Kingdome For though his Title was just and good to such a Kingdome yet he to express his humility and contempt of all worldly pomp for a pattern to his Disciples would not seek nor endeavour the attainment of that honour although if he had endeavoured the same yet it had been no rebellion in him for if he would have claimed it his servants would and might lawfully have fought against his enemies but the reason why they did not was because Christ did deny them a commission Joh. 18.11 But for the justness and Legality of Christs Title to the Crown of Judah Notwithstanding Cesars title of Conquest all those places cited out of Matthew Luke and John do sufficiently declare it And therefore seeing Cesars conquest of that Kingdome could not so Legitimate his Title as to destroy Christs Right to the Crown I do thence conclude that Conquest is not a lawful Title in it self nor a sufficient warrant for us to withdraw our obedience from our lawful and native Soveraign before God hath declared his wil and pleasure concerning the same by one of the two prementioned wayes unless where it pleaseth the Prince himself to submit as Christ did to Cesar and then our submission to that Conquerer is a part of our duty to our own Prince and an act of obedience Primarily to his Commands and by vertue of the Princes Commands to the Conquered For it is our duty to honour them whom the King will honour Quaere If it be not lawfull for the people to elect their own King nor any other meanes assigned by God for collation of this honour but either Birth-right or Conquest What is to be done where the Royall Issue is extinct and no Conquerer doth Claime Or else where a mixt multitude amongst whome there is no relation of blood to preheminence one above the rest do consent to make a Plantation and to erect a new Common-wealth Sol. Samuel hath set us a president in this Case 1 Samuel 10.20.21 For though the Lord had revealed his will to Samuel concerning his owne election and appointment of Saul to be King 1 Samuel 9.15 Yet because Samuel knew that King should be a Tyrant to plague the people for their Idolatrous trust in a King 1 Samuel 10.18 he concealed that Revelation and would not nominate their King least the people should afterwards when they suffered by Sauls oppression blame Samuel for appointing him But used the meanes of lots to declare the will and pleasure of God unto the people And the like course was used by the eleven Apostles when they had no warrant from God to appoint or elect another Apostle nor durst presume to conferre that high calling upon any man without a warrant from God as you may read Acts 1.23 So that in both those cases mentioned in this question we are to use the meanes of lots For that meanes is likewise warranted by God where his will is not otherwise declared Proverbs 16.33 But the peoples election is absolutely unlawful as the premises I hope have sufficiently manifested either in those or any other cases And thus much of Monarchie in its Natural acception as it relates to that supremacy which doth Supereminence the Monarch above all the rest of the society and thereby entitle him to the Crown My Method now in the last place presents the consideration of Monarchie in its Theological conception as it relates to those ends which qualifie all Monarchical Actions And these are Gods glory the Kings honour and salus populi CHAP. IX Of the nature and species of the ends of Monarchie IN the sixth Chapter of this Booke I distinguished the adaequate end of Monarchie into Principalem minùs principalem 1. The principall end is that whereunto both Monarchs and Monarchists are principally obliged to have a regard in all their Monarchicall and mutuall duties and this againe is two-fold viz. Primus à primo ortus Or according to the scholasticall expressions of others Originans originatus 1. The originant principall end which indeed is the end paramount and the Alpha and Omega of all other ends and the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all politicks is the glory of God 2. The originated principall end whis doth spring from this is the Kings honour 2. The lesse principall end which is the result of both the former is salus populi Now concerning the ends there are two things considerable 1. Their nature and wherein they doe consist whereof wee shall speake in this present Chapter And for a further explication of this point we shall in the next Chapter insist upon the Resolution of an emergent Quaere concernning the due limitation of Regall Power 2. Their order and subordination amongst themselves where wee shall demonstrate the preheminence of the Kings honour above salus populi or the peoples safety and therein also declare the just extension of the subjects obedience whereof in the eleventh Chapter And for the further illustration of all we shall likewise declare what influence oathes and covenants ought to have upon the duty either of King or Subject In the last Chapter of this Booke which shall conclude our discourse of Monarchie Now concerning the first principall end which is Gods glory it is to be understood that we doe not speake of it here in that sense which the Apostle doth Rom. 11. last that is in its extent and latitude as it is the universall end of all things but onely as it is limited to Monarchicall actions and duties in which sense Gods honour and the Kings are not really but onely modally and circumstantially different like the substance and the shadow or the waters in the fountaine and the waters in the channell And therefore both of them doe consist in the very same duties and are of the very same nature in all their speces in reference to Monarchie as the ensuing divisions will manifest whereof the first is the division of Honour in Fundamentalem Symbolicum 1. Fundamentall Honour is that true and reall excellency worth and goodnesse which doth make the Subject truly honourable and is two-fold viz. Originans originatus 1. Originant and radicall Honour is that excellency worth and goodnesse which is in God the honorante or person giving honour whereunto that Doxologie of Davids doth allude 1 Chron. 29.10 11 12. And those words of Christs to the young man Mat. 19.17 denying any to be good but one even God i.e. radically and essentially good for the persevering Angels participate of a derivative goodnesse without the least mixture of evill but onely God himselfe of a radicall primitive add essentiall goodnesse For some Angels lost their goodnesse but it is impossible for God to be divorced from his goodnesse 2. Originated and derivative Honour is that excellency worth and goodnesse which God doth communicate personae honoratae or to the person receiving this honour and this againe is two-fold viz. Ethicus Politicus 1. Ethicall Honour is that
