Striving towards Consensus in the Debates on the Political Relevance of the Mosaic Laws among Calvinists
Debates on the political relevance of the Mosaic laws were time and again an issue during the Reformation period in Europe. Since the 1550s and 1560s, as we have seen in the case of Theodore Beza, disputes flared up and the key quesÂtion in these disputes remained in how far the political laws of Moses respecÂtively the judicial laws were abrogated or still binding for the Christian magisÂtracy.
Junius's book De politiae Mosis observatione was part of these disputes. The book title does not display this at a first glance, but the headings of the two parts of the treatise hark back to a theological disputation â€?over the judiÂcial laws of Moses' that preceded the publication of Junius's book. The actual 38 theses of the disputation that Junius presided over as professor at the uniÂversity of Leiden in June 1593, form the first part of the book. The second part comprises long observations based on the 38 theses?1 According to the preface of Junius's De politiae Mosis observatione, Junius faced two extreme positions or parties in the debates on the applicability of the judicial laws of Moses. One party endorsed the necessary transfer or direct applicability of the judicial laws in a Christian commonwealth; the opponents voted for a necessary abroÂgation of the judicial laws of Moses. The latter party argued that exactly like the ceremonial laws, the judicial laws of Moses could no longer be binding for Christians.[309] [310] [311] In the preface, Junius did not become specific about these two parties and did not name names, but it is obvious that he spoke about an ongoÂing debate, to which he was eager to find a systematic answer. And we may add that this way of looking for consensus was typical, particularly for a large group of Calvinist theologians, who only followed in the footsteps of their theological teachers Calvin and Beza, in accordance with whom they still chose their own methods and answers.When we consider books similar to Junius's De politiae Mosis observatione that focused on the political laws of Moses and the model of the Mosaic polity, the large proportion of Calvinist authors stands out. In England and beforeJunius, the Calvinist theologian Edmund Bunny was the first to dedÂicate a treatise, albeit a short one of only 160 pages, to the political laws of Moses and the Mosaic polity respectively ancient â€?Iewish policie', entiÂtled The scepter of Iudah: or, what maner of government it was, that unto the common-wealth or Church of Israel was by the law of God appointed (London, 1584). Much more comprehensive than Bunny's treatise was the book Legum Mosaicarum forensium explanatio (1604) by the Herborn professor of theolÂogy and churchman Wilhelm Zepper (1550-1607).53 The main goal of Zepper's book was to achieve a consensus in the debates about the application of the Mosaic judicial laws. By far the most comprehensive studies on the subject, however, were the four books (in three parts) of the Scottish theologian and Hebraist John Weemes (c.1579-1636).54 Indeed, in many parts of these books and even in other treatises, Weemes cites Franciscus Junius.[312] [313] [314] [315] Weemes must have stayed for some time at the university of Leiden. A disputation on origÂinal sin (de originali peccato, 1599) in the faculty of theology bears his name (,Ioannes Wimesius Scotus1), and no other than Franciscus Junius presided over this disputation?6 The works of John Weemes were a significant factor for the circulation of Junius's writings and arguments on the British Island, where Weemes became one of the forerunners of Christian Hebraism?7 Altogether, a majority of Weemes's works, as well as the treatises of Edmund Bunny and Wilhelm Zepper can be brought into line with the politia-judaica literature, just as Junius's De politiae Mosis observatione. So we may conclude: a majority of the authors of the politia-judaica literature, especially among the theologiÂans at the end of the sixteenth century and beyond, were Calvinists. Several of them were also trained in legal studies and influenced vice versa other jurists in Early Modern times?8 This is especially the case for the writings of John Calvin, Theodore Beza, and - in similar manner - Franciscus Junius. To some degree Junius's treatise De politiae Mosis observatione was the systematic comÂplement of Calvin's exegesis and Beza's comparative compilation on the same subject. 5