this kind of learning far excelled him yet he thinks it clear and the best and most rational though it neither agree with reason or Religion And though his hope is not much yet some hope he hath some Soveraign may put it in practice If they have no better directions they may make use of his principles as some have done to their ruine Princes and Ministers of State have no need to be taught them for they know them too well and follow them too much Of a Christian Common-wealth CAP. I. Of the third part the 32. of the Book Of the Principles of Christian Politicks MR. Hobbs in the former part seemed to have some use of his Reason but in this he is like unto such as are lunatick though now and then he hath his Lucida Intervalla And whether he hath done thus out of ignorance or design I know not but this I know that he is deeply guilty of Errour and presumption He hath taught us little that is good and solid much which is dangerous and damnable The judicious Reader if any such will vouchsafe to read him will reject and that with scorn and indignation many things in the Book but some simple giddy fools especially in these Lunatick times may be taken with his fooleries and blasphemies His design is to take all power from the Church Dethrone Christ and confer all spiritual power in matters of Religion upon the civil Soveraign and this directly contrary to express Scripture He hath turned the Pope out of his infallible Chair and transformed soveraign civil Princes and Rulers into Popes and to them in highest points which concern out eternal salvation we must captivate our judgement It seems to be a fault to spend any time in answering him and for the same I may be censured either as a fool or as one ill-imployed yet because his doctrine though it can do no good yet may do hurt and that to many I will yet but briefly say something to him The very Title of this part is ambiguous and as he here understands it uncouth For he determines the subject to be a Christian-Common-wealth and in that sense as not any other hath taken it For a Christian-Common-wealth is either a Government of Christians as Christians and that is called the Church either as universally considered subject unto Christ her Lord and King or as it is divided into several particular associations under some form of Discipline and Christian its called most usually as believing and professing the faith of Christ exhibited or else it s a Common-wealth civil which hath publikely received and acknowledged the Christian Faith Neither of these wayes doth he understand it For with him a Christian Common-wealth is such a State wherein the people depend upon and must absolutely submit unto the soveraign civil professing himself a Christian as infallible in all matters of Doctrine Worship Discipline and he derives the Authority of the Canon of the Scripture from him yet neither Reason nor Scripture ever taught him any such Doctrine But let us hear what he professeth for thus we read in him T. H. And this Scripture it is out of which I am to take the principles of my Discourse concerning the rights concerning those who are the supreme Governours on earth of Christian-Common-wealths and of the duty of Christian subjects towards their Soveraigns This is the substance as it is the Conclusion of his first Chapter The Rule of all discourse that is true must be the Word of God either natural or prophetick as he expresseth himself The prophetick word we Christians do affirm to be contained in the Scriptures which once granted to be the word of God written must of necessity be believed as infallibly true by a natural principle That God is true and truth it self not accidentally but Essentially That the Prophets and Apostles knew them immediately to be the word of God he seems to confess But how we know them to be so is a question The signs or Rules to know a true Prophet from a false he hath assigned to be two 1. The matter of the Revelation 2. The miracles done for confirmation But of this in the former part that which is sufficient hath been said By Scripture we understand the word of God written to be written is but an adjunct to the word of God which is the word of God and may be so though never written yet it pleased God to cause it to be written that it might be preserved more pure and entire and be continued as a lasting Monument and record in the Church and as he directed the Prophets and Apostles in the speaking of it to be infallible so he likewise made them infallible in the writing Words and writings are but signs of that which God revealed they understood declared and that by us being truly understood and rightly applyed according to the intention of the Revelation ought to be our Rule But if this be misunderstood and misapplyed as by this Author they are they cannot direct us mislead us they may And here we must distinguish between the entire Canon of the Scripture and the principal and intended matter therein contained as necessary to salvation The Canon is so many ways and so strongly confirmed that no other Book in the world can be in this respect parrallel with it and it were irrational to reject it The books of this Canon are usually distinguished