him that commands the government is upheld by a double obligation from the Citizens first that which is due to their fellow citizens next that which they owe to their Prince Wherefore no subjects how many soever they be â—an with any Right despoyle him who bears the chiefe Rule of his authority even without his own consent CHAP. VII Of the three kindes of Government Democraty Aristocraty Monarchie I. That there are three kindes of Government onely Democraty Ariristocraty Monarchie II. That Oligarchy is not a diverse form of government distinct from Aristocraty nor Anarchy any Forme at all III. That a Tyranny is not a diverse state from a legitimate Monarchy IV. That there cannot be a mixt state fashioned out of these severall species V. That Democraty except there be certain times and places of meeting prefixt is dissolv'd VI. In a Democraty the intervalls of the times of meeting must be short or the administration of Government during the intervall committed to some one VII In a Democraty particulars Contract with particulars to obey the People the People is oblig'd to no man VIII By what acts Aristocraty is constituted IX In an Aristocraty the Nobles make no Compact neither are they oblig'd to any Citizen or to the whole People X. The Nobles must necessarily have their set meetings XI By what acts Monarchy is constituted XII Monarchy is by Compact oblig'd to none for the Authority it hath receiv'd XIII Monarchy is ever in the readiest capacity to exercise all those acts which are requisite to good Government XIV What kind of sin that is and what sort of men are guilty of it when the City performes not its office towards the Citizens nor the Citizens towards the City XV. A Monarch made without limitation of time hath power to elect his successor XVI Of limited Monarchs XVII A Monarch retaining his Right of Government cannot by any promise whatsoever be conceived to have parted with his Right to the meanes necessary to the exercise of his Authority XVIII How a Citizen is freed from subjection I. VVE have already spoken of a City by institution in its Genus we will now say somewhat of its species As for the difference of Cities it is taken from the difference of the Persons to whom the Supreme Power is committed this power is committed either to one Man or Councell or some one Court consisting of many men Furthermore a Councell of many men consists either of all the Citizens insomuch as every man of them hath a Right to Vote and an interest in the ordering of the greatest affaires if he will himselfe or of a part onely from whence there arise three sorts of Government The one when the Power is in a Councell where every Citizen hath a right to Vote and it is call'd a DEMOCRATY The other when it is in a Councell where not all but some part onely have their suffrages and we call it an ARISTOCRATY The third is that when the Supreme Authority rests onely in one and it is stiled a MONARCHY In the first he that governes is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The PEOPLE In the second the NOBLES In the third the MONARCH II. Now although Ancient Writers of Politiques have introduc'd three other kindes of Government opposite to these to wit Anarchy or confusion to Democraty Oligarchy that is the command of some few to Aristocracy and Tyranny to Monarchy yet are not these three distinct formes of Government but three diverse Titles given by those who were either displeas'd with that present Government or those that bare Rule For men by giving names doe usually not onely signifie the things themselves but also their own affections as love hatred anger and the like whence it happens that what one man calls a Democraty another calls an Anarchy what one counts an Aristocraty another esteemes an Oligarchie and whom one titles a King another stiles him a Tyrant so as we see these names betoken not a diverse kinde of Government but the diverse opinions of the Subjects concerning him who hath the Supreme Power For first who sees not that Anarchy is equally opposite to all the forenam'd Formes For that word signifies that there is no Government at all that is not any City But how is it possible that no City should be the species of a City Farthermore what difference is there between an Oligarchie which signifies the Command of a few or Grandâ—â—s or an Aristocraty which is that of the Prime or Chief Heads more then that men differ so among themselves that the same things seeme not good to all men whence it happens that those persons who by some are look'd on as the best are dy others esteem'd to be the worst of all men III. But men by reason of their passions will very hardly be perswaded that a Kingdome and Tyranny are not diverse kindes of Cities who though they would rather have the City subject to one then many yet doe they not beleeve it to be well govern'd unlesse it accord with their judgements But we must discover by Reason and not by Passion what the difference is between a King and a Tyrant but first they differ not in this That a Tyrant hath the greater power for greater then the Supreme cannot be granted nor in this That one hath a limited power the other not for he whose authority is limited is no King but his Subject that limits him Lastly neither differ they in their manner of acquisition for if in a Democraticall or Aristocraticall Government some one Citizen should by force possesse himself of the Supreme Power if he gain the consent of all the Citizens he becomes a legitimate Monarch if not he is an Enemy not a Tyrant They differ therefore in the sole exercise of their command insomuch as he is said to be a King who governs wel and he aâ—… Tyrant that doth otherwise The case therefore is brought to this passe That a King legitimately constituted in his Government if he seeme to his Subjects to Rule well and to their liking they afford him the appellation of a King if not they count him a Tyrant Wherefore we see a Kingdome and Tyranny are not diverse Formes of Government but one and the self-same Monarch hath the name of a King given him in point of Honour and Reverence to him and of a Tyrant in way of contumely and reproach But what we frequently finde in bookes said against Tyrants took its originall from Greek and Roman Writers whose Government was partly Democraticall and partly Aristocraticall and therefore not Tyrants onely but even Kings were odious to them IV. There are who indeed doe think it necessarily That a Supremâ— Command should be somewhere extant in a City but if it should be in any one either Man or Councell it would follow they say that all the Citizens must be slaves Avoiding this condition they imagine that there may be a certaine Form of Government
his death then the Monarch being dead the authority is confirmed in the people not by any new acts of the subjects but by vertue of the former Right for all the supreme comâ—and as Dominion was in the People but the use and exercise of it was only in the temporary Monarch as in one that takes the benefit but hath not the Right But if the People after the election of a temporarie Monarch depart not from the Court before they have appointed certain times and places to convene during the time prescribed him as the Dictators in ancient times were made by the People of Rome such an one is not to be accounted a Monarch but the Prime Officer of the People and if it shall seem good the People may deprive him of his office even before that time as the People of Rome did when they conferred an equall power on Minutius Master of the horse with Quintus Fabius Maximus whom before they had made Dictator The reason whereof is that it is not to be imagined that whether Man or Counsell who hath the readiest and most immediate power to act should hold his command on such termes as not to be able actually to execuâ—e it for command is nothing else but a Right of commanding as oft as nature allowes it possible Lastly if the People having declared a temporary Monarch depart from the Court on such termes as it shall not be lawfull for them to meet without the command of the Monarch we must understand the People to be immediately dissolved and that his authority who is thus declared is absolute forasmuch as it is not in the power of all the subjects to frame the City a new unlesse he give consent who hath now alone the authority Nor matters it that he hath perhaps made any promise to assemble his Subjects on some certain times since there remains no Person now in being but at his discretion to whom the promise was made What we have spoken of these four cases of a People electing a Temporary Monarch will be more clearly explain'd by comparing them with an absolute Monarch who hath no heir apparent for the People is Lord of the subject in such a manner as there can be no Heir but whom it self doâ—h appoint Besides the spaces between the times of the subjects meeting may be fiâ—ly compar'd to those times wherein the Monarch sleepes for in either the Acts of commanding ceases the Power remaines Farthermore to dissolve the convent so as it cannot meet againe is the death of the People just as sleeping so as he can never wake more is the