made the young dumb Prince speak All men are tied to the maintenance of Sovereign Right none amongst men more than Church-men it is a necessary truth as aptly plentifully and purposely set forth in Gods Word as any else Prince and Priest were once joyned in one Person and are so tied that Alterius Altera poscit opem res conspirat amicè We find onely three Office-bearers anointed by God King Priest and Prophet who then more tied to maintain the Lord 's Anointed and his Right than Priests and Prophets God hath honoured Kings to be the Nurse-fathers of his Church nor when we reflect upon by-gone Story find 〈◊〉 that ever the Church had either Beauty Plenty or Progress but under Monarchy and view this day the condition of the Christian Church under any other Government than Monarchy and we will find her condition but sorry and poor It is the onely Government which is most conntenanced and magnified in Holy Writ And I dare to say that none or all of them who ever writ purposely of Politicks or in an Historical way laid down Political Maxims whether it be Plato in his fancied Republick or Aristotle in his Politicks or Cicero or Livie or Dionysius Halicarnasseus or Cornelius Tacitus or who besides either by Art or Story is most renowned this way have given us so fully so apertly the Right of Monarchy the true prescript of Government and perfect Rule of Obedience to the Subject The Ancient Fathers and Martyrs whilst Emperours were Heathenish and Persecutors have delivered this Doctrine pleaded the Sacred Royal Prerogative of Emperours and with other Truths have sealed this with their Blood Who can deny then but it beseemeth a Divine most of all men to maintain or write of this subject A wonder then it is that some Smatterers in Divinity writing in this subject do borrow Principles from old Poetical Fables and Toyes make premises and infer Conclusions not onely destructive of Monarchy but also contradictory to that Truth Scripture hath revealed Like to them are our Pettifoggers in the Law I reverence Learned Iureconsults who deserved well in this subject who cry out what have Church-men to do to dispute the King 's Right that belongeth to us who are versed in the Laws of the Kingdom and know what Power the Law alloweth the King what not these Ignaroes who are better versed in the Statutes and Acts of Parliament than in the Acts of Christ and his Apostles may even as well go about not to authorize the Book of God except it be warranted by their Law as to aver that the King hath nothing immediately from God nor no Sacred Right but what He hath by Law More learned Lawyers than they can be as Bodin Barclay and others have treated of this matter and made as good Vse of Scripture and Holy Fathers writing as any other Warrant besides It is more than evident then that no men are more obliged no men may be more fitted to maintain the Royal Prerogative of Kings than Divines But Officiis quis idoneus istis I confess my weakness my insufficiency and am forced to have recourse to a Patron worthy of it and able to maintain it I could hit upon no subject more worthy of so great a Personage as you are nor a Patron so worthy so enabled to maintain it and its poor Author as your Lordship Nobles are amongst Subjects the first-born the ennobled amongst the Romans had a badge of a Moon or Crescent in Plutarch's judgment not so much to signifie the instability or frailty of their Place and Honour as to put them in mind to be obedient and loyal to their Prince the Fountain of their high Dignity as the Sun is to the Moon for your high Nobility by a long continued race transmitted to you from most noble Ancestours to write or recite it were as to light a candle to add light to the Sun in his strength in his vertical point and that transmitted so from them and derived to you that in that whole Stem the Root and all Branches who inherited the Honour not any tainted with Disloyalty Nay their Honour is higher some of them have had the honour to dye in the highest Bed of Honour to lose their Lives and great State and Honour for Loyalty to Royalty This is nothing yet but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the splendour of Birth the glory due to those of whom you are descended Nam genus Proavos quae non fecimus ipsi Vix ea nostra voco True Nobility besides these requireth not onely the inheritance of Riches for that is but Antiquae inveteratae Divitiae as Athlary writ to the Senate of Rome with the inheritance of Honour for that it is a Body empty of a living Soul but it is to inherit the Noble Honour of Noble and Generous Ancestours Nobile saith Aristotle id est quod ex bono genere prodit generosum quod à sua natura non degeneravit Herein you all meet for Honour and Virtue do contest for the Excellency but Virtue truly hath the Eminency In you is verified that of the Lyrick Poet. Fortes creantur fortibus bonis Est in juvencis est in equis Patrum Virtus nec imbellem feroces Progenerant aquilae columbam Malice it self how ingeniously witty soever cannot prejudice you in this whose Piety is admirable whose Wisdom and Prudence is above Age above the ordinary and all your Equals a master of your Passions and so experienced in matters of State and Government that it is a wonder to them who know you and incredible to those that have not been eye and ear witnesses Your Heroical magnanimity speaketh it self in your Heroick Martial Acts admired not onely by excellent Commanders not onely for Courage but for Prudence and rare Government by which you gained so much that the valiant Annibals and Scipioes there would rather sacrifice themselves than expose You to Danger and yet you would not act the General but by doing the valiant Acts contemning Dangers and Death beseeming inferiour Officers but worthy of the greatest Caesar. Who can consider aright that more than admirable piece of Prudence in that Treaty of Cessation in such a time and such a case where You were so assaulted with two of the worst extremes of Opinions enraged both of them with the same degree of madness but must say that is true Cicero said de nat deor Nullus unquam magnus vir fuit sine afflatu divino The intelligent and better sort must confess that without a great mercy to us and more than ordinary Favour from God this could not have been effected The better sort are confident the happy Effects of that Work will make many Souls live and Your Honour live for ever These are the Load-stones of all the Honour the Love and Zeal which have necessitated me to take recourse to Your Honour's Patrocine that what is deficient in me and this poor trifling Treatise