into three kinds Historical Prophetical Doctrinal In the Historical part that which may seem to be most incredible is far more credible then many things commonly and generally believed in all Religions and upon far less probable grounds This the Ancient Fathers and Divines have made evident against the greatest Schollars of the world who did except against these Books And in particular Cyril against Julian The Prophetical hath been proved in a great part by God himself to the least particulars fulfilling what he hath foretold The Doctrinal part is either Moral or Positive Morals few rational men do question because they have some affinity with the internal Principles of natural Reason The Positives are such as Reason cannot reach and therefore required at the first publication at least some extraordinary confirmation that Reason might be certain they were revealed by God These Positives are that the Son of God was incarnate that he by the sacrifice of his body and death upon the Cross did expiate the sin of man That he rose from the dead ascended into Heaven sits at the right hand of God and Reigns in Heaven and Earth shall come to judge both quick and dead c. The Signs and Wonders done by the Apostles the Gifts of the Holy Ghost and Gods powerful working of the Spirit upon the souls of men upon the preaching hearing and receiving of these Positives did sufficiently testifie they were from Heaven For in confirmation of the Positives not the Morals these things were done by God The matter of them is such as
Laws of Nature These Laws are the moral precepts of eternal justice and equity from which all civil Laws have their rise and are either conclusions drawn from them or certain rules tending to the better observation of them Which things well considered do make it very evident how little the power of civil Lords and Princes must needs be In some few indifferent things they may be absolute have arbitrary power and be in some respect above those constitutive Laws which they themselves enact His instance in Jephtah gives them power above and contrary to the Laws of God and Nature Yet who will grant him that Jephtah sacrificed his daughter The text will not evince it for it only saith that whatsoever cometh forth of my doors to meet me c. shall be the Lords or I will offer it up for a burnt-offering Judges 11.31 For the particle 〈◊〉 Vau turned by some copulatively for and is here as in many other places dis-junctive and signifies or Again if Jephtah did sacrifice her he sinned not only against the Law of Nature but also the written Law of Moses For God gave no command permission or toleration to any that we read of but only to Abraham to sacrifice with humane blood and that Commandment was but to try him for he would not suffer him to put him to death Besides God threatens ruine and destruction to such as did offer their children to Moloch and shed their blood And their sin was not only because they offered them to Idols and Devils but also because they shed innocent blood without any warrant or Commission from God the only supreme and absolute Lord of life Further how could the vow of man which was but a voluntary Obligation be above the Law of God and make that lawful which by a Superiour Law was unlawful I verily believe she was devoted only not sacrificed But suppose he did sacrifice her to God to whom he had vowed her yet he did not this as a Soveraign of her life but as a subject to God The example of David murthering Vriah can much less prove the absolute power of Soveraigns to take away the lives of their innocent subjects For David had no such power for 1. He was no absolute Prince but limited both by the written Laws of God and also the Natural 2. Neither he nor any other can have any such power because man cannot God doth not give any such power 3. David did not only iniquity but injustice to Vriah 1. As his fellow-subject in respect of God 2. As his own subject whom he was bound as innocent to protect not to destroy 4. His proof out of Psal 51.4 Against thee only is invalid For 1. Though it be so translated by some and so understood by Ambrose and others who follow him yet neither that translation nor the interpretation thereon can be evinced either out of the Original or the Septuagint or the vulgar or Junius or Vatablus 2. Genebrard Vatablus Junius Ainsworth and others understand it that God only was privy to and knew of this sin and the words following And done this evil in thy sight seem to confirm this sense 5. Yet suppose it should be turned against thee only yet others interpret onely to be principally as supreme Law-giver and Judge not only to me but all others who only hast the Original power of punishing and pardoning not only me but others and that not only temporally but spiritually and eternally Yet the exposition of Ambrose is taken up because Princes desire it to be so absolute and both Divines and other men are very ready to slatter such as are in present possession of power But to make the point more evident let me digress a little and search out the reason and cause of the power of life and death as in the hands of civil Soveraigns To this end observe That no man hath