had not the power of the Keys What meant by those words of the Oath of Supremacy Erastians worthy of no answer because they mistake the state of the Question and do not distinguish between the power of the Sword and the power of the Keyes CHAP. XI Whether Bishops be the primary subject of the power of the Keys The different Opinions concerning the Definition and Essence of a Bishop as also concerning the first Institution of Episcopacy St. Hierom's opinion in this point Spalatensis his Arguments to prove the divine Right of Bishops as invested with the Power of Ordination and Jurisdiction examined and answered Dr. Andrew's judgment in this point After the primitive and also the Hierarchical Bishop which differ much the English Episcopacy different from both the former in some things proper to its self is examined Though some Episcopacy be grounded upon a divine general Precept yet it 's not the primary subject of the power of the Keys neither is Episcopal Government proved to be necessary by any special Evangelical Precept of universal and perpetual Obligation CHAP. XII Whether Presbytery be the primary Subject of the power of the Keys The abolition of Episcopacy and Surrogation of Presbytery in several reformed Churches The nature institution and distinction of Ecclesiastical Presbyters The places of Scripture whereon the Divine Right of Law or Rulong Elders is grounded examined The Reasons why Presbyters cannot be the primary Subject of this Power The Arguments of the Authors of Jus Divinum Ecclesiastici Regiminis insufficient to prove it The English Presbytery as intended and modelled by the Parliament with the Advice of the Assembly of Divines inquired into the perfections and imperfections of the same as modelled by the Parliament without the King. Certain reasons which may be imagined why the Parliament would not trust the Ministers alone with this power CHAP. XIII Whether the power of the Keys be primarily in the People The Opinion of Morellius and the Brownists of Blondel of Parker and his mistake in Politicks applyed to the Church to make it a mixt Government The judgment of the Author concerning the Power of the Keys to be primarily under Christ in the whole Church exercised by the best and fittest for that work The explication of his meaning concerning the Power the Subject of the power and the manner how this power is disposed in this Subject The Confirmation of the Proposition that the power of the Keys is in the whole Church both by the institution and exercise of this power Where is premised a confutation of Mr. Parker's Opinion grounded upon two several places as he understands them The principal places of Scripture concerning Church-Government in foro exteriori explicated to find out where this power is by institution for Legislation Jurisdiction and making of Officers CHAP. XIV Concerning the extent of a particular Church The several extensions of the Church in excess according to the opinions of such as subject all Churches particular to that one Church of Rome of such as subject all to a general Council Whether Mr. Hudson is justly charged by Mr. Hooker and Mr. Ellis and divers others as guilty of Popery in asserting the Vnity of the universal Church The Congregational extent what Congregations are How they are gathered Whether the primary subject of an Independent power The Arguments of Mr. Parker and the Dissenting Brethren from Scripture and Politicks answered A National extent examined What means to be used for to compose our differences and to settle peace amongst us CHAP. XV. Of Subjection Civil What Subjection in general is the degrees of it What a subject in a Civil State is the definition explained What the duties of Subjects be What offences are contrary to this subjection what Rebellion and Treason the several degrees of Treason What Vsurpation is whether any subjection be due to usurped Powers When a power is dissolved How far the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance bound the English subject Whether the Civil War did dissolve the Government Whether the late Warlike Resistance made against the King's party and his Commissions was Rebellion or no Something of the Question Whether upon any cause it be lawful for the Subjects to resist or take up Arms against their lawful Soveraign as it 's handled by Arnisaeus Whether after the War said to be between King and Parliament was commenced there was any ordinary Legal power which could induce an Obligation to subjection Whether the Act of alteration or any other Form since proposed could introduce an Obligation Whether it be lawful to submit unto an extraordinary power when no Legal power according to the Fundamental Constitution can be had The distinction division and education of Subjects CHAP XVI Of Subjection Ecclesiastical What Ecclesiastical Subjection is The distinction of Ecclesiastical Subjects The qualification of a Church-member Something of separation from a Church The alterations divisions made and the Errors Blasphemies professed in the Church of England in these late times The manner of admission of Church-Members The ancient and also the modern division of Ecclesiastical Subjects and their subordination The Hierarchical Order The Education of Church-members LIB I. CHAP. I. Of Government in General and the Original thereof section 1 PRropriety is the ground of Power and Power of Government and as there are many degrees of Propriety so there are of Power Yet as there is but one Universal and absolute Propriety so there is but one supream and universal Power which the most glorious blessed and eternal God can only challenge as his due For he contrived all things by his wisdom decreed them by his will and produced them by his Power and to this Day worketh all things according to the counsel of his will Ephes. 1.11 In this respect he is worthy to receive Glory and Honour and Power because he hath created all things and for his pleasure they are and were created Rev. 4.11 By Creation he began by Conservation he continued to be actually the Proprietary of all things for he made them of nothing and gave them being and existence so that they wholly always depend upon him and are absolutely his Therefore he hath power to dispose of them as he pleaseth and to order them to those ends he created them This ordination of them which began immediately upon Creation continueth and shall continue to the end and is either General of all things or Special of some special more noble and more excellent Creatures Such are Men and Angels endued with understanding and Free-will and capable of Laws rewards and punshments both Temporal and Eternal The ordination of these is more properly and strictly called Government which is a part of divine Providence The Government of Angels no doubt is excellent and wonderful though we know little of it because not revealed section 2 That of men is more fully manifested to us as men in that Book of books we call the holy Scriptures the principal subject
and do yet condemn them both in Words and Writings as guilty of most horrible Treason and Rebellion which others will undertake to prove the censurers themselves deeply guilty of Wise and learned Men no whit inferior to them do certainly know that as they could not maintain their cause by dint of Sword so neither can they make it good by dint of Argument One of their learned Casuists delivers this as a positive truth That to disobey a lawful Sovereign is such an act as that no circumstances can make it lawful no not the Glory of God nor the saving of many Souls nor preventing the Ruine of a Nation This is high Divers who read this in his Books conceive that in this he toucheth the Cause and Controversie between King and Parliament I cannot charge him with any such thing But let his Application be what it will I will consider his Proposition in it self and will suppose it to be grounded upon that divine Maxime We must not do evil that good may come For that which God hath made sin nothing can make lawful But then the Question is What he means by Sovereign what by disobedience to a lawful Sovereign If he mean by Sovereign one invested with supream Power and an absolute Monarch it 's clear enough the Kings of England were not such For 1. They had no Legislative Power which is the greatest without this Parliament 2. That his personal Commands bound no Man for he could command nothing but according to the just Laws and Customs quas vulgus elegerat 3. The late King himself in his Answer to the Nineteen Propositions confessed That the Parliament had a share in the Legislative Power It 's true they had the Title of Sovereign and Majesty but in another sence than many take it As for the second Term Disobedience it might be twofold 1. In respect of absolute Sovereigns 2. In respect of the Kings of England In respect of the former a lawful Sovereign may command unlawful things and contrary to the Laws of God and in this case their Commands may nay must be disobeyed 1. If they command things lawful in themselves yet they may command them so as to be unlawful A man is bound to love Father and Mother by the Law of God and to do so is not only lawful but necessary Yet if this love come in competition with the love of Christ it 's plainly unlawful Therefore I will be so charitable as to think he understood the proposition of disobedience to lawful Commands of lawful Sovereigns otherwise he saith nothing but his proposition is false 2. In respect of the Kings of England their Commands are personal or legal His legal