breake Gods trust when he destroyes a city because as Solomon witnesseth Prov. 16. that judgement is Gods and the King is sent by God to destroy those cities for the Tyrannicall Prince is Gods servant for the execution of his judgements and hath his heart guided by God Prov. 21.1 as well as the good Prince is for the dispensation of Gods mercies And therefore to resist a Tyrannicall King is to resist God from whom that Tyrant doth derive his power as Christ testifieth of Pilates power John 19.11 which we may not doe to save either our lives or estates To the third Argument I answer Answ 3 that ten thousand instances are not sufficient to legitimate one act expresly prohibited by the Law of God for even the Holy Ghost himselfe doth record the failings of the most holy men and that in the most notorious manner as in Abrahams lie to the Egyptians Gen. 12. Davids Murder and Adultery Solomons Idolatry and Peters Perjury Yea and sometimes we finde their sins passed over without reproofe as in the Polygamie of Jacob David many of the Kings and others yet the silence of the Holy Ghost in passing by this sinne of Polygamie without reproofe did not make it lawfull But for the instances of resistance in David and Elijah they are all particularly answered by severall Authors who have writ of this subject Only the resistance and deposition of Rehoboam is legitimated by Gods expresse approbation but if you observe the Text you shall finde that approbation relates to Rehoboams punishment and losse of the tenne Tribes and not to the peoples act of resistance For saith the Lord this thing is from me that is the renting the ten Tribes from Rehoboam according to his owne words to Solomon 1 King 11.11 but for the peoples act of resistance it is termed a Rebellion 1 Kin. 12.19 For though the deposition of Rehoboam and exaltation of Jeroboam was good and just in it selfe in regard it was the decree of God and accordingly declared to be his will 1 Kin. 11.31 yet in regard the people had no warrant to execute that decree and in regard Jeroboam did not act in order to Gods decree looking upon the execution of that decree against Rehoboam but upon the satisfaction of his ambitious desires it was sinfull both in Jeroboam and the people And that this was Jeroboams end appeares plainly because he durst not trust God for the preservation of his Honour and Dignity although God had promised the perpetuation thereof in the same Chapter Ver. 38 as well as the donation but runne to the Devill for the security of his Crowne erecting two Calves for the people to worship lest if the people should goe up to Jerusalem to worship the Lord should not be able to continue their affections to him nor performe his promise Chap. 12.28 So that God did never approve the act of resistance against the King unlesse by those who had a particular warrant from himselfe as well for the manner as the matter as in Jehu's case 2 King 10.30 without which it is not lawfull for any man to endeavour his owne safety by any resistance or opposition of the Kings power or any other acts of dishonour to the King CHAP. XII What influence Oathes and Covenants ought to have upon the duties either of King or Subjects Quaere SUppose the King have consented to the making of Lawes destructive to his owne Honour which preferre the peoples Safety before it and have also obliged himselfe by Oath for the observance of those Lawes whether may the King breake that Oath and Rule contrary to those Laws for the support and vindication of his owne Honour Sol. This was the case of the Israelites with the Gibeonites with whom the Israelites made a Covenant Josh 9.15 contrary to a former expresse command from God Exod. 23.32 Cha. 34.12 Deut. 7.1 which Covenant therefore was not oney prejudiciall to the Israelites but also unlawfull in it selfe yet after it was confirmed with an Oath by the Israelites they might not breake it Josh 9.19 although it was gained by fraud and subtilty as appeares in the Text For when Saul did ignorantly out of zeale to the children of Israel and Judah imagining the former command of God to lay an higher obligation upon them then their own Oath so fraudulently procured breake that Covenant and destroy the Gibeonites 2 Sam. 21.1 2 3. the Lord revenged that perjurious act of Sauls upon the whole land of Israel by a constant famine yeare after yeare till the Honour of God was vindicated by the satisfaction of the Gibeonites in the bloud of seven of Sauls sonnes Ver. 9. And the Prophet David further resolves this case in expresse words Psal 15.5 Attesting Gods regard of that mans happinesse who doth regard Gods honour being thus engaged above all selfe-respects by performing what he hath sworne though it be to his owne hinderance and therefore the King may not breake a Law confirmed by an Oath although it be destructive to his owne Honour The reason whereof is Because Gods Honour by that Oath is made an hostage for the Kings fidelity and therefore the King is bound to regard the performance of that Law as he regards the Honour of Gods Name which must have the preheminence above his owne Honour Although all other Lawes not ratified with this high sanction may and ought to be revoked by the King if they be prejudiciall to his owne Honour for all such Lawes are supposed to be fraudulently procured like the grant of Mephibosheth's estate to Ziba 2 Sam. 16.1 for no man would willingly dishonour himself for that were against the Law of Nature and therefore may be revoked as that Law of Davids was by himselfe upon better information 2 Sam. 19.19 But a Law confirmed by Oath though fraudulently procured may not be revoked upon better information for that Joshua received concerning the Gibeonites Josh 9.16 yet all this must be understood of matters capable of this sanction that is such as are not destructive to the Honour of God formerly engaged by himselfe even from all eternity for Holinesse is the very Nature and Essence of God and all wicked Lawes which are opposite to this are destructive to his eternall Honour and therefore not capable of this sanction of an Oath for thereby Gods Honour is opposed to itselfe but where these two doe come in competition the lesse evill is to be made choice of we must rather breake our Oath though that be destructive to Gods temporary and adventitious Honour then act a wicked thing which is destructive to his essentiall and eternall Honour But in all matters of indifference which are capable of this sanction of an Oath that is the highest temporary sanction and therefore ought to be regarded above all former promises or resolutions of our owne although they be grounded upon a temporary command from God which is manifest in this case of the Gibeonites Quaere Seeing the Lawes preferring salus populi before the Kings Honour being confirmed by the Kings Oath doe oblige the King to act accordingly whether doe not they likewise priviledge the people to act things prejudiciall to the Kings Honour in order to their owne safety especially if the people have covenanted and sworne the same Lawes Sol. The acts of the King and the acts of the people in this case are of a farre different nature For the acts of the King in observance to those Lawes are onely