tannerus, so Turrianus and others who make a scandalum permissum, a scandal that a Christian may hinder another to fall in, and yet he permits him to fall in it. But God has a prerogative to permit sinful scandals, men have no such power, when they are obliged to hinder it. The divinity of others seems better to me, who deny that the least venial [sin] should be committed to eschew a greater sin.”
.
On Doing the Greater Good when Possible
See also ‘Occasioning Passive Scandal may be Warranted & Justified by a Necessary or Higher Good’.
.
Order of
Bible Verses 35+
Articles 2
Quotes 3
.
Bible Verses
Old Testament
Gen. 13:9-11 (An example of not choosing the higher good):
“Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left. And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar. Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan;”
Gen. 50:20 “But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.”
1 Sam. 17:29-32 “And David said, ‘…Is there not a cause?’… David said to Saul, ‘Let no man’s heart fail because of him; thy servant will go and fight with this Philistine.'”
1 Chron. 22:5 “David said, ‘Solomon my son is young and tender, and the house that is to be builded for the Lord must be exceeding magnifical, of fame and of glory throughout all countries: I will therefore now make preparation for it.’ So David prepared abundantly before his death.”
2 Chron. 1:11-12
“And God said to Solomon, Because this was in thine heart, and thou hast not asked riches, wealth, or honour, nor the life of thine enemies, neither yet hast asked long life; but hast asked wisdom and knowledge for thyself, that thou mayest judge my people, over whom I have made thee king:
Wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee; and I will give thee riches, and wealth, and honour, such as none of the kings have had that have been before thee, neither shall there any after thee have the like.”
Ps. 37:16 “A little that a righteous man hath is better than the riches of many wicked.”
Ps. 69:30-31 “I will praise the name of God with a song, and will magnify him with thanksgiving. This also shall please the Lord better than an ox or bullock that hath horns and hoofs.”
Ps. 84:10 “For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.”
Ps. 118:8 “It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man.”
Ps. 119:98-100 “Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies… I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.”
Prov. 15:16-17 “Better is little with the fear of the Lord than great treasure and trouble therewith. Better is a dinner of herbs where love is, than a stalled ox and hatred therewith.”
Prov. 16:8 “Better is a little with righteousness than great revenues without right.”
Prov. 16:16 “How much better is it to get wisdom than gold! and to get understanding rather to be chosen than silver!”
Rov. 16:32 “Beter is he that is slow to anger is better than the mighty; and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city.
Prov. 27:5 “Open rebuke is better than secret love.”
Eccl. 4:9 “Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their labour.”
Eccl. 5:5 “Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.”
Eccl. 7:5 “It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise, than for a man to hear the song of fools.”
Song 1:2 “Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.”
Dan. 12:3 “And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.”
Hos. 2:7 “shall she say, ‘I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now.'”
Amos 5:14 “Seek good, and not evil, that ye may live: and so the Lord…”
.
New Testament
Mt. 12:11-13 “And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days. Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it forth; and it was restored whole, like as the other.”
Mt. 13:46 “Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.”
Mt. 18:8-9 “Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.”
Lk. 5:39 “No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.”
Lk. 10:42 “But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”
Acts 18:26 “And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.”
Acts 20:35 “remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how He said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.'”
Rom. 9:3 “For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:”
Rom. 9:21-23 “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,”
1 Cor. 7:9 “But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.”
1 Cor. 7:38 “So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better.”
Heb. 11:4 “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.”
Heb. 11:7 “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.”
Heb. 11:8 “By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed;”
Heb. 11:10 “For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.”
Heb. 11:16 “But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.”
Heb. 11:24-26 “By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter; Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.”
Heb. 11:32-35
“And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:
who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions. Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:”
.
Articles
2000’s
Germain Grisez & Joseph Boyle, Jr. – D. ‘Legitimate Uses of ‘Greater Good” in Life & Death with Liberty & Justice: a Contribution to the Euthanasia Debate (Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1979), ch. 11, pp. 355-58
Grisez and Boyle are Roman Catholic ethicists in the Thomist tradition. They argue, against Consequentialism (a form essentially of Utilitarianism, that measures all things by their consequences on pretense of the greater good) that there are different qualitative goods for humans that are incommensurable, that is, the various goods one ought to pursue (or evils to avoid) cannot be measured with the same scale of quantification.
For instance, in seeking out a bank by which to gain interest on one’s money, all other things being equal (or other moral factors being ignored), one might go with the best rate of return for the “higher good”. However if that bank has racist and dehumanizing practices, which one would be in some way contributing to, it is not so clear what the greater good would be, or that this can be measured in terms of dollars.
Fentiman, Travis – 8. ‘Contra-Acting & the Greater Good’ in ‘Using Contraceptives may be in Accord with Natural Law & Scripture: a Response to Feser’ (RBO, 2025)
.
Quotes
Order of
Baxter
Honyman
Fentiman
.
1600’s
Richard Baxter
Christian Concord, or the Agreement of the Associated Pastors & Churches of Worcestershire, with Richard Baxter’s Explication & Defence of it, & his Exhortation to Unity (London: A.M., 1653), ‘Objections Answered’
pp. 35-36
“The public welfare and unity of the churches is to be preferred before the pleasing, yea or edifying of any single member… Much more must the temporal commodity of single men give place to the churches’ welfare (which will not stand with disorder)… If you plead inconveniencies to them: Remember then it is no matter of conscience, but of worldly commodity: and may not I set the general good of the churches against any man’s commodity?”
.
pp. 83-84
“Also this power is given to certain ends: and if it be used against those ends, so that either the ends or that means must be forsaken, it is easy to see that it is means and not the ends. For the means are not always the same, God having [a] store [of means] if any one fail. Especially the means is of positive morality and the ends [are] of natural morality:
For when two duties come together, and both cannot be chosen, the choosing of the less (which must give place to the greater) is a sin: and positives are less (caeteris paribus [all things being equal]) than naturals: And the substantials of positives [are] more necessary than the circumstantials:”
.