Commands if agreeable to the Laws of God ought to be obeyed and his Subjects are bound to submit unto his legal Power for other Power as King he hath none But as for his personal Commands they bind no Subject as a Subject and if they be contrary to the Law in obeying them we may be guilty of Disobedience to the Law nay of Disobedience to the King as King nay guilty of Treason against the Kingdom and the Kings Crown and Dignity And methinks such learned Men should not be ignorant of these things section 20 As for the Parliament it was charged with taking upon them the Militia seising upon the Navy securing the Ports making of a new Broad Seal creating of Officers abolishing of Episcopacy and Liturgy established by Law by which they lost many of their Subjects calling in the Scots proposing a Covenant to the people upon high terms and many other things and all these without the King nay contrary to the King's Command who had so graciously condescended unto them in granting many things unto them prejudicial as he thought to his Prerogatives and the ancient Rights of his Predecessours especially the Acts of continuance and of the Triennial Parliament 1. For the Militia it was alledged The King promised it and the Lawyers and learned Counsel informed them That if the King in such a time should neglect it they might take it and exercise it themselves without him and it 's reported that the very same parties who had given this Advise to the Parliament after they were come unto the King did counsel him to set on foot the Commission of Array in opposition to the Parliament's Militia 2. For seizing the Navy Ports and creating of Officers in a Declaration of the Lords and Commons upon the Treaty at Oxford is shewed the necessity of doing so and the antiquity of that practice for they instance in many Parliaments which have done the like and more too It was no new thing And though his Majesty affirmed these things were his by Law yet it was not his but by way of trust for the defence not the destruction of the Kingdom 3. For the Broad Seal there was a necessity of making a new one seeing that the former was surreptitiously against Law and Right carried and conveyed away Neither had the King as separate and divided from the Parliament any right unto it 4. The abolishing of Episcopacy and Liturgy is conceived might be justly charged upon the Scots who when the King and so many great Ones had deserted the Parliament would not firmly adhere unto them but upon such terms Otherwise the reformation of Bishops and Book of Common-prayer was far more for the Protestant interest than Presbytery which was rather inconsistent with it 5. The calling of the Scots was said to be done in extremity and grounded upon the National League according to which they were bound of themselves to have assisted the Parliament as some thought and judged 6. The Covenant is said to be more from the Scot than the English and what the design of the first Contrivers in it might be was known to few who took it It proved to be of bad consequence whether in respect of the nature of the Covenant or some other cause may be doubted for the Parliament of Scotland thought it a sufficient ground for Duke Hambleton to invade England and the English House of Commons judged them Rebels and Traitors who should joyn with him or assist Such is the frailty inconstancy and pravity of men 7. As for the high demands of the Parliament it 's alledged No King ever did such things or gave occasion to make such demands and he did but grant that which was reasonable and necessary for the time and less than former Laws required so that except as separated from the Parliament he was an absolute Monarch his denial of their demands was not consistent with the Constitution of the Kingdom section 21 But after that the Royal party was totally subdued there falls out a subdivision amongst the Anti-Royalists For they who could agree against a third Party could not agree amongst themselves For they began to play Scotch and English first and then the Presbyterian who much though not in all things inclined to the
God was nothing but jus ad recte agendum a right to do right in matters of Religion If they did otherwise they abused their power they lost it not And if an Heathen Prince or State should become Christian they acquire no new Right but are further engaged to exercise their power in abolishing Idolatry and establishing the true Worship of the true God. This may be signified by the Titles of Nursing-Fathers of the Church Defenders of the Faith Most Christian Most Catholick King. All which as they signified their Right so they also pointed at their Duty which was to protect the true Church and maintain the True Christian Catholick Faith. 4. Though Regal and Sacerdotal power were always distinct and different in themselves yet they were often disposed and united in one Person Thus Melchisedeck was both King and Priest Thus Romulus was Prince and the chief Pontiffe For he is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Halicar Antiqu. Rom. lib. 2. The succeeding Kings took the same place After the Regal power was abolished it was an high Office. When Rome became Imperial the Emperours took the Title of Supream Pontiffe and some of them after they became Christian retained it Yet still as the Powers so the Acts were distinct For Melchisedeck as King ruled his People in Righteousness and Peace as Priest officiated received Tithes and blessed Abraham As they were sometimes united so they were divided For God entailed the Sacerdotal power upon the house of Aaron and afterwards the Regal power upon the family of David Neither did Christ or his Apostles think it fit to make the Ministers Magistrates or the Magistrates Ministers Yet in this Union or Division you must know that this Sacerdotal and Ministerial power was not this Civil power of Religion which always belonged to the Civil Governours even then when these two powers were divided 5. If Civil powers stablish Religion and that by Law call Synods order them ratifie their Canons divest spiritual and Ecclesiastical persons of their temporal priviledges or restore them yet they do all this by their civil power by which they cannot excommunicate absolve suspend much less officiate and preach and administer Sacraments In this respect if the civil power make a civil Law against Idolatry Blasphemy Heresie or other scandal they may by the same power justly punish the offenders by the sword and the Church censure them by the power of the Keyes 6. This jus Religionis ordinandae this power of ordering matters of Religion is not the power of the Church but of the State not of the Keyes but of the sword The Church hath nothing to do with the sword nor the State with the Keyes Christ did not say tell the State and whatsoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven c. Neither did he say of the Church that she beareth not the sword in vain Therefore he must needs be very ignorant or very partial that shall conceive that the State is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the power of the Keyes section 3 These things premised give occasion to consider how the Oath of Supremacy is to be understood especially in these words wherein the Kings or Queens of England were acknowledged over all persons in causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil all supream head and because that word Head was so offensive it was changed into Governour For the clearing hereof it 's to be observed 1. That by these words it was intended to exclude all foreign Power both Civil and Ecclesiastical especially that which the Bishops of Rome did challenge and also exercise within the Dominions of the Crown of England 2. That the Kings and Queens of Enland had no power supream in making Laws and passing judgements without the Parliament Therefore by supream Governour was meant supream Administratour for the execution of the Laws in the intervals of Parliament In this respect the Canons and injunctions made by the Clergy though confirmed by royal assent without the Parliament have been judged of no force 3. That by Ecclesiastical causes are meant such causes as are materially Ecclesiastical yet properly civil as before For matters of Religion in respect of the outward profession and practice and the Parties professing and practising are subject to the civil power For by the outward part the State may be disturbed put in danger of Gods judgements and the persons are punishable by the sword even for those crimes Yet neither can the sword reach the soul nor rectifie the conscience except per accidens That by Ecclesiastical is not meant spiritual in proper sense is clear because the Kings of England never took upon them to excommunicate or absolve neither had those Chancellours that were only Civilians and not Divines power to perform such acts Yet they received their power from the Bishops and it was counted Ecclesiastical 4. In respect of these Titles those Courts which were called Spiritual and Ecclesiastical derived their power from the Crown And the Bishops did correct and punish disquiet disobedient criminous persons within their Diocess according to such authority as they had by Gods word and as to them was committed by the authority of this Realm These are the words of the Book of Ordination in the consecration of Bishops The words seem to imply that they had a mixt or at least a twofold power one by the word as trusted with the power of the Keyes the other from the Magistrate or Crown and that was civil Such a mixt power they had indeed in the high Commission Yet though this may be implyed yet it may be they understood that their power by the word of God and from the Crown were the same The act of restoring the ancient jurisdiction to the Crown 1 Eliz. 1. doth make this further evident For it 's an act of restoring the ancient jurisdiction in Ecclesiasticals especially to the Crown for that 's the Title Where it must be observed that the power was such as the Parliament did give 2. That they did not give it anew but restore it 3. They could not had no power to give it if it belonged to the Crown by the Constitution but to declare it to be due upon which Declaration the Queen might resume that which the Pope had usurped and exercised 4. It 's remarkable that not the Queen but the Parliament by that act did restore it as the act of the Oath of supremacy was made by a Parliament which by that act could not give the King any power at all which was not formerly due In respect of Testaments temporal jurisdiction Dignities Priviledges Titles as due unto the Church by humane Constitution and donation all Ecclesiastical causes concerning these were determinable by a civil power How tithes are a lay-fee or divine right hath been declared formerly Hence it doth appear that the Oath of Supremacy was not so easily understood as it was easily taken by many and the Oxford Convocation I believe but that they