absolute power of his own life as he hath of his goods Man may have the use and possession but not the propriety and dominion of it Therefore it s granted on all hands that though a mans life be said to be his own yet he may not be felo de se and kill himself he is not Master of his life so far as to have any power or liberty to do any such thing It s true that God who is Lord of life and death gives liberty to man in some cases to hazard in some he commands to lay down his life He may hazard it in a just war and defence of his own Countrey and also of himself against an unjust invader He must lay down his life and God commands it for the testimony of Christ in which case he that loseth it shall find it From all this it follows that no people can by making a Soveraign give any absolute power of life and death unto him For nothing can give that which it hath not neither can they make themselves Authors of the unjust acts of their Soveraign much less of his murthers and taking away the lives of their innocent subjects Id enim quisque potest quod jure potest If thus it be then they must have power to take away life from God who alone hath power of life and this power he only gives in case the subject be guilty of such crimes as by his Laws are capital T. H. pag. 110. in the margent The liberty which writers praise is the liberty of Soveraigns not of private men G. L. By writers he means the Roman and Greek Historians and Philosophers who wrote so much of liberty amongst the rest especially Aristotle and Cicero By this it seems he never understood these Authors though he accuse others of ignorance The liberty which the English have challenged and obtained with so much expence of blood is not the power of Kings much less of absolute Soveraigns as he would make the world believe but that which is due unto us by the constitution of the State Magna Charta the Laws and the Petition of Right It s but the liberty of subjects not Soveraigns when he hath said all he can we are not willing to be slaves or subject our selves to Kings as absolute Lords Neither are we willing that either flattering Divines Court-Parasites or Unjust Ministers of State should wind up the pretended prerogative so high as to subject our lives and estates and also our Religion to the arbitrary absolute and unreasonable will of one man whom they did desire to advance so much for their own interest There is a difference between the subjects liberty whereby in many things he may command himself and supreme power which commands others under their Supremacy By liberty Aristotle Cicero meant such a priviledge as every subject might have in a free-State not that Soveraignty which belonged to the whole and universal body over several persons where it is to be noted that one and the same person who is a subject and at the best but a Magistrate
hath a share in the Soveraign power Yet this he hath not as a single person but as one person joyntly with the whole body or major part at least of the people So in our Parliaments every man there is as a single person and all of them any waies considered but as the joynt Representative of the people in a certain place at a certain time acting according to a certain order are but subjects yet in the capacity and habitude of a Parliament they are no subjects but in the name of the people have a Legislative power and exercise the highest acts of Government excepting those of the Constitution And this may be one reason why our English Ancestors have been so careful to maintain and preserve this great Court and Assembly of Parliaments because they knew upon that depended their liberty in the vacancy and intervals of Parliaments For take away this and our liberty is gone And wise men know that the liberty of the English subject depends upon these great Assemblies Some therefore have attempted either the total extirpation of them according to the example of France and Spain or a diminution of their power and priviledges so as to make them meer shadows If any say and infer from all this that therefore the form of our Government even under Kings is popular and hath the nature of a free-State I say it hath much of a free-State in the Constitution but not in the Administration Yet it s far different from those four kinds of popular Governments mentioned by Aristotle Pol. lib. 6. c. 4. The constitution whereof is little better then levelling The principal thing aimed at in such forms as the Author alledgeth out of the Philosopher cap. 2. Ejusdem libri was liberty supposing it could be had no where but in such Governments and this liberty was to do either what they pleased or to govern by course fearing lest any person or persons continued long in any eminent place of command would in time ingross the power Yet this supposition was false For liberty might be had without levelling and free-States might be and have been better constituted and regulated For no constitution is good where provision is not made that Wisdom and Justice rather then persons may govern and the multitude so kept under as that they may be subjects not rebels and cast off all power To return unto the matter proposed and conclude this point 1. The