Binding in Conscience: Early Modern English Protestants and Spanish Thomists on Law and the Fate of the Soul

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

In Romans 13:5, St. Paul famously announced that Christians must obey law not only for fear of punishment, but also "for conscience sake." Early modern Protestants and Catholics agreed that violations of laws that bound conscience, if unrepented, threatened damnation. But not all law obligated conscience. Natural law typically did. So did Jesus's injunctions and God's moral law revealed in the Old Testament, but not His judicial law governing civic affairs or His ceremonial law regulating Jewish religious observance. Human laws about things indifferent, matters neither commanded nor forbidden in scripture and nature, presented the most complicated case. Disobedience to only certain classes of human laws - but not all - imperiled the soul. Catholics and Protestants fiercely debated how to distinguish rulers' ordinances that bound conscience from those that did not. This article explores the principles that animated the dispute and the methods used for linking human law to the fate of the soul or challenging that connection.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)803-837
Number of pages35
JournalLaw and History Review
Volume33
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 12 2015

Fingerprint

conscience
Law
Thomist
Early Modern English
Fate
natural law
god
penalty
anxiety

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • History
  • Law

Cite this

Binding in Conscience : Early Modern English Protestants and Spanish Thomists on Law and the Fate of the Soul. / Ross, Richard J.

In: Law and History Review, Vol. 33, No. 4, 12.10.2015, p. 803-837.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{e25ef0370eb045508a229f5995327c2c,
title = "Binding in Conscience: Early Modern English Protestants and Spanish Thomists on Law and the Fate of the Soul",
abstract = "In Romans 13:5, St. Paul famously announced that Christians must obey law not only for fear of punishment, but also {"}for conscience sake.{"} Early modern Protestants and Catholics agreed that violations of laws that bound conscience, if unrepented, threatened damnation. But not all law obligated conscience. Natural law typically did. So did Jesus's injunctions and God's moral law revealed in the Old Testament, but not His judicial law governing civic affairs or His ceremonial law regulating Jewish religious observance. Human laws about things indifferent, matters neither commanded nor forbidden in scripture and nature, presented the most complicated case. Disobedience to only certain classes of human laws - but not all - imperiled the soul. Catholics and Protestants fiercely debated how to distinguish rulers' ordinances that bound conscience from those that did not. This article explores the principles that animated the dispute and the methods used for linking human law to the fate of the soul or challenging that connection.",
author = "Ross, {Richard J.}",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "12",
doi = "10.1017/S0738248015000450",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "803--837",
journal = "Law and History Review",
issn = "0738-2480",
publisher = "University of Illinois Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Binding in Conscience

T2 - Early Modern English Protestants and Spanish Thomists on Law and the Fate of the Soul

AU - Ross, Richard J.

PY - 2015/10/12

Y1 - 2015/10/12

N2 - In Romans 13:5, St. Paul famously announced that Christians must obey law not only for fear of punishment, but also "for conscience sake." Early modern Protestants and Catholics agreed that violations of laws that bound conscience, if unrepented, threatened damnation. But not all law obligated conscience. Natural law typically did. So did Jesus's injunctions and God's moral law revealed in the Old Testament, but not His judicial law governing civic affairs or His ceremonial law regulating Jewish religious observance. Human laws about things indifferent, matters neither commanded nor forbidden in scripture and nature, presented the most complicated case. Disobedience to only certain classes of human laws - but not all - imperiled the soul. Catholics and Protestants fiercely debated how to distinguish rulers' ordinances that bound conscience from those that did not. This article explores the principles that animated the dispute and the methods used for linking human law to the fate of the soul or challenging that connection.

AB - In Romans 13:5, St. Paul famously announced that Christians must obey law not only for fear of punishment, but also "for conscience sake." Early modern Protestants and Catholics agreed that violations of laws that bound conscience, if unrepented, threatened damnation. But not all law obligated conscience. Natural law typically did. So did Jesus's injunctions and God's moral law revealed in the Old Testament, but not His judicial law governing civic affairs or His ceremonial law regulating Jewish religious observance. Human laws about things indifferent, matters neither commanded nor forbidden in scripture and nature, presented the most complicated case. Disobedience to only certain classes of human laws - but not all - imperiled the soul. Catholics and Protestants fiercely debated how to distinguish rulers' ordinances that bound conscience from those that did not. This article explores the principles that animated the dispute and the methods used for linking human law to the fate of the soul or challenging that connection.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84949623820&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84949623820&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0738248015000450

DO - 10.1017/S0738248015000450

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:84949623820

VL - 33

SP - 803

EP - 837

JO - Law and History Review

JF - Law and History Review

SN - 0738-2480

IS - 4

ER -