Dignity or Honour without any Power The nature of it consists in Power which hath several branches concerning which he relates the Opinion and Judgment of the Philosopher of Historians of the writers of Politicks of Lawyers and in the end delivers his own mind and reduced them to certain Heads in this manner Iura majestatis sunt Majora Defensionis Gubernationis in Minora de aerario colligendo Legibus condendis Magistratibus constituendis The first division is taken from the inequality of these Prerogatives and Rights The second he seems to ground upon these words That our King may judge us and go out before us and fight our Battels 1 Sam. 8.20 Where to Judge seems to signifie to Govern by Law and Officers to go out before us and fight our Battels presupposeth in his Judgment the power of the Militia To these he adds other two concerning the ordering of Religion and Coining of Money Under these general Heads he reduceth many other particulars and so proceeds to handle 1. the greater 2. The less Prerogatives severally and that largely This with the salving of some doubts and confuting some Errours is the Scheme and substance of the whole Treatise divided into three several Books section 8 Leaving every one to his own method I will with submission to better Judgment make bold to deliver my own Majestas est Realis quae potest rempublicam Constituere abolere mutare reformare Personalis quae agit cum exteris De Bello Pace Per Foedera Legationes suis circa divina religionem ordinando humanae leges ferendo exequendo This though not exact may serve the turn and in some measure declare the several branches of this great Power which in it self is but one yet hath many acts and the same different in respect of several and different Objects and Subjects I only mention the chief Heads to which the rest may be reduced for the better and more distinct understanding of it I will more particularly explain my self 1. Therefore Majesty is Reall Personal Real is in the Community and is greater than Personal which is the power of a Common-wealth already constituted For as you have heard before this form of a Common-wealth is virtually in it before it be constituted and their consent is the very foundation of it And this consent whether mediate or immediate tacit or express is so necessary that though a people be conquered yet the Victor cannot govern them as men without their consent Nay more when God designed immediately first Saul then David yet the election and consent of the people did concur with and follow upon the Divine Designation As this Real Majesty is a Power to model a State so it s always inherent and can never be separated insomuch that when a form of Government is dissolved or there shall be a failer of Succession the Power of the Soveraign doth divolve unto them by the law of nature or rather it was always in the people As this Community hath the power of constitution so it hath of dissolution when there shall be a just and necessary cause Hence appears the mistake of Junius Brutus Buchanon Heno and others when they say Ejus est destituere Cujus est constituere if they meant it of the multitude and body of the Subjects as Subjects under a form of Government it can only be true of a Community where they have just and necessary cause Subjects as Subjects cannot do it because of their Subjection and Obligation whereas the Community as a Community is free from any Obligation to any particular Form either from the Laws of God Natural or Positive or from their own Consent or Oaths And though the People in this consideration are bound both by the Natural and Positive Laws of God to constitute a Government if they can yet they are not bound to this Form or that Another Act of this Majesty in the Community is when they see it necessary and just and they have not only Power but Opportunity to do it to alter the Form of the Government this Act as with us is above the Power of a Parliament which may have Personal yet cannot have this Real Majesty For a Parliament doth necessarily presuppose a Form of Government already agreed upon whereby they are made the Subject of Personal Soveraignity Therefore they cannot alter or take away the cause whereby they have their being nor can they meddle with the fundamental Laws of the Constitution which if it once cease they cease to be a Parliament If the Government be dissolved and the Community yet remains united the People may make use of such an Assembly as a Parliament to alter the former Government and constitute a new but this they cannot do as a Parliament but considered under another Notion as an immediate Representative of a Community not of a Common-wealth And thus considered the Assembly may constitute a Government which as a Parliament cannot do which always presupposing the Constitution as such can act only in and for the administration That Community is wise which doth and happy which can keep their Majesty so due unto them as to limit their personal Soveraigns so as not to suffer them to take it from them and assume it to themselves section 9 As there is a real so there is a personal Majesty so called because it 's fixed in some Persons who are trusted with the exercise of it and may and many times do forfeit to God and in some cases forfeit to the Community or the People for when it is said it may be forfeited to the People we must understand that the People is not Plebs the meanest and the lowest rank and but a part of the Community but the whole Community it self as a Community otherwise we may lay the Foundation of all kinds of Tumults Confusions Seditions and Rebellions The Person or Persons trusted with the Majesty and Power are bound to seek the good of the whole People and for that end they are trusted with it and no otherwise Hence the saying Suprema lex salus populi esto The Acts of this Power which it hath a right to exercise are many and that in respect of those without or those within the Common-wealth For agit cum exteris it dealeth and acteth with those without This is not the first but rather the last kind of acting It ariseth from the relation which it hath to other States with which it may have some society though it hath no dependance upon it The Rules of this Acting as it respects themselves and the States with whom they deal are the Laws of Nations Yet the particular Laws of every several State may determine the Rules according to which it will act with or against another State. Because one State may wrong or benefit or strengthen and help another hence it comes to pass that sometimes there is a cause of War. For when by Ambassadours or other
or land in time of Peace or Warre To these may be referred Heralds Ambassadours publick Agents with the rest which shall be mentioned in the second Book of this Treatise And because he is no Officer which hath not some publick power and this he cannot have of and from himself therefore all Officers are made such by the Soveraign who by granting Commissions and other wayes derives their power unto them And as he gives them power so he may remove them and revoke their power or translate them or call them to account To chuse nominate propose them may be an act of the people or some of them yet to constitute them and give them their political being is an act of Majestie either mediate or immediate And because the personal Soveraign and his Officers cannot do their duty and discharge their places without sufficient maintenance therefore in this respect there is a right to command the purse For as they say he that bears the sword must have the purse And if there be not a sufficient standing Revenue and Treasury determined in the constitution the Soveraign must have a power to raise monies to defray the publick necessary charges Hence that Vniversale eminens dominium of Majesty in every State so much mentioned in the Authors of Politicks The reason of this is clear in the very light of nature that the people maintain their Governours because the benefit of the Government redounds unto them according to that of the Apostle For this cause pay you tribute also for they are Gods Ministers attending