Ordered Loves, Inequalities, Supremacy, and "Racism"

 By: Thomas F. Booher 

Today, being a white Christian man in the United States and holding to properly ordered loves (a good definition of which is given here: https://americanreformer.org/2024/12/rightly-ordered-love/)  consistently and publicly will get you labeled as a "racist" or "white supremacist" or something similar soon enough. 

In fact, you do not even have to be white or a man to be labeled something like a "white supremacist". But there's a rule out there today that if you can't find a minority to say it first, then what you are saying is bigoted, racist, etc. 

I like the phrase/terminology of "properly ordered loves" because it is harder to slander/bear false witness against. It is harder to reduce down to some sort of scary word like "racist" or "kinist" or "supremacist" or "nazi" or whatever. I would say I also like the notion of "family first", but apparently some have even tried to attack those who would prioritize the family -- recognizing our own household as something God has called us to love most and be fiercely loyal to over many other things including other families (hence properly ordered loves, 1 Timothy 5:8, etc.) -- by saying we are "familial-ists"! Oh no, watch out, the "familial-ists" are coming! Look at how strongly they love their families and devote themselves to them to the glory of God! Arrggggh! 

The maneuver used again and again by many is to strike you down simply by labeling you some scary  sounding but never clearly defined term/word, like "familial-ist, kinist, racist, nationalist, supremacist, patriarchal, etc." If you believe God made men and women different, with men created to lead and rule, and women to be helpmeets to the men leading and ruling for God's glory, you are a big bad "patriarchal-ist". 

In this case, the sinister goal, whether such persons who do this fully realize what they are doing or not, is to evoke imagery of a blustering, angry, abusive man that beats his wife and children mercilessly, thinking God blesses him as he does so. That's the same magic spell cast over many who are labeled a supremacist, racist, or other words today. "Oh, you think you should love your own family and country over others? You sound like a wicked nationalist, just like the national socialists, the Nazi's, and you must be Hitler. And you must hate other peoples and nations as well. Enjoy the flames of hell, you bigot!"

Now, there are some who are so worn out with this, they have tried to "flip the script" as it were, and simply embrace these labels as good things. "So, you say loving my own people first and most makes me a supremacist? So be it then, I am a supremacist. In fact, our European forbears who settled this land are, after all, supreme to the natives that were here and others who have failed to take dominion. Supremacist is actually an excellent label, thank you very much." Of course, that becomes absolute proof positive for those who throw such labels around with the goal of demonizing decent people who are simply noticing reality and history that such persons actually are demonic "supremacists". 

Satan loves to twist words, confuse the truth by doing so. This is why bearing false witness is a sin, after all. The struggle is when Satan takes terms that can be good and reasonable, and twists them so that if you believe in rightly ordered loves at all, you get labeled with a term that is supposed to send a chill up everyone's spine. 

What makes this "spell" so effective and powerful today? It is sad but expected when progressives and leftists do this and get away with it. It is revealing when those who claim to be conservative and on the "right" do this and destroy those who are much closer to them and should be allies, or at least co-belligerents. It shows that we have been blinded by many things. Perhaps the root term and all-encompassing ideology that allows the spell to continue over our minds, even sincere and Bible-believing Christians, is "Egalitarianism". That word doesn't send a chill up our spines. The way it is being wielded though, frankly should. Merriam Webster online defines this as the image shows: 

By the surface definition, today we would say we of course would wish to be "Egalitarian". Don't we all believe in equality? But as usual, it all depends on what we mean by "equality". Are all human beings made in the image of God by God Himself? Yes, of course. But does that mean all human beings are identical and equal in every sense of that word? Of course not. But that is where we start getting very queasy, if not angry already. After all, doesn't the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence plainly say, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." 

Well, 1776 comes before 1790, but is only 14 years apart, and the Naturalization Act of 1790 essentially said that only free white persons/Europeans of good character could be considered for citizenship in the United States of America. Today we have redefined this portion of the Declaration of Independence along modern liberal, Egalitarian lines, such that 1790 would have to somehow be racist, bigoted, evil, etc. But imagine you, an American with white/European lineage, going to Japan and demanding they allow you to become a citizen, and further, regard you as Japanese! Do you see how absurd this is? What duty does any country have to grant you citizenship, and then lie and tell you that you are now "one of them"? You are not. We should not have to do this here in America either. 