prejudiciall to himselfe and his owne Honour and so are onely mala poenae and therefore capable of this sacramentall sanction from him But as for the acts of the people in this case they are destructive to the Honour both of God and the King which are sinnes prohibited in the fift Commandement which enjoynes us to regard their Honour above all selfe-respects as I have formerly declared and therefore all acts of the people either in the procurement or observance of such Lawes are mala culpae For it is a sacriledge of an high nature to violate and invade the sacred Power and Prerogative of Kings and therefore incapable of this sacramentall sanction from them For all Associations and Covenants against any of Gods Commandements are directly Covenants with Death and agreements with Hell and all the Oathes Vowes and Statutes made and framed thereupon are directly mischiefes framed by a Law and Obligations sealed to serve the Devill And whether it be safer for us to continue in the service of such a Master by acting according to such hellish Oathes and Covenants or to forsake his service by renouncing our sacriledge and giving Caesar his sacred right and due is not a case of any great difficulty to those who value God and salvation above the Devill and the damnation of their owne soules FINIS
eight species unto the will I shall for a more distinct and Methodicall proceeding herein give you first a brief Analysis of that part of Internall Government which relates to the understanding whereunto I shall suit the instances of Scripture God doth Govern the Intrinsecall acts of the understanding either by way of Illumination Immediate 1. In spirituall matters As in Revealing unto Adam that blessed seed which should break the Serpents head Gen. 3. and reiterating the same unto Noah Sem and Abraham in the same manner Nor was the Immediate power of God less seen in inspiring the minds of the Apostles most of whom were rude illiterate men and thereby enabling them not only to record the mysteries of Salvation for edification of his Church and to prescribe rules of faith and manners which should be oracles of instruction and direction unto all future ages but also to utter extemporarie words of wisdom against which all their adversaries were not able to reply Mat. 10.19 2. Or in temporall By revealing unto his Prophets even all those temporall afflictions deliverances which should befall his own people long before they came to passe as the bondage of and deliverance from Aegypt unto Abraham Gen. 15.13 The beginning and ending of the captivity of Babylon unto Ieremiah Ch. 25.8 unto John in Patmos al those imminent calamities which should befall the Church of Christ til the time of his second coming in the end of the world As we may read in the book of the Apocalypâ— Or mediate 3. In spirituall matters First by sending visions unto Daniel and after sending the Angell Gabriel to expound them and thereby to let Daniel understand the number of the yeers which were determined for the persecution of the Jewes by several Tyrants for the space of 490 years after their return from the Captivity of Babylon at the end whereof Messias the Prince should work that great deliverance for all that did or should beleeve in him Dan. 9. 4. Or in temporal So Moses became learned in all the wisdom of the Aegyptians Act. 7. And Daniel had Caldean Tutors by whose Lectures he attained unto wisdom learning and understanding in all visions and dreames Dan. 1.17 Or infatuation Immediate 5. In spirituall matters As in those who made a dumb idol by their own act and then worshipped the same Esay 44. in the Scribes and Pharisees and obstinate Jewes whose eies the Lord blinded that they could not see nor understand those things concerning Christ which many of the Ignorant people knew and beleeved Ioh. 10.42 6. Or in temporal For it is the Lord who frustrateth the tokens of the sooth-sayers and maketh Diviners mad making that knowledge which they would seem to have in future events for the prediction of good or bad success in mens affaires and fortunes appear to be foolish and vain Esay 44.25 Or mediate 7. In spirituall matters As in those false Prophets and ignorant Priests which prophesied lies and neglected the instruction of the people of whom the Lord vehemently complaineth in the Prophet Micha 3.5 Mal. 2.8 8. Or in temporal As in Absaloms embracing the destructive counsell of Hushai the Archite and rejecting the safe and politck counsell of Achitophel for saith the text The Lord had determined to destroy the good counsell of Achitophel to the intent the Lord might bring evill upon Absalom 2 Sam. 14. Now as concerning Gods actuall administration of Power and Authority in ordering and regulating the acts and effects of the will of man whether by way of obduration and perseverance in evill as in Pharaoh Nabuchad-nezzer and Belshazzar Or by way of mollification and conversion unto good as in Manasses Mary Magdalen and Paul the Maximes of Philosophy declaring the necessary dependance of the will upon the understanding and the irresistable power of the understanding over the acts and effects of the will by enforcing as it were the will to embrace or refuse whatsoever the understanding shall propose unto the will under the notion of a good or evill truly eligible or avoidable do so plainly demonstrate all the power and command over the will of man in every respect both of matter manner and meanes to be the right and prerogative of God in regard of his absolute power and command over the understanding which is the master and guide of the will that I conceive it not pertinent to produce any expresses of Scripture though it be plentifull in instances to that purpose to evidence a truth so clear and obvious For I desire to avoid prolixity where the perspicuitie of the matter doth rather recommend brevity to my judgement And here I should conclude this chapter of Internal Regiment and the parts thereof and enter upon a Polemicall discourse concerning some important doubts arising from the premises But that our former division extending the power and authority of God unto the Intrinsecall acts and effects issuing from the form and essence of all other creatures as well as of men doth require that for method sake we should in this place speak a word or two of the actuall administration and exercise thereof both in Supernaturall and naturall Agents As for the absolutenesse of Gods power and command over the acts and effects of Angels our Saviour Christ himself is a sufficient witnesse thereof teaching his Disciples Mat. 6. to pray that their obedience here in earth might be parallel to the obedience which is performed to God in Heaven And the prophet David maketh it the very property of the Angels in Heaven to fulfill the Commandments of God and to hearken unto the voice of his words Psa 103.20 Neither are the Devils lesse subject unto the commands of God as appeares by their attendance thereupon concerning the triall of Iob Ch. 1. and the seducing of Ahab 1 Kin. 22. their worshipping of Christ and proclaiming him to be the Sonne of the most High God Mar. 5. Luk. 8.28 And by that testimony which the evil spirit possessing the Damsel of Thyatyra gave unto the callings and Doctrine of Paul and Sylas Act. 16.16 And by the different respects of the evil spirit unto the adjurations of Paul and of the seven sonnes of Scaeva Act. 19. And as for Gods actual Administration of power and authority over the Intrinsecall acts of the natural Agents the holy Ghost doth sufficiently demonstrate it in recording the readiness of many of them to execute the commands of God even in such particular acts as are no way sutable to their natural Inclinations as in Ravens to feed Elijah 1 Kin. 17. In the whales attendance to receive Jonah and transport him safe to dry land Jonah Ch. 1. 