continually upon this very thing Render therefore to all their dues tribute to whom tribute is due custom to whom custom Rom. 13.6 7. It 's true that Soveraigns may have their private purse therefore some distinguish inter aerarium fiscum Aerarium is the publick Treasury which is maintained by Tribute Custom and other Impositions and this is to be raised and disposed of by the supream for the preservation of the publick Fiscus as some tell is the Soveraigns private purse whereof he may dispose at will and pleasure This publick propriety presupposeth every mans several propriety and no wayes prejudice it This right is reckoned by some amongst the lesser Prerogatives but there can be no minora Jura Majestatis in proper sense For because Majestas is Maxima potestas therefore all the essential parts and rights are so too section 13 The last is the Power of Jurisdiction whereby Justice is administred and it 's over all persons in all causes both Military Civil and Ecclesiastical so far as they fall under the Soveraigns cognisance Under this Head I comprehend not only the power of those acts of Judgement more strictly so called as Convention Discussion Decision of the cause upon evidence of the merit or demerit but the Execution To which last may be referred all penalties as well capital as not capital with Dispensations in Judgement suspension of Execution pardons To this of Jurisdiction also belongs all reservations of certain causes the receiving last appeals the final determinations and irrevocable sentences By vertue of this Power Commissions for judicial proceedings Courts the order of trial from first to last all calling of Assemblies general and provincial Civil and Ecclesiastical are determined From all this it 's evident that all Jurae Majestatis may be reduced to the Legislative Judicial and Executive Power if we understand Judicial and Executive in a larger sense than they are commonly taken And here it 's to be noted that Majesty Real is before and above all Majesty personal And by personal Majesty or personal Soveraign I do not mean only one single person as a Monarch but all Aristocratical and Polyarchical Soveraigns who are many Physically but considered as one person morally as joyntly invested with one Power Soveraign section 14 Thus far concerning the nature of Majesty after which follow some Epithets given to Majesty by Authors to signifie the properties thereof These are either included in the essence or flow from it For 1. It 's absolute and so Arbitrary Absolute soluta legibus It cannot be bound by any Lawes nor judged because the Soveraign is the Lawgiver himself and the Fountain of Jurisdiction He may bind himself by Oath to govern and judge according to the Lawes not to be governed or judged by the Lawes Yet no Soveraign personal is free from the Obligation of the natural and positive Lawes of God in force and how far he is inferiour to the real Soveraign who is subject to the same Lawes I will not here discuss 2. It 's universal not only in respect of all acts of Government but of all persons within that Territory For it must be coadequate to the whole body which it must act and animate it 's neither greater nor less No persons things or actions within can be exempted from this Power nor can it extend to any thing person action without but per Accidens 3. It s supream not in respect of God nor of the power of other States but in respect of the power of Fathers Masters Officers Corporations and Societies within every several State. For by vertue of Majesty it is that Soveraigns are equal in respect of themselves superiours in respect of their Subjects and inferiours unto God whose servants and subjects they are trusted with a particle of his power and accountable unto him 4. It 's Independent yet not in respect of God upon whom all Soveraigns do not only chiefly but wholly depend but in respect of all subordinate Powers within but coadequate to them without For all power civil within the Territory is derived from Majesty Fiduciary Princes therefore as such are not Soveraigns though they may have the title of Soveraignty yet a Soveraign may be fiduciary for some part of a Country within and part of the Dominions of another Soveraign Neither can the chief Magistrate of a Commonwealth trusted at certain times with the general exercise of the Power be such Protection and Vassalage are conceived by some not to destroy Independency neither doth confederation For though the League between several States as in Switzerland and the united Netherlands Provinces may be strict and Commissioners may be made and trusted with great power in things which concern the several States jointly such the states-General of the Low-Countries be yet this is thought to be no diminution of Majesty For it remains entire in the several Republicks 5. It s indivisible for though it hath several branches which may be distinguished yet they cannot be separated For if you take away but one much more if you take away more you make it imperfect and essentially defective and insufficient to Govern For as in Philosophy Essentia est indivisibilis so in Politicks Majestas est indivisibilis sic Majestatis Jura sunt inseparabilia As these Rights are indivisible in respect of themselves so they are in respect of the Subject For divide and separate some of
of the same and Scotland vanquished In all our sad divisions which happened from first to last and are not wholly yet ended to this day Two things are worthy the serious consideration of wiser men than I am 1. What party for time past hath been most faithful to the English interest 2. What course is to be taken for to setle us more firmly for time to come For the first we must understand what the English interest is The interest of England is twofold Civil and Ecclesiastical for we are English men and Christians The Civil interest is salus populi Anglicani there is no doubt of that for the peace safety liberty happiness of our dear Country is the end whereat we are all bound both by the written and natural Laws of God to aim The interest Ecclesiastical is the Protestant Religion and the perservation of the substance thereof Prelacy Presbytery Independency much less Antipaedobaptism and other Sects are not essential but accidental to it This being the interest of England we cannot judge of the faithfulness either of the King 's or Parliaments party by the quality of the persons of either side For there were both good and bad on both sides who had their several grounds of adhering to this or that party and their several ends and neither their grounds nor ends good Nor can any man justifie all proceedings and actings of either side both had their errours Nor must we judge of them according to their protestation for both could not by such contrary means attain the same end as both sides protested to maintain the King the Parliament the liberty of the Subject the Laws and the Protestant Religion Neither in this particular must the Laws of the English Constitution and Administration be the rule for both acted not only above the Laws but contrary to the latter of them at least For no Laws could warrant the Parliament to act without the King or the King without the Parliament much less was it justifiable that there should be in one Kingdom two not only different but contrary commands supreme and from different heads and persons This was directly against the very nature of all Common-Wealths which have only one first mover and one indivisible supreme power to animate and act them section 19 The Rule therefore must be the Laws of God as above the Laws of Men and we must consider according to these divine Rules what was the state of the Controversie the justice and equity of the cause made evident and the just necessity of doing that which was done Neither must we look at the cause only as just in it self but also how it 's justly or unjustly maintained For men may use such means as shall never reach the just end intended but also such as may be destructive of the cause it self and raze the very foundation of it Besides all this before a perfect judgment can be made the secret counsels contrivances designs hidden actings of the chief Actors should be known yet these many times lie hid and are not known or if known yet to very few and some of these few cannot found the bottom Many things are charged upon the King as acting against the English interest as Civil as that he dissolves Parliaments without just and sufficient cause that he intermits Parliaments for sixteen years together that having signed the Petition of Right he acts contrary to it imposeth Ship-money calls a Parliament signs the Act of Continuance deserts it calls the Members from it calls another Parliament at Oxford challengeth a negative Voice to both the Houses raiseth a War against it though he was informed that this tended to the dissolution of the Government that whosoever should serve to assist him in such Wars are Traitors by the fundamental Laws of this Kingdom and have been so adjudged in two Acts of Parliament 11 Richard 2. and 1 Henry 4. And that such persons ought to suffer as Traitors These with other particulars charged upon him seem directly contrary unto the civil Interest of the Kingdom Again to Marry a Popish Lady upon Articles directly contrary to the Laws of England and the Protestant Religion established by Law to entertain Twenty eight Popish Priests with a Bishop to tolerate Mass in the Court to receive Three Agents from the Pope one after another Pisano Con Rosetti