death of a man As therefore a King who hath no Heir going to his rest so as never to rise again i. e. dying if he commit the exercise of his Regall Authority to any one till he awake does by consequence give him the Succession the People also electing a Temporary Monarch and not reserving a power to convene delivers upto him the whole Dominion of the Country Furthermore as a King going to sleep for some season entrusts the administration of his Kingdome to some other and waking takes it again so the people having elected a Temporary Monarch and with all retaining a right to meet at a certain day and place at that day receives its supremacy again And as a King who hath committed the execution of his Authority to another himself in the mean while waking can recall this commission againe when he pleaseth so the People who during the time prescribed to the Temporary Monarch doth by Right convene may if they please deprive the Monarch of his Authority Lastly the King who commits his Authority to another while himself sleeps not being able to wake againe till he whom he entrusted give consent loses at once both his power and his life so the people who hath given the Supreme Power to a temporary Monarch in such sort as they cannot assemble without his command is absolutely dissolv'd and the power remaines with him whom they have chosen XVII If the Monarch promise ought to any one or many subjects together by consequence whereof the exercise of his power may suffer prejudice that Promise or Compact whether made by Oath or without it is null for all Compact is a conveyance of Right which by what hath been said in the fourth Article of the second Chapter requires meet and proper signes of the Will in the conveyer But he who sufficiently signifies his will of retaining the end doth also sufficiently declare that he quits not his Right to the means necessary to that end Now he who hath promis'd to part with somewhat necessary to the Supreme Power and yet retaines the Power it selfe gives sufficient tokens That he no otherwise promis'd it then so farre forth as the power might be retain'd without it Whensoever therefore it shall appear that what is promis'd cannot be perform'd without prejudice to the power the promise must be valued as not made i. e. of no effect XVIII We have seen how Subjects nature dictating have oblig'd themselves by mutuall Compacts to obey the Supreme Power We will see now by what meanes it comes to passe that they are releas'd from these bonds of obedience And first of aâ—l this happens by rejection namely if a man cast off or forsake but conveigh not the Right of his Command on some other for what is thus rejected is openly expos'd to all alike catch who catch can whence again by the Right of nature every subject may heed the preservation of himselfe according to his own judgement In the second place If the Kingdome fall into the power of the enemy so as there can no more opposition be made against them we must understand that he who before had the Supreme Authority hath now lost it For when the Subjects have done their full indeavour to prevent their falling into the enemies hands they have fulfill'd those Contracts of obedience which they made each with other and what being conâ—…uer'd they promise afterwards to avoid death they must with no lesse endeavour labour to performe Thirdly in a Monarchy for a Democraâ—y and Aristocraty cannot fail if there be no successour all the subjects are discharg'd from their obligations for no man is suppos'd to be tyed he knows not to whom for in such a case it were impossible to perform ought And by these three wayes all subjects are restor'd from their civill subjection to that liberty which all men have to all things to wit naturall and salvage for the naturall state hath the same proportion to the Civill I mean liberty to subjection which Passion hath to Reason or a Beast to a Man Furthermore each subject may lawfully be freed from his subjection by the will of him who hath the Supreme Power namely if he change his soile which may be done two wayes either by permission as he who gets license to dwell in another Country or Command as he who is Banisht
submitted themselves to be protected and judged by reason of the great esteem they had of Prophecies The Reason of this thing was because that though penalties were set and Judges appointed in the institution of Gods priestly Kingdome yet the Right of inflicting punishment depended wholly on private judgement and it belonged to a dissolute multitude and each single Person to punish or not to punish according as their private zeale should stirre them up And therefore Moyses by his own command punisht no man with death but when any man was to be put to death one or many stirred up the multitude against him or them by divine authority and saying Thus saith the Lord. Now this was conformable to the nature of Gods peculiar Kingdome For there God reignes indeed where his Lawes are obeyed not for fear of men but for fear of himselfe and truly if men were such as they should be this were an excellent state of civill government but as men are there is a coercive power in which I comprehend both right and might necessary to rule them and therefore also God from the beginning prescribed Lawes by Moyses for the future Kings Deut. 17. vers 14. and Moyses foretold this in his last words to the people saying I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt your selves and turn aside from the way that I have commanded you c. Deut. 31. 29. when therefore according to this prediction there arose another generation who knew not the Lord nor yet the works which he had done for Ispael the children of Israel did evill in the sight of the Lord and served Bâ—laam Iud. 2. 10 11. to wit they cast off Gods government that is to say that of the Priest by whom God ruled and afterward when they were overcome by their enemies and opprest with bondage they looked for Gods will not at the hands of the Priest any more but of the Prophets These therefore actually judged Israel but their obedience was rightly due to the High Priest Although therefore the Priestly Kingdome after the death of Moyses Ioshuah was without power yet was it not without Right Now that the interpretation of Gods word did belong to the same High Priest is manifest by this That God after the Tabernacle the Ark of the Covenant was consecrated spake no more in mount Sinai but in the Tabernacle of the Covenant from the propitiatory which was between the Cherubims whether it was not lawfull for any to aproach except the High Priest If therefore regard be had to the Right of the Kingdome the supreme civill power and the authority of interpreting Gods word were joyned in the High Priest If we consider the fact they were united in the Prophets who judged Israel For as Iudges they had the civill authority as Prophets they interpreted Gods word and thus every way hitherto these two powers continued inseparable XVI Kings being once constituted it s no doubt but the civill authority belonged to them for the Kingdome of God by the way of Priesthood God consenting to the request of the Israelites was ended which Hierom also marks speaking of the books of Samuel Samuel sayes he Eli being dead and Saul slain declares the old Law abolisht Furthermore the Oaths of the new Priesthood and new Soveraignty in Zadok and David do testifie that the Right whereby the Kings did rule was founded in the very concession of the People The Priest could Rightly doe whatsoever every man could rightly doe himselfe for the Israelites granted him a Right to judge of all things and to wage warre for all men in which two are contained all Right whatsoever can be conceived from man to man Our King say they shall judge us and goe out before us and fight our battails 1. Sam. 8. 20. Iudicature therefore belonged to the Kings but to judge is nothing else then by interpreting to apply the facts to the Lawes to them therefore belonged the interpretation of Lawes too and because there was no other written word of God acknowledged beside the Law of Moyses untill the Captivity the authority of interpreting Gods word did also belong to the Kings Nay forasmuch as the word of God must be taken for a Law if there had been another written word beside the Mosaicall Law seeing the interpretation of Lawes belonged to the Kings the interpretation of it must also have belonged to them When the book of Deuteronomie in which the whole Mosaicall Law was contained being a long time lost was found again the Priests indeed asked Counsell of God concerning that book but not by their own authority but by the Commandement of Iosiah and not immediately neither but by the meanes of Holda the Prophetesse whence it appears that the authority of admitting books for the word of God belonged not to the Priest neither yet followes it that that authority belonged to the Prophetesse because others did judge of the Prophets whether they were to be held for true or not for to what end did God give signes and tokens to all the People whereby the true Prophets might be discerned from the false namely the event of predictions and conformity with the Religion â—stablisht by Moyses if they might not use those marks The authority therefore of admitting books for the word of God belonged to the King thus that book of the Law was approved and received again by the authority of King Iosiah as appears by the fourth book of the Kings 22. 