cannot repeal it By Scripture then and Antiquity it is clear that the interposed act humane whatsoever it be whether Election Succession Conquest or any other lawful way doth not collate the Power but design or declare the person and letteth not the Power to be of immediate Collation from Almighty God as when the Church designeth or declareth a man for a sacred Function it is God only who bestoweth the supernatural Power Faculty and Ability Or it is in some case like to that when our King sendeth the honourable Order of the Garter to a Duke or Prince abroad by the hand of a Gentleman the Gentleman intimateth it to the person honoured but the bestowing or collating of the honour is from the power of the King the sole and proper Fountain of that Honour Let this suffice to remove their first scruple we come next to examine that which both Jesuit and Puritan make much of that is A private and individual Person may make away his own native and proper Liberty and enslave himself to a Lord and Master from hence they conclude Ergo a Community or Multitude may surrender their own native Liberty to one or more to rule over them See Bellarmine pressing this Argument lib. de Laicis cap. 6. and Suarez lib. 3. defens Doctr. Orthod cont Sect. Anglic. If we would grant all this yet this much we will gain that as a singular Person when he hath made away his Liberty to another he cannot resume it no although he hath made his bargain in a hard condition disadvantageous to himself then although we give that their consequence is good which we will never grant it will by as necessary consequence follow that when the People have devested themselves of that Power naturally inherent in them and invested one or more with it they cannot resume it no not though they have made it to their own disadvantage It may be they will tell us Argumentum à simili in dissimili non concludit that an Argument built upon a Similitude concludeth not in the point of Dissimilitude We will yield to them this with both our hands and upon the same ground we rejoyn that there is a wide disparity and difference betwixt the two 1. First because it is certain Nemo nascitur naturâ servus None by Nature cometh in the World in the condition of a Slave Nature in this is equally Indulgent to all But on the other side it is as true Nemo nascitur liber ab Imperio No man is born in that condition to be free from Government but with his natural Being cometh into the World subject to some Every man is born subject to his Father of whom immediately he hath his Existence in Nature and if his Father be the subject of another he is born a Subject to his Father's Superiour 2. Next there is another great difference Every man by Nature hath an immunity and liberty from despotical and herile Empire and in this may say Possum facere de meo quod volo I have this privilege by the Law of God and Nature that I am enslaved to none and consequently without his own voluntary act making away this native and natural liberty he cannot be devested of it and in his bargain and covenant may more and less enslave himself but on the other side God and Nature have laid a necessity upon all men coming into the World subesse imperio to be subject to Government Again because this Government this Empire this Sovereignty cannot protect us sufficiently to make us enjoy the sweet fruits of happy Government Peace Righteousness Plenty Godliness and Honesty except it be entirely endowed with Sovereign Power to act its Duties preserve it self protect us Almighty God as he investeth the Sovereign with entire Sovereignty so hath he set the bounds of it defined it otherwise such is the corruption and natural repugnancy of every one to it that forthwith it should be rent in pieces It is accidental to any to render himself a Slave it is occasioned either by Force as when one is taken by an Enemy he is Mancipium Servus or otherwise some extreme necessity and indigency forceth one to enslave himself to sell his Liberty to redeem him from Debt Death or any ignominious and intolerable condition to state himself in a more tolerable one In brief it is some supervenient necessity that forceth man to make away his native and natural Liberty à servitute but subesse imperio to submit and subject to lawful Government congruous to the condition of man and necessary and convenient for the happy Being of man is natural is necessary by the inviolable Ordinance of God and Nature This answer to their second Sophism cleareth the sense of their Maxim so much cryed up and so much abused Quisque nascitur liber every one is born a free man that we need not insist much upon it yet to make the general sense of the Maxim appear and to discover their adulterate and bastard sense we say it is most true that Quisque nascitur liber à servitute Every man is born a free man from slavery but Nullus nascitur liber ab imperio none is born exempted from the subjection of lawful Government without a subordination and subjection to a Superiour Christ as man was not exempted from this It is recorded in Scripture Luke 11. 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He did subject himself to Ioseph his putative Father and Mary his true Mother the word in the original is the same which the Apostle useth Rom. 13. 1. commanding obedience and subjection to Higher Powers It were very fit our opposites would consider what Power the Father had over the Children by the Law of God and Nature that to redeem himself from Debt from any distressed state and condition he might have enslaved his Children begotten of his Body If this Power was not by the right of Nature by the warrant of God I can see no other for it could not be by a mutual and voluntary act of Father and Children To shut up all in few words give me leave to put you in mind that the Stoicks observe three Notions of servitus of Service and Subjection 1. The one is when a man contrary to native and natural Liberty is made a Slave to a Lord or Master this they call servitutem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when a man hath power to command use dispose another man's Person as his other Goods at pleasure for this cause the Scripture standeth not to call a Servant his Master's Money 2. The other is when a man's Person is confined or committed that he is deprived of living at liberty as he lists as Criminals or Debtors this kind of servitude they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when the liberty of going where we will or doing what is lawful at pleasure is taken from us 3. The third is a Servitude as they call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consisting in Subordination in
inferred from hence This made Buchanan ingeniously maintain that Orders and Laws in Parliament were only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Precognitions till the whole People gave their Consent and had their Influence authoritativè upon the Statutes and Acts of Parliament By this you may know where he put the Legislative Power in the Community and this is with more shew of reason than the Observator's Tenet who holdeth that the Legislative Power is in the Parliament and yet Buchanan is more justifiable for this reason because where Majesty is there is Legislative Power but according to the Observator's mind in the People is the underived Majesty let him then come home to the Scotish Tenet and make it an Article of their new Covenant or new Creed if they will that the Legislative Power is in the People and the Parliaments Orders and Statutes are only preparatory precognitions I know the Observator thinks to salve all this that the whole Power of the Gentry and Commons is entirely transferred from the collective Body to the representative the Parliament To this we answer two things 1. The first is ye and your Brother-assistants the Scots are not of one mind for in the beginning of the Scottish Troubles when the Subjects there were preferring Petitions by their Declarations and Protestations they put all the Power in the collective Body and kept their distinct Tables 2. Next speak ingeniously and candidly Observator shew us the reason of the Difference of the Disparity why the whole entire Power of the Community if any they have should not be totally and entirely derived from the People to the King when they devest themselves of their underived Majesty and invest the King with it no less than