to maintain the Queen-mother to engage the generality of the People of England to retard the relieving of Ireland to admit divers of the Popish Irish Murtherers and Rebels into his Army to call our English Forces sent to relieve the poor distressed Protestants of Ireland out of that Nation and employ them against the Parliament of England to suffer some of the Heads of the Irish Rebels to be so near his Person to endeavour to bring in the Duke of Lorrain with his Forces into this Nation to contract with the Irish Rebels upon condition to enjoy their Religion to furnish him with Ten thousand Irish Rebels to strengthen his party in England with divers other acts like unto these is conceived to be not only inconsistent with but plainly destructive of the English Protestant Interest And if this be true it must needs be so Yet it might be said that the King endeavoured to maintain his own regal Power the Episcopacy and Liturgy established by Law and that he did not oppose the Parliament but a seditious party in the Parliament and other Sectaries whose principles were destructive both of all civil and also Ecclesiastical Government and without the judgment of able Lawyers and learned Divines he did not undertake the War either against Scotland or England or any other It 's true that of those who adhered to the King and liked not the Parliaments proceeding there were some consciencious persons who judged the King an absolute Monarch and did not like many things done by that party yet they thought it the Duty of Subjects to suffer and that it was no ways lawful to resist But the Casuists say That Ignorantia excusat a tanto non a toto their Ignorance might make their Crime less yet no ways free them from all Guilt It was not Invincible they might easily have known that the King of Enland was no absolute Monarch seeing he could not impose any Subsidy upon the Subject nor make or repeal a Law without the Parliament neither could he by his Letters or personal Command revoke the Judgment of any Court. And though they might be Civilians or read Foreign Writers which take our Kings for absolute Sovereigns yet no ancient Lawyers no Parliaments did declare them to be such Nay they might have known that they themselves obeying the King 's personal Commands disobeyed him as King and that serving him in the Wars they were guilty of High Treason against the Kingdom and against the King's Crown and Dignity Of these Royalists some have been high and cruel against their Brethren the Parliamenteers and have censured them
Parliament determines 1. Their Courts 2. The parties subject to their power 3. The causes belonging to their Cognisance 4. The manner of proceeding 5. The Acts of Jurisdiction 7. As for their Courts they 1. Make them to be Congregational Classical Provincial National 2. Define the number of the persons how many must be of the Quorum 3. They subordinate the Inferiour to the Superiour and all to the Supream which was the Parliament 4. They determine the times of their Sessions which of the Inferiour Courts were more frequent of the Superiour more seldom 5. The order of Appeals is from the Inferiour to the Superiour 8. The parties subject to their Jurisdiction were all in their several precincts 9. The Causes were not Civil or Capital but Ecclesiastical especially ignorance and scandal 10. Their manner of proceeding was upon Information Summons Confession Conviction by Witnesses 11. The Acts of Jurisdiction were Suspention removal from Office or Sacraments receiving and restoring The matter and substance of these Ordinances was enlarged and more distinctly and orderly declared in the Book of Discipline one thousand six hundred forty eight section 10 This Model though imperfect had something of the ancient primitive Discipline in many things was agreeable to the general rules of Scripture and if exercised constantly by wise and pious Men might have done much good especially in preventing ignorance and scandal for time to come Yet it had many enemies as the Prelatical and Episcopal party because it was not a Reformation but an abolition of Episcopacy The dissenting Brethren liked it not because it extended so far beyond the Congregational bounds took in whole Parishes did not require a sufficient qualification of the Members and subordinated Congregations and Inferiour Assemblies to the Superiour and Greater The prophane and ignorant were against it because it called them to account and required knowledge and a stricter kind of life and this was a commendation of it Some approved it not because it was so like unto and almost the same with the Kirk Discipline of Scotland Many were offended with it because of the ruling and lay-Elders as some call them Besides it was set up in the time of the bloody War and without the Kings consent who was a great enemy unto it Neither were the Statutes of the former Discipline repealed Though some did but assert the Jus Divinum of it yet that was not made so clear as to satisfie many no not the Parliament it self Though the Ordinances and the book of Discipline require it to be generally put in practice yet no man was eligible for an Officer that had not taken the national Covenant yet that was not generally imposed or taken nor could any but a Covenanter have any Vote in the Election As the institution of it was an Act of the Civil Power in the Parliament without the being so it reserved the chiefest power unto it self and to future Parliaments and it would not trust the Ministery or the Elders with it And there might be several reasons for it 1. First after Reformation began end ever since our separation from Rome the Ecclesiastical power was restored to the Crown 2. In times of Popery the Church and especially the Pope and Clergy had encroached and entred too far upon the Civil Power 3. The general Assemblies of Scotland were thought too much independent upon the Crown and to have too great an influence upon the State. 4. That seeing the Church required the assistance of the State it was judged necessary that it should so far depend upon the State as it required the help of the State. Yet if the Discipline had been the pure and simple form instituted by Christ and his Apostles there had been no cause of these jealousies no need of these policies By all this its evident that the Presbytery of England could not be the primary subject of the power of the Keyes because they received their institution from the Parliament which reserved the chiefest power unto it self It s true that there was something Ecclesiastical in it yet even that depended upon the Civil Power more than upon an Ecclesiastical Assembly or representative though general CHAP. XIII That the Government of the Church is not purely Democratical but like that of a free State wherein the Power is in the whole not in any part which is the Authors judgement section 1 THat the power of the Keyes is not primarily in the Pope nor in the Civil Soveraign nor in the Prelate nor in the Presbyter not in both joyntly as in a pure Aristocracy hath been formerly declared It remains we examine the peoples title as distinct from that of the Bishop and the Presbyter as they are formaliter eminenter cives Ecclesiae parts of a Christian Community The people and number of Believers thus considered are rather Plebs than Populus To understand this it s to be considered that in a Christian Community there are neither Optimates properly not Plebs There may be and are as you heard before such as are incompleat and virtual members as Women Children and other weak Christians who are not fit to have any Vote in the Publick Affairs of the Church much more unfit to exercise and mannage the power of the Keyes There are also compleat members and amongst these some more eminent than the rest To place the power in the inferiour rank or to make that party predominant is to make the government Democratical And this opinion is not worth the confutation because it s not only disagreeing with plain Scripture but with the rules of right reason In this regard they are generally rejected Some charge Morellius and the Brownists with this errour but I have not seen their Books The Learned Blondel may seem to be of this mind because he placeth the power in Plebe Ecclesiastica But upon due examination it will be found otherwise Mr. Parker who asserts the Government in some respect to be Democratical rejects Morellius yet he himself cannot be altogether excused For he will have the Government to be mixt and partly Democratical in the People partly Aristocratical in the Officers or Governours He further explains himself and saith its Democraticum quoad Statum for the Constitution Aristocraticum quoad exercitium for the Administration and Exercise of the Power For he distinguisheth between the Power which is in the whole Church and the Dispensation or Exercise thereof which is in the Governours or Officers who he saith have not all the power of dispensation because the Church reserves so much as is convenient and belonging to her Dignity Authority and Liberty given her of Christ. But this is a mistake in Politicks and the general Rules of Government For a State is mixt or pure in respect of the Constitution not the Administration and the Question is not concerning the secondary but the primary subject of power which the Officers deriving the power from the whole Church cannot be for they have