23. Chap. where it is reported that he gathered together all the severall degrees of his Kingdome the Elders Priests Prophets and all the people and he read in their cares all the words of the Covenant that is to say he caused that Covenant to be acknowledged for the Mosaicall Covenantâ— that is to say for the word of God and to be again received and confirmed by the Israclites The civill power therefore and the power of discerning Gods word from the word of men and of interpreting Gods word even in the dayes of the Kings was wholly belonging to themselves Prophets were sent not with authority but in the form and by the Right of Proclaimers and Preachers of whom the hearers did judge and if perhaps these were punisht who did not listen to them plainly teaching easie things it doth not thence follow that the Kings were obliged to follow all things which they in Gods name did declare were to be followed for though Iosiab the good King of Iudah were slain because he obeyed not the word of the Lord from the mouth of Neobo King of Aegypt that is to say because he rejected good Counsell though it seemed to come from an enemy yet no man I hope will say that Iosiah was by any bond either of divine or humane Lawes obliged to beleeve Pharoah Neobo King of Aegypt because he said that God had spoken to him But what some man may object against Kings that for want of learning they are seldome
an Aristocraty the Nobles make no contract nor are they obliged to any citizen or to the whole People The Nobles must necessarily have their set meetings By what acts a Monarchy is framed That the Monarch is by compact obliged to none for the authoritie he hath received A Monarch is ever in the readier capacity to exercise all those acts which are requisite to well governing What kind of sin that is and what sort of men are guilty of it when the City performs not its office to the Citizens not the Citizens towards the City A Monarch made without limitation of time may elect his successors Of limited Monarchs A Monarch retaining his Right of Government cannot by any promise whatsoever be conceiv'd to have parted with his Right to the means necessary to the exercise of his Authority my what Beanes a Subject is freed from his subjection What Lord and Servant are The distinction of Servants unto such as upon trust enjoy their naturall liberty or Slaves and such as serve being imprison'd or settered The obligation of a Servant ariseth from that freedome which is granted him by his Lord. Servants that are bound are not obliged to their Lord by any Contract Servants have no propriety in their goods against their Lord. The Lord may sell his Servant or alienate him by Testament The Lord cannot be injurious to his Servant He that iâ— Lord of the Lord is Lord also of the Servants By what meanes servants are freed The Dominion over beasts is by the Right of nature Paternact Dominion riseth not from generation Dominion over Infants belongs to him who who first hath theâ— in his power Dominion over Infants is originally the Mothers The exposed Infant is his that preserves him The sonne of a Subject and chiefe is his that commands In such a conjunction of male and female as neither hath the commanding power over the other the children are the Mothers except by pact or civill law it be otherwise determined Children are no lesse subject to their Parents then servants to their Lords and subjects to their City Of the honour due to Parents and Lords Wherein liberty doth consist and the difference between subjects and servants There is the same Right in an hereditary which there is in an institutive government The question concerning the Right of succession belongs onely to Monarchy A Monarch may dispose of the command of his government by Testament Or give it away or sell it A Monarch dying without Testament is ever understood to will that a Monarch should succeed him And some one of his 〈…〉 children And a male rather then female And of the males the eldest rather then the yonger And his Brother if he want issue before all others In the same manner that men succeed to the power doe they also succeed to the Right of Succession A comparing the state of nature with the civill The gains and losses of the The praise of Monarchy Annotation The government of one cannot be said to be evill in this respect namely because one hath more power then all the rest Rejection of their opinion who say that a Lord with his servants cannot make a City The exactions are more grievous under command of the people then under the Monarch Innocent Subjects are lesse obnoxious to punishment under a Monarch then under the People Single Persons have no lesse liberty under a Monarch then under the People It is no disadvantage to the Subjects that they are not all admitted to the publique deliberations Civill deliberations are unadvisedly committed to many by reason of the unskilfulnesse of most men By reason of their Eloquence By reason of Faction By reason of the unsetlednesse of the Laws For want of secrecy These inconveniences do adhere to Democraty forasmuch as men are naturally delighted with an opinion of wit The inco nveniences of government proceeding from a King who is a childe The power of Generalls is an argument of the excellency of Monarchy The best state of a Common-weale is that where the subjects are the Rulers inheritance Aristocraty is so much better by how much it approaches nearer to Monarchie the worse by how much it is more distant from it The beginning of institutive Government from the consent of the People The power of judicature and determination of warres depend on the will of the supreme Officer They who have the supreme authority are by Right unpunishable That without a supreme power there is no government â—ut confusion That servants and sonnes owe their Lords and Parents simple obedience The absolute power of Princes proved by most evident testimonies of the Scripture as wâ—ll new as old That the judgement of good and evill belongs to private Persons is a seditious opinion That subjects doe sin in obeying their Princes is a seditious opinion That Tyrannicide is lawfull is a seditious opinion That even they who have the Supreme power are subject to the Civill Lawes is a seditious Opinion That the Supreme Power may be divided is a seditious opinion That faith and holiness are not acquired by study and reason but are ever supernaturally infused and inspired is a seditious Opinion That single Subjects have any propriety or absolute Dominion over their own goods is a seditious Opinion Not to know the difference between a People and a Multitude prepares to Sedition Too great a Tax of Money though never so just and necessary disposeth men to Sedition Ambition disposeth men to Sedition So doth the hope of successe Eloquence alone without wisdom is the onely faculty needfull to raise seditions How the folly of the common people and the eloquence of ambitious men concurre to the dissolution of a Common-weale The Right of supreme authority is distinguisht from its exâ—râ—ise The safety of the People is the supreme Law It is the duty of Princes to respect the common benefit of many not the peculiar interest of this or that man By safety is understood all manner of benefits Query Whether it be the duty of Kings to provide for the salvation of their subjects soules as they shall judge best in their own câ—nsciences Wherein the safety of the People consists That discoverers are necessary for the defence of the People To have Souldiers Armes Garrisons and Money in readiness in times of Peace is necessary for the Peoples defence A right instruction of Subjects in civill doctrines is necessary for the preserving of Peace Equall distribution of publique burthens conduceth much to the preservation of peace It s naturall equity that Monies be â—axt according to what every man speuds not to what â—e posseseth It conduces to the preservation of peace to depresse the ambitious And to dissolve factious Lawes whereby gaining arts are cherisht and great expences restrained doâ— conduce much to the enriching of the subject That more ought not to be determined by the Lawes then the benefit of Prince and Subjects require That greater punishments must not be inflicted then are prescribed
