“With Dangers Compast Round” 1660–1665be given to “vagrants or beggers by choice,” and they should be proportioned to
the rank, way of life, and level of education of recipients, so as to “avoid the absurd-
ity of equalizing the unequal” (790).
The final chapter (17) treats the reciprocal duties of magistrate and people and of
ministers and church members in distinctly Miltonic terms. The only topic treating
kings is headed “The immorality of royal courts” (796). Reprising his argument in
Of Civil Power and in Book 1, Milton restricts the duties of magistrates toward
religion to fostering and protecting it; if they exercise force over conscience or
supervision over the church they are as much Antichrist as the pope:
We may be sure that, since Christ’s kingdom is not of this world, it does not stand by
force and constraint... the gospel should not be made a matter of compulsion, and
faith, liberty and conscience cannot be. These are the concerns of ecclesiastical disci-
pline, and are quite outside the province of civil jurisdiction.^180Treating the magistrate’s duties abroad, Milton argues the legitimacy of war, if
undertaken with careful consideration, citing Old Testament precedent and the
absence of New Testament prohibition (803). Treating the duties of ministers and
church members he chiefly cites scripture texts and points back to his discussions in
Book 1.^181 Discussing the obedience subjects are said to owe tyrants, Milton does
not reprise his argument in Tenure, but he does deny any scriptural authority to the
absolutist position by refuting the texts usually cited to support it. 1 Peter 2:13
pertains only to obeying lawful ordinances and verse 18 “is addressed to slaves, and
has nothing to do with the duties of free people” (800). The Israelites obeyed
Pharaoh but they were nowhere commanded to do so or praised for it; and Daniel’s
example of obedience in captivity is irrelevant. However, he concedes that “in
lawful matters it may be prudent to obey even a tyrant, or at any rate to be a time-
server, in the interest of public peace and personal safety” (801). That qualification
may mean to sanction his own and other Puritans’ prudential behavior in the Res-
toration regime.