those thus Associated may have Communion in Divine Things and Actions and their Pastors with their Flocks before any form of Discipline be introduced or setled and these Believers may by Word and Sacraments receive Heavenly Comfort and attain Eternal Life without such Discipline and before it can be established amongst them and so I hope it is at this time in this Nation with many a faithful servant of God who by the benefit of a good Ministry with God's Blessing upon their Labours are truely converted and continue and go on in a state of Salvation as happily as many who are under a form of Government And here it is to be observed 1. That though the Apostles were extraordinary Officers infallibly directed by the Holy Ghost which Christ gave them yet ordinary Ministers lawfully called and succeeding them if they preach their Doctrine truly have a promise to convert and save the Souls of sinful Men. 2. That the Work of these ordinary Ministers is not only to feed the Flock of Christ already gathered but to convert and gather Sinners unto Christ and this not by the Rod of Discipline but the Word of God which is the Power of God unto Salvation 3. This gaining Souls to Christ is not the gathering of Churches out of Churches and Christians out of Christians to make a party of their own under pretence of a purer Reformation but it 's a far more excellent Work and of another kind tending directly to an higher end 4. After a Minister becomes a Pastour of a Flock and hath relation unto them as his Flock and they to him as his People he must needs have some Power over them and they must be subject unto him and obey him in the Lord and he hath power to remit Sins to shut and open and what he doth in this kind according to his Commission will be made good in Heaven Yet these Acts of his are not Acts of External Discipline but of his Ministerial Office as he is a Servant to Jesus Christ. This I speak not against Discipline which if agreeable to the word of God is a great Blessing but against all such who under pretence of this or that form of Church-Government disturb the Church and discomfort and discourage many a precious Saint of God. The end of this is to manifest that these places of Scripture Mat. 16.19 John 20.22 23. are no grounds whereon to build Church-Government section 5 Because former places are not so pertinent I proceed in the next place to the Words of Institution of Church-discipline you may read them Mat. 18.17 18. De exteriori foro ibi agitur Exterioris fori jurisdictio illo nec alio loco fundata est That 's the only place for the Institution and no other saith Dr. Andrews in that most learned and exact piece far above his other Works To understand this place we must observe 1. The Parties subject to this Tribunal 2. The Causes proper to that Court. 3. In what manner and order Causes are brought in and prepared for Judgment 4. The Judge 5. The Acts of Judgment upon Evidence of the Cause 6. The Ratification of these Acts and so of the Power 7. How this Ratification is obtained and the Judgment made effectual 1. The party subject to this Tribunal is a Brother If thy Brother offend thee verse 15. This may be explained from 1 Cor. 5.11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator or covetous or an idolater c. There are covetous Persons and Idolaters of the World verse 10. and Fornicators and Idolaters which are called Brethren The former are without the latter within the Church The former are subject to the Judgment of God but not of the Church the latter are subject to the Judgment of the Church Do not thou judge them that are within So that the Subjects in this Common-wealth are Brethren Disciples such as profess their Faith in Christ. 2. The Causes are Spiritual and Ecclesiastical and must be considered under that Notion For it 's a Trespass an Offence committed by a Brother as a Brother against a Brother as a Brother whether it be a wrong against a Brother or a sin whereby a Brother is offended grieved displeased For if a Brother be a Fornicator or Idolater c. he must tell the Church and not the State he must be made as an Heathen or Publican if he will not hear the Church this is no Sentence of the State or Civil Judge it 's made good in Heaven so is not the Judgment of the Civil Magistrate It must be the Judgment of a Brother as a Brother within the Church which the Church as a Church must judge and in the name of Christ not of the Civil Soveraign and the Party offending must be delivered up to Satan not to the Sword. Yet one and the same Crime may make a person obnoxious both to the temporal Sword of the Magistrate and the spiritual Censure of the Church and may be justly punishable and punished by both though some of our English Lawyers have delivered the contrary who might ground their Opinion upon Ecclesiastical Supremacy of the King For tho' the Laws of England might determine so yet the Laws of God and Christ do not 3. The manner and order of proceeding is 1. Privately to admonish and if that take effect to proceed no further 2. If upon this the party will not reform he must be charged and convinced before two or three Witnesses and if he shall persist impenitent then he must be convented before the Ecclesiastical Tribunal upon Information and Accusation and the same once made good and evident the Cause is ripe prepared for Judgment section 6 The Judge in the fourth place is the Church Tell the Church where we must know what this Church is The word in the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and we find it used in the Old Testament about seventy times by the Septuagint who so often turn the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by that name Upon perusal of the places we shall find that it signifies Assemblies and of many kinds as good bad holy prophane greater less festival civil military Ecclesiastical and Religious occasional standing orderly confused ordinary extraordinary It 's observable that very seldome some say but once as Psal. 26.5 it signifies a wicked and prophane Society Sometimes not often it 's a Military body But most of all by far a few Texts excepted it notes an holy and religious Convention or Assembly For sometimes it 's a National Polity of Israel under a sacred Notion and very often a religious Assembly for Prayer Fasting Dedications renewing their Covenant with God Praises Thanksgivings and such like Acts of Worship so that the word seems to be appropriate unto Religious Assemblies and though it signifie other Societies yet these most frequently and principally And this is confirmed from the
New Testament where it s used a hundred and eleven times at least and in all these places signifies an Assembly or Society Religious except in Acts 19.32 39 41. where it signifies both a tumultuous and also an orderly Assembly or Society or Convention as a civil Court of Judgment which signification is here applied by our Saviour to a Spiritual Judicatory for Spiritual Causes Though this be a special signification yet it signifies the number and Society of Believers and Disciples who profess their Faith in Christ exhibited and this is this Church-Christian and the People of God. Yet it signifies this People under several Notions as sometimes the Church of the Jews sometimes of the Gentiles sometimes the Universal Church sometimes particular Churches sometimes the Militant Church either as visible or mystical sometimes the Church Triumphant sometimes a Church before any form of Government be introduced sometimes under a form of Government so it 's taken and supposed by our Saviour here Grotius his Conceit that our Saviour in these words alludes to the manner of several Sects Professions as of Pharisees Sadduces Essenes who had their Rules of Discipline and their Assemblies and Convention for the practice of them may be probable Yet without any such Allusion the place is plain enough from the context and other Scriptures Erastus upon the place is intollerable and most wofully wrests it so doth Bishop Bilson in his Church-Government and is point-blank contrary to D. Andrews who in his Tortura Torti doth most accurately examine interpret and apply the words and most effectually from thence confute Bellarmine One may truly say of that Book as he himself said of Austin's Treatise De Civitate Dei it was opus palmarum For Civil Common Canon-Law Politicks History School Learning the Doctrine of the Casuists Divinity and other Arts whereof he makes use it is one of the most learned and accurate of any put forth in our times By his Exposition of this Text he utterly overthrows the immediate Jus Divinum of Episcopacy in matters of Discipline and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction He plainly and expresly makes the whole Church the primary subject of the Power of the Keys in foro exteriori Therefore suppose the Bishops were Officers by a Divine Right as he endeavours to prove tho' weakly in his Letters to Du Moulin yet at best they can be but the Churches Delegates for the exercise of that Power And it is observable that divers of our Champions when they oppose Bellarmine's Monarchical Government of the Church peremptorily affirm the Power of the Keyes to be in the whole Church as the most effectual way to confute him yet when they wrote against the Presbyterian and the Antiprelatical party they change their Tone and Tune But to return unto the words of Institution 1. The word Church here signifies an Assembly 2. This Assembly is an Assembly for Religion 3. The Religion is Christian. 4. This Assembly is under a form of External Government 5. This Government presupposeth a Community and Laws and Officers Ecclesiastical These presupposed it 's a juridical Assembly or a Court. 