compounded of those three kinds we have spoken of yet different from each particular which they call a mixt Monarchie or mixt Aristocraty or mixt Democraty according as any one of these three sorts shall be more eminent then the rest For example if the naming of Magistrates and the arbitration of War and Peace should belong to the King Judicature to the Lords and contribution of Monies to the People and the power of making Lawes too altogether this kind of State would they call a mixt Monarchie forsooth But if it were possible that there could be such a State it would no whit advantage the liberty of the subject for as long as they all agree each single Citizen is as much subject as possibly he can be but if they disagree the State returns to a Civill War and the Right of the private Sword which certainly is much worse then any subjection whatsoever * But that there can be no such kind of Government hath been sufficiently demonstrated in the foregoing Chapter Artic 6 7 8 9 10 11 12. But that there can be no such kinde of Government Most men grant That a Government ought not to be divided but they would have it moderated and bounded by some limits Truly it is very reasonable it should be so but if these men when they speak of moderating and limiting do understand dividing it they make a very fond distinction Truly for my part I wish that not onely Kings but all other Persons endued with Supreme Authority would so temper themselves as to commit no wrong and onely minding their charges contain themselves within the limits of the naturall and divine Lawes But they who distinguish thus they would have the chief power bounded and restrain'd by others which because it cannot be done but that they who doe set the limits must needs have some part of the power whereby they may be enabled to doe it the Government is properly divided not moderated V. Let us see a little now in the constituting of each Form of Government what the constitutours doe Those who met together with intention to erect a City were almost in the very act of meeting a Democraty for in that they willingly met they are suppos'd oblig'd to the observation of what shall be determin'd by the major part which while that convent lasts or is adjourn'd to some certain dayes and places is a clear Democraty for that convent whose will is the will of all the Citizens hath the Supreme Authority and because in this Convent every man is suppos'd to have a Right to give his voice it followes that it is a Democraty by the definition given in the first Article of this Chap. But if they depart and break up the Convent and appoint no time or place where and when they shall meet again the publick weal returns to Anarchy and the same state it stood in before their meeting that is to the state of all men warring against all the People therefore retains the supreme power no longer then there is a certain day and place publiquely appointed and known to which whosoever will may resort For except that be known and determined they may either meet at divers times and places that is in factions or not at all and then it is no longer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the People but a dissolute multitude to whom we can neither attribute any Action or Right Two things therefore frame a Democratie whereof one to wit the perpetuall prescription of Convents makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the People the other which is a plurality of voyces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the power VI. Furthermore it will not be sufficient for the People so as to maintain its supremacy to have some certain known times and places of meeting unlesse that either the intervals of the times be of lesse distance then that any thing may in the mean time happen whereby by reason of the defect of power the City may be brought into some danger or at least that the exercise of the supreme authority be during the intervall granted to some one man or Councell For unlesse this be done there is not that wary care and heed taken for the defence and Peace of single men which ought to be and therefore will not deserve the name of a City because that in it for want of security every mans Right of defending himselfe at his own pleasure returns to him again VII Democraty is not framed by contract of particular Persons with the People but by mutuall compacts of single men each with other But hence it appears in the first place that the Persons contracting must be in being before the contract it selfe but the People is not in being before the constitution of government as not being any Person but a multitude of single Persons wherefore there could then no contract passe between the People and the Subject Now if after that government is framed the subject make any contract with the People it is in vain because the People contains within its will the will of that subject to whom it is supposed to be obliged and therefore may at its own will and pleasure disengage it selfe and by consequence is now actually free But in the second place that single Persons doe contract each with other may be inferred from hence that in vain sure would the City have been constituted if the Citizens had been engaged by no contracts to doe or omit what the City should command to be done or omitted Because therefore such kind of compacts must be understood to passe as necessary to the making up of a City but none can be made as is already shewed between the Subject and the People it followes that they must be made between single Citizens namely that each man contract to submit his will to the will of the major part on condition that the rest also doe the like as if every one should say thus I give up my Right unto the People for your sake on condition that you also deliver up yours for mine VIII An Aristocraty or Councell of Nobles endued with supreme authoritie receives its originall from a Democraty which gives up its Right unto it where we must understand that certain men distinguisht from others either by eminence of title blood or some other Character are propounded to the People and by plurality of voyces are elected and being elected the whole Right of the People or City is conveighâ—d on them insomuch as whatsoever the People might doe before the same by Right may this Court of elected Nobles now doe which being done it is clear that the People considered as one Person its supreme authority being already transferred on these is no longer now in being IX As in Democraty the People so in an Aristocraty the Court of Nobles is free from all manner of obligation for seeing subjects not contracting with the People but by mutuall compacts among themselves were tyed
in a Civill Government and with the peace of mankind cannot possibly be done because there is no City without a Command and a restraining Right LIBERTY that we may define it is nothing else but an absence of the lets and hinderances of motion as water shut up in a vessell is therefore not at liberty â—ecause the vessell hinders it from running out which the vessell being broken is made free And every man hath more or lesse liberty as he hath more or lesse space in which he employes himself as he hath more liberty who is in a large then he that is kept in a close prison And a man may be free toward one part and yet not toward anothert as the traveller is bounded on this and that side with hedges or stone walls lest he spoyle the vines or corne neighbouring on the high way And these kinde of leâ—s are externall and absolute in which sense all Servants and Subjects are free who are not fetter'd and imprisoned There are others which are arbitrary which doe not absolutely hinder motion but by accident to wit by our own choyce as he that is in a ship is not so hindered but he may cast himselfe into the Sea if he will and here also the more wayes a man may move himselfe the more liberty he hath and herein consists civill liberty for no man whether subject sonne or servant is so hindred by the punishments appointed by the City the Father or the Lord how cruell soever but that he may doe all things and make use of all meanes necessary to the preservation of his life and health for my part therefore I cannot finde what reason a meer servant hath to make complaints if they relate onely to want of liberty unlesse he count it aâ—misery to be restrained from hurting himselfe and to receive that life which by warre or misfortune or through his own idlenesse was forfeited together with all manner of sustenance and all things necessary to the conservation of health on this condition only that he will be rul'd for he that is kept in by punishments layd before him so as he dares not let loose the reines to his will in all things is not opprest by servitude but is governed and sustained But this priviledge free subjects and sonnes of a family have above servants in every goverment and family where servants are that they may both undergoe the more honourable offices of the City or family and also enjoy a larger possession of things superfluous And herein layes the difference between a fâ—ce subject and a servant that he is FREE indeed who serves his City onely but a SERVANT is he who also serves his fellow subject all other liberty is an exemption from the Lawes of the City and proper only to those that bear Rule X. A Father with his sonnes and scrvants growne into a civill Person by vertue of his paternall jurisdiction is called a FAMILY This family if through multiplying of children and acquisition of servants it becomes numerous insomuch as without casting the uncertain dye of warre it cannot be subdued will be termed an Hereditary Kingdome which though it differ from an institutive