The Cure of Church Divisions… (London, 1670), pt. 1, Direction 39, ‘Know which are the great duties of a Christian life, and wherein the nature of true Religion does consist; and then pretend not any lesser duty against those greater, though the least when it is indeed a duty, is not to be denied or neglected’, pp. 209-10
“Heaven-work and heart-work are the chiefest parts of Christian duty. Christ often gives us his summaries of the Law and inculcates his great Command; Jn. 13:35; Mt. 22:37-39; Lk. 10:27. And so does the apostle, Rom. 13:10; 1 Pet. 1:22; 1 Jn. 3:11, 14, 23 & 4:7, 11-12, 20; 2 Jn. 5. And the fruits of the Spirit are manifest, Gal. 5:22-23. James says that pure religion and undefiled before God, even the Father, is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in adversity and to keep ourselves unspotted of the world, James 1:27. Paul says, 1 Tim. 1:5, ‘The end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience and of faith unfeigned:’ And then adds, ‘From which some having swerved, have turned aside to vain janglings’—
In a word: The effectual belief of pardon and eternal glory given through Christ, and the love of God and man, with the denial of ourselves, and fleshly desires, and contempt of all things in the world, which are competitors with God and our salvation, with a humble patient enduring of all which must be suffered for these ends, is the nature and sum of the Christian religion.
Do nothing therefore as a duty which is a hinderance to any of this. Contentious preachings and factious sidings which weaken love are not of God. The servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle to all men, 2 Tim. 2:24…
It is one of the most important things in the world for the resolving of a thousand cases of conscience and the directing of a Christian life to know which duties are the greater and which are the lesser, and so which is to be preferred in competition; For that which is a duty at another time is a sin when it is done instead of a greater! as Christ has resolved in the case of the Sabbath. If good must be loved as good, then the greatest good must be most loved and sought. Sacrifice instead of mercy is a sin: Our gift must be left at the altar while we go to be reconciled to our brother. Mt. 5. Never hearken to those men who would set up their controverted duties or any positives and lesser things against the duties of nature itself or the great substantial parts of godliness.”
.
Andrew Honyman
The Seasonable Case of Submission to the Church-Government as now Re-established by Law, Briefly Stated and Determined by a Lover of the Peace of this Church & Kingdom (Edinburgh: Tyler, 1662), p. 27
“if the standing to it be found impeditive of a greater good, to which we are bound by a prior obligation, then the oath, being an obstacle of such a greater good, ceases to bind the swearer.”
.
2000’s
Travis Fentiman
“Editor’s Extended Introduction” in English Puritans, A Refutation of the Errors of Separatists (1604; RBO, 2025)
p. 14
“The errors and deficiencies one materially tolerates and accommodates for the time and circumstances under necessity, for the higher good in love, overlooking a multitude of sins (1 Pet. 4:8), without approving them, versus what one believes and the standard one seeks to reform unto, namely the spotless Word of God, are two different things which may consist with each other.”
.
p. 27
“[George] Gillespie nowhere in his tome speaks of or argues the “greater good”. He does address personal, “greater duties,” but this allows him to confine the issues to immediate circumstances. Yet the relevance of a larger view of the greater good and its affecting our ethical obligations (especially with inconvenient actions, but also regarding scandal) cannot be denied.”
.
p. 31
“In Acts 16:3, about Paul using his liberty to circumcise Timothy due to the onlooking Jews, the necessity for this material action (albeit understood religiously and falsely by others, as Paul knew it would so be misunderstood beforehand) was for the sake of not unduly scandalizing others, even unbelievers, for the greater well-being of the Church, avoiding its disturbance and for the flourishing of the Gospel. Note that Gal. 5:1 calls circumcision “a yoke of bondage” when it is imposed out of religious necessity, and yet Paul was willing to occasionally submit to it for the higher good when he would not submit to it out of formal principle or always (Gal. 2:5).”
.
p. 32
“Though the Old Testament rites after Christ’s death were called “the commandments and doctrines of men” (Col. 2:22), just as the sort that Jesus condemns in Mt. 15:2–9, yet Paul and the Christians did not put any opinion of holiness in these rites or opinion of necessity beyond their nature or what derived from the circumstances (though others did). Paul and the Christians used these material, inconvenient and scandalous (in some way) ceremonies in accord with nature’s light, Christian prudence and the Word’s general rules for the greater good: “Unto the pure all things are pure” (Tit. 1:15).”
.
pp. 48-49
“Things less than fully good, or impure, not inherently wrong, may in some circumstances, especially according to the degree of necessity, be personally, materially done, even in worship, public worship and Church government (though they occasion passive scandal in some), for the good in the things themselves and for attaining higher and weightier goods (in proportion to that degree), while seeking to avoid the greater hurt and scandal, without approving the impurities or what may be deficient in them.
…An easy way to see the truth of it is to consider the following example (which [George] Gillespie practiced): To read a Bible translation as the Word of God from the pulpit which has wrong readings, bad translations and mistranslations in it (and hence to call those things God’s Word and for people to believe they are God’s Word when they are not) is inconvenient, impure and scandalous. Yet the KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, NRSV, ASV and the Bible version your church uses, and you use personally, all have wrong readings, bad translations and mistranslations in them. One might respond:
“But the translation we read from is the best we have, or in cases where it is not, we are helpless to publicly change it when our authorities so impose it according to their office and (erroneous) discretion. If these acts are sinful, we would have to not read God’s Word at all and forfeit his worship ordinance of public Scripture reading, despite his command to maintain such (1 Tim. 4:13).