2. In that fire which exercised its natural heat and fury upon the Kings Officers and yet altogether restrained the same towards the three children Dan. 3. And those hungry Lyons which would not touch Daniel in a whole nights space yet devoured his accusers in an instant Dan. 9. CHAP. III. Of the resolution
very foundation of the people because the subduction of the King produceth necessarily the ruine and destruction of the people And this Jus Divinum Implicitum which relateth to these internall blessings or bona animi and particularly to this habit of Prudence the fountain of all Morall acts is that which directly and properly claimes a place in Monarchie in its Morall Capacity 2. Externall blessings are those which Aristotle termes bona corporis fortunae the blessings of the body are temporal life health and beauty the blessings of Fortune Riches and Honour Whereof one particular is a Royal descent and another part of that honour is Primogeniture which doth entitle a man to that supremacie which is the material cause and ground of Monarchie Now this Jus Divinum Implicitum which relateth to Externall blessings and particularly to the blessing of Primogeniture in a Royall Progenie is that which doth properly claime a place in Monarchie in its Naturall capacity 2. Explicite Divine Right is that which is grounded upon the will of God revealed in the Scriptures concerning those duties which we are to performe to God as returnes of the former expreses of his love to us the Revelation of which duties is contained in express precepts and Commandments Which sanction doth make a truth absolutely and Essentially Divine excluding all humane option and prudence and admitting of no case wherein Conscience may dispence with the performance thereof without the guilt of Eternal death and Damnation the least deviation from such a precept being malum culpae that is an evill of sinne And therefore this sanction imposeth an obligation upon every mans conscience for the performance of such duties as are thus precisely commanded in what estate or condition soever he be whether Rich or poor sick or healthfull bond or free in time of warre or in time of peace And these truths which are capable of this preceptive sanction are such whose entire perfection both Immediate and ultimate consists in action and are the returnes of Gods love to us and the very expresses of our love to him Of which truths Christ meant when he said If you know these things happy are ye if ye do them For knowledge of these truths without performance doth but aggravate our guilt it being onely our performance of them which can make us happy And these are the dutyes of every mans calling wherein he is obliged in conscience so to demean himself that every action which relateth thereunto may be a Testimony of his love to God and his neighbour by squaring it according to that Rule which God hath prescribed for the Regulation thereof But for the further Illustration of this Jus Divinum explicitum you must observe that there are two sorts of express precepts and Commandments recorded in Scripture which do impose two sorts of Explicite and Essential Divine sanctions upon these practical truths 1. Are absolute and Generall precepts of the Moral Law which concern the duty of man towards God and his neighbour which is still the same in Essence both under the Law and Gospel and do Generally oblige all men in all places at al times this kind of precepts it is which adds an absolute general sanction unto those duties which are the end of Monarchie 2. are particular Circumstantial precepts which are not Universally obligatory but do concern either some men at al times as the judicial Ceremoniall Lawes did the Jewish Nation Jewish Profelites or some men onely and at some times onely as all personal Commands given upon particular occasions As that to Saul for destruction of the Amalekites with all their substance 1 Sam. 18. And that to Jonas for Proclaiming the destruction of Nineveh Jonah Cha. 1. And that to the Prophet which God sent to Bethel for abstinence both from meat and drink in that place 1 Kin. 13. Now though these precepts be temporally or personally obligatory and therefore the contempt or neglect thereof a sinne which strikes at the very face of God in his prerogative Royal yet in regard the performance of them is not a natural but onely a preternatural duty they are not equally obligatory to the Conscience as the precepts of the Moral Law are nor doth the transgression of such Commands render a man equally guilty or liable to those punishments of Eternal death and Damnation which the transgression of Moral precepts doth and therefore the severest punishments which any Scripture doth annex to such offences is that the transgressour shall be cut off from his people As it fel out in that disobedient Prophet slain by a Lion 1 Kin. 13. But I have no warrant of Scripture to judge him damn'd for that offence A confirmation whereof we have from Gods expresse declaration of his different regard to the dutyes of the Moral and of the Ceremonial Law 1 Sam. 15.22 Hos 6.6 Where God preferres Mercy and Obedience before sacrifice and burnt-offerings Querae Seeing the precepts of the Morall law are more absolutely obligatory then any other and the transgressions of those precepts more severely punishable then any other Whether ought Gods particular and Extraordinary Commands to be obeyed when they enjoyn an Act contrary to the precepts of the Moral Law as in Abrahams offering of Isaac for a sacrifice to God sol The wil of God being the ground of all Law when it is declared concerning any particular Act doth dispence with the obligation of any Law as to that particular and exempt the party commanded both from the guilt and punishment And therefore the Lord Commended Abrahams Resolution to kil his sonne in obedience to his particular Commands although the very thought and resolution of homicide be directly a transgression against the Moral Law Querae But is not God then the Author of sinne in such commands for seeing there is a transgression of the Moral Law which must necessarily be a sinne and seeing that sinne is not imputed to the man that acts the transgression because Gods Commands do exempt him Must not this sinne then be imputed to God sol God in such cases is a Judge which passeth the deserved sentence of death upon that person who is to suffer for neither Isaak nor the justest man that liveth is innocent in the eyes of God the party who obeyes these Commands is the executioner And therefore as neither Judge nor Hangman is guilty of murther in the homicide of a Malefactor deserving death so neither was God nor Abraham guilty of sinne in that resolution of Abrahams to kil his son at the particular Command of God And this Jus Divinum Explicitum doth properly claime a place in Monarchie in its Theologicall capacity in Relation to those dutyes which are the proper and Native ends of Monarchie which are Gods glory the Kings honour and salus populi or the peoples good and welfare And thus you see of what sort of Jus Divinum Monarchie is capable 1. In its Moral
