Page:Complete Works of Menno Simons.djvu/428

128 Perhaps some will ask, Why then, did they scourge the apostles? Stone Stephen? and why were many saints put to death by Saul? Why was their community destroyed, since they were not allowed capital punishment?

To this I answer: That all this did not transpire without the consent of the Romans, for they, themselves, confessed before Pilate, saying, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death," John 18: 31. The stoning of Stephen was not done lawfully, but merely in a riot, as Luke declares, saying, Exclamantes autem voce magna, continuerunt aures suas, and impetum fecerunt unanimiter in eum; and this the Zurichans have also thus translated into the German: "They cried with a loud voice, and stopped their ears and ran upon him with one accord," as they also intended to do with Christ, and also with Paul, Acts 7: 57; 10: 31; 21: 30; 23: 12; 26: 10; Luke 4: 29. Again, that Saul or Paul destroyed the church, and put to death many of the saints, as he related before Agrippa, we may be sure that he did not do so without the consent of the magistracy; for it is manifest and incontrovertible, that the scepter did not allow them to put any one to death, and, for this reason they said, "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death;" the scepter was taken from them, and came into the hands of the Romans, as has been explained above. If they had been allowed to practice their own law of blood, they would not have delivered Christ unto Pilate; Lucius would not have taken Paul from the tumultuous Jews; Herod would not have imprisoned Peter, nor killed John the baptist, and James; for this would not do, in the worldly adjudication, for one to grasp the jurisdiction of another; such a policy would, doubtlessly, soon fail. Acts 21: 27–40; 24: 7.

We are well aware, beloved brethren, that there are some who call this Jewish shunning, or ban, to which Christ has directed us, a Pharisaic leaven, and frankly say, We do not want to be pointed to a leaven, without the Scriptures. Whosoever these may be, we pray them for the Lord's sake, first, to consider well what they say; for, in my opinion, they do not understand their own words. Does not Moses say, "Whosoever does not hearken unto my (God's) words, which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him," Deut. 18: 19. Does not Jeremiah say. That he "shall execute judgment and justice in the earth?" Does not the Father from high heaven, say, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him?" Does not Paul say, "In whom (Christ) are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge?" Jer. 23: 5; Matt. 17: 5; Col. 2: 3. I am sure that the word and teaching of Christ is Scripture enough for all the pious. He it is, I say, and not I, who points his believers to the use of the ban. Tu quis es, qui ex adverso respondes Deo? That is, Who art thou that wouldst answer God with perverseness?

If there be any brother under the whole canopy of heaven, who can show, by the divine truth, that these words of Christ apply to any other time than to the time of Christ, without violating the Scriptures, then I will gladly hear him, and open my ears to the truth; for I desire not to contend against the truth, which is my testimony, but I desire to uphold it. For, for the sake of truth, I have had to hear and suffer much, these many years; and am yet prepared unto death, by the grace of the Lord, to testify to the truth. But I know, and am convinced, that it can not apply to any other time, without violating the word and Scriptures of Christ, as we have sufficiently shown and proven, to the reader, above, by abundance of reasons and Scriptures.

Secondly, I desire, for God's sake, that my beloved brethren will weigh with the balance of the Scriptures, what leaven is, and what the Scriptures mean by it, before they call this beforementioned ban, to which Christ directs us, a pharisaic leaven. It implies, first, the word and its power, or rather, faith and its power. Secondly, it signifies a corrupting, ungodly being or man. Thirdly, a deceiving, leavened, corrupting doctrine. If the Jewish ban and shunning, to which Christ points us, was a leaven, as some mistakenly assert, then they must show, by virtue of the Scriptures, what leavening and corruption it has caused in the pure word, and in the hearts of the