Yet it is better to worship approximately, though defectively, yet in real participation (though only by a certain degree) with God’s ordinance, than not at all, and it is necessary for the higher good of our well-being and salvation to do these inconvenient, impure and scandalous actions and ceremonies under necessity as a requisite for the good that cannot be brought about without them.”
Now you are gaining understanding.
…
If one could not morally, materially conform to something not inherently wrong, though it be inconvenient and may occasion some degree of passive scandal in someone somewhere, one could not live in society in everyday life (as Jesus and Paul told us to do: Jn. 17:15; 1 Cor. 5:9–10), function in or govern a family, and one would get fired from work very quickly. To decline doing what is inconvenient for higher goods is to choose and accomplish the lesser good, or to fall short of the glory of God, which is sin (Rom. 3:23).”
.
p. 81
“Thus, to return to the Scriptural example in Acts 21:20–26 (with 16:3 & 18:21), when new Christians with serious misconceptions about what God required for public worship thought that Paul (a mature Christian teacher) taught against their way of worship, which was seriously defective, Paul, without a fuss, at the instigation of other Christian leaders, publicly led and performed that defective worship to prevent scandal to the erring, for the sake of visible Christian unity. Rather than dissent and abstain, Paul publicly led and participated in that defective, burdensome worship for the greater good. If that was true for inferior, carnal ordinances with no spiritual efficacy (2 Cor. 3:6–17; Heb. 7:18–19; 8:13; 9:10; 10:1–4), how much more does it pertain to impurities in the greater, spiritual, efficacious and enduring ordinances of God?”
.
pp. 89-90
“One may object: (1) But is not a minister leading responsive readings inducing others to do what is wrong, which is prohibited by God’s Law (WLC #99.5–8)? Besides what has been said, to put it in a bit different way: Given that the impurities in responsive readings do not so corrupt the reading of the Word as to make the hurt more than the benefit, overturning the profit and substance of the ordinance itself, so God graciously receives this worship from sincere Christians.
Leading weaker brothers in substantially good and Biblical worship as their consciences will bear (Rom. 14:5), especially given public order, is to direct them to their duty, which WLC #99.5–8 also obliges us to; and the moral necessity to do the greater good ordained of God, though mixed with impurities (without morally approving them), is greater than to abstain from that substantial and greater good because of its impurities. This is not to do “what God forbids,” which “is at no time to be done,” because this is precisely what “He commands” and “is always our duty” (WLC #99.5). If one does not agree, but believes it is sinful to ever personally perform, or direct others to do good things with impurities, inconvenience, an association of evil or that which another person could take scandal at, welcome to Separatism. Our puritan authors’ Scriptural Refutation of it will be instructive to you.”
.
p. 102
“Baxter argued persuasively in detail in this era in England that it may be moral and for the greater good (and even necessary) to tolerate receding to a lesser state of past reformation for a time and in the circumstances while the previous or a greater reformation cannot be sustained or made without greater harm than good. Samuel Bolton (a Westminster divine) and other puritans concurred. Anyone experienced in Church government will agree.”
.
p. 112
“The even more basic principle involved [in the indulgence controversy] is whether a minister may give up some liberty for a time, even indefinitely, for the furthering of Christ’s ministry, even for its long-term survival (Isa. 26:20) or the eternal well-being of souls (Col. 1:24)? Besides Jesus’s example and teaching in a broken and declining Church, Mt. 17:24–27; 26:51–54; Lk. 9:51; 22:43; 23:35–37; Jn. 10:17–18; Gal. 4:4–5; Phil. 2:8, see that of Paul often under the same state, Acts 16:3–4; 21:13, 23–26; 1 Cor. 4:11–12; 8:13; 9:12, 19–23; 2 Cor. 6:3–10; 11:23–28; Gal. 5:13; Phil. 1:12–14; 2 Tim. 2:9–10; 2 Thess. 3:8–9.
Or is this principle sinful? If a person has liberty to amputate their own bodily extremities in some needful circumstances for the greater good of the whole (Mt. 18:8–9), from the greater to the lesser, may not one give up some of their bodily liberty for a greater good?”
.
p. 125
“Divines commonly accept that covenants do not remove preexisting obligations. [Andrew] Honyman, amongst other things, maintains that preaching the Gospel and procuring the greater good of “the public peace and good of Church and State, and prevent[ing] horrid confusions” are preexisting and more foundational ministerial obligations than the form of Church government or what the SL&C could alter.”
.
p. 134
“When you accommodate your boss’s unnecessary restrictions at work for the greater good, are you sacrificing God’s divine-right of governance over you and you are guilty of your boss’s errors? Are you divinely obliged to suffer the consequences of getting fired and hazarding your family’s survival every time your company wants you to do something not fully in accord with God-prescribed, right reason?”
.
p. 139
“However, “evil” is an ambiguous term and may stand for miserable or moral evils. One may morally choose to undergo and suffer certain miserable (though not moral) evils in necessity, other alternatives not being available, likely, reasonable or best. Choosing to eat expired food rather than starve is not wrong, though starving would be. That one must have the best or none at all, is against the greater good; miserable evils often contain a significant degree of good, and we ought not to choose the worst.”
.
p. 176
“It is divine law, jure divino, both by nature and Scripture, for the stronger to relinquish rights and privileges for the here and now to help the weaker, for the greater good (Ps. 40:6–8; Mt. 5:38–48; Mk. 15:3–5; Jn. 10:15–17; 1 Cor. 6:4–8; 9:4–23; Eph. 5:25–26; Phil. 2:6–9; 1 Pet. 2:19–25; WLC 99.5), especially when called by Christ to do so (Mt. 28:18–20; Acts 9:15–16).
Ought not the stronger and more excellent parts of the body, rather than ignoring or forsaking the weaker and less comely parts, unite with, serve and benefit them, covering them over with greater honor, as we ourselves do and God does (1 Cor. 12:23–24), “that there should be no schism in the body”? (1 Cor. 12:25)”
.