Monarchy being acquired by force in the original manner of its constitution yet being constituted it hath al the same properties and the Right of authority is every where the same insomuch as it is not needfull to speak any thing of them apart XI It hath been spoken by what Right supreme authorities are constituted Wee must now briefly tell you by what right they may be continued Now the Right by which they are continued is that which is called the right of SUCCESSION Now because in a Democratie the supreme authority is with the People as long as there be any subjects in being so long it rests with the same Person for the People hath no Successour In like manner in an Aristocraâ—y one of the Nobles â—ying some other by the rest is substituted in his place and therefore except they all dye together which 〈◊〉 suppose will never happen there is no succession The Querie therefore of the Right of Succession takes place onely in an absolute Monarchy For they who exercise the supreme power for a time onely are themselves no Monarchs but Ministers of state XII But first if a Monarch shall by Testament appoint one to succeed him the Person appointed shall succeed for if he be appointed by the People he shall have all the Right over the City which the People had as hath been shewed in the 7. Chap. Art 11. but the People might choose him by the same Right therefore may he choose another but in an hereditary Kingdome there are the same Rights as in an institutive wherefore every Monarch may by his will make a successour XIII But what a man may transferre on another by Testament that by the same Right may he yet living give or sell away To whomsoever therefore he shall make over the supreme power whether by gift or sale it is rightly made XIV But if living he have not declared his will concerning his successour by Testament not otherwise it is supposed First that he would not have his Government reduced to an Anarchy or the state of warre that is to the destruction of his subjects as well because he could not doe that without breach of the Lawes of nature whereby he was obliged to the performance of all things necessarily conducing to the preservation of Peace as also because if that had been his will it had not been hard for him to have declared that openly Next because the Right passeth according to the will of the Father we must judge of the successour according to the signes of his will It is understood therefore that he would have his subjects to be under a Monarchicall Government rather then any other because he himselfe in ruling hath before approved of that state by his example and hath not afterward either by any word or deed condemned it XV. Furthermore because by naturall necessity all men wish them better from whom they receive glory and honour then others but every man after death receives honour and glory from his children sooner then from the power of any other men hence we gather that a father intends better for his children then any other persons It is to be understood therefore that the will of the father dying without Testament was that some of his children should succeed him yet this is to be understood with this provâ—so that there be no more apparent tokens to the contrary of which kind after many successions custome may be one for he that makes no mention of his succession is supposed to consent to the customes of his Realme XVI Among children the Males carry the preheminence in the beginning perhaps because for the most part although not alwayes they are â—itter for the administration of 〈◊〉 matters but specially of wars but afterwards
be a woman or youth or infant provided that they be fit for affaires who are endued with the publique Offices and charges And that which is said Woe to the land whose King is a childe doth not signifie the condition of a Monarchy to be inferiour to a Popular state but contrariwise that by accident it is the grievance of a Kingdome that the King being a childe it often happens that many by ambition and power intruding themselves into publique counsels the government comes to be administred in a Democraticall manner and that thence arise those infelicities which for the most part accompany the Dominion of the People XVII But it is a manifest sign that the most absolute Monarchy is the best state of government that not onely Kings but even those Cities which are subject to the people or to Nobles give the whole command of warre to one only and that so absolute as nothing can be more wherein by the way this must be noted also that no King can give a Generall greater authority over his army then he himselfe by Right may exercise over all his subjects Monarchy therefore is the best of all governments in the Camps But what else are many Common-wealths then so many Camps strengthened with armes and men against each other whose state because not restrained by any common power howsoever an uncertain peace like a short truce may passe between them is to be accounted for the state of nature which is the state of War XVIII Lastly since it was necessary for the preservation of our selves to be subject to some Man or Councell we cannot on better condition be subject to any then one whose interest depends upon our safety and welfare and this then comes to passe when we are the inheritance of the Ruler for every man of his own accord endeavours the preservation of his inheritance But the Lands and Monies of the Subjects are not onely the Princes Treasure but their bodies and wildy minds which will be easily granted by those who consider at how great rates the Dominion of lesser Countries is valued and how much easier it is for men to procure mony then money men nor doe we readily meet with any example that shewes us when any subject without any default of his own hath by his Prince been despoiled of his life or goods through the sole licenciousnesse of his Authority XIX Hitherto we have compared a Monarchicall with a Popular State we have said nothing of Aristocracy we may conclude of this by what hath been said of those that that which is hereditary and content with the election of Magistrates which transmits its deliberations to some few and those most able which simply imitates the government of Monarchs most and the People least of all is for the Subjects both better and more lasting then the rest CHAP. XI Places and Examples of Scripture of the Rights of Government agreeable to what hath beene said before I. The beginning of institutive Government from the consent of the People II. Judicature and Wars depend on the will of Supreme Commanders III. That they who have the Chief Authority are by Right unpunishable IV. That without a Supreme Power there is no Government but Anarchy V. That from Servants and Sons there is a simple obedience due to their Lords and Parents VI. Absolute Authority proved by most evident places as well of the New as the Old Testament I. VVE have in the 6. Chapter and the 2. Article so derived the Originall of institutive or politicall Government from the consent of the Multitude that it appears they must either all consent or be esteem'd as Enemies Such was the beginning of Gods Government over the Jewes instituted by Moses If ye will obey my voice induced c. Ye shall be unto me a Kingdome of Priests c. And Moses came and called the Elders of the People c. And all the people answered and said All that the Lord hath spoken we will do Exod. 19. ver 5 6 7 8. Such also was the beginning of Moyses his power under God or of his Vicegerency And all the people saw the thunderings and lightenings and the noyse of the Trumpet c. And they said unto Moyses speak thou unto us and we will hear Exod. 20. 18 19. The like beginning also had Sauls Kingdome When yee saw that Nahash King of the children of Ammon came out against you yee said unto me nay but a King shall raign over us when the Lord your God was your King Now therefore behold the King whom yee have chosen and whom yee have desired 1 Sam. 12. 12. But the major part only consenting and not all for there were certain Sons of Belial who said How shall this man save us and they dispised him 1 Sam. 10. 27. those who did not consent were put to death as Enemies And the people said unto Samuel Who is he that said shall Saul reign over us Bring the men that we may put them to death 1 Sam. 11. 22. II. In the same 6. Chapter the 6. and 7. Articles I have shewed that all Judgment and Wars depend upon the will and pleasure of him who beares the Supreme Authority that is to say in a Monarchy on a Monarch or King and this is confirmed by the Peoples owne judgement Wee also will be like all the Nations and our King shall JUDGE us and goe out before us and fight our BATTELS 1 Sam. 〈◊〉 20. And what pertaines to Judgements and all other matters whereof there is any controversie whether they be Good or Evill is confirmed by the testimony of King Solomon Give therefore thy Servant an understanding heart to JUDGE thy People that I may discerne between GOOD and EVILL 1. Kings 3. 9. And that of Absolom There is no man deputed of the King to heare thee 2. Sam. 15. 3. III. That Kings may not be punished by their subjects as hath been shewed above in the sixth Chapter and the twelfth Article King David also confirmes who though Saul sought to stay him did notwithstanding refrain his hand from killing him and forbad Abishai saying Destroy him not for who caâ—â— stretch forth his hand against the Lords Anointed and be innocent 1 Sam. 22. v. 9. And when he had cut off the skirt of his garment The Lord forbid saith he that I should doe this thing unto my Master the Lords Anointed to stretch forth mine hand against him 1 Sam. 24. 7. And commanded the Amalekiâ—e who for his sake had slain Saul to be put to death 2 Sam. 1. 15. IV. That which is said in the 17. Chapter of Judges at the 6. verse In those dayes there was no King in Israel but every man did that which was right in his own eyes as though where there were not a Monarchy there were an Anarchy or confusion of all things may be brought as a testimony to prove the exexcellency of Monarchy above all