is taken from the Relations which persons invested with Regal Honour have unto God by virtue whereof they are styled in Scripture the children of God Psa 82. Ministers and servants of God Rom. 13.4 Jer. 27.6 But we have no warrant or ground either in nature reason or Religion to priviledge the people to elect and appoint children or deputies and servants unto God or to consecrate a person for the person of the King is sacred And therefore the election of Kings cannot pertain unto the people For a sacred effect cannot proceed from a prophane cause The third reason is taken from the nature of the Kings office which is to judge the people for no Judge ought to receive any gift or benefit from those who are to be judged by him because all engagements occasion partiality in the judgements even of the wisest men Deut. 16.19 But he that receives a Crown receives a gift 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore no King ought to receive his Crown from the people nor be elected by them Nay and for this very reason Moses appointed all the officers who were to judge the people under him Deut. 1. And David those who were to judge them under him either in Ecclesiastical or civil affaires 1 Chron. 23. unto the 27. The fourth reason is taken from the peoples Incapacity unfitnesse to manage such a prerogative manifested by God himself in three particulars First in their Ignorance Secondly their Seditiousnesse Thirdly their Inconstancy 1. Their ignorance and want of judgement to discerne between good and evil and that also in this particular point of Government A manifest whereof is exhibited in Solomon who though he was an Idolater and so grievously peccant in his duty towards God yet doth receive an ample testimony from the holy Ghost of his justice and munificence towards his people which was the ground of that Panagyrick pronounced by the Queen of Sheba concerning Solomons Government In which particular he was also a Type of Christ And the object of the Jewes expectation til this very day concerning the Messias is the enjoyment of a happinesse under his Government Paralel to that of Solomons Yet were not the people in the dayes of Solomon contented with his Government but desired an alteration complaining of his Tyranny and oppression 1 Kin. 12.4 2. Their factiousnesse a constant effect and consequence of their Ignorance For there was never any pretence against a present Government and men in Authority so absurd and unjust which did not relish with and obtain support from the multitude Witnesse the conspiracy of Korah against Moses Numb 16. Of Absalom against David 2 Sam. 15. Of the High Priests and Rulers against our Saviour Christ Mat. 26. Of Thoudas and Judas against Cesar Acts 5. And indeed the innumerable and horrid mischiefes which ensued upon the peoples tumultes about the election of their Bishops which in the Primative times was for some reasons permitted to the people were the very cause for which the Emperour a. Novel Constit 123. Justinian translated that priviledge from the people to the Priests some few of the Citizens which afterwards for the like and some other reasons the Monarchs assume to themselves For he that reads b. In Epitaph Patris Nazianzene concerning the peoples absurdities about the election of Eusebius Bishop of Cesarea Or c. Lib. 1. Cap. 24. Eusebius concerning the peoples outrage about the election of a Bishop at Antioch which sea was eight yeares together vacant by reason the peoples differences could not be reconciled in all that space Or d. Lib. 2. Cap. 5. Euagrius concerning the horrible murders committed by the people of Alexandria about the election of a Bishop to that sea upon the deposition of Dioscorus Or e. Eccles Hist l. 2. C. 1◠Ruffinus concerning the bloody Intestine warres amongst the people of Rome about the election of Damascus where the places of prayer overflowed with the blood of men wil never Judge it safe nor convenient that any such prerogative as the election and constitution of Kings and Monarchs should pertaine to the people whose factions and distempers occasioned such horrid and barbarous mischiefs and murders about the elections onely but of their own Bishops 3. Their inconstancie an inseparable effect and consequence of the two former For God himself could never please the people long with any of his blessings though he gave them bread from Heaven yet their soules soon loathed it Numb 11.6 Though the Lord appointed the weakest man upon the earth for their Ruler and Judge yet they complained of his Tyranny Numb 16.3 And you see what great joy they expressed upon the desertion of Moses and the exaltation of the golden Calf which f. Loc. Com. Class 4. Ca. 20. Peter Martyr makes the ground of his result concerning the Illegality and Injustice of the placing such a Power in the people in the collation and arbitrary reassumption of this Supreamacy For saith he If any such Power were in the people the most just and gratious Kings could not be safe For though they Rule never so well yet they shall never long satisfie the people And now to compleat the confutation of this opinion concerning the peoples right unto and power in this Royal investiture I shal return an answer to the Arguments alledged for the propugnation thereof and to those damnable and execrable Inferences grounded thereupon 1. To these Instances of Scripture mentioning the peoples making and anointing of Kings I answer that these acts of the people were performed two wayes 1. Sometimes as acts of homage and duty by way of acknowledgement and testification of the Supreamacy already Legally confirmed upon the person to whom these dutyes are performed And such acts are expressed upon two several occasions 1. Where God did conferre this Supreamacy and Regal honour by any extraordinary wayes and means as in Saul David Solomon and Jeroboam 2 Where God used their meanes for the Vindication of the Kings just Title against an usurper As in Joas whom Jehoiada the Priest and the Captaines and people crowned and anointed King in the Temple restoring him to his just Rights which had been usurped by his Grand-Mother Athaliah 2 Kin. 11.12.13 And in Vzziah the son of Amaziah whom the people restored to his just Power which the conspirators who flew his Father had usurped And in both these cases the acts of the people are good and lawful and approved by God being declared to be the wil of God upon the former occasion extraordinarily upon the latter ordinarily 2. These acts of the people are sometimes acts of power and Authority collating this Supreamacy and Regal power upon some person who hath no other right or Title thereunto neither of Birth-right nor of Revelation from God As upon Absalom Adonijah Jehoahaz Judas Theudas and Barchozba who professed himself the Messiah and drew the people into rebellion against the Romane Emperor which occasioned those warres wherein