On Actions where the Inconveniences outweigh the Benefit, or the Benefit outweighs the Inconveniences
See also ‘On Occasional & Partial Conformity without Sin, or Moderate Puritanism’.
.
Quote
1600’s
French Reformed Churches
ed. John Quick, Synodicon, Synod of St. Maixant (1609), ch. 3, p. 314
“7… for the future the additions made at the close of propositions in colloquies should be omitted, because of the inconveniencies which have happened, and do far exceed the benefit which we expected from them…”
.
On the Ethical Principle of Avoiding the Greater Material or Miserable Evil (and hence doing the greater good)
Note that this principle may result in different practical actions depending on the circumstances and necessity, namely in materially submitting to less than ideal things, or in opposing less than ideal things, both for the greater good.
See also ‘On the Distinction between Moral vs. Natural (or Miserable) Evil’ and ‘On Occasional & Partial Conformity without Sin, or Moderate Puritanism’.
.
.
Order of
Articles 2
History
Quotes 18+
.
Articles
1600’s
Baxter, Richard – ‘Reformation & Conformity’
Baxter (1615-1691) here demonstrates, through an extended comparison, or parable, from real, then-recent and current events in England that the puritans had lived through and were in the midst of (including taking into account covenanting), that it may be moral and for the greater good (and even necessary) to tolerate receding to a lesser state of past reformation for a time and in the circumstances while the previous or a greater reformation cannot be sustained or made without greater harm than good.
.
2000’s
Fentiman, Travis – Theses 25-30, ‘Choosing the Lesser of Two Evils’ in ‘Theses on the Ethics of Civil Voting, with a Correction to the Booklet, Christ Centered Voting’ (2024) at ‘On Voting’ (RBO)
.
History
On the Middle Ages
Dougherty, M.V. – Moral Dilemmas in Medieval Thought from Gratian to Aquinas Pre (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011)
ch. 2, Auxerre & Summa Halesiana
5. ‘Appeals to the lesser evil principle’, pp. 80-83
ch. 6, Moral Dilemmas in the Early Thomistic Tradition
4. ‘An attack on the principle of the lesser evil’, pp. 183-88
…
6. ‘Thomistic appeals to the principle of the lesser evil’, pp. 190-95
7. Thomism and irresolvable prior-fault dilemmas, pp. 195-98
.
Quotes
Order of
Zanchi
Burges
Ames
Byfield
Aberdeen Doctors
Jeanes
Bolton
Rouse
Gee
Durham
Baxter
Presbyterians & Independents
Scottish Ministers
Sanderson
English Presbyterians
Corbet
Turretin
Church of Scotland
Fentiman
.
1500’s
Jerome Zanchi
On Philippians, ch. 1, fol. 45, as trans. by Sprint, Cassander Anglicanus, ‘Reformed Practices’, p. 167
“Wherefore many things are to be tolerated by the ministers that the peace of churches be not rent and that schisms may be avoided, so that they be not such things or doctrines which do fight with the foundation and do heave at it;”
.
1600’s
John Burges
An Answer Rejoined to that much Applauded Pamphlet of a Nameless Author, bearing this Title: viz. A Reply to Dr. Morton’s General Defence of Three Nocent Ceremonies… (London: Matthewes, 1631), p. 16
“I told some of my parishoners that I must wear the surplice, or loose my place, and they, me, requiring to know of them how they would accept my ministry if I wore it (for my judgment [that it was tolerable] they knew).
They answered that they should never profit by it. Here upon I resolved not to stumble them, admonished them of their error, told them they would repent it ere the year went about; And indeed so did they with many tears, wishing that I had rather worn ten surplices than to have left them.”
.
William Ames
On Conscience [d. 1633; 1639], bk. 1, ch. 4, last section:
“If any man through errour of conscience should hold it to be an unlawful thing to go to the Church and serve God there (which otherwise he is tied to do) because he knows the preacher to be a lewd and naughty man, and thinks that he shall be partaker with him in his wickedness, his sin is greater in staying away than if he were present there: because it is a greater sin to neglect God’s service than to communicate with an others’ personal wickedness in that service.
But if he should think it unlawful to be present at holy duties for idolatry which he judges will be committed there, he should sin more heinously if he should be present there: because the sin of idolatry is greater than a neglect of true worship. In the first instance he sins more that follows his conscience than he that does against it; but in this [latter case], his sin is greater that does contrary to it.”
.
Nicholas Byfield
A Commentary upon the Three First Chapters of the First Epistle General of St. Peter... (London, 1637), on 1 Tim. 2:13
pp. 434-35
“Things inconvenient, even in matters of religion, may be commanded in some cases: as when it is to redeem a far worse inconvenience. For of two evils of punishments, the magistrate may take the less as well as any other private man. And if that subjects, to prevent worse inconveniences, may use inconvenient ceremonies, then may the Magistrate, to prevent worse inconveniences, command inconvenient ceremonies.
If the apostles may use the inconvenient Jewish ceremonies, then the apostles may enjoin for a time the use of inconvenient ceremonies: as they did make ordinances about things which yet they called burdens, Acts 15. (Circumcision was a burden, Acts 15:10, and these bur∣thens were necessary things, v. 28, and they were said to do well if they observe them, v. 29.) And Moses may make an ordinance about the use of a bill of divorcement, which yet was a grievous inconvenience to redeem a worse inconvenience.
But if magistrates do appoint inconvenient things, and burden the Church with them, when there would be no great inconvenience to the Church if such things were not, then such magistrates must give their account to Christ for so doing; but yet the people are bound to obey still, because we cannot be freed from our subjection laid upon us by God, except it appear to us that they command not only an inconvenience, but a sin, as all sound divines confess.”