6. Because Courts are Inferiour Superiour and Supream it signifies all especially Supream 7. It determines no kind of Government but that of a free State as shall more appear hereafter 8. Christ doth not say Dic Regi tell the Prince or State nor Dic Petro tell Peter or the Pope as though the Government should be Monarchical either Civil or Ecclesiastical nor Dic Presbytero tell the Elders nor Dic Apostolis Episcopis aut Archiopiscopis that the Government should be purely Aristocratical nor Dic Plebi that the Government should be purely Democratical nor Dic Synodo tell the Council general or particular But it saith tell the Church wherein there may be Bishops Presbyters some Eminent Persons neither Bishops nor Presbyters There may be Synods and all these either as Officers or Representatives of the Church and we may tell these and these may judge yet they hear and judge by a power derived and delegated from the Church and the Church by them as by her Instruments doth exercise her Power As the body sees by her eye and hears by the ear so it is in this particular but so that the similitude doth not run on four feet nor must be stretched too far This being the genuine Sense favours no Faction yet admits any kind of Order which observed may reach the main end For this we must know and take special notice of that Christ will never stand upon Formalities but requires the thing which he commands to be done in an orderly way Yet it 's necessary and his Institution doth tend unto it to reserve the chief Power in the whole Body otherwise if any party as Bishops or Presbyters or any other part of the Church be trusted with the power alone to themselves they will so engross it as that there will be no means nor ordinary jurisdiction to reform them Of this we have plain Experience in the Bishops of Rome who being trusted at first with too much Power did at length arrogate as their own and no ways derived from the Church and so refused to be judged For if the Church once make any party the primary subject of this power then they cannot use it to reduce them Therefore as it is a point of Wisdom in any State to reserve the chief power in the whole Community and single out the best and wisest to exercise it so as if the Trustees do abuse their power they may remove them or reform them so it should be done in the Church If any begin to challenge either the whole or the Supream power as Officers many of these nay the greater part of them may be unworthy or corrupted and then the Church is brought to straits and must needs suffer Some tell us that the King of England by the first Constitution was only the Supream and Universal Magistrate of the Kingdom trusted with a sufficient power to govern and administer the State according to the Laws and his chief work was to see the Laws executed Yet in tract of time they did challenge the power to themselves as their own and refused to be judged Yet in this Institution if Peter if Paul tho' Apostles do offend much more if Patriarchs Metropolitans Bishops Presbyters do trespass we must tell not Peter not Paul not an Apostle not a Bishop not any other but the Church No wit of Men or Angels could have imagined a better way nor given a better expression to settle that which is good and just and prevent all parties and factions and yet leave a sufficient latitude for several orderly ways to attain the chief end section 7 The Judge being known the Judicial Acts of this Judge must be enquired into in the fifth place and these are two the first is binding the second loosing For all Judgment passed upon any person is either against him and that is binding
Bodies Politick as Universities Corporations Counties Armies and Common-wealths This is God's way of Government which the wisest Governours did always imitate Thus Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them Rulers over the People Rulers of thousands Rulers of hundreds Rulers of fifties and Rulers of tens And they judged the people at all seasons the hard causes they brought to Moses but every small matter they judged themselves Exod. 18.25 26. In this Text considered with the antecedent many things as proper to Government are observable 1. There must be Laws 2. Officers 3. Courts according to the tria Jura Majestatis of Legislation making Officers and Jurisdiction These presuppose a Community and a Constitution 1. There must be a power of making Laws that belongs to the Soveraign 2. Laws by this power must be made for Administration which without them must needs be arbitrary and irregular 3. Those Laws once enacted must be promulgated that they may be known 4. Once known they must regulate both the peoples obedience and the acts of Officers and judgment of the Judges After Laws once established they must be executed and that cannot be orderly and effectually done without a division of the people For 1. they must be numbred divided into tens fifties hundreds thousands tribes 2. They must be co-ordinate and equally poised tens with tens fifties with fifties hundreds with hundreds thousands with thousands 3. They must be subordinate ten to fifty fifty to an hundred and hundreds to thousands and all unto the whole When this is done Officers by whom these Laws must be executed must be made These must first be well qualified 2. The people must chuse them Deut. 1.13 3. Moses must appoint them their places assign them their circuits give them their charge 4. They must have their Courts and Sessions judge execute the Laws and be subordinate the lesser Courts to the superiour and all to the Supream For their Causes especially if difficult must ascend till they came to Moses and he brought them to God who was their Soveraign this was extraordinary But afterwards they had their Sanhedrim and Court of Appeals This subordination seems to be implied in those words of our Saviour Matth. 5.22 But I say unto you that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgement and whosoever shall say unto his brother Racha shall be in danger of the council but whosoever shall say Thou Fool shall be in danger of hell fire One thing in all this is considerable That Moses did not make every Division nor every Court severally independent but subordinated all unto one supream Consistory A Multitude though National therefore is no impediment to good Government especially when they are numbred divided co-ordinated and subordinated and so by a certain and fixed order made one section 11 As a Multitude is no hinderance so neither is a national distance of parts For if we should enquire into the Constitution of the Chaldean or the Persian Empires of both which we might learn much out of the Holy Scriptures especially in the Books of Ezra both first and second called Nehemiah and Ester and Daniel most of all we should find 1. That the extent of them was far more than National and the distance of the parts far greater 2. That these were divided subordinated not only in the parts less to the greater but also in their Officers both for War and Peace the Revenue and the Administration of Justice and so by order united under one Head. The Empire of Rome the parts whereof were severed at a very great distance as from the River Euphrates in the East to the Ocean upon the West of France and from Aegypt Southward to the North of the Lesser Asia was according to their principles of Policy as well governed as any European petty State at this time is The Turkish Seigniory tho' of great extent is as well ordered as divers several Kingdoms Christian confined to a far more narrow compass Their order is good their strength great their Counsel which doth manage it politick their Laws for administration of Justice certain their divisions from matters of Religion few or none and their internal strength must needs be firm and the continuance of their Dominion hath been long Some attribute the excellency of their Government to their severity in punishments and their bounty in rewards yet though these add something yet these are but the least part The Dominions of Spain are many and scattered at a very great distance round about the Globe on both sides the Line within and without the Tropicks yet all these are subjected to one supream Judicatory and are tolerably governed and by a great deal of policy have been kept together till of late France indeed is stronger because divided into thirty Provinces it 's united in one Vicinity and subject to one Monarch Yet in these vast Dominions and great Empires the union of their many parts so distant did depend not only upon ordinary means but some extraordinary acts of Divine Providence From all this it 's evident that by division co-ordination subordination the supream power of one Nation nay of many Nations may be diffused through the whole Body so as to animate it and reach every part even the remotest section 12 Yet it may be objected that all the Members of a National Church can never meet together in one place and Assembly It 's true they cannot neither is it needful Joshua called and assembled all Israel when yet none but their Elders their Heads their Officers their Judges were called and convented Josh. 23.2 Upon which place Masius thus comments Cum dictum esset omnem Israelem fuisse convocatum ipsa deinde universitas ad eos deducitur qui populum omnem repraesentabant So that all Israel met in their Representative Thus David thus Solomon did use to convocate all Israel As our State hath its Wittena Gemot the Parliament which Cambden calls Pananglium so a National Church may have a general Assembly to represent the whole And this may be so composed as to be an abridgement and contraction of the quintessence of the wisdom piety and learning of a National Church This is a most excellent way for a Community to act by This may be both the terminus à quo ad quem of all these publick acts which are of weight and general concernment By this the Nomothetical Power is exercised to this by Appeal the highest causes are brought and finally determined yet here it 's to be observed that a Representative of the whole is not the whole properly but synecdochically and an Instrument whereby the whole doth so act yet if any thing be done amiss in a former particular Assembly the whole may correct it by a latter 2. That if the Constitution of a general Representative be right and the Members thereof duly qualified and act according to their qualification there will