the whole entire Power of the whole Kingdom is devolved upon the two Houses and that irrevocably too to hold in the King as in your Knights and Burgesses you are not able to shew it but what with one hand you take unjustly from the King with another but a wrong hand you ascribe to the Parliament It is like in times succeeding and after-ages our wise Kings will learn to know what is their Power Place and Prerogative by that the Parliament hath assumed to them but we are hopeful they will never exercise it with such Cruelty and Tyranny I many times think upon it that as the extravagant Ambition and Usurpation of the Pope of Rome robbing Kings of their sacred Right and assuming to himself such superlative Transcendent Power for himself and his See both in Spirituals and Temporals hath wakened Christian Kings to consider better of their sacred Prerogative and by what he unlawfully and antichristianly assumed to himself in temporalibus to know what Trust God Almighty hath given to his Vicegerents his Kings so I am hopeful if God hath mercy reserved for these Kingdoms and Church right Bounds and Limits will be set to Subjects which will produce happier and sweeter Fruits of Government than we see or feel from these corrival co-equal co-ordinate fansied Powers and Sovereignty and Royalty be better rooted which God of his Mercy grant for the good of his Church the happy estate of the Kingdom and honour and right of our King If what is said be not enough to shew the Weakness of these popular Sophisms I come nearer to the Observator and put it home in a case where I dare promise he will say it is Sophistry By this way of reasoning I will prove there is no better way for the Observator to improve his Wealth than to make over the Right of all he hath to me the Argument will hold good Quod efficit tale est magis tale he that maketh me rich by giving me all his goods moveable and immovable maketh himself richer but the Observator by giving of all his goods my assumption should have been hypothetical for positively I know the Gentleman will not do it to me maketh me rich Ergo he maketh himself more rich This Logick I conceive is not so powerful as to cheat him out of his natural rational Faculty and so cheat him out of all his Lands Chattels and Revenues yet it may be by an order of the House that in some case this Logick may serve to good purpose that the People giving the twentieth the tenth the fifth part or the Moity of their Moneys and Revenues and all their Plate to strengthen the Parliament to advance the good Cause to cherish if we will speak truly and foment this present Rebellion it will not lessen their Wealth but enrich them more because quod efficit tale est magis tale it maketh some rich and consequently the Donors much more rich Certainly if this Logick hold it must be in great request for if this Logick do it not few can see how the Publick Faith can be kept Divinity and Church-rents if you sacrilegiously rob God which God forbid will not do it it must be some Sophism like this some Sophism in this kind that must answer for Publick Faith refund the Moneys borrowed from just Creditors and repay the wise Undertakers qui spem pretio emerunt who have brought their Hogs to a good Market To apply this shortly in few words If I remember rightly this Maxim quod efficit tale est magis tale I learned in the University to be understood de principio formali effectivo of such an Agent as is formally such in it self as is the Effect produced Next that it is such as is effective and productive of it self as when the Fire heateth cold Water it is hot formally in it self and maketh Water hot likewise By which it is necessary that the Quality inherent in the Effect be formally inherent in the Agent for this reason it is that Wine cannot be said to be drunk because drunkenness is no wayes inherent in Wine nor can Wine be capable of it and this made Aristotle qualifie his Maxim quod efficit tale est magis tale modò utrique insit And this insit utrique that it be in both maketh that the Maxim holds not in such Agents who operate by donation for he that is the Donor denudeth himself of the Right and Power of that he giveth to the Donee So here this condition faileth too And consequently if the Right of the King were transferred by Derivation and Donation from the People the Donation devests them totally of it except the King have it by way of loan which to my thinking never any yet spoke Next it is required that there be a Latitude and that that is effected be capable of a Latitude of more and less as when as I said before Fire heateth Water the heat of the Fire is more than the heat of the Water Lastly some add too that the Maxim must be understood ante effectum productum Now all the Argument falleth to the ground for Sovereignty never was nor can be in the Community Sovereignty hath power of Life and Death which none hath over himself and
not terrae filii Cadmus off-spring sprung out of the Earth Kings then are not made provided chosen found exalted anointed adopted by Saints by People by Pope by Presbytery by any diffusive collective representative virtual Body of the Community but by and of God alone for their Power their Sovereignty they are dii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elohim the manner of Propagation Derivation Communication is by Filiation by Adoption they are filii Excelsi the Sons of the most High and for eminency above all they are the first born this is the Language of Canaan it is the Language of Ashdod to say that a King is minor universis singulis major Scripture Reason speak the contrary primogenitus the first-born is not above every Brother severally but if there were thousands millions numberless numbers he is above all in Dignity in Precedency in Power It is statuted by God in the beginning of the World that the younger Brother and Brethren all of them sub te erit appetitus ejus tu dominaberis illius Vnto thee or subject unto thee shall be his desire and thou shalt rule over him Gen. 4. 7. To return a little to the Practice of the Law in constituting David King you find it was not the diffusive the collective Body of Israel that found David chose him exalted him anointed him c. It was God alone it was not the Elders of Bethlehem his own City neither they nor the other knew of it 1 Sam. 16. 4. Nor were the Saints sharers in this work with God they knew nothing of it Psal. 89. 19. Nay not Samuel the Prophet had it been he it had not been King David but King Eliab It is worthy of our labour to take notice how the anointing of Kings is wholly attributed to God in Scripture and other Kings besides the Kings of Iudea are called The Lords Anointed Which is more than evident by what is before expressed the phrase of Scripture is very emphatical They are anointed with his holy Oyl the Act is his He anoints The holy Oyl is his He anoints with his Oyl this Oyl is sacred too it is not every Oyl but his Oyl and his sacred Oyl Sacred Oyl it is which how it can be so denominated and come from the People as its first subject and Seat its Origine and Source is not conceivable in Reason Sacred it is in three respects First from a sacred Fountain a sacred Efficient from God himself 2. Next for its sacred Influence upon the Person it makes the Person of the King Sacred 3. For its influence upon the Charge the Function his Power his Authority is Sacred too And both the Person and the Charge are Supreme which is most fitly resembled in the Sacramental Ceremony of Oyl put Oyl in whatsoever Liquor you will it swimmeth above in the surface Now all this is so intirely and solely given to God that neither Priest nor People Pope nor Presbytery have any part in it Psal. 89. 