.
pp. 436–37
“Fourthly, that when the authority of the magistrate or Church has determined concerning the use of things indifferent, we are not now left free, nor are bound to look at the scandal of particular persons, but must make conscience of it that we offend not the Church, by working a greater hurt or loss to the Church than the particular hurt of private persons can extend unto. In such cases as this, the apostle’s rule holds: ‘If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the Church of God,’ 1 Cor. 11:16.
And we are bound, in this text of the apostle Peter [1 Pet. 2:13], to obey the human ordinances of men in authority; from which obligation other men’s offense cannot free us. And the apostle charges us to look to it that we offend not the Church in prescribed ordinances and that we be careful not to offend private men in free ceremonies.”
.
Aberdeen Doctors
Duplies of the Ministers & Professors of Aberdeen to Second Answers of some Reverend Brethren, concerning the Late [National] Covenant (Aberdeen: Raban, 1638), “First Duply”, p. 11
“…we most heartily wish any disease of this Church to be timeously prevented and cured. But withal we wish this to be done without a rupture, and such a dangerous division… which in itself is a sore disease, and from which in holy Scripture we are often and very earnestly dehorted.
Dionysius [†264], Bishop of Alexandria, in his epistle to Novatus, recorded by Eusebius, Histories, bk. 6, ch. 45, worthily says:
‘You ought rather to have suffered anything whatsoever for avoiding of cutting asunder the Kirk of God: and martyrdom for keeping the Kirk from schism is no less glorious than which is suffered for not committing idolatry. And in my opinion also it is greater: for in suffering martyrdom for not committing idolatry, a man suffers for one, even for his own soul; but here a man suffers martyrdom for the whole Kirk.’”
.
Henry Jeanes
A Treatise concerning a Christian’s Careful Abstinence from All Appearance of Evil… (Oxford: Turner, 1640), pp. 76–78 Jeanes was an English presbyterian.
“I will but recite a limitation of Gregory de Valencia… Having laid down a rule, that for avoiding the scandal of our neighbor, which springs either from his ignorance or weakness, it behooves us, by the obligation of charity, to do or omit that which may be done, or left undone without sin, he afterwards puts this exception [in Latin]… And indeed (me thinks) he speaks reasonably.
For improbable seems it that the sweet moderation which is in the yoke of divine laws should consist with so great a rigor, as in all matters whatsoever not simply unlawful, to exact not only a brotherly, but also a servile compliancy with every supposed weak one, whose weakness may be but pretended by those that are willing to speak favorably of them. For the humoring and contenting of every supposed weakling in all matters at which he takes offence, I conceive not myself bound to endanger my life to hazard my estate and fortunes, or to incur any other great or notable inconvenience…”
.
Samuel Bolton
The Arraignment of Error… (London: Miller, 1646), p. 311
“And thus I have showed you what materials our brethren will afford us to this building [of Church government], which I could for my own part rather be content to sit down withal, than by raising it higher, but heighten our confusion, run the mischief of division among ourselves, than which no penal evil can be sadder and more uncomfortable. I wish we might all remember the apostle’s rule, Phil. 3:15-16…”
.
Francis Rouse
The Lawfulness of Obeying the Present Government… (London, 1649), p. 9. Rouse was a Westminster divine.
“If a master’s mate had thrown the master overboard, and by power would suffer no other to guide the ship but himself; if the mariners will not obey him commanding aright for the safe guiding of the ship, the ship must needs perish and themselves with it.
So that whereas some speak of ill consequences, if this doctrine be received, they may here see worse consequences if it be not received; and wise men should see the consequences on all sides, and judge upon the whole.”
.
Edward Gee
An Exercitation concerning Usurped Powers… (London, 1650), ch. 4, p. 32. Gee was an English presbyterian.
“2. As there may be danger that way to the things specified, so there may be danger and insecurity to the same things on the other hand… let impartial reason and experience judge whether the preservation or destruction thereof has more danger in it to religion and the kingdom’s liberty.
3. But seeing there may be some danger on each side… our safest way is to avoid the horrid sin and greater danger of covenant-breaking…”
.
James Durham
The Dying Man’s Testament to the Church of Scotland, or a Treatise concerning Scandal... (Edinburgh: Higgins, 1659), pt. 4, ch. 7, pp. 322-23
“If it be asked then: What way men may discern the side that is to be followed in such a case when inconveniencies threaten on all hands?
Answer: By these and such like ways:
1. It is to be looked what side has the most dangerous and destructive inconveniencies.
2. What inconveniencies are most certain and inevitable, and the greatest and most inevitable inconveniencies are to be shunned, and men would not choose a certain hurt to eschew that which is uncertain.
3. It would be looked what side duty lies upon, or to what the command does press; and although inconveniencies seem to follow that, yet it is to be followed as most safe.”
.
Richard Baxter
Five Disputations of Church-Government & Worship (London, 1659), 5th Disputation
p. 417
“Where a thing is evil but by accident, the greatest accidents must weigh down the less.”
.
pp. 423–24
“I have heard many pleading for ceremonies say that if the magistrate commanded them and would not otherwise permit them to preach the Gospel, they would preach in a fool’s coat and a fool’s cap with a feather rather than forbear. But I do not think that any of them would justify that ruler that would make such a law…”
.
p. 461
“Yet if the miscarriage be so great in the [authorities’] ordering even of these
circumstances or in the manner of duties, as shall overthrow the duty itself and be inconsistent with the ends, or bring greater evils upon the Church than our refusing to
obey… then… we are not bound to follow… in such a case, but otherwise we are.”
.
p. 463
“But if a governor so mis-determine but a mode or circumstance as will overthrow the substance and ends of the worship, I would not obey, except some greater evil were likely to follow my not obeying at that particular season than the frustrating of the duty itself would come to…
An unhandsome vesture I would use in obedience to a lawful governor and to avoid a greater evil: but not so ridiculous a vesture as would set all the people on laughing so as to frustrate the work that we assemble
for.”
.
