The Calvinist Context of Junius’s De politiae Mosis observatione
In several aspects one can specifically speak of a Calvinist or lGenevan-Calvmist background of Junius's book De politiae Mosis observatione. First, Junius called John Calvin and his successor Theodore Beza his theological teachers.
Junius began his studies of theology in Geneva in 1562,[295] and witnessed the last two years of Calvin as reformer and theologian. In these last years of his life, Calvin was, among other things, engaged in writing his commentaries on the books of Moses. The commentaries were collected and published first in Latin in 1563 by the printer and humanist Henri Estienne, and then in 1564 in French by Frangois Estienne (Mosis libri quinque cum commentariis / Commentaires sur les cinq libres de Moyse)?[296] In recent years, Calvin's commentaries have increasingly earned attention in research because of the new method that Calvin used to bring the law of Moses in the last four books of Moses (Exodus-Deuteronomy) into a â€?harmonic form' (in formam harmoniae digesti).[297] Following a new approach, Calvin went beyond his own dogmatic masterpiece, the Institutes of the Christian Religion, with a systematic interpretation of the ceremonial laws and the judicial laws of Moses as appendices of the Ten Commandments (the moral law). Calvin was not the first Protestant reformer who considered the ceremonial and judicial laws of Moses additions to the Decalogue. In fact, Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575), Swiss reformer of Zurich and successor of Huldrych Zwingli, had already interpreted these laws of Moses as adjacent laws to the Decalogue (adiectae leges), which â€?explained' and â€?confirmed' the Ten Commandments.[298] Thus, Calvin was able to build upon this understanding of Mosaic law, but contributed by an even more systematic exegesis. For Calvin (and later theologians and jurists who followed him like Junius) the Mosaic law spread over all five books of Moses and needed a dedicated interpretation. Calvin's interpretation set in with a differentiation between the historical narÂration of the books of Moses (historiae narratio) and the doctrine or teachings (doctrina). For Calvin doctrina included the instruction of the church in true piety (vera pietas), in fear for and the cult of God (timor et cultus Dei), and the rules of a sanctified and just life (sancte iusteque vivendi regula). The doctrina in the books of Moses moves everybody to fulfil his or her duty (officium) in life.[299] [300] Naturally, the doctrina must also comprise the law of Moses. Here, Calvin differÂentiated between the four principle parts of doctrina:- the prefaces to the law (praefationes);
- the Ten Commandments or Decalogue as �the rule of a just and holy life' (a summary of the moral law);
- the appendices to the Decalogue (French: dependances), namely the cerÂemonies as appendix to the First Table of the Decalogue, and the politiÂcal or forensic law as appendix to the Second Table of the Decalogue;
- and the promises, which were concerned with the aim and purpose of the law.
This new systematic exegesis of Mosaic law by Calvin in the last years of his life became an important backbone of Calvinist interpretations of the law of God. In a sense, Calvin's approach was understood as a model and template by later generations of Calvinist thinkers.43 For later theologians, jurists, and other scholars it meant an important step toward a comparative study of the politÂical laws of Moses, because individual precepts of the judicial law of Moses could now be related to the Decalogue/the moral law (natural and divine), as appropriate. But whereas Calvin did not stretch his interpretation so far as to conclude the binding force of certain political laws of Moses, Calvin's successor and moderator of the Venerable compagnie des pasteurs in Geneva, Theodore Beza (Theodore de Beze, 1519-1605), was more open in this regard.
He argued in favour of the actual political relevance of certain judicial laws of Moses and published an elaborate collection of these laws in his handbook Lex Dei, moralis, ceremonialis, etpolitica (1577). Indeed, the only authority that Beza mentioned in this book is his teacher John Calvin. But it is clear that Beza went beyond Calvin with the compilation of the political laws of Moses. Beza collected legal texts from the five books of Moses (including only one quotaÂtion from the book of Joshua) by using the common threefold division of the Mosaic law - now with a Greek terminology: Beza called the moral law â€?ethiÂcal law' (lex ηθικη), the ceremonial â€?priestly law' (lex lερατικη), and finally the judicial law of Moses the â€?political law' (lex πολιτικη).[301] Apart from the preface Beza added no further extra-biblical sources and only very short descriptions of his method that were in total not much longer than a page.[302] [303] [304] [305] The part on the moral law, which other theologians usually tended to elaborate upon in great detail, only filled a few pages in Beza's handbook. It is for the most part a synopsis of the different versions of the Decalogue in Ex. 20u-17∕Deut. 5:1-21 and precepts from the Book of Leviticus.4θIn total, the focus of the book was clearly on the biblical text itself, and here, especially on the political laws of Moses. In the very part on the political laws of Moses, Beza worked in great detail. He collected political laws out of the Pentateuch, divided them in rubrics and classes, and ascribed them to individÂual commandments of the Decalogue (lex ηθικη). For instance, political preÂcepts dealing with idololatry were compiled under one rubric and ascribed to the First and Second Commandment of the Decalogue.47
Beza's book Lex Dei, moralis, ceremonialis, et politica became probably the most important source for Junius's De politiae Mosis observatione.
Junius's terÂminology remained very close to Beza's in some instances. Beside the more common notion of â€?political law' for the judicial laws of Moses, Junius, just like Theodore Beza, made use of the term â€?ethical laws' or â€?ethical precepts' (praecepta ηθικd) for the moral law of Moses, for example?8 Beza remained in so far really important for Junius, as he had emphasised beyond Calvin the enduring exemplary character of the political laws of Moses. Beza had started to do so in his dispute with Sebastian Castellio over the right of magistrates to punish heretics (see his De haereticis a civili magistratu puniendis libellus, 1554).[306] Junius later joined Beza in speaking of â€?a perfect example of law' that could be found in the laws of Moses in a political sense.[307] [308] And lastly, both Beza and Junius did so because they had similar motives. For them, the interpretaÂtion of the law of Moses was never a mere â€?scholarly endeavour' of theologians. It was rather highly political.4