20. With mine holy Oyl have I anointed him God finds the Oyl and the hand to do it You will say Samuel's hand did it The Principle of the Law will take away this Scruple Quod quis facit per alium facit per se What one doth by another he doth that by himself Samuel was onely the Delegate God was the Principal and Delegant and in reason the Act must be referred to the Principal The Oyl was God's too not from the Apothecaries shop nor the Priest's Vial this Oyl descended from the Holy Ghost who is no less the true Olive than Christ is the true Vine Yet I pray you mistake it not to account it of the holy Oyl of Gratia gratum faciens Saving Grace as some Fanaticks and Fantasticks fondly imagine this is a sacred Oyl to make the Person and Function Sacred as we have said Our seventh Argument to prove that Sovereignty in a King is immediately from God and not from the diffusive collective representative or virtual Body of the Community is that all Royal Ensigns and Acts of Kings are ascribed to God If Kings were the Derivatives of the People and Community in whom is that fansied underived Majesty how comes it to pass that the holy Spirit hath not in any place or syllable of Scripture intimated it and how cometh it to pass that in such a particular way and enumeration all are given to God 1. Their Crown is of God by putting it on their head Isai 62. 3. The Royal Diadem is in the hand of the Lord. Psal. 21. 3. Thou puttest a Crown of pure Gold upon his head Hence it was that the Emperour's Coin of old was printed with an hand coming out of Heaven and putting it on their head The very Heathen did term them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as having and holding their Crowns from God Their Sword is God's and he girdeth them with it David Professeth so much Psal. 18. 39. For thou hast girded me with strength the Sword is the Emblem of strength unto the Battel See Iudges 7. 17. 3. Their Scepter is the Scepter of God Exod. 4. 20. and 17. 9. The Hebrew word Sebet signifieth no less Scepter than Rod. It is a miraculous one too We read onely of two miraculous Rods Moses's and Aaron's By Moses's rod what wonders were wrought in Egypt and what a Miracle was it that the rod of Aaron budded and none else of the twelve Tribes and for what purpose was it that God made both the one and the other miraculous Was it not to manifest to the World that the Sovereign Power of a King as Moses was King of Ieshurun and high Sacred Power of the High Priest and the Tribe of Levi were not by Derivation by Translation by Communication from the People but immediately independently from God himself He is well nigh out of his Wits that will make any thing miraculous the Work and Effect of the Multitude 4. Their judgment is the judgment of the Lord 2 Chron. 19. 6. Again 5. Their Throne is the Throne of God 1 Chron. 19. 21. The ancient Fathers and Councels used the same diction they called 1. Their Writings sacri apices 2. Their Presence sacra vestigia 3. Their Majesty sacra Majestas 4. Their Words their Commands divalis jussio The Law speaketh the same Language and whatsoever goods belonged to them they are called res sacrae See Brissonius his Lexicon lib. 7. in the Sacras Being that in Holy Scripture in reverend Antiquity and in the Law all their Ensigns all their Royal Acts their Persons their Right their Goods are denominated Sacred and given to God himself how can our new Statists against the expressions of the Holy Spirit of the Holy Fathers and of Jurists honour Kings no better but to call them Derivatives of the People Is this to ennoble them No truly it disgraces Kings it maketh them the basest Extract of the basest of Rational Creatures the Multitude the Community It is certainly untrue
Kingdom Power Strength Glory and Majesty More absurd is that that they with brazen-face affirm this Majesty in a King is derived onely cumulativè communicativè so that the People are not devested of it but that in certis casibus in some cases which if they be not real People shall fansie them at pleasure this same Sovereignty and Majesty is resumable An old Philosopher would laugh at him who would presume to say that a matter passive actuated and perfected by Union with a Form could at pleasure shake off that specifick and individual Form and marry it self to another they may with as good reason say that a Husband hath Marital Power from his Wife and to gratifie that Sex with which they are very prevalent they may endow every Wife with that Power to resume her Freedom and to marry to another at pleasure A third reason against this Paradox in State and Divinity is this there is no warrant in Scripture nor doth Nature teach that God hath fixed all Government Sovereignty and Majesty in the Community as in its prime and proper subject The fittest opportunity to evidence this Right and Prerogative of the People was certainly when Saul was anointed and appointed the first King of Israel Till this time God did retain the Government in his own hands and actuated it by the hands of Moses Ioshua c. as his Viceroyes and Deputies the Text of Scripture is plain in this 1 Sam. 8. 7. God saith to Samuel They have not rejected thee but me Again 1 Sam. 10. 18. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel I brought Israel out of Egypt and delivered them out of the hand of the Egyptians and of them that oppressed you Verse 19. And you have this day rejected your God who himself saved you out of your adversities and tribulations and ye have said unto him nay but set a King over us Again 1 Sam. 12. 12. And when you saw that Nahash the King of the Children of Ammon came against you ye said unto me nay but a King shall reign over us when the Lord your God was your King To these passages joyn Gideon's words Iudges 8. 23. When they offered the Kingdom hereditary to him and his Posterity he replied I will not rule over you neither shall my Son rule over you The Lord shall rule over you These places prove clearly a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God's ruling of this People by his substituted Deputies When this extraordinary way and peculiar to this People onely was to cease and a King to be established over them like to the Kings of other Nations it was most opportune and high time to declare this Native inherent right of the People in whom is this National and fancied underived Majesty and to leave them by their right to transfer their right upon him whom they judged most fitting and able to be King But here Ne mu Lucilianum not one syllable for it not the least insinuation Nay you have point blank the contrary a virtual destructory of this imagined and conceited Right as at large before we have expressed and cleared for Scripture vindicateth to God as proper and peculiar to himself the Designation of the Person of Saul and the collation and bestowing of Royal Sovereignty It is worth your notice that Scripture recordeth that after he was designed and declared King The Spirit of God came upon him which without wronging the letter of the Text may be interpreted of God's Grace enabling him for the charge The very Heathen did acknowledge that in Kings there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 something from above bestowed above the ordinary stream of Endowments incident to man