Further, our founders did not believe, for instance, that slavery had to be banished in every sense of the word, in order for all men to be created equal and have certain unalienable Rights. Evidently, they believed, with a straight face, that being created equal and being born a slave was no injustice or sinful inequality in itself, nor did being a slave  inherently prevent one from obtaining "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

What does Scripture say on this point? Is slavery in itself evil? No. God Himself commanded His people to enslave pagan, enemy, wicked nations. Imprisonment is certainly a form of slavery, where freedom is stripped and labor is mandated. Children have much freedom limited while in their homes, and are "imprisoned/enslaved" to some great degree to the will of their parents, and the 5th commandment and all Scripture commands that children are to obey their parents in the Lord. 

Paul and Peter, inspired by the Holy Spirit to write this down in Scripture, say with a straight face that bondservants/slaves are to obey their Masters, and that Masters are to treat their slaves well, Eph. 6:5-9, 1 Pet. 2:18-25. In fact in 1 Pet. 2, slaves are even to bear up under harsh masters that beat them, not because Masters had a right to cruelly treat their slaves, but rather because Christ Himself also suffered unjustly, and at times we may be called to do the same, knowing the Lord will reward us for suffering unjustly just as He did His Son Jesus Christ. 

But the point is this -- today we often import modern Egalitarianism into the Scriptures, such that we have to explain away things like slavery in the Bible, including the New Testament. Paul regulates slavery, he doesn't abolish it. He speaks to the Christian household, and lists Masters and Slaves in the household right alongside husband and wife, and children and parents. We dare not rebuke God and the Holy Spirit! We dare not say the Lord was wrong when He permitted slavery, and even sanctioned slave-owning (in certain forms at least) where the Master treated his slaves well. 

This is not at all to say that slavery is the ideal, or that we should be striving for slavery. Paul also says in I Corinthians 7:21-24, "Let each one remain in the same calling in which he was called. Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use it. For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave. You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. Brethren, let each one remain with God in that state in which he was called."

If you can acquire freedom in a righteous and reasonable way, and use that to further serve God, praise God! Do so. But, note also, the slave in Christ is freed in Christ, freed to serve the Lord in his station in life. So then, "do not be concerned about it...let each one remain with God in that state in which he was called."

Already we are having a detailed discussion about something unconscionable to the modern mind -- slavery and its relative utility. Treating anyone like wild beasts, locked up in a cage to suffer and die, such as the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, is morally evil and reprehensible. It is not treating human beings well. It is being an awful Master. Such treatment would only be fitting, perhaps, for severe criminals. 

But is slave-owning, in itself sinful? No. If one bought a slave and treated that slave well, and did not have a hand in causing that slave to be shipped over in wicked conditions, etc., the slave owner would be commended by Christ, by Paul, by the early Church, received into membership, given communion, could even serve as a Minister of the Gospel, provided he treated his slaves well.

So return to the first definition listed above for egalitarianism, "a belief in human equality especially with respect to social, political, and economic affairs." Then add to it the second definition, "a social philosophy advocating the removal of inequalities among people." 

Is this righteous? The women's liberation movement, demanding their right to vote, was done in the name of "equality". Women today who demand they are allowed to preach in churches do so in the name of "equality" and removing inequalities among people. Women in the workforce, doing every job a man can do, including combat roles in the military, etc., are done in the name of removing boundaries, also known as "equality" today. 

The second definition shows that those who hold to this philosophy believe that most all inequalities are evil, that we must overcome differences, strengths and weaknesses, hierarchy, particular callings and roles, in order to achieve the greatest good and righteousness. Indeed, only by doing so can we have, they would say, true "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." 

Well, how is all that "equality" working out for us today in the good ol' USA? Now men are demanding equality by being called women so that they can play in women's sports! Children are having their privates removed at their parent's urging so that they can truly be "equal", so that they can truly be the desired sex/gender they were meant to be, that they "desire" to be. This, of course, will set them free, and give them their true, inalienable rights. 