other forms of government unlesse that by the word King may perhaps be understood not one man onely but also a Court provided that in it there reside a supreme power which if it be taken in this sense yet hence it may follow that without a supreme and absolute power which we have endeavoured to prove in the sixth Chapter there will be a liberty for every man to doe what hee hath a minde or whatsoever shall seem right to himselfe which cannot stand with the preservation of mankinde and therefore in all Government whatsoever there is ever a supreme power understood to be somewhere existent V. We have in the 8. Chapter the 7. and 8. Article said that Servants must yeeld a simple obedience to their Lords and in the 9. Chapter Article 7. that Sonnes owe the same obedience to their Parents Saint Paul sayes the same thing concerning Servants Servants obey in all things your Masters according to the flesh not with eye service as men-pleasers but in singlenesse of heart fearing God Colos 3. 22. Concerning Sonnes Children obey your Parents in all things for this is well pleasing unto the Lord. Colos 3. 20. Now as wee by simple obedience understand ALL THINGS which are not contrary to the Lawes of God so in those cited places of Saint Paul after the word ALL THINGS we must suppose excepting those which are contrary to the Lawes of God VI. But that I may not thus by peece meale prove the right of Princes I will now instance those testimonies which altogether establish the whole power namely that there is an absolute and simple obedience due to them from their subjects And first out of the new Testament The Scribes and Pharisâ—es sit in Moyses seat all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and doâ— Mat. 23. 2. Whatsoever they bid you sayes he observe that is to say obey simply Why Because they sit in Moyses seat namely the civill Magistrates not Aaron the Priests Leâ— every soule be subject to the higher powers for there is no power but of God the powers that be are ordained of God whosoever therefore resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation Rom. 13. 1. Now because the powers that were in Saint Pauls time were ordained of God and all Kings did at that time require an absolute entire obedience from their subjects it followes that such a power was ordained of God Submit your selves unto every ordinance of man for the Lords sake whether it bee to the King as supreme or unto Governours as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of wicked doers and for the praise of them that doe well for so is the will of God 1 Pet. 2. 13. Again Saint Paul to Titus Put them mind to bee subject to Principalitiies and Powers to obey Magistrates c. Chap. 3. vers 1. What Principalities Was it not to the Principalities of those times which required an absolute obedience Furthermore that we may come to the example of Christ himselfe to whom the Kingdome of the Jewes belonged by hereditary Right derived from David himselfe He when he lived in the manner of a subject both paid tribute unto Caesar and pronounced it to be due to him Give unto Caesar saith he the things which are Caesars and unto God the things which are Gods Mat. 22. 21. When it pleased him to shew himselfe a King he required entire obedience Goe said he into the village over against you and straightway yee shall finde an Assetyed and a Colt with her loose them and bring them unto me and if any man say ought unto you yec shall say the Lord hath need of them Mat. 14. 2. This he did therefore by the right of being Lord or a King of the Jewes But to take away a subjects goods on this pretence onely because the Lord hath need of them is an absolute power The most evident places in the old Testament are these Goe thou near and heare ALL that the Lord our God shall say and speak thou unto us all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee and we will hear it and doe it Deut. 5. 27. But under the word all is contained absolute obedience Again to Joshua And they answered Joshua saying ALL that thou commandest us we will doe and whithersoever thou sendest us we will goe according as we hearkened unto Moyses in ALL things so will we hearken unto thee onely the Lord thy God be with thee as he was with Moyses whosoever hee be that doth rebell against thy Commandement and will not hearken unto thy words in ALL that thou commandest him he shall be put to death Joshua 1. 16 17 18. And the Parable of the Bramble Then said all the trees unto the Bramble Come thou aâ—d reign over us And the Bramble said unto the trees If in truth yee anoint me King over you then come and put your trust in my shadow and if not let sire come out of the Bramble and devoure the Cedars of Lebanon Juages 9. vers 14 15. The sense of which words is that we must acquiese to their sayings whom we have truly constituted to be Kings over us unlesse we would chuse rather to be consumed by the fire of a civill warre But the Regall authority is more particularly described by God himselfe in the 1. Sam. 8. vers 9. c. Shew them the Right of the King that shall reign over them c. This shall be the Right of the King that shall reign over you he will take your Sons and appoint them for himself for his Chariots and to he his horsemen and some shall runne before his Chariots c. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries c. And he will take your vineyards and give them to his Servants c. Is not this power absolute And yet it is by God himself styled the KINGS RIGHT neither was any man among the Jewes no not the High Priest himselfe exempted from this obedience For when the King namely Solomon said to Abiathar the Priest Get thee to Anathoth unto thine â—wn fields for thou art worthy of death but I will not at this time put thee to death because thou â—arest the Ark of the Lord God before David my father and because then hast been afflicted in all wherein my Father was afflicted So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest unto the Lord. 1 Kings 2. 26. It cannot by any argument be proved that this act of his displeased the Lord neither read we that either Solomon was reproved or that his Person at that time was any whit lesse acceptable to God CHAP. XII Of the internall causes tending to the dissolution of any Government I. That the judging of good and evill belongs to private Persons is a seditious opinion II. That subjects doâ— sinne by obeying their Princes is a seditious opinion III. That Tyrannicide is
not having any other Gods for in that consists the essence of the Covenant made with Abraham by which God requires nothing else but that he should be his God and the God of his seede Also the Precept of keeping holy the Sabbath for the Sanctification of the seventh day is instituted in memoriall of the six dayes Creation as appeares out of these words Exod. 31. ver 16 17. It is a perpetuall Covenant meaning the Sabbath and a signe betweene me and the Children of Israel for ever for in sixe dayes the Lord made Heaven and Earth and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed Of the third kind are the Politique judiciall and Ceremoniall lawes which onely belong'd to the Jewes The lawes of the fiâ—st and second sort written in Tables of stone to wit the Decalogue was kept in the Ark it selfe The rest written in the volume of the whole Law were laid up in the side of the Arke Deut. 3. ver 26 For these retaining the faith of Abraham might be chang'd those could not XI All Gods Lawes are Gods Word but all Gods Word is not his Law I am the Lord thâ— God which brought thee out of the Land of Aegypt is the word of God 〈…〉 is no Law Neither is all that which for the better deolaring of Gods Word is pronounc't or written together with it instantly to be taken for Gods Word For Thus saith the Lord is not the voice of God but of the Preacher or Prophet All that and onely that is the word of God which a true Prophet hath declar'd God to have spoken Now the writings of the Prophets comprehendng as well those things which God as which the Prophet himselfe speaks are therefore called the word of God because they containe the word of God Now because all that and that alone is the Word of God which is recommended