which how it may subsist with a derivation of all their Majesty and Power from the multitude let them judge who have not made a Divorce betwixt themselves and sound Reason and Judgement By no means let us neglect to observe that God when he designed Saul to be King collated upon him Royalty he left no other act to his People but to admit him which was not left to their voluntary determination to admit or reject him at pleasure Nor is that to be over-leap't that God would not allow them by compact and contract to make their own conditions to limit and enlarge their King at pleasure but gave himself to the subject jus Regis the Law of the King to which the Subjects were to submit in the hardest case He prescribed Lex imperandi a Law and Rule to Kings to rule and reign by Deut. 17. But at the admittance of Saul he giveth Legem parendi the Subject a Law of Obedience and Patience 1 Sam. 8. which is so peremptory in the extremest acts of Tyranny and Oppression that no other Remedy is left but Prayers and Tears Patience and crying to the Lord in the day of Trouble and Oppression Of this by God's Grace more hereafter qq 3 4 5. A fourth Argument against this popular Errour and Deceit is this if all Sovereignty and Supreme Power were originally inherent in the People and from thence derived to the King then undoubtedly Democracie were the best of all Governments The reason is pregnant that spece and kind of Government which cometh nearest to its original must be sounder and more perfect but Democracie which is the Government of many cometh nearer to the multitude than Aristocracie where some few of the better sort or than Monarchy where one hath the Supremacy and Government The nearer to the Fountain the Stream runneth more pure and clear This Argument cannot well be taken off and it is a strong Argument changing the terms in the assumption for Monarchy it proyeth the excellency of Monarchy above all Governments because it approacheth nearest to the Government of God and God himself who is the Author of all Government as the Argument before is made the Conclusion is most false because howsoever all Writers of Politicks in many things concerning Policy differ as much amongst themselves as Clocks or our Sectaries yet all unanimously accord and agree in this that of all Government Democracie and popular Government is the worst and do prefer Aristocracie to it by many stages which likewise enforceth our Argument for the excellency of Monarchy for the farther you recede from Monarchy as in Democracie the worse the Government is and the nearer you approach to it as in Aristocracy the Government is the better Some have a nearer approach to one than many and many are at a greater distance with one than some few which things duely considered and rightly pressed will bring home the Conclusion that Formalis completa gubernandi ratio est in Monarchia the proper specifick formal and complete essence of Government is in the Sovereignty of one Review and consider all Politicians whom you will they will grant that Suprema potestas est in indivisibili posua â—upremacy and Sovereignty is an indivisible and undivided Entity How can you share it then amongst more or many Nay
competent Iudge Who is this Judge For my part I know none but Almighty God the King of Kings If you say that the Judge is the diffusive Body or the Collective or the representative which I see not how it can be conceived without the Head the King yet at this time I yield it to you in your own notion and virtual Body I oppose that cannot be are they not all Subjects Are they not all under his Protection Have they not all sworn or should swear Allegiance and Supremacy How then can they be imagined in any other capacity than of a Subject How in any other notion relation or consideration but as the other Party Contractor in this imaginary notional and fancied Contract How can it with Law with Justice with Reason subsist that you shall be in your own Cause in your own Case in a matter of so high a Concernment Judge Witness and Party The highest that any as yet have gone is to fancy a coordinate Power with the Sovereignty of a King which in effect is a very bull and is as much as to say Supreme and not Supreme Sovereign and not Sovereign King and no King I deny not but that it may be proved if that your Practice may interpret your Power that you have run farther and reach higher in your Sovereignty than any King any Monarch in Europe except you speak of the King of Spain's Power over all his Dominions without Europe Never any of them claimed more but paternum Imperium but with grief we see this new Doctrine hath erected Despoticum herile Imperium I say the most you have claimed to your representative Body and that maimed too is a coordinate Power which in Law in Reason runneth upon equal upon coequal terms Now in Law Par in parem non habet Imperium an Equal cannot Lord or Judge over an Equal much less an Inferiour may usurp it above a Superiour Amongst many other reasons why our Lord Ioh. 8. would not sentence the Adultress that was taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this is not an unprobable one that although he knew her guilty as God and as Man gratiâ visionis yet he would not act the Judge and Witness Omnis Christi actio nostra instructio Learn of him to be meek and humble nay just too and challenge not to be Judges Accusers and Witnesses in your own cause Imperial Law and Ecclesiastical both condemn it nay the very Light of Nature made Africanus disclaim to be against the Defendant Judge Accuser and Witness The Casuits when they dispute and resolve the Case how a Judge shall proceed in Judgment when to his private knowledge he knoweth contrary to that is like to be adduced and the Judge tyed to determine secundum allegata probata that in such a case he may if another competent Judge may be found exuere personam publicam personam Iudicis and witness for Truth that Justice be not prejudiced Fie for shame that Iesuits Romanists and Casuists althey hold many of our puritanical Principles yet are not so impudent as our Puritans and Sectaries To hasten to more Proofs of the Truth we maintain give me leave to tell you that I think or fancy at least that this Opinion that Sovereignty is seated in the Community every individual having its share which by Derivation from all and every one is concentred in the Person of the King is not unlike that Dream of Democritus and other Philosophers who fancyed to themselves that the whole Vniverse was composed and diversified by a casual Concourse of what I know not fantastical and imaginary Atomes CHAP. X. Wherein the Truth of our Tenet is by more reasons asserted the contrary Error disproved and the Absurdities in the Sectaries paradox involved are discovered THis Tenet that a King hath his Sovereign Power communicativè not privativè from the people that he is so invested with it that the People have it habitually suppletively and may resume it in some exigent cases giveth nothing to the King but only an empty and void Title which is not only resumable at peoples Pleasure but so coarctated and bounded with Limits and Conditions of their own devising that simul semel at the same Instant and Moment he both receiveth Empire and Sovereignty and layeth down the Power to rule and determine in matters which concern either the private or publick good At the same Instant without prejudice or derogating from the honour of Royalty be it spoken a King becometh a Monster an Hermaphrodite