Things have gotten so far off the rails we have finally began to see the root cause of Satan's deceptions all along -- the myth of equality. This was, in many ways, Satan's original temptation, going back to the Garden and the Fall of man. He promised Eve, and derivatively Adam, "equality" with God, knowing good and evil, by partaking of the forbidden fruit. Such equality, such privilege and blessing, was deserved, demanded, and God was the true demon to withhold it! That, at least, is the lie Satan has been telling from the beginning, and the tale he continues to weave throughout history and today. 

So let us be honest. Individuals are not all equal. Some, by nature and nurture, are superior to others. Others are inferior, and some are equal. Now, we can say this in a very simplistic and rather stupid way. One person may be superior in this or that gifting or area, but not so in another. Bob may think with his mind better than Bill, naturally a better critical thinker and problem solver, but Bill may be better at working with his hands, visualizing how to build things, or intuitively getting something done in the real world. Then there are gifts of speech, memory, strength, and the like. But even here, we tend to try to soften the differences by saying something like, "well, sure, there are inequalities, but they all balance out in the end. So there's still really an equality/balancing despite relative strengths and weaknesses." But is this true? No, it is not.

Further, we should recognize that the Westminster Larger Catechism, compiled by many famed Puritans of old, the "Westminster Divines" as they are called, codified the language of Superiors, Inferiors, and Equals in Q&A 124-133, 

Q. 124. Who are meant by father and mother in the fifth commandment?

A. By father and mother, in the fifth commandment, are meant, not only natural parents, but all superiors in age and gifts; and especially such as, by God’s ordinance, are over us in place of authority, whether in family, church, or commonwealth. Prov. 23:22, 25: Eph. 6:1-2; 1 Tim. 5:1-2; Gen. 4:20-22; Gen. 45:8; 2 Kings 5:13; 2 Kings 2:12; 2 Kings 13:14; Gal. 4:19; Isa. 49:23. 

To use an innocuous, sports analogy: A fullback in football, which is a dying breed in today's game, is usually good at only one thing, unless he is Mike Alstott. He is big, burly, and good at blocking. He might be able to get you two yards and a cloud of dust, or punch it in at the goal line. He might be able to catch a pass out of the backfield, but don't hold your breath. His job is to be a mauler, to pave the path for the half-back to run through with the football in his hands. The fullback basically has one strength, and so even the best blocking fullbacks in NFL history, the Lorenzo Neal's of the world, aren't going to be paid as well as even mediocre backup Quarterbacks. Is this unjust? Of course not. But does it reveal an inequality? Of course it does, and that's perfectly fine. It's reality. It is what it is. Further, it doesn't erase the value or worth of Neal's contributions as a fullback. Ladainian Tomlinson, the half-back that Neal blocked for for many years, was an MVP and is now in the NFL hall of fame. 

In 2007, Lorenzo Neal became the highest paid running back, signing a 3 year deal/extension worth 5.1 million dollars. Tomlinson way back in 2001 signed a rookie contract that paid him over 6 million every season, for a total of almost 40 million dollars over those 6 seasons. He went on to sign another large contract that paid him 7.5 million dollars per season. Neal was a far better blocker than Tomlinson, but Tomlinson got far more money, because he could do many more valuable things than what Neal could accomplish. 

If you have ever played chess, you know that different pieces have different "abilities" and point values depending on their ability. There is no "equality" between a pawn and a knight, much less a queen. And yet, depending on how the board is lining up, sometimes it is the pawn that becomes crucial, may even win the game for you and put the opposing king in check-mate. All are "equal" in that they are chess pieces and in the game, and are useful and contribute. But the chess pieces are not all "equal" in value and worth.  

Nobody has a panic attack when we say these obviously true things in the world of sports or chess. But what about in the world of real life? Some people, by God's good pleasure and kindness, have greater giftings and aptitudes than others, of body and mind. Further, we have to recognize that certain families/dynasties/lineages have been superior to others. And yes, some peoples/nations are superior to others at times, as the Lord blesses, raising up one and putting down another. All these inequalities are ultimately from God's hand, often blessing the righteous and casting down the wicked. But Scripture also tells us time and again that sometimes the righteous must suffer unjustly for a season, while the wicked seemingly enjoy all the blessings. Such are the complexities of life. 