to us for such by a true Prophet it cannot be knowne what Gods Word is before we know who is the true Prophet nor can we beleeve Gods Word before we beleeve the Prophet Moyses was beleev'd by the People of Israel for two things His Miracles and his Faith for how great and most evident Miracles soever he had wrought yet would they not have trusted him at least he was not to have beene trusted if he had call'd them out of Aegypt to any other worship then the worship of the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob their Fathers For it had beene contrary to the Covenant made by themselves with God In like manner two things there are to wit supernaturall Praediction of things to come which is a mighty miracle and Faith in the God of Abraham their deliverer out of Aegypt which God propos'd to all the Jews to be kept for marks of a true Prophet He that wants either of these is no Prophet nor is it to be receiv'd for Gods word which he obtrudes for such If Faith be wanting he is rejectin these words Deut. 13. ver 1 2 3 4 5. If there arise among you a Prophet or a dreamer of dreams and giveth thee a signe or a wonder and the signe or the wonder come to passe whereof he spake unto thee saying Let us goe after other Gods c. That Prophet or that dreamer of dreames shall be put to death If Praediction of events be wanting he is condemn'd by these Deut. 18. ver 21 22. And if thou say in thine heart how shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken When a Prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord if the thing follow not nor come to passe that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken but the Prophet hath spoken it presumptuously Now that that is the word of God which is publisht for such by a true Prophet and that he was held to be a true Prophet among the Jewes whose faith was true and to whose praedictions the events answer'd is without controversie but what it is to follow other Gods and whether the events which are affirm'd to answer their praedictions doe truly answer them or not may admit many controversies specially in praedictions which obscurely aenigmatically foretell the Event such as the praedictions of almost all the Prophets are as who saw not God apparently like unto Moyses but in darke speechâ—s and in figures Numb 12. ver 8. But of these we cannot judge otherwise then by the way of naturall reason because that Judgment depends on the Prophets interpretation and on its proportion with the Event XII The Jewes did hold the booke of the whole Law which was called Deuteronomie for the written word of God and that onely forasmuch as can be collected out of sacred history untill the Captivity for this booke was deliver'd by Moyses himselfe to the Priests to be kept and layd up in the side of the Ark of the Covenant and to be copyed out by the Kings and the same a long time after by the authority of King Josiah acknowledg'd againe for the Word of God 2 Kings 23. ver 2. But it is not manifest when the rest of the books of the Old Testament were first receiv'd into Canon but what concernes the Prophets Isaiah and the rest since they foretold no other things then what were to come to passe either in or after the Captivity their writings could not at that time be held for Prophetique by reason of the Law cited above Deut. 18. ver 21 22. Whereby the Israelites were commanded not to account any man for a true Prophet but him whose Prophecies were answer'd by the events And hence peradventure it is that the Jewâ— esteem'd the writings of those whom they slew when they Prophesied for Prophetique afterward that is to say for the word of God XIII It being known what Lawes there were under the old Covenant and that Word of God receiv'd from the beginning we must farthermore consider with whom the authority of judging whether the writings of the Prophets arising afterward were to be receiv'd for the Word of God that is to say whether the Events did answer their praedictions or not and with whom also the authority of interpreting the Lawes already receiv'd and the written Word of God did reside which thing is to be trac't through all the times and severall changes of the Commonwealth of Israel But it is manifest that this power during the life of Moyses was intirely in himselfe for if he had not been the Interpreter of the Lawes and Word that office must have belong'd either to every private person or to a congregation or Synagogue of many or to the High-Priest or to other Prophets First that that office belong'd not to private men or any Congregation made of them appeares hence that they were not admitted nay they were prohibited with most heavy threats to heare God speake otherwise then by the means of Moyses for it is written Let not the Priests and the people break through to come up unto the Lord lest
able enough to interpret those books of antiquity in the which Gods word is contained and that for this cause it is not reasonable that this office should depend on their authority he may object as much against the Priests and all mortall men for they may erre and although Priests were better instructed in nature and arts then other men yet Kings are able enough to appoint such interpreters under them and so though Kings did not themselves interpret the word of God yet the office of interpreting them might depend on their authority and they who therefore refuse to yeeld up this authority to Kings because they cannot practise the office it selfe doe as much as if they should say that the authority of teaching Geometry must not depend upon Kings except they themselves were Geometricians We read that Kings have prayed for the People that they have blest the people that they have consecrated the Temple that they have commanded the Priests that they have removed Priests from their office that they have constituted others Sacrifices indeed they have not offered for that was hereditary to Aaron and his sonnes but it is manifest as in Moyses his life time so throughout all ages from King Saul to the captivity of Babylon that the Priesthood was not a Maistry but a Ministry XVII After their returne from Babylonian bondage the Covenant being renewed and sign'd the Priestly Kingdome was restor'd to the same manner it was in from the death of Ioshuah to the beginning of the Kings excepting that it is not expresly set downe that the return'd Jewes did give up the Right of Soveraignty either to Esdras by whose directions they ordred their State or to any other beside God himselfe That reformation seemes rather to be nothing else then the bare promises and vowes of every man to observe those things which were written in the booke of the Law notwithstanding perhaps not by the Peoples intention by virtue of the Covenant which they then renewed for the Covenant was the same with that which was made at Mount Sinai that same state was a Priestly Kingdome that is to say the supreme civill authority and the sacred were united in the Priests Now howsoever through the ambition of those who strove for the Priesthood and by the interposition of forraigne Princes it was so troubled till our Saviour Iesus Christs time that it cannot be understood out of the histories of those times where that authority resided yet it 's plaine that in those times the power of interpreting Gods Word was not severed from the supreme civill power XVIII Out of all this we may easily know how the â—ewes in all times â—om Abraham unto Christ were to behave themselves in the Commands of their Princes for as in Kingdomes meerly humane men must obey a subordinate Magistrate in all things excepting when his Commands containe in them some Treason so in the Kingdome of God the Iâ—weâ— were bound to obey their Princes Abraham Isaac Jacob Moyses the Priest the King every one duâ—…ng â—heir time in all things except when their commands did containe some treason against the Divine Majesty Now treason against the Divine Majesty was first the deniall of â—is divine providence for this was to deny God to be a King by nature next Idolatry or the worship not of other for there is but one God but of strange Gods that is to say a worship though of one God yet under other Titles Attributes and Rites then what were establisht by Abraham and Moyses for this was to deny the God of Abraham to be their King by Covenant made with Abraham and themselves in all other things they were to obey and if a King or Priest having the Soveraign authority had commanded somewhat else to be done which was against the Lawes that had been his sinne and not his subjects whose duty it is not to dispute but to obey the Commands of his superiours Of the Kingdome of God by the new Covenant I. The Prophesies concerning Christs Dignity II. The Prophesies coneerning his Humility and Passion III. That Jesus was THAT CHRIST IV. That the Kingdome of God by the new Covenant was not the Kingdome of Christ as Christ but as God V. That the Kingdome by the new Covenant is heavenly and shall beginne from the day of Judgment VI. That the government of Christ in this world was not a Soveraignty but Counsell or a government by the way of doctrine and