composed of a Sovereign and a Subordinate of a King and a Subject Again by this they hold I see not how they can difference a King from a Magistrate which with all understanding and knowing Politicians are distinguished by their different specifick Entity and Being Nay a Magistrate is stated into a safer and better Condition than a King for the Magistrate is to exercise Judgment and Jurisdiction by known Statute and custom Law the King is censurable deposable at the Pleasure of the Multitude as they fancy him to have transgressed The Magistrate cannot be censured be punished but by Law the meanest the basest of Subjects may arrest cite convene the King before the undèrived Majesty of the Community he may be judged by the arbitrary Law that is in the Closet of their Hearts and that not only for real Misdemeanour for real male-administration but upon fansied apprehended Fears and Jealousies and these not evident by any apparent Act or Attempt but intended If this be not to seat themselves upon the Tribunal of God who hath reserved as peculiar to himself to judge and discover mens Hearts and Intentions I know not what else can be it except it be that those Seraphical Doctors make so bold with Almighty God to unfold the Secrets of Predestination and to define who are the Elect who the Reprobate Any man that hath nothing left but common Sense will chuse rather to live the most private and obscure Life than to expose and oppose himself with an idle nominal Title of Honour to the most corrupt and corrupted Judgments and Affections of an ignorant injust and indiscreet Multitude I pray you when neither the true Grandeur and Splendour of Majesty nor the sacred Power of Empire nor the highest Pitch of Reverence and Obedience due to so sacred a Function and so sacred a person can shelter and protect him who can be so demented as not only to embrace an empty Title Ixions cloud but run the hazzard of total Ruine and perpetual Disgrace I know what will be answered good Kings are in no Danger this Terrour is only a Terrour a Curb to bad Kings The contrary this day appears and ordinarily the best of Kings are most in danger Who knoweth not how ambitious factious and discontented Spirits are most ingenious and solicite where no real and just Challenge can be made against a good King by specious and spurious Pretexts to incense and inflame with Fury the
Pearls and precious Stones you know to whom I have a better Opinion and Esteem of all the Kings Subjects It is a poor and ignorant shift that some Pettifoggers Smatterers in the Law use to wrong the sacred Prerogative of Kings acknowledging no more for the royal Prerogative nor what they say the Law municipal of the Kingdom hath determined I do not speak this to reproach intelligent Jurists and reverend Judges whose places and parts I reverence as much as any accounting the knowledge of that Science next to Divinity and far more excellent and useful than all others besides I acknowledge none have written more divinely almost nor rationally in maintenance of the sacred Right and Person of Kings than some excellent and eminent in the Knowledge of the Law as Bodin Barcklay Blackwood â—nd others to whose Travels in this Subject we owe much but for these other Sâ—ioli they cannot distinguish betwixt a Statute declarative and a Statute consâ—â—tutive What is found in the Statutes of the Kingdom concerning the Prerogative they only declare Prerogative to the Subject and add a Sanction penal in case of Violation they do not determine it God Almighty hath by himself declared it We would laugh at him in the School of Divinity who would but mutter that the Decalogue was not a Law till God wrote it with his own Finger in two Tables in mount Sinai gave it to Moses and Moses intimated it to the people What is morally natural in it is Lex naturae the Dictate of Nature by the finger of Nature written in the minds and Hearts of all and what is positivum morale positively moral was from the Beginning so known and practised by the Church from Adam to Moses when David commanded what share of the Spoil those should have who were the reserve to preserve the Stuff Scripture calleth this Ordinance a Law made by David to last for ever yet we know this was God's Ordinance before the Law The very like is in Statutes and Acts of Parliament declaring the royal Prerogative of a King that the Subject may the better know it be put in malâ fide if he violate it and know what Judgment he is to expect Lastly to shut up all this Discourse let us intreat the impartial Reader to cast his Eyes upon all Story domestick and Foreign and especially domestick and if they find not the worst Bargains ever Subjects made was at any Rate to purchase a possession of the sacred Rights of Kings sometimes it hath been no better than occidisti possedisti it hath been purchased with a great deal of Blood The Market hath been made by Sedition Rebellion Rapine Murder plundering God and man and sometimes regained again to its right Owner but at as dear a Rate and Price It is in Morals as in Naturals Omne corpus quiescit in suo loco an Element without its place hath never Rest nor the World good by it's Operation and Influence till it be replaced and seated in it's right Locality God hath commanded not a date but a reddite not a giving unto Caesar of his Right but a rendring not only as due but if it be with-holden or with-drawn to restore him it The Stories of these Kingdoms have too many real Proofs of this Truth I forbear to cite them or to refer you to them I wish of these days and others like them that they be never known nor read of hereafter Excidat illa dies c. But seeing I treat of this purpose divinely give me leave to speak Gods Truth to you as becometh Gods Servant and a good Subject Till those Kingdoms be purged of Sacriledge so highly committed against God by wronging his Anointed and his Church and both of them restored to their sacred Right we need not expect true and solid Peace nor the true and effectual Blessings of God Let us fancy to our selves this or that Accommodation for Peace if God be wronged in his Anointed and Church we add only Fewel or Oyl to the Fire Almighty and merciful God the God of all Spirits put it in the Hearts of all Christians and Subjects to honour him and in him and for him his Anointed and Church rendering to God what is God's and to the King what is the Kings that there may be a Blessing in these Kingdoms in our Ierusalem there may be Peace within her Walls and Prosperity within her Gates that the Crown which he hath put upon the head of his Anointed our Sovereign may flourish with him and his Seed for ever and we and our Posterity may live in Godliness and Honesty under him and them till the coming of our Lord when he they and we shall receive that immortal Crown of eternal Glory which the King of Kings Lord of Lords and chief Bishops of our Souls hath laid up for all them that fear him Amen CHAP. XV. Wherein is examined the Iesuit's Maxim That every Society of Mankind is a perfect Republick and consequently the Community may supply and rectifie the defects and errours of Sovereignty And the Puritan's too That if there were not such a Power and Super-intendency in People to supply God had left man remediless THE Jesuit and Puritan although they differ in their Expressions agree well in the Sense and intend both of them one Conclusion How this Argument 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be retorted upon the Jesuit against his Numen