English liberty is their birth-right 2. It s not the power of Soveraigns 3. It s not unlimited but bounded within reasonable bounds 4. We do not learn it out of the Greek and Roman Histories nor from the Athenians or Romans but from our own Laws which are far different from theirs and far more agreeable to the written Laws of God which left the people of Israel under their Judges the freest people of the world and yet no Levellers 5. Our learning out of Greek and Latine Authors hath not been bought so dear or cost so much blood except out of the breech of School-hoyes And most of those who have controlled the just acts of their Soveraigns never read much less understood those Authors T. H. pages 111 112 113. The liberty of the subject is in such things as are neither determined by his first submission to the Soveraign power nor by the laws G. L. This is the substance of three pages and amounts to so much as may easily be comprised in a few words For when a subject is not bound either by the Laws of the Constitution or Administration he is free according to Mr. Hobbs his judgement Yet in proper sense in both these cases he is no subject but Dominus and far more then liber The Civilians do better determine the liberty of the subject to be potestatem agendi sub publicae defensionis praesidio though this be no perfect definition As before so now I say that liberty here is not opposed to obligation but servitude For â—o be subject to a wise Soveraign according to just Laws is so much liberty as any reasonable man can desire for in this respect he is rather subject to God then man and to serve him is doubtless perfect freedom As no Soveraign should be denyed so much power as to protect the least if innocent and to punish the greatest if guilty so no subject should be bound to do evil which is servitude and bondage indeed or restrained from doing that good which God commands him Civil government was never ordained by God to be destructive either of moral or divine vertues or of the noble condition of man as a rational creature Therefore regular submission unto supreme power will never stand with any obligation unto evil or contract for protection except in innocency Paul pleading before Festus saith If I be an offender or have committed any thing worthy of death I refuse not to die Acts 25.11 How this can stand with what this Author saith when he affirmeth that its lawful for a man guilty and condemned to save himself if he can I leave to others for to examine From the Apostles words its evident he desires no protection even of himself as worthy of death neither hath God given any power to man to save in such a case And though any person by the Law of nature may defend himself yet this must be done cum moderamine tutelae inculpatae In case a subject hath made himself capitally guilty he hath forfeited his life to his Soveraign as Gods Vicegerent whom he must not resist in the execution of Justice though he be not bound to kill himself neither doth the multitude or strength of any such capital offenders any waies give them right to resist their Soveraign in their own defence as the Author would have it For they cannot defend themselves as men but they must defend themselves in this case as guilty men which is not lawful How the offer of pardon should take away the plea of self-defence I understand not seeing they had no right before it was offered The offer of pardon indeed if the party offering may be safely trusted may take away all fear and so all colour of any plea by force to defend themselves from that death which pardon will take away or remove In the close of this discourse concerning liberty of the subject he grants it a part of this liberty That the subject may sue his Soveraign and before a Judge appointed by the said Soveraign If this be so then 1. The subject hath propriety of goods 2. That he and his Soveraign are two distinct parties and in this case the Soveraign represents him not as one person 3. That the Law in this respect is above the supreme Governor 4. Therefore the Soveraign is not absolute 5. That the subject may complain of some actions and injustice of the Soveraign contrary to the Authors fourth right of Soveraigns 6. That to him belongs not all Judicature in all Causes as in
means and motives used for to rectifie the heart CAP. XII Of the Second Part. The 28. of the Book Concerning punishments and rewards UPon obedience or disobedience follow punishments or rewards determined by Judgement which is an act of Jurisdiction and considers the Law as violated or observed And here comes in according to order that head of Jurisdiction in general which properly is handled in that part of Politicks we call Administration And he that undertakes to deliver a model of Politicks and yet saith nothing of Jurisdiction but proceeds from crimes to punishments per saltum as Mr. Hobbs doth is but a superficial Author But let us hear his definition of punishment T. H. A punishment is an evil inflicted by publick Authority on him that hath done or omitted that which is judged by the same Authority to be a transgression of the Law to the end that the will of men may be thereby better disposed to obedience