Now, we are never excused to claim there are inequalities when they aren't actually present, nor to exaggerate them. Recognizing there is a ranking and ordering to loyalties and loves, doesn't mean we are all ordering them rightly. We must judge with righteous judgment. I have seen some online so glamorizing their own ancestors that they basically venerate their paganism and try to argue it was infused with so much light that the Gospel coming to European shores was simply Christ revealing Himself in full form, such that their pagan gods were akin to types and shadows of Christ! This type of thinking and teaching is foolish and heretical. 

Others have gone to an extreme overcorrection regarding missions work. While I heartily agree, for example, that taking a bunch of teenagers overseas to "evangelize" foreign nations is foolhardy, a large waste of money, and more of an excuse to have a vacation, nevertheless meaningful missions work can be done by ordained ministers. Our nation is in decline and the vast bulk of our church resources and ministerial labors should focus on local missions, reviving our own people here, but that does not mean there is never a situation where raising modest funds to send our pastors short term to help other foreign ministers is somehow a "betraying of your own people/race". If you have time for a hobby without sinning against your wife and children and church, you surely can help other ministers in these sorts of ways without sin. We need to avoid obtuse overcorrections. 

But Egalitarianism has a stranglehold on the minds of most persons in our nation today, including Evangelical and Reformed Churches. It is the main threat, and is a deception of Satan that undercuts our very vision and ability and thought process to judge with righteous judgment from the outset. 

So while we cannot say that Bob, simply because he comes from a good stock and line and nation and education, is automatically going to be more gifted than Bill who came from some dark jungle of Africa steeped in paganism, at the same time, we must recognize that with such extreme inequalities from the start, "Bob" is going to ordinarily be more gifted naturally, and turn out more cultured, learned, and achieve more than the other. This should not lead to boasting, but humility, in those who are more gifted by nature and nurture. For to whom much is given, much is required. Those who have superior gifting by nature, and nurture, will be held responsible by God all the more strictly for how they use that. But denying these "inequalities" exist, or even worse, saying they do exist but are unjust, unfair, and evil, and trying to erase them by elevating inferiors over superiors, is wicked inversion of God's order, distorts ordered loves, and denies God's gracious gifts given to some and not others, in whatever measure he sees fit, whether these are natural or supernatural giftings/aptitudes/cultivations, etc. 

It should go without saying that natural giftedness/advantages as well as growing up in a superior culture and better economic class and education, etc., does not save/redeem a person, nor predispose God to redeem such a person, for God is no "respecter of persons" (Rom. 2:11, Acts 10:34-35). At the same time, we must recognize these advantages are owing to God's kindness to begin with, and God is often pleased to use these temporal blessings as means to receive Gospel/salvific blessings -- to hear the Gospel, be regenerated by the Spirit, repent and believe in Christ, and then use these natural, God-given advantages to be a faithful and well-equipped Christian, to humbly serve and help others. God often uses the weak to shame the wise. But those who have been taught and trained well, such as the Apostle Paul, once regenerated, will be able to use their learning and other aptitudes and advantages for much glorious work for the sake of God's kingdom.

In the parable of the 10 talents, remember the proportions. True, while this is a parable about the Kingdom of God, it has application to all mankind, whether redeemed or not, whether within God's kingdom/covenant or not. In fact, the text itself notes that the giving of "talents" is in proportion to the variance of "abilities" of each individual, Matt. 25:14ff.: 

“For the kingdom of heaven is like a man traveling to a far country, who called his own servants and delivered his goods to them. And to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one, to each according to his own ability; and immediately he went on a journey. Then he who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and made another five talents. And likewise he who had received two gained two more also. But he who had received one went and dug in the ground, and hid his lord’s money. After a long time the lord of those servants came and settled accounts with them.

“So he who had received five talents came and brought five other talents, saying, ‘Lord, you delivered to me five talents; look, I have gained five more talents besides them.’ His lord said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.’ He also who had received two talents came and said, ‘Lord, you delivered to me two talents; look, I have gained two more talents besides them.’ His lord said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.’

“Then he who had received the one talent came and said, ‘Lord, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you have not sown, and gathering where you have not scattered seed. And I was afraid, and went and hid your talent in the ground. Look, there you have what is yours.’

“But his lord answered and said to him, ‘You wicked and lazy servant, you knew that I reap where I have not sown, and gather where I have not scattered seed. So you ought to have deposited my money with the bankers, and at my coming I would have received back my own with interest. So take the talent from him, and give it to him who has ten talents.