“§15. And if men that have no authority over us shall pretend authority from God [such as Church prelates] and go about to exercise it by ceremonious impositions, we have the more reason to scruple obeying them, even in things indifferent, lest we be guilty of establishing their usurpation and pretended office in the Church, and so draw on more evils than we foresee, or can remove.”
.
A Christian Directory: a Sum of Practical Theology and Cases of Conscience Buy (1673), pt. 4, Christian Politics, Ch. 12, ‘Directions Against Scandal as Given’, pp. 80, 82-83
“§3… When Christ says, ‘If thy right eye or hand offend (or scandalize thee) pluck it out,’ or ‘cut it off,’ etc., Mt. 5… He plainly means, ‘if it draw thee to sin,’ or else He had never added that it is better to enter maimed into life than having two eyes or hands to be cast into Hell!
That is, in a word, ‘Thy damnation is a greater hurt than the loss of hand or eye, and therefore if there were no other way to avoid it, this would be a very cheap way.'”
.
The English Nonconformity as under King Charles II & King James II Truly Stated & Argued (London, 1689), ch. 2, p. 14
“XXV. Though we think not that men may [morally] command us to destroy our neighbors’ souls by scandal, yet when disobedience to a ruler’s law is likely to do more hurt than the scandal taken at it comes to, we are for avoiding the greater hurt.”
.
Of National Churches… (London: 1691), ch. 15, ‘The Case of Toleration of Dissenters from the Common Laws & Customs of a National Church’, pp. 70-71
§11. The terms of toleration must differ:
1. according to the different case of the superiors and imposers.
2. And according to different causes of dissenters.
3. And according to their different capacities and relations.
4. And according to their different temper and behavior in managing their cause.
5. And as rulers are able or unable to suppress them without more hurt than good.”
…
§ 16… even heresy and many faults may have impunity, though not a justifying toleration in a time and place where punishment and suppression cannot be used without apparent doing more hurt than good. Rulers are not bound to do what they cannot do. And they cannot do that which they must not do because it will do more hurt than good.”
.
Leading English & Presbyterian Ministers
The Grand Debate between the most reverend Bishops & the Presbyterian Divines appointed by His Sacred Majesty as Commissioners for the Review & Alteration of the Book of Common Prayer... (London, 1661), ‘The Papers’, p. 59
“We… beseech you [bishops] that you will be pleased to repent of these desires and not to prosecute them, considering that to avoid a lesser evil (avoidable by safer means) you will bring a far greater evil on the churches, and such as is like to strip these nations of the glory in which they have excelled the rest of the world, even a learned, able, holy ministry and a people sincere and serious, and understanding in the matters of their salvation.”
.
On Scottish Ministers 1673
Robert Wodrow, The History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland from the Restoration to the Revolution, 4 vols. (Glasgow: Blackie & Son, 1832), 2.216 (lt col bot)
“Mr. George Hutchison and some others were peremptorily against subscribing the paper [against the king’s indulgence], and the plurality were for signing and presenting it in their names: yet when they considered the necessity of unity in this matter, and that if they were not of one mind, it would do more hurt than good, they came all into this, to use it as a directory;”
.
Robert Sanderson
Bishop Sanderson’s Judgment concerning Submission to Usurpers (d. 1663; London, 1678), pp. 26-27
“Besides, arguments drawn from scandal in things neither unlawful nor (setting the reason of scandal aside) inexpedient, as they are subject to sundry frailties otherwise, so they are manifestly of no weight at all when they are counterpoised with the apparent danger of evil consequents on the other side. For in such cases there is commonly equal danger (if not rather something more) of scandal to be taken from the example the quite contrary way.”
.
English Presbyterians
Collinges, John – English Presbytery, or an Account of the Main Opinions of those ministers and people in England who go under the name of Presbyterians… (London, 1680), p. 2
“…what is necessary to such actions, considered as human acts and common to them with all other human acts, ought to be left at liberty, or so commanded [for public worship] as they may be done without offence to the general rules of holy Writ, by which all human acts are to be guided, viz. so as God may be most glorified, others most edified, and least scandalized.”
.
John Corbet
Of Divine Worship, pt. 3, §6 in The Remains of the Reverend & Learned Mr. John Corbet… (d. 1680; London: Thomas Parkhurst, 1684), p. 218
“If superiors command that which is above their sphere to command, namely, things not necessary in genere [in their kind], yet if they be not simply evil, subjects may do those things, unless they be evil in their consequence to a higher degree than the not doing of them would be. In this case it is not formal obedience, but they are done for the end’s sake and to avoid evil.”
.
Francis Turretin
Institutes (P&R), 2.104
“Thus it seems better to lack some useful good (but less necessary), than from the use of it to incur the imminent danger of any great evil.”
.
Church of Scotland
A Seasonable Admonition & Exhortation to Some who Separate themselves from the Communion of the Church of Scotland… Unanimously agreed unto by the Commission of the General Assembly, December 9, 1698 (Edinburgh: Mosmam, 1699), p. 19
“We do believe and avouch that the Church has from the Lord Jesus Christ, power and authority to meet in synods and councils about ecclesiastic matters relating to doctrine and discipline, and this power is intrinsic to the Church, and as [such that] no man can take it from her. So neither should they [magistrates] hinder her in the exercise of it; and if the magistrate should forbid her meetings, or dissolve them before their affairs are ended, he does wrong the Church and it should be humbly represented to him, and the Church’s right be avouched. Further, if the Church’s need require, she may not only without the magistrate’s call meet, but sit when prohibited; but this should not be without great necessity, nor should it be when the Church is likely to have greater prejudice by it than advantage.
For in reference to affirmative precepts, Christian prudence should ponder and choose the season and circumstances which conduce most for the glory of God and good of the Church. Imprudent rashness and indiscretion, though under the name of zeal in unseasonably doing what is duty on the matter, may do and has done much hurt to the Church.”