the Covenant which is the obligatory part and as they truly alledged implyeth a mutual engagement of the parties therein concerned Now the parties Primarily and Originally concerned in this Covenant are two viz God upon the one party and the people upon the other party as Moses declareth when he reciteth that Original and general Covenant which is indeed the ground of all other particular Covenants Lev. 26. Deut. 28. And therefore Solomon maketh this Covenant a ground why people should obey the Kings Commandments not as the Kings but as Gods Commandment which he termeth the oath Eccles 8.4 is not so much between the King and people as between God and the people For the King is onely the Deputative party assigned by God and entrusted by him for the performance of this Covenant upon Gods part And therefore the Lord doth make the King gracious or Tyrannical to the people according to their own deserts and their regard to this Covenant upon their own part as Solomon declares Prov. 21.1 The Kings heart saith he is in the hand of the Lord as the rivers of water he turns it which way soever he will viz either for a vengeance or recompence to the people as the Lord himself judgeth of their merits And though the King may spare the wicked and persecute the Righteous even unto death as Pilate did our Saviour yet even in that the King doth but execute Gods decrees as the holy Ghost declareth concerning that unjust judgement of Pilates Acts 4.28 For Pilate did nothing but what God had determined before to be donne And therefore when the King passeth a judgement which we imagine to be unrighteous we must not look upon the Kings judgement and consider that it commeth from him and still refrain both our mouths and hearts from cursing the King Eccles 10.20 For when the King doth that which by the publique law is not warrantable and just he is not therein unjust to us but to himself For though he do not observe the Rule which God hath set for him to judge by and therefore must account to God for the breach of the trust received from him yet he cannot transgresse the Rule of Gods Eternal Decrees which God hath appointed us to be judged by According to which Law God by the Kings mouth and sentence doth punish even our most secret sinnes For every mans judgement is from the Lord and not from the Judge or Ruler Prov. 29.26 So that in a word the King may do male that s a wrong to himself for which he is accomptable to God but he cannot do malum that is any wrong to us by inflicting any thing upon us which is not just and according to our deserts from God whose place the King supplyes in judgement which is the ground of Solomons assertion that The Kings lips do pronounce Divine sentences and that his mouth transgresseth not in judgement Prov. 16.10 Now therefore upon these grounds of Solomons it is manifest that there is no sense why the people should claim any power over the King by vertue of this Covenant 1. Because he is not their Deputy but Gods and every man must account to him for his actions who doth constitute and depute him As when the King doth depute a Judge for any Province or City the people under his command have no power to question him for any act which they conceive unjust but either by petition to that Judge or else by their addresses to the King his Master whose trust all corrupt Judges do deceive and not the trust of the people For they never received any Power or Authority from the people but from the King And in like maner the people for redresse of their grievances from the kings oppressions must address themselves to the King by petition and if that prevail not then to God by prayer who is the Kings Lord and Master and from whom he receives his power and whose trust he breaks by acts of injustice which is ultimum Refugium as Samuel declares when he prophesieth of Sauls Tyranny whereby the people should be grievously oppressed as the Prophet foresheweth for redress whereof the people when the King would not hear them should cry unto the Lord. 1 Sam. 8.18 Other meanes of remedy then which the prophet Samuel did not dream of nor could not prescribe to the people to make use of and whereas if he had conceived resistance to be lawful he might soon have found out that way and have advised the people so to provide for their own security 2. Because the people never received injustice from the King if they look upon themselves for the judgement is the Lords who cannot do injustice nor break the Covenant upon his part although the minister or Deputy may fail and offend in the execution of his office in his own particular which is his own guilt As a Hangman that executes the just sentence of death upon a malefactor if in doing his office his intentions have not reference to the sentence of justice but the satisfaction of some private grudge or some covetous design or the like that officer is guilty of murder although the Malefactor receive from his hands nothing but his due deserts And thus much I hope may be sufficient to declare the errour and vanity of that opinion that the peoples consent and approbation are the ordinary and Instrumental meanes and causes of that supremacy and Soveraign power which doth preheminence the Monarch above all others within the same society and from whence he derives his title to the Regal Diademe I shall in the next place proceed to speak of the just efficacy and virtue of birth-right as to this purpose CHAP. VII Of the Title of Birth-right THE second opinion concerning the efficient cause and meanes of this Supremacy and Regal Dignity is that which Imputes it to Birth-right and Hereditary succession The efficacy whereof as to this purpose the Scriptures do set forth in five pâ—â—ticulars 1. In the prerogatives of the first-born who were hoâ—◠〈◊〉 by God with a double fanction 1. Ceremonial which did meerly Typical and common to man and beast Exod. 13 2◠〈◊〉 this sanction did not qualifie a man in relation to any temporal honour but prefigured onely the Spiritual prerogatives of Christ the first-born amongst many brethren 2. Natural which sanction did preheminence the first-born above all his brethren in honours and possessions as the Lord declared to Cain Gen. 4.7 And Isaac to Jacob who although he was younger then Esau yet obtained that prerogative by promise from God Gen. 25.23 Which by composition was confirmed from Esau himself Gen. 25.33 which was the ground and cause why those prerogatives of honour Soveraignty and possessions were confirmed unto him by his fathers blessing Gen. 27.28.29 And Jacob acknowledged the same honour and Supremacy to pertain unto Reuben his eldest sonne but because Reuben had forfeited that honour by defyling his fathers bed and Simeon and Levi the