‘For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

Reformed Preacher, Theologian and well known Bible Commentator Matthew Poole ( (1624–1679) concisely strikes the death knell to the wicked Egalitarianism of our day, from his commentary on this passage, Matthew 25:15, 

"'to one five talents, to another two, to another one, to every man according to his several ability', 

it signifieth only God’s unequal distribution of his gifts to the sons of men, according to his own good pleasure; which is true both concerning natural parts, as wit, understanding, judgment, memory, as concerning those which the heathens call good things of fortune, as riches, honours, aud dignities; Christians call them the good things of Providence; under which notion also come all acquired habits, or endowments, such as learning, knowledge, moral habits, &c., which though acquired are yet gifts, because it is the same God who gives us power to get wealth, as Moses speaks, Deu 8:18, who also gives men power to get knowledge, and upon study and meditation to comprehend the natures and causes of things, and also to govern and bridle our appetites: or the gifts of more special providence, or distinguishing grace. I take all those powers given to men, by which they are enabled to do good, or to excel others, to come under the notion of the goods here mentioned, which God distributeth unequally according to his own good pleasure, and as seemeth best to his heavenly wisdom, for the government of the world, and the ordering of the affairs of his church; of all which God will have all account one day, and reward men according to the improvement, or no improvement, which they have made of them in their several stations."

Here is Matthew Henry on that same passage. You will even see that he approvingly quotes and then translates from Latin, the Roman Stoic Philosopher Seneca, who lived around the time of Christ Himself : 

"When Divine Providence has made a difference in men’s ability, as to mind, body, estate, relation, and interest, divine grace dispenses spiritual gifts accordingly, but still the ability itself is from him. Observe, First, Every one had some one talent at least, and that is not a despicable stock for a poor servant to begin with. A soul of our own is the one talent we are every one of us entrusted with, and it will find us with work. Hoc nempe ab homine exigiture, ut prosit hominibus; si fieri potest, multis; si minus, paucis; si minus, proximis, si minus, sibi: nam cum se utilem caeteris efficit, commune agit negotium. Et si quis bene de se meretur, hoc ipso aliis prodest quod aliis profuturum parat—It is the duty of a man to render himself beneficial to those around him; to a great number if possible; but if this is denied him, to a few; to his intimate connections; or, at least, to himself. He that is useful to others, may be reckoned a common good. And whoever entitles himself to his own approbation, is serviceable to others, as forming himself to those habits which will result in their favour. Seneca de Otio Sapient. Secondly, All had not alike, for they had not all alike abilities and opportunities. God is a free Agent, dividing to every man severally as he will; some are cut out for service in one kind, others in another, as the members of the natural body. When the householder had thus settled his affairs, he straightway took his journey. Our Lord Jesus, when he had given commandments to his apostles, as one in haste to be gone, went to heaven."

Finally, to complete a three-fold witness, here is John Calvin on the same passage:

"Let us know that the Lord does not bestow on all indiscriminately the same measure of gifts, (Ephesians 4:7,) but distributes them variously as he thinks proper, (1 Corinthians 12:11,) so that some excel others. But whatever gifts the Lord has bestowed upon us, let us know that it is committed to us as so much money, that it may yield some gain; for nothing could be more unreasonable than that we should allow to remain buried, or should apply to no use, God's favors, the value of which consists in yielding fruit. Matthew 25:15. To every one according to his own ability. By this term Christ does not distinguish between natural gifts and the gifts of the Spirit; for we have neither power nor skill [688] which ought not to be acknowledged as having been received from God; and, therefore, whoever shall determine to give God his share will leave nothing for himself. What then is meant by saying, that the master of the house gives to each person more or less, according to his own ability? It is because God, as he has assigned to every one his place, and has bestowed on him natural gifts, gives him also this or the other injunction, employs him in the management of affairs, raises him to various offices, furnishes him with abundant means of eminent usefulness, and presents to him the opportunity."