.
2000’s
Travis Fentiman
“Editor’s Extended Introduction” in English Puritans, A Refutation of the Errors of Separatists (1604; RBO, 2025)
p. 31
“In Acts 16:3, about Paul using his liberty to circumcise Timothy due to the onlooking Jews, the necessity for this material action (albeit understood religiously and falsely by others, as Paul knew it would so be misunderstood beforehand) was for the sake of not unduly scandalizing others, even unbelievers, for the greater well-being of the Church, avoiding its disturbance and for the flourishing of the Gospel.
Note that Gal. 5:1 calls circumcision “a yoke of bondage” when it is imposed out of religious necessity, and yet Paul was willing to occasionally submit to it for the higher good when he would not submit to it out of formal principle or always (Gal. 2:5).”
.
pp. 32-33
“Paul and the Christians used these material, inconvenient and scandalous (in some way) ceremonies [of Moses in the New Testament] in accord with nature’s light, Christian prudence and the Word’s general rules for the greater good: “Unto the pure all things are pure” (Tit. 1:15). All this was but a light sacrifice for Paul who was willing to go much further, and did: “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” (1 Cor. 9:20).
He also did it to seek to avoid persecution, tumult and imprisonment (Acts 21:22–33). Or it can be done for the peace of the Church (Acts 15:19–21; 16:1–5), even in light of the presence of ignorant civil and religious authorities (such as the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem, so as not to scandalize them, even for the longterm).
Onlooking Christians receiving passive scandal thereby, as undoubtedly some did, so far from suspecting, despising, judging and setting at nought (Rom. 14:3–4, 10) the Christian ministers, ought to realize that such material things and actions may be needful for ministers to do for the sake of the message of spiritual salvation. Ministers ought to teach the people the spiritual truth about these inconvenient, material ceremonies (as the
early Christian officers did: Acts 15:11, 17, 32, 35) so that the ceremonies be less of a burden and the people may keep and tolerate them (Acts 15:20, 23, 28–29; 16:4) for the right reasons until they can be put aside when the necessity is alleviated, as Beza advised ministers in order to avoid the greater harm of ministerial deposition.¹
¹ Sprint: “Beza in a case of [the threat of ministerial] deprivation advises to conform; yet before they conform he thus counsels them: That both the pastor and the flock sin not against their conscience (presupposing the purity of doctrine to be left entire): We persuade the pastors that after they have freed their conscience, both before the King’s Majesty and the bishops, by a modest (as it becomes Christians to be free from all tumult and sedition) and yet weighty protestation (according as the greatness of the case requires): they then do openly press unto their flocks those things which do tend to take away the offence arising from conformity, and do withal discreetly and peaceably give diligent endeavor for the amendment of these abuses, as the Lord shall offer occasion (and so to conform); Epistle 12, fol. 99.” Cassander Anglicanus, “Reformed Practices,” “Practice,” p. 196.”
.
p. 48
“To put forward a more refined and true principle in alternative to [George] Gillespie’s:
Things less than fully good, or impure, not inherently wrong, may in some circumstances, especially according to the degree of necessity, be personally, materially done, even in worship, public worship and Church government (though they occasion passive scandal in some), for the good in the things themselves and for attaining higher and weightier goods (in proportion to that degree), while seeking to avoid the greater hurt and scandal, without approving the impurities or what may be deficient in them.
[John] Sprint essentially affirmed this principle, while Gillespie essentially denied it.”
.
p. 184
“Reckless Church union is not here being recommended; rather implementing union
ought to be governed by nature’s light and laws, Christian prudence and the general rules
of the Word.
Union ought not to be sought if it would do greater hurt than good, for instance, if the one Church would shred into oblivion, whereas the two Churches separate would at least maintain what good had preexisted.
Churches coming together in at least the fundamentals is not being held out as all or nothing; rather it is a goal which may be worked towards as it is able to be borne and as progress can be made.”
.
The Human Will as the Source of Evil
William Ames
Conscience with the Power & Cases Thereof (1639), bk. 3, ch. 19, ‘Of a Voluntary Act’, pp. 92-3
“Question 1. Whether in a good or evil act there be necessarily required an inclination of the will?
1st Answer. First, the will is the principle and the first cause of all human operation in regard of the exercise of the act. For we therefore do this or that rather than another thing, because we will; As God Himself is said to do all things of his own Will, Eph. 1:11. So also does man who is made after the Image of God. The first cause therefore of the goodness or sinfulness of any act of man, is in the will.
2. Secondly, liberty also of election is formally in the will: that therefore anyone does yield obedience to God, or refuses to do so, proceeds from the will.
3. Lastly, our obedience stands in our conformity to the Will of God, and the disobedience, in our unconformity thereunto. Now our conformity with the Will of God is first and principally in our will, Apoc. 2:6.”
.
.
On Love of God, Self-Love & Love for those Close to Us, in Relation to Others
See also, ‘On the Order of Love’, ‘On Love to God’, ‘On Love of Oneself’ and ‘On Love & Righteousness toward our Neighbor’.
.
Order of
Quotes 2
Articles 4
.
Quotes
Order of
Rutherford
Baxter
.
1600’s
Samuel Rutherford
The Divine Right of Church Government… (1646), Appendix, pp. 83-84
“6th Rule. There is a principal obligation, a less principal, a least principal. Hence these three degrees issue from love: 1. God, 2. ourselves, 3. our neighbor.
The love of God is most principal, and is the measure of the love of ourselves: the love of ourself is less principal than the love of God, and so the obligation [is] less. I am to make away, life and all things, yea, eternal glory as divided from holiness, and as it includes only happiness, rather ere I sin against God.