of Custome and Tribute for their owne private patrimonies could not be sufficient for maintaining such Kingly magnificence nor doe we finde any particular Law or Statute for the particular endowment of these Kings but onely that generall Right and Prerogative which they derive from God investing them with a power over both our estates and persons which was the cause that God prescribed not in the Law any settled or certaine maintenance for Kings as he did for Priests For though both were his anointed Servants and Deputies and Kings also in a higher degree for they had power over the Priests as well as the people for Moses was not onely a god to the people but to Aaron Exod. 4. And Moses David Solomon Jehoshaphat and other godly Kings exercised this power over both Priests and Levites yea even over the high Priests themselves and that in the highest manner deposing one and advancing another to that Pontificall honour 1 King 2.26 Yet in regard Kings had power to provide for themselves in that manner as themselves judged requisite for their own honour and the peoples safety whereas the Priests had no power at all in any secular matters but what the King did delegate unto them by Commission therefore it pleased God to consigne a set portion for the Priests maintenance and not for the Kings Ob. The Lord blamed the Kings of Judah for imposing taxes upon the people Ezek. 45.8 9. And when Moses prescribed the Kings duty Deut. 17. he prohibited the multiplication of horses and of gold and silver whereby to spoile and oppresse the people Sol. The Lord both in these and many other places prohibiteth the imposition of all Illegall taxes and exactions such as Tyrannicall and wicked Kings usually laid upon the people for the support of their owne insatiate lusts and vanities and such as Samuel told the Israelites would be imposed upon them by Saul in his Tyrannicall government 1 Sam. 8.10 But never prohibited such as were intended for the honour of himselfe and the King and the benefit and welfare of the people though they seemed never so heavy and grievous as that tax was which Pharaoh by Joseph's advise imposed upon the Egyptians for seven yeares together which use and end is not to be determined by the people's discretion but the Kings as appeares in that instance concerning Pharaoh's act And therefore though it be unlawfull for the King to demand such taxes for any other intent but the honour of himselfe and the good of his Subjects yet is it not lawfull for the people to deny them or resist the Kings authority when they suppose and judge them to be demanded for other wicked ends as appeares by those addresses which Samuel told the people they should make unto the Lord for redresse of Sauls Tyranny by prayers and teares 1 Sam. 8.18 For neither Samuel nor the people in those dayes dreamed of these means of resistance and dethronement of Kings which the Devill hath since suggested unto his disciples For surely had those ancient Statists understood these new redresses of Tyranny to be just and lawfull they would never have enslaved and subjected themselves unto such pressures as are recorded in that Text. Repl. Naboth did justly deny his vineyard unto Ahab 1 King 21.3 and therefore the peoples disobedience to the Kings unjust demands of any part of their estate is not unlawfull but commendable Sol. That deniall of Naboth's was grounded upon a particular law of Gods concerning Inheritances in Israel as Naboth there declareth God forbid saith Naboth that I should give the Inheritance of my fathers unto thee For God had prohibited by his Law that any man should alienate the hereditary possessions of his family which by his appoitntment were to be reserved entire to continue the distinction of the families in Israel Numb 36. And againe Ahab did not command that vineyard from Naboth as a King but as a private purchaser intreated Naboth to exchange or sell it to him for a private conveniency and not for any publike use in which case Naboth might justly deny it For though a King be alwayes a King yet he doth not alwayes act as a King in his Politicke capacity but sometimes as a private person in his naturall capacity as in the scholasticall discussion of any point in question or in any contentious recreations as in Wrastling or Tennis and the like in which cases it is not unlawfull to oppose the King both in words and actions And of this nature also are such private bargaines for private uses and conveniencies as Ahab desired to make with Naboth and as David did make with Araunah for his threshing-floore which he would not take by his power but bought with his monie 2 Sam. 24. because it was to pacifie God for his owne private offence and not for the peoples Ver. 17. For though the people were punished it was David alone that offended Delirant Reges plectuntur Achivi But in whatsoever the King acts in his Politicke capacity as a King he may not be resisted or opposed either in words or actions or denied any service either from our estates or persons because in that capacity he is a God over us and may claime the same obedience from us which is due to God himselfe in all Politicall matters whereunto his Commission doth extend as the eleventh Chapter of this Booke shall more fully manifest So that if Ahab had demanded this vineyard of Naboth for any publicke use concerning the Kings honour and the peoples safety Naboth's pretence of Inheritance could not have warranted and justified his deniall thereof to Ahab For inheritances might be sold in Israel till the year of Jubilee in case of private necessity as appeares Lev. 25.25 and therefore much more might be commanded by the King in case of publike necessity For a publicke necessity must needs be a stronger super sede as for any Law then a private can be As also the description of Sauls Government by Samuel doth further evidence 1 Sam. 8.10 for what that Tyrant did to satisfie his lusts a good King may do to preserve the publike And it is not improbable that the pretence of such a deniall was the blasphemy whereof Jezabell caused Naboth to be falsly accused for the Text doth not say that it was blasphemy immediately against God but against God and the King which argueth that those witnesses accused Naboth of some disloyall speeches not consistent with the duty of a Subject which for ought appeares in the Text might relate to Naboth's deniall of that vineyard which the false witnesses might pretend to have beene demanded for such uses and in such a manner as that the deniall thereof might render Naboth guilty of a capitall dishonour and disobedience to the King And thus much briefly of the nature and spece's of Fundadamentall Honour the other spece of Honour opposite to this is Symbolicall whereof in a word 2. Symbolicall Honour is the signall exhibition