So in summary, inequalities are real among individuals, indeed even writ large among families, communities, and nations. The Bible after all does speak of tribes, tongues, and nations, and causes some to fall and others to rise. And we are called to show piety to our own family and household first, indeed, a godly father lays up an inheritance for his children's children, Proverbs 13:22. Nations with people doing this are going to excel over other nations over time. If we look back at history, in God's natural gifting and supernatural grace, we have seen in His kindness many European lands be richly blessed, even to help spread the Gospel far and wide, after it reached their shores in the ministry of the Apostles. Our forefathers settled the land that became the United States, when people who rightly can be characterized as savages did not do so for hundreds if not thousands of years. We did not do that in a perfectly righteous or sinless way, but it was a Christian European people who came over, took dominion, and evangelized the more savage tribes as well. Despite the sins and warts that were in there, the Lord mightily used these Pilgrims and those who came after, for His glory and the good of millions of peoples. 

Now, with Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy and others demanding we allow highly talented foreigners come in and take American jobs, we need to be able, without guilt, to assert our historic and present superiority, possible only by God's kindness, and further our right to our own land, which is for us and our children in this nation, and not for the foreigner. Indeed, to bring in foreigners and exalt them to high places is suicide and wickedness, a judgment of God per Deut. 28:43-44, 

“The alien who is among you shall rise higher and higher above you, and you shall come down lower and lower. He shall lend to you, but you shall not lend to him; he shall be the head, and you shall be the tail.

We must judge with righteous judgment, which begins with rejecting wicked, Satanic "Egalitarianism" and embrace the inequalities that God has ordained in this world, including among peoples. We must do that in a loving and holy way, and in all humility, knowing our superiorities are from God at root, whether superiorities of nature or nurture. And also where we are inferior, we thank God for those who are our superiors and for their kindness to help us. We must seek to do good to all, but in the proper order, with rightly ordered loves and loyalties, to our own family and friends first. 

Let them call us what names they must, we will stand on God's Word and Truth, and multiply our talents as he enables us, for His glory and our good. When some overreact or overcorrect, saying Bill is only a one talent man that is burying his talent, when in fact he might even be a 5 talent man doing well, we should rebuke such obvious errors and slanders, even if Bill is a native of the jungles of Africa and yet was well-endowed far beyond what we would have imagined possible. Also, if the United States and our Heritage has had a long line of 5 talent families flowing from Europe, and we are rapidly squandering it and God is giving us over, we shouldn't lie about this either. We should not deny our blessed past, nor deny our faltering present, but seek to revive the flames of godliness and glory once again, with God's help and strength. 

A good article on generosity and hospitality, which really gets into properly ordered loves, can be found here: https://americanreformer.org/2023/06/the-virtue-of-hospitality/  

***1/31/2025 Addition***

I thought I'd share another quote a friend of mine pointed me to, regarding ordered loves. The more you actually study the Church tradition, including the Reformers on these matters, the more it becomes evident this is the kind of thing that basically everyone believed. You may have heard that J.D. Vance just referred to ordered loves in an interview as well, and then online referenced it as the ordo amoris. 

Anyway, this quote is from William Ames (learn more here: https://www.monergism.com/topics/puritans/william-ames-1576-1633), one of the chief Puritans who also advised on the Synod of Dordt in 1619, which produced the Canons of Dort, one of our Confessional documents, and from which really came the idea of the "5 points of Calvinism" over against the Arminians. He would absolutely be called a "Kinist" and "Racist" today by many Reformed Pastors today, who I'll leave them unnamed. Anyway, here is the Ames quote, which is actually very important, because if we jumble this up (and we have on an individual, family, church, community, and national level) things go very badly: 

13. The order of this charity [love] is this: that God is first and chiefly to be loved by charity, and so he is, as it were, the formal reason for this charity toward our neighbour. Next after God we are bound to love ourselves, namely with that charity which respects true blessedness; for loving God himself with a love of union, we love ourselves immediately with that chief charity which respects our spiritual blessedness. But secondarily, we should love others whom we would have partake of the same good with us. Moreover, others may be deprived of this blessedness without

our fault, but we ourselves cannot; and therefore we are more bound to will and to seek this blessedness for ourselves than for others.

14. This is why the love of ourselves has the force of a rule or a measure for the love of others:

You shall love your neighbour as yourself.