terrenum the Pope we told in the preceding Chapter only now let the Jesuit give me leave to ask him how a Republick is conceivable is imaginable without a Governour or Governours and People governed How can a Society be imagined without Order and how Order without Priority and Posteriority When the Jesuit then saith that every Society of men is a perfect Republick and every perfect Republick must have within it self as much Power as may preserve it self from Ruine and right what is amiss he must necessarily by this Society of men and Republick mentioned in the Premisses understand only the Community of the People and Subject in an abstracted Notion from the Sovereign Governour or Governours otherwise concludes nothing at all to purpose And here let me intreat the Jesuit or Puritan to tell me where ever he read the word Civitas or Republick ascribed to a multitude a disorderly rout where there is no Governour It is alike to conceive a politick Body without a Governour as to conceive the natural Body without a Head We pardon the Jesuit and Puritan to give us new Tenets in Policy seeing they are so bold with God and his Church to give us new Tenets in Divinity Again it is worth our observing that when our Adversaries come to shew where this Republick is where this Superintendent Power is seated they differ and vary infinitely It is no wonder to hear the Builders of Babel speak with different Tongues we are hopeful God in his mercy will scatter them upon the Earth and cast down this Babel The
operateth with his Ordinance and by his Influence supervenient of his Grace and Power effecteth that which Baptism in its nature abstractly cannot produce So as remission of sin and regeneration consequitur ad Baptismum followeth with and is conjoined with Baptism The School giveth us the way to discern it when it is so and that is whensoever Signum creatum the interposed act or previous disposition hath no natural contingency with the effect the work wrought must be produced by some supervenient extrinsecal more eminent agent which is God Schoolmen do confess that the Sacraments do not confer grace Vi naturali Physicâ inhaerente by their natural intrinsecal and inherent Power but Vi morali supernaturali superveniente extrinsecâ but by some extrinsecal supervenient Power The like you may observe in sacred Orders it is confessed amongst all understanding and sound Divines that by Admission into sacred Orders the admitted receiveth a supernatural Power in supernatural things for supernatural ends This is not done without the interposing of an humane Act the Imposition of the Bishops hands and yet it is most certain this is not done by the Bishops act it is the Power of God concurring and cooperating with his own Ordinance In moral things you may see the like a man marrying a woman becoming her head and Lord there precedeth this Power and Right a created humane Act the voluntary Consent of the Woman yet it cannot be said that her Consent endoweth or investeth the man with this marital Right it floweth from and followeth immediately the inviolable Ordinance of Almighty God and this tye is so strict so perpetual by the same Ordinance that it cannot be made void but by God himself No man can put asunder whom God hath joyned together This holds in the Constitutions of Kings Some humane act as Election Succession or Conquest is interposed but none of them hath any natural Contingency with Sovereignty and Majesty that by their intrinsecal Power they can collate it produce it work it or effect it The Collation must necessarily then be immediately from God and the same way as in sacred Orders This was the Sense of the ancient Church who ordinarily institute a Parallel betwixt Prince and Priest that as the Priest hath his sacred power spiritual immediately from God so the Prince hath his sacred Sovereign temporal power independently from any other and solely dependent from God Hear them speak it in their own words Hosius spoke so to Constantius the Emperour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vide Athanas. epist. ad Solit. vit agent The Sense is Hosius acknowledgeth that Kings and Emperours have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sovereignty and Royalty as independently as immediately from God as Bishops and Priests have the trust which is peculiar to them ex vi ordinis and averreth that it is no less Intrusion upon God surreptitiously to invade the Kings Right his Prerogative than for any not called to the Ministery to intrude upon the sacred Function and Charge of Bishop or Priest The Passage is excellent 1. Kings are Kings quà Kings reduplicativè immediately from God and by his Donation of Power 2. As Priests have a Power incommunicable to any besides so Kings have their Sovereignty incommunicable to Subjects or any else 3. That to rob or surreptitiously to steal from Kings their sacred Prerogative is sacrilegious Usurpation presumptuous Intrusion upon God himself no less if no more than for a Lay-man to intrude upon the holy Function and Charge of Bishop or Priest Neither Athanasius nor Hosius nor any Father else understood but that Princes had their Power as immediately from God as Church-men in sacred Orders To the Greek Fathers joyn the Latin Saint Austin de Civit. Dei lib. 4. cap. 33. saith Solus verus Deus dat regna terrena bonis malis c. neque hoc temere neque fortunâ Sed pro rerum ordine ac tempore occulto nobis notissimo sibi It is the only true God none else man nor Angel that giveth Kingdoms and that not only to good but to bad Kings And this is not done casually by hap-hazzard but in Wisdom conform to the Exigency of the time of men living in the time How it cometh that sometimes bad men are Kings sometimes good men it is of his Wisdom in a secret Dispensation most evidently known to himself hid to us but for all this always just I wish our Sectaries would hear and believe this Lecture of Saint Austin's certain I am the holy and learned Father knew they came not to their Crowns but by some interposed act of Election Succession Conquest c. notwithstanding he will have all their Sovereignty Majesty and Power solely from God Symmachus the Pope writing to Anastasius the Emperour speaketh thus Tu defer Deo in nobis nos deferemus Deo in te which words formally and explicitly imply that Royalty in Kings is to be reverenced and obeyed as in Gods immediate Vicegerents upon Earth as God is to be obeyed in Church-men his immediate Vicegerents in the work and supernatural Acts and Effects of the Gospel To this Patriarch add the Suffrage of another great one Cyril of Alexandria lib. 11. in Ioh. cap 13. where amongst other things to this purpose he saith Et homines quidam à Deo accipiunt ut aliis possint dominari Review again that excellent Passage of the Council of Paris lib. 2. cap. 5. Constat ergo quia non actum non voto neque brachio fortitudinis humanae sed virtute iâ—â— occulto judicio dispensationis divinae regimen confertur terrenum It is in the opinion of these Fathers in this Council assembled that no act humane whatsoever which is interposed in the Constitution of a King maketh him King but only virtus occultum judicium dispensationis divinae the Power the secret and incomprehensible Judgment of God in his unsearchable Dispensation Review the Passage 1 Sam. 12. v. 11. And the Lord sent Ierubbaal and Bedan and Iephtah and Samuel c. Here you see the sending of Iephtah to be Judge is no less given to God than the sending of Gideon and Samuel whose calling was by extraordinary Revelation Compare this Passage witâ— Iudges 11. There you will find that Iephtah came to be Judge by a Covenant made betwixt him and the Gileadites Here you have an interposed Act and a great one that seemeth to serve much for your purpose you have a Covenant a Compact Yet notwithstanding the Lord to shew this Act this Compact this Covenant contributed nothing to make him Judge the Lord himself in authorizing him as Judge vindicateth it no less to himself than when extraordinarily he authorized Gideon and Samuel 1. Sam. 12. v. 11. a place an Argument unanswerable which bringeth home two Conclusions the one that the Authority and Power is from God the other that whatsoever act intervening if it were a Covenant it contributeth nothing to Authority cannot weaken it