and the parts the Soveraign and the Subject According to this method though mine ability be not much I have spoken of a Community both Civil and Ecclesiastical and of a Common-wealth 1. Civil then 2. Ecclesiastical In both the first part is the Soveraign where I enquire 1. Into his power civil and then into the spiritual power of the Keys in the Church 2. I proceed to declare how the Civil Soveraign acquires or loseth his power and how the Church derives her power or is deprived of it 3. The next thing is the several ways of disposing the power civil in a certain subject whence arise the several forms of Government civil and the disposal of the power of the Keys the primary subject whereof is not the Pope or Prince or Prelate or Presbyter or People as distinct from Presbyters but the whole particular Church which hath it in the manner of a free State. Here something is said of the extent of the Church After all this comes in pars subdita both Civil and Ecclesiastical where I speak of the nature of subjection and of the distinction division and education of the Subjects both of the State and Church All this is done with some special reference both to the State and Church of England desiring Peace and Reformation If any require a reason why I do not handle Ecclesiastical Government and Civil distinctly by themselves without this mixture the reasons are especially two 1. That it might be known that the general Rules of Government are the same both in Church and State for both have the same common principles which by the light of Reason Observation and Experience may be easily known but especially by the Scriptures from which an intelligent Reader may easily collect them Therefore it 's in vain to write of Church-Government without the knowledge of the Rules of Government in general and the same orderly digested The ignorance of these is the cause why so many write at random of Discipline and neither satisfie others nor bring the Controversies concerning the same unto an issue 2. By this joynt handling of them the difference between Church and State Civil and Ecclesiastical Government the power of the Sword and Keys is more clearly as being laid together apparent For this is the nature of Dissentanies Quod juxta posita clarius elucescunt This is against Erastus and such as cannot distinguish between the power of ordering Religion for the external part which belongs unto the civil Soveraigns of all States and the power of the Keys which is proper to the Church as a Church Yet if these two Reasons will not satisfie and some Reader may desire and wish they had been handled dictinctly he may read them as dictinct and several even in this Book I my self had some debate within my self what way I should handle them yet upon these reasons I resolved to do as I have done section 12 A Common-wealth once constituted is not immortal but is subject to corruptions conversion and subversion The Authors of Politicks following the Philosopher make these accidents the last part of their Political Systems and some speak of them more briefly some at large and declare the causes and prescribe the Remedies both for prevention and recovery Corruption is from the bad constitution or male-administration and both Soveraign and Subject may be and many times are guilty The conversion and woful changes and also the subversion and ruine is from God as the supream Governour and just Judge of Mankind who punisheth not only single and private Persons and Families but whole Nations and Common-wealths Of these things the Scripture humane Stories and our own experience do fully inform us But of them if it may be useful I shall speak more particularly and fully in the second Book the subject whereof in general is Administration in particular Laws and Canons Officers of the State and of the Church and Jurisdiction both Civil and Ecclesiastical The reasons why I desire to publish this first and severally from the latter part are partly because though the first draught of that latter part was finished above half a Year ago yet I intend to enlarge upon the particulars partly because I desire to know what entertainment this first part may meet withal for if it be good I shall be the more encouraged to go forward but chiefly because the most material Heads and Controversies are handled in this which is far more difficult The latter will be more easie yet profitable and useful especially if some of greater ability would undertake it The God of Truth and Peace give us Humility Patience Charity and the Knowledge of his Truth that holding the Truth in Love we may grow up unto him in all things which is the Head even Christ to whom be Honour Glory and Thanks for ever Amen FINIS * vid. Comin de bell Neap. lib. 5. Scope of the Work. Means to prevent Errors Sect. 1. The reason of differences in Church-Affairs What a Common-wealth in general is Foundation of the Work. Constitution Community in general De C. D. lib. 19. Cap. 21. Cap. 22. What Community Civil is Original of community Members of a Community Ecclesiast Community A good ground of Childrens right to Baptisme What hinders Reformation A Community formed is a Commonwealth De C. D. Lib. 19. cap. 13. Neighbour a notion of Society Majesty in the People really c. Real Majesty greater than Personal The mistake of Junius Brutus Buchanon Heno A Parliament cannot alter a form of Government A happy Community Majesty Personal Acts of Personal Majesty 1. Without Within Soveraigns must order Matters of Religion Civil matters Properties of Majesty Fundamental Charter of Civil Majesty Power how got Justly got extraordinary How Kings must govern Ordinarily By Election Best Government By Conquest Vsurpation Subjects may defend their Rights What destroys Personal Majesty Bracton Kings duty Binds not posterity Majesty when forfeited When Subjection ceases a Isa. 22.2 Vers. 21. b Rev. 1.18 1 Cor. 3.7 d Mat. 16.29 e Joh. 20.22 23. f 1 Cor. 5.12 g Ibid. h Ibid. 13. 11 Quaest. in vesperiis Dib 4. dist 8. Quaest. 2. What a King is What the King cannot do Parliament best Assembly Parliament Members qualified Wittena Gemote What the House of Commons is The End of calling the House of Lords What Barons called to Parliament Power of Parliament without the King. Why Kings Consent required First subject of Personal Majesty What the Parliament cannot do Who gave Crown Prerogatives and Parliament-being Kings of England no absolute Monarchs Cause of England 's Miseries What observable in our sad Divisions How to judge of our Divisions What charged on the King. Disobedience to King unlawful Parliament accused acquitted The cause changed Treaty at the Isle of Wight The 〈◊〉 works 〈◊〉 God among us Sect. 22. What may be the best way of settlement Qualification of Parliament members What to be looked into by a Parliament first * Non assumit Rex vel jus clavium vel censurae sed quae exterioris politiae Tort. Torti pag. 318. Rex qua Rex habet primatum Ecclesiasticum objective qua Christianus effective qua Rex actu primo qua Christianus secundo Mason de Minist Angl. l. 3. pag. 312. Primitive Bishop His Power Hierarchical B. B. His Power Hierarch Jure Humano * De Repub Eccles. lib. 2. c. 3. sect 7 8 9. Sect. 7. * Act. 8.14 * Ludovicus Arabelensis Lewis Arch-Bishop of Arles President in the Council of Basil. English Bishops What Dean and Chapters were English Bishops not Jure Divino * Lib. 3. c. 3 4. Tit. de praescript adversus haereticos Job 37.12 Prov. c. 12.5 * Gal. 1.1 * De. polit Ecclesiastica l. 3. c. 7. p. 26. * Tort Tor. p. 41. * Vignierus de excommunicatine venatorum The Church the Subject of the Keyes As in the Fundamental Office of Christ. Church-government what Who guilty of Schism Who Schismaticks Parish no Congregation Christian What Church the primary subject of the Keys The supposed end of the Congregational notion The subject of the whole Treatise * Isa. 49.23 Chap. 60.16 22. * Chap. 55.34 * 1 Cor. 11.34 * In his Book of the Church c. 8. p. 63. Best means to reform and unite a Church Divided What 's the chief interest of a Nation as Christian. Soveraign real Personal Measure of subjection rightly bounded The rational part of a people the heir of real Majesty The Sacrament what Education What makes a Church-Member Who a Visible Saint Division Subordination of that Church when Subordination of Bishops prudential Episcopal Hierarchy not of Divine Authority Bishops over Presbyters uncertain The Pope the Man of Sin c. Prelacy the occasion of Hierarchy and that of Papacy England under no foreign Primate What a Bishop was at first No Divine Testimony for Bishops Bishops of good use not of necessity A special Work of the Levite