15. Hence it is never lawful to commit any sin for another’s sake, even though our offence may seem small, and to be a chief good which we should seek for another. For he that wittingly and willingly sins, hates his own soul. Pro 8.36, He that sins against me, offers violence to his own soul. Pro 29.24.He that partakes with a thief, hates himself: he hears cursing and does not declare it.2

16. Among men, none that is capable of being blessed, should be wholly removed from being embraced by our charity; for if we love God above all things, no enmities will so far prevail with us, that we may not love our very enemies for God. Mat 5.39; Rom 12.17; 1Thes 5.15. 1Pet 3.9.3

17. But among men, those who come nearer to God, and nearer in God to ourselves, are more to be loved than others,. Gal 6.10, Let us do good to all, but especially to the household of Faith.

18. But because those who believe are nearer both to God and to us spiritually, than those who do not as yet believe, they are therefore also more to be beloved.

19. Yet this is to be so understood that it refers to the present time, and to immediate affection. For we may will that good to some other person as much or more in times to come, because the grace of God and faith has come between. This is the sense in which the affection of the Apostle for the Israelites is to be taken, Rom 9.3.4

20. If among those who are to be beloved, there is no apparent disparity either in respect to God, or in respect to us, then they are to be beloved equally.

21. But if any apparent disparity appears, either in their nearness to God or to ourselves, then the one who exceeds in any nearness, is more to be beloved — that is, when we cannot exercise the act of our love alike toward all, we are more bound to place our love on those whom God has commended to us by some special nearness or communion, than on others. Therefore, even though we should equally will the salvation of others, yet the exercise and care of this will is chiefly due those who are joined near to us in some special respect. For example, though a Soldier ought to wish well to all his fellow Soldiers, yet he is bound to take most care of those who are of the same band, and closest to him in Rank. This appears in that example of Paul, who more fervently desired the conversion of the Israelites than of other Nations. He gives one reason for this affection: because they were his brethren, and kindred according to the flesh, Rom 9.3.

22. Yet in this prerogative of charity, we must wish for those who are near to us, those good things which pertain to that conjunction by which they are near — such as wishing spiritual good things to those who are most spiritually joined to us, and natural good things to those with whom we have a natural nearness. It is not that those kinds of good things are to be separated from one another in our desires, but because of the very kind of conjunction, it is as it were, a beckon from God by which he stirs us up to bestow our pains chiefly in this or that kind.

23. Hence it follows: First, that kindred in blood, Caeteris paribus, all other things being equal, are more to be beloved than strangers, in those things which pertain to the good things of this life; and among those who are near in blood, those who are nearest are most to be loved.

24. Secondly, that some special friend is more to be beloved than an ordinary kinsman in blood, at least in those things which pertain to the common duties of this life. This is because that friendship may be such that considered by itself, it has a nearer conjunction than consanguinity. Pro 18.24. For a friend is nearer than a brother.

25. Thirdly, that parents are to be loved more than any friend, because the nearness of parents is greater than that of friends as touching communicating those things which are most intimate to us. 1Tim 5.4. If any widow has children or nephews, let them learn first to show piety towards their own house, and to recompence their parents: for this is honest and acceptable in the sight of God.

26. Fourthly, that parents are more to be beloved than children, in those good things which ought to redound from the effect to the cause — such as Honour, Esteem, Reverence, Thankfulness, and the like. But children are more to be loved than parents, in those kinds of things which are derived from the cause to the effect, such as Maintenance, Promotion, Providence, and the like.

27. Fifthly, that husbands and wives are to be loved more than parents or children, in those things which pertain to society and union in this life; for that is the greatest nearness, of which it is said they shall be one flesh: Gen 2.24 and Mat 19.5, Therefore a man shall leave his Father and Mother, and shall cling to his Wife, and they shall be one flesh.

28. Sixthly, that those who have deserved good from us are more to be beloved than others; and among those, such who have communicated spiritual good things to us are most to be beloved: Let him that is taught in the word communicate1 all good things to the one who taught him, Gal 6.6.

29. Seventhly, that a community or a whole society is more to be beloved than any member of it, because the conjunction of a part with the whole is greater than with another part. And therefore, a prince whose life and safety is necessary or most profitable for the common good, is more to be beloved than any or various of the common people — indeed, more than ourselves in temporal things. 2Sam 21.17. You shall no more go with us to battle, lest you quench the light of Israel; also Lam 4.20.2

-William Ames: The Marrow of Theology, Ch. 16: Of Justice and Charity Toward our Neighbor, Points 13-29.