The obligation to care for my own salvation is more principal than my obligation to care for the salvation of my brother: for the love of myself is the measure and rule of the love of my neighbor. Now because the obligation of caring for the soul of my brother is only secondary, in compare[ison] of the obligation of caring for my own salvation, I am not to sin myself, or sinfully to omit anything that is commanded me in a positive precept, to prevent the sin of my brother.
Yet hence it does not follow that a positive precept is more excellent than the law of Nature, which is, ‘Thou shalt not murder,’ nor ‘scandalize him for whom Christ died.’ Because though to care for the soul of my brother be of the law of nature simpliciter, yet [it] is a secondary obligation, and may cease and yield to a stronger obligation that ties me more principally to care for my own soul; for though the command be positive, yet knowingly to sin by a sinful omission, is no less a destroying of my own soul, and so of the law of nature, in a higher obligation, than the other is.”
.
Richard Baxter
A Second Admonition to Mr. Edward Bagshaw (London: Simmons, 1671), ‘To those Readers…’, p. 3
“7. By forgetting that God will have all men’s own wills, by choosing or refusing, to have more hand in their welfare or misery than other men’s: And if they mischoose, the sin will be their own.”
.
Articles
1500’s
Musculus, Wolfgang – Common Places of the Christian Religion (1560; London, 1563), ‘Of Love’
Of the order of love 470.b
.
1600’s
Ames, William – sections 13-44 in ch. 16, ‘Justice & Charity toward our Neighbor’ in The Marrow of Theology trans. John D. Eusden (1623; Baker, 1997), bk. 2, pp. 302-5
.
2000’s
Wood, James R. – ‘Ordering Our Social Loves’ (2023) at Ad Fontes
This is on the ordo amoris (order of love).
Wikipedia – ‘Storge’
Storge is a Greek word meaning ‘love’ or ‘affection’, referring to natural or instinctual affection, or familial love.
.
.
On Christian Hedonism
Travis Fentiman 2017
“Why John Piper’s Christian Hedonism is fundamentally wrong:
Piper explicitly makes suffering and self-denying good works simply a means to a greater reward in heaven, which is to be our aim in order to receive more joy. Thus he interprets Heb. 2:12 this way about Christ enduring the cross for the joy set before Him on the other side of the cross.
While a reward is an encouragement to good works, it is an adjunct thereto, not the aim.
While our ultimate supreme end is to glorify God, our proper subordinate end is not our own good, but the design of the work itself: the good of others, which is true love.
Thus John Owen in his Death of Death argues that Christ’s subordinate end in the salvation of men was not his own reward therefrom, but the salvation of men. See the Banner paperback reprint, pp. 91 ff.
Think of this true Christian: Christ’s main focus, what He had before his eyes, what He was intent on, was not his own reward, but love for you and your well being.
With regards to the chief end of man, one cannot completely make glorifying God or enjoying God a means to the other one (as Piper), but rather the divines used ‘and’, not ‘by’ (as Piper).
To make one’s own good the primary focus of good works is mercenary and unnatural; it is not love for the other, which loses itself in the other person.”
.
On Moderation, Temperance & Self-Control
Article
1600’s
Perkins, William – Ε’ΠΙΕΙ’ΚΕΙΑ, or a Treatise of Christian Equity & Moderation. Delivered Publicly in Lectures (Cambridge, 1604)
.
Quote
1600’s
John Bairdie
Balm from Gilead, or the Differences about the Indulgence Stated & Impleaded in a Sober & Serious Letter to Ministers & Christians in Scotland (1674; London, 1681), pp. 154-56
“Study moderation in all things: Let not Christian prudence pass with you for wisdom of the flesh, nor Christian moderation for Laodicean lukewarmness. ‘Let your moderation be known to all men;’ let it be visible and apparent, both in your passions, opinions and discourses.
1st. Moderate your affections, let not wildfire take the place of zeal, nor zeal turn passionate, pickish, peevish and bitter… Nor does the wrath of man work the righteousness of God.
2ly. Be moderate in your opinions: This moral idol of the mind (opinion) is too apt to be adored and oversway. Put a temper to it and hang a balance upon it, to keep it in poise and course; for true is that in common experience, though a fallacy indeed, that opinio est veritate major. And for moderation in opinion, study well:
(1) Your fallibility and aptness to mistake, and consequently to dwell in a constant self-jealousy and suspicion. We like not to allow of fluctuating and Pyrronian doubting about necessary and vital points, nor to hang all opinions either (like Mahomed’s tomb between the two loadstones) in an aequilibrio. Yet too much confidence in matters of mere opinion is oft a vanity, refuted sufficiently by the new discoveries time and industry produces, compelling us to alter. But what one thing does contribute more to beget and continue ruptures than conceit and idolizing of self-wisdom and self-opinion, with an undervaluing of all that differ from us, while yet (perhaps) they may hit nearer the mark of truth than we, and have better advantages to discover it than we?
(2) Study self-reflection, to consider how oft ye have found in time your (once confident) opinions to have failed you, that you have been necessitated to change and take up new measures. And this will help you to much moderation, experience being the schoolmaster of very fools.
(3) Be moderate in your discourses; how are some’s tongues dipped in gall and set on fire of Hell! and instead of edifying communication that may minister grace to the hearers, little other than rigid censuring and bitter backbiting of one another! O when shall our tongue be our glory, not our shame! but to bridle the intemperacy of the tongue, study to speak nothing but what God may hear, and as in his hearing; speak of others as of yourselves; and this will make you speak sparingly, charitably and with due moderation. And were tongues once well governed, and that unruly evil tamed, no doubt but differences would soon diminish. Let your moderation then in all things be known to all men, the Lord is at hand. Moderation in our way is like the symmetry in the humors of the body, which keeps all in health and happiness.”
.
.
.
Related Pages
Expositions of the Ten Commandments
On the Ethics of Material Cooperation with, & Associations with Evil
On Occasional & Partial Conformity without Sin, or Moderate Puritanism