perswasion VII What the promises of the new Covenant are on both parts VIII That no Lawes are added by Christ beside the institution of the Sacraments IX Repent ye be baptized keep the Commandements and the like forms of speech are not Lawes X. It pertains to the civill authority to define what the sinne of injustice is XI It pertains to the civill authority to define what conduces to the Peace and defence of the City XII It pertains to the civill authority to judge when need requires what definitions and what inferences are true XIII It belongs to the Office of Christ to teach morally not by the way of speculation but as a Law to forgive sinnes and to teach all things whereof there is no science properly so called XIV A distinction of things temporall from spirituall XV. In how many seveverall sorts the word of God may be taken XVI That all which is contained in holy Scripture belongs not to the Canon of Christian Faith XVII That the word of a lawfull Interpreter of holy Scriptures is the word of God XVIII That the authority of interpreting Scriptures is the same with that of determining controversies of Faith XIX Divers significations of a Church XX. What a Church is to which we attribute Rights Actions and the like personall Capacites XXI A Christian City is the same with a Christian Church XXII Many Cities do not constitute one Church XXIII Who are Ecclesiasticall Persons XXIV That the Election of Ecclesiasticall Persons belongs to the Church their consecration to Pastors XXV That the power of remitting the sinnes of the penitent and retaining those of the impenitent belongs to the Pastors but that of judging concerning repentance belongs to the Church XXVI What Excommunication is and on whom it cannot passe XXVII That the Interpretation of Scripture depends on the authority of the City XXVIII That a Christian city ought to interpret Scriptures by Ecclesiasticall Pastors I. THere are many cleare prophesies extaâ—…t in the old Testament concerning our Saviour Jesus Christ who was to restore the Kingdome of God by a new Covenanâ— partly foretelling his regall Dignity partly his Humility and Passion Among others concerning his Dignity these God blessing Abraham â—akes him a promise of his sonne Isaac and â—ddes And Kings of People shall be of him Gen 17. vers 15. Jacob blessing his sonne Judah The Scepter quoth be shall not depart from Judah Gen. 49. vers 10. Gâ—d to Moyses A Prophet saith he will I raise them up from
sometimes false either of which apart is called thinking and also beleeving both together doubting But when our reasons for which we assent to some Proposition derive not from the Proposition it selfe but from the person Propounding whom we esteeme so learned that he is not deceiv'd and we see no reason why he should deceive us our assent because it growes not from any confidence of our owne but from another mans knowledge is called Faith And by the confidence of whom we doe beleeve we are said to trust them or to trust in them By what hath been said the difference appeares first betweene Faith and Profession for that is alwaies joyn'd with inward asseâ—… this not alwayes 〈◊〉 That is an inward perswasion of the minde this an outward obedience Next betweene Faith and Opinion for this depends on our ownâ— reason that on the good esteeme we have of another Lastly betweene Faith and Knowledge for this deliberately takes a proposition broken and chewed that swallowes downe whole and entiâ—â— The explication of words whereby the matter enquir'd after is propounded is conducible to knowledge â—ay the onely way to 〈◊〉 is by deâ—… but this is prejudiciall to Faith for those things which exceede humane capacity and are propounded to beleev'd are never more evident by explication but on the contrary more obscure and harder to be credited And the same thing befalls a man who endeavours to demonstraâ—â— the mysteries of Faith by naturall reason which happens to a sick man who will needs chew before he will swallow his wholsome but biâ—…r Pillâ— whence it comes to passe that he presently brings them up againe which perhaps would otherwise if he had taken them well downe have prov'd his remedy V. We have seene therefore what it is to beleeve But what is it to beleeve in CHRIST Or what Proposition is that which is the object of our Faith in CHRIST For when we say I beleeve in CHRIST we signifie indeed Whom but not What we beleeve Now to beleeve in CHRIST is nothing else but to beleeve that JESUS IS THE CHRIST namely Hee who according to the Prophesies of Moyses and the Prophets of Israel was to come into this world to institute the Kingdome of God And this sufficiently appeares out of the words of CHRIST himselfe to Martha I am saith he the Resurrection and the life HE THAT BELEEVETH IN ME though he were dead yet he shall live and WHOSOEVER LIVETH AND BELEEVETH IN ME shall never dye Beleevest thou this She saith unto him Yea Lord I beleeve that THOU ART THE CHRIST the Soâ— of God which should come into the world John 11. ver 25 26 27. In which words we see that the question BELEEVEST THOU IN ME is expounded by the answer THOU ART THE CHRIST To beleeve in CHRIST therefore is nothing else but to beleeve JESUS HIMSELFE saying that he is THE CHRIST VI. Faith and Obedience both necessarity concurring to Salvation what kinde of Obedience that same is and to whom due hath beene shewed above in the 3. Article But now we must enâ—â—iâ—e what articles of Faith are requisite And * I say that to a Christian there is no other article of Faith requisite as necessary to Salvation but only this THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST But we must distinguish as we have already done before in the 4. Article betweene Faith and Profession A Profession therefore of more articles if they be commanded may be necessary for it is a part of our obedience due to the Lawes but we enquire not now what Obedience but what Faith is necessary to salvation And this is prov'd first out of the scope of the Evangelists which was by the description of our Saviours life to establish this one Article and we shall know that such was the scope and counsell of the Evangelists if we observe but the History it selfe Saint Matthew beginning at his Genealogy shewes that JESUS was of the linage of David borne of a Virgin Chap. 1. that He was adored by the Wise men as King of the Jewes that Herod for the same cause sought to slay him Chap. 2. That his Kingdome was Preacht both by John the Baptist and Himselfe Chap. 3 4. That He taught the Lawes not as the Scribes but as one having authority Chap. 5 6 7. That he cur'd diseases miraculously Chap. 8 9. That He sent his Apostles the Preachers of his Kingdome throughout all the parts of Judea to proclame his Kingdome Chap. 10. That He commanded the Messengers sent from John to enquire whether he were the CHRIST or not to tell him what they had seene namely the miracles which were onely competible with CHRIST Chap. 11. That he prov'd and declar'd his Kingdome to the Pharisees and others by arguments parables and signes Chap. 12. and the following Chapters to the 21. That He maintain'd himselfe to be the Christ against the Pharisees That He was saluted with the title of King when he entred into Jerusalem Chap. 21. That he forewarn'd others of false Christs and That He shewed in Parables what manner of Kingdome his should be Chap. 22 23 24 25. That He was taken and accused for this reason because He said He was a King and that a Title was written on his Crosse THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWES Chap. 26 27. Lastly that after his resurrection He told his Apostles that all power was given unto Him both in Heaven and in Earth Chap. 28. All which tends to this end That we should beleeve Jesus to be the Christ Such therefore was the Scope of Saint Matthew in describing his Gospell but such as his was such also was the rest of the Evangelists which Saint Iohn sets down expresly in the end of his Gospel These things saith He are written that ye may know that Jesus is the Christ the Sonne of the living God Iohn 29. vers 31. I say that to a Christian Although I conceive this assertion to be sufficiently proved by the following reasons yet I thought it worth my labour to make a more aâ—…ple explication of it because I perceive that being somewhat new it may possibly be distastfull to many Divines First therefore when I say this Article That Jesus is the Christ is necessary to salvation I say not that Faith onely is necessary but I require Justice also or that Obedience which is due to the Lawes of God that is to say a Will to live righteously Secondly I deny not but the profession of many Articles provided that that profession be commanded by the Church is also necessary to salvation but seeing Faith is internall Profession externall I say that the former onely is properly Faith the latter a part of Obedience insomuch as that Article alone sufficeth for inward beleefe but is 〈◊〉 sufficient for the outward profession of a Christian Laâ—â—ly even as if I â—ad said that true and inward Râ—pentance of â—innes was onely necessary to salvation yet were it not to be held