The Argument is this To whomsoever the power of vengeance and recompence pertaineth he is a God for God himselfe affirmeth those prerogatives to be peculiar to himselfe Deut. 22.35 36. But both these prerogatives pertaine unto the King as Saint Paul affirmeth in this Text ergo Kings are Gods and by consequence the fift Commandement which prescribeth our duty to them must be a Precept of the first Table The seventh Reason is grounded upon the nature of that obligation which the commands of Kings doe impose upon their Subjects which binde the conscience Ver. 5. which is Saint Pauls fift motive to obedience Wherefore ye must needs be subject not onely for wrath but also for conscience sake Which reason Saint Peter alledgeth also to perswade this kind of submission to Kings 1 Pet. 2.13 Submit your selves for the Lords sake because the submission is not to man but to God Ephes 6.7 whose Majesty and Authority the King doth represent and in the latter part of this second Chapter Saint Peter presseth this kind of submission for conscience sake and the Lords sake by Christs example who needed not to have submitted to Pilate or the Jewes for wrath for he was able to overthrow them all with a blast of the breath of his mouth as he did the officers John 18.6 and shall doe Antichrist at the last day 2 Thes 2. Or to have obtained twelve legions of Angels from his Father for that purpose Mat. 26.53 whereof one single Angell was able to destroy 185000. Assyrians in one night but yet to honour the Substitute and Deputy of his Father he submitted to their power knowing it was his Fathers will and that the judgement was not theirs but Gods Acts 4.28 which is the ground of Nazianzens advise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We must submit to good Kings as to the Lord himselfe to bad Kings for the Lords sake Upon which grounds it is easie to prove the King to have the relation of a God to his subjects For he that can command the conscience is a God but the commands of the King doe oblige the conscience i. e. in licitis politicis whereunto his Commission doth extend and therefore in reference to all those matters the King is a God to his Subjects And by consequence this fift Commandement prescribing the Subjects duty must be a Precept of the first Table The eight and last Reason is taken from the nature of those acts whereby Subjects ought to expresse their obedience to Kings Ver. 6 7. which is Saint Pauls fixt motive to obedience which acts doe referre either unto the Kings power or else to his maintenance 1. The acts of obedience relating to power are Feare and Honour which are due onely to God Deut. 6.13 Mat. 4.10 Mal. 1.6 But Saint Paul commandeth us to performe these duties unto the King in this Text to which Solomon addeth another precept Prov. 24.21 My sonne feare God and the King And David likewise commanded the people to worship God and King Solomon 1 Chron. 29.20 so that God and the King are made a joynt object of these duties which are peculiar to God ergo the King must supply the place of God in reference to his Subjects and by consequence the fift Commandement must be a Precept of the first Table Ob. Christ forbids us to feare them that can kill the body onely but cannot kill the soule Mat. 10.28 but Kings can onely kill the body and not the soule ergo wee may not feare Kings Sol. That command of Christs is not Positive but Comparative as appeares in the Text and onely prohibits us to feare the King more then God Repl. Then when the Kings commands are contrary to Gods we may resist Sol. We may resist his commands but not his power for in those cases we must obey God by an active the King onely by a passive obedience for which wee have the president of the Apostles themselves Acts 4. and 5. who did refuse to obey the commands of the Rulers prohibiting them to preach in the name of Jesus but yet submitted to their power in yeelding themselves to be imprisoned and beaten according to the commands of the Rulers so that they obeyed both God and the Magistrate the first by doing the latter by suffering 2. The acts of obedience relating to the Kings maintenance are Tribute and Custome whereof I spoke at large in the ninth Chapter of this Booke in the point of Secondary Honour due to the King where I demonstrated these to be due to God onely Primarily and to the King onely Secondarily as he supplies the place of God in Ruling and Judging his people And therefore seeing we are to performe those acts of submission and obedience to the King whereof God himselfe is the proper and immediate object it followeth necessarily that the fift Commandement which prescribeth those acts must be a Commandement of the first Table Now upon these grounds it is easie to frame an answer to the three Arguments alledged for the preheminency of the peoples safety above the Kings Honour whereby to legitimate the resistance of Kings in order to the peoples safety To the first Argument taken from the Law of nature Answ 1 I answer that it is grounded upon a false supposition for the fift Commandement which is the ground of the Kings Honour is not a Precept of the second Table but of the first the duties whereof are grounded upon a love exceeding the love of our selves for the Law of God and Nature teacheth us to love God above our selves Deut. 5.6 Mat. 22.37 and therefore though the King be a man in his naturall capacity and therefore in that sense hath the relation of a neighbour yet in his Politick capacity in which sense onely he is the object of the duties of the fift Commandement he hath the relation of a God to us and not of a neighbour and therefore we ought to regard his Honour above our owne safety and rather to suffer the losse both of our estates friends and life then dishonour him To the second Argument grounded upon the instance of a Generall I answer Answ 2 that the case is farre different For I presume the Argument presupposeth that Generall to be trusted by the King for the safety and protection of that city and not for the destruction of it and that upon this supposition they doe resist him as a Traitor to his trust and in this case the resistance is lawfull because his Commission doth not extend to that act and he is onely a Magistrate so farre as his Commission doth authorize him But suppose the King should have judged that city to be destroyed and authorize that Generall to execute that judgement in this case it were absolutely unlawfull to resist and all acts of opposition in the city or souldiery being the Kings Subjects were absolute treason and rebellion because the Kings Commission from God doth extend absolutely both to our estates and persons nor doth he