the first sense every man is born free in the second sense some onely by misdemeanour or misgovernment are restrained from the liberties of free Subjects In the third sense no man is born free but subject to his Father and to his Father's Father his Father's Sovereign so that all are born tyed to Obeisance and Duty of Allegiance and seeing Christ fulfilled so all righteousness that he subjected and submitted himself to his Parents and to Caesar too we must deny to be Christians if we deny that we are born under the tye of Allegiance Of these three enough we haste to consider some more of their Popular Maxims and Sophisms CHAP. XIII The Maxim Quod efficit tale est magis tale or Propter quod unumquodque tale ipsum magis tale or Constituens constituto potior is examined ROssaeus and Brutus and after them the Observator have abused this Maxim infinitely to the great abuse and wronging of Sovereignty and to advance the Subject above the King the disorderly rout of the multitude above the Lord 's anointed The Observator enunciates it thus Quod efficit tale est magis tale that which maketh any thing such or such is in it self much more such or such he assumes but the People make the King give him all the Power and Majesty he hath Ergo the people are above the King c. Aristotle pronounceth the maxim thus Propter quod unumquodque est tale illud ipsum est magis tale Rossaeus Brutus Bouchier and others give us it thus Constituens constituto potior the Constituent is more excellent than the constituted but the People are Constituents of Royalty Ergo c. Howsoever they differ in the Expression they agree in the Sense let us examine it It were fitter to reserve this to our fourth Question but seeing the Observator maketh it his first Ground we resolve to shew the weakness of it here We premise this although we would grant their major their Maxim in the greatest and most vast Latitude of their Conception the Argument concludes not against us for the Assumption is as false as Falshood it self we have proved that the people in no notion imaginable whether diffusively or collectively or representatively taken are either the Efficients or Constituents or Donors or Authors Sovereignty or Sovereigns we might therefore without hurt to the Cause we maintain grant their Maejor their Maxim Yet that we may undeceive the simpler sort we will a little scan the Truth and proper Sense of the maxim and major It is no less truly than usually spoken Qui versatur generalibus versatur dolosè there is no readier a way to deceive the ignorant and little knowing people than by abusing general Maxims which are current extending their Force farther than they can reach If Commons and almost all even of better place and understanding were not too violently zealous for and impatient of Instrusion upon or Violation of their supposed Rights and Liberties and were not by the Corruption of Nature too too apt and facile to entertain Suggestions which are plausible to their Fancy and Humour and withal were not wanting to themselves in Moderation they could neither trust nor magnifie so much such specious deluding and deceiving Sophisms nor would they so madly and closely adhere to their Masters and Teachers of such Doctrines as to be inflamed with Fury to become mad in Impiety and Rebellion with such Impetuosity that they cease not till they become their own Instruments to ruine themselves totally and to bring upon themselves the imaginary and groundless Evils that they most fear from others Philosophy teacheth us that all such general Maxims must be bounded and limited with their own true Limitations and Qualifications otherwise they conclude not necessarily firmly I learned of Aristotle in the School that this maxim Propter quod unumquodque est tale illud ipsum est magis tale requireth necessarily before it bring home the Conclusion two Conditions 1. The t'one is Vt utrique insit that what you are to conclude be both of them in the efficient and effect 2. The t'other is Vt recipiat majus minus that that is really in both and predicated of both have such a Latitude that it hath a Capacity of more and less Without these Limitations the Maxim will conclude too much which in right Logick is the equivalent of that to conclude nothing Seeing we intend a popular way that the shallowest may understand it let us prove what we say by Instances to the contrary by examples to the contrary It is against Sense and Experience to conclude This maketh such a thing such Ergo it self is much more such for by the same way I reason What maketh any thing drunk that is much more drunk but Wine maketh a man drunk Ergo Wine is much more drunk This concludes not the reason is because a man may be drunk but Drunkenness is neither inherent in Wine nor accident to Wine This is taken off then by that Limitation Vâ—rique non inest Again Scintilla ignis ab ictu silicis a little Spark of Fire from a Flint-stone falling into a Magazine of Powder putteth the whole Magazine into a Fire and that the Town or Castle will it follow hence Ergo that little Spark of Fire from the Flint is a greater Fire than when a whole City is a Fire I know to this may be answered a greater Fire it is when the Castle is in Fire but no more Fire the Difference being only in degrees of Extension not of Intension as Philosophers speak next that the scintil from the Flint-stone is magis tale more so than the City inflamed or the Castle incensed because it is so effectivè formaliter both formally in it self and effectively the cause of the other the other set on fire by it is only formaliter formally so because this is not so easily intelligible by every ordinary Reader I speak more plain The Parliament cannot like these Maxims of the Observators and if they see and judge right they must make an Order against them and this especially for by this Ground it will follow inevitably and necessarily that the Counties and Corporations of England may make void all their Commissions given to the Knights and Burgesses of the house of Commons and send others in their place Nay more will follow that they cannot make orders and Laws but that the Counties and Corporations may make much more undo what they do repeal what they establish establish and enact the contrary Frame the Argument The Constituent is better and higher in place and dignity than the constituted but the Counties and Corporations are the Constituents of the Knights of Shires and Burgesses in the House of Commons Ergo they may void their Commissions Ergo they may change the Commissioners send others in their place Ergo they may repeal their Orders establish other Laws contrary and contradictory to theirs c. and many more Absurdities may be