This is a very imperfect definition and one reason is the Author presumes much of his own judgement and desires to be singular otherwise he had a better definition made to his hands For poena est vindicta noxae This punishment is defined in general as it includes the penalties inflicted by Parents Masters or any one who have power to command another it reacheth the punishments executed by God This definition may easily be made so as fully to express the nature of civil punishment intended by this Author But for the better understanding of the nature of punishment we must observe that it may be considered several waies 1. As determined by the Law which binds the party subject either to obedience or punishment 2. As deserved by the party offending who is bound to suffer it 3. As defined by the Judge upon judicial evidence 4. As inflicted by the Minister of execution 5. As suffered by the party condemned 6. As prevented by pardon out of meer mercy or upon satisfaction made and accepted The efficient cause of punishing in a Common-wealth is the Soveraign or higher powers bearing the Sword and as exercising Jurisdiction either by himself or his Minister For a Soveraign doth punish as a Judge The immediate and formal object of this act is noxa civilis some offence or crime judged upon evidence to be a violation of the Law The general nature of it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 retribution The thing retributed or rendred is something that brings hurt or dammage to the delinquent or party offending who as judged guilty is the proper subject of it It s called by some Malum triste proper malum turpe The proper act complete and consummate is the inflicting of this evil determined by just judgement so as that the party condemned doth actually suffer it All this for the general notion of it may be observed out of the words of the Apostle who saith That God will render to them who are contentious and do not obey the truth but obey unrighteousness indignation and wrath tribulation and angnish upon every soul of man that doth evil Rom. 2.8 9. For here we have the Judge the crime Judged to be so the retribution or rendering the thing or evil rendred so as to be suffered the cause why it s rendred In this respect the higher powers are said to bear the sword to take vengeance upon evil doers Rom. 13.4 The ends of punishment are many 1. Some of them are to correct and reform the party punished 2. Some for example that others may hear and fear 3. The end of all punishments in general is to vindicate the power of the Law-giver and the honour and force of the Law to manifest Justice and the hatred of evil and to procure the peace and tranquillity of the Community Before the Author proceed to draw conclusions from his definition he enquires how the Soveraign acquired the power of punishing And resolves T. H. That the-subject in the first constitution laid aside his power of self-preservation by hurting subduing killing others in his own defence and so did not give it but left it to the Soveraign G. L. This is ridiculous absurd and grounded upon his false principles For 1. The Soveraign is the Minister of God and is bound to do so that he keep within the compass of his Commission that which God would do and that is to punish evil And as all his power of making Laws Judgement Peace War c. are from God so is this amongst the rest By whom he is made a Soveraign from him he hath the sword to punish Men may give their consent that such a man or such a company of men shall raign but the power is from God not them 2. In the constitution of a supreme Governor no man can Covenant to be protected or defended in doing evil Neither can any or all higher powers in the world justly promise to protect any in evil neither hath any man any power unjustly to preserve himself For that of the Author that in the state of nature every man hath right to every thing is absolutely false and abominable When a man subjects himself unto a Soveraign ordained of God not only to protect the good but punish the evil he cannot except himself from his punitive power if he do ill because he subjects according to the just Laws of God and cannot lawfully do any other waies So that power to punish is given by God not left by man unto higher powers civil After his definition of punishment civil and determination of the means how power punitive is acquired he 1. Draws conclusions from his definition 2. Declares the several kinds of punishment 3. Distinguisheth of rewards 1. The conclusions are either good and pertinent or false or not deducible from the definition and I will not trouble the Reader with the examination of them 2. His distribution of punishments is tolerable And here we must observe 1. That punishment civil can only reach the body and this temporal life of man for the sword cannot reach the soul 2. That these punishments as well as spiritual are either of loss or pain poena damni aut sensus privative or positive The one takes away some good the other inflicts some positive evil 3. That some of them take away life either civil as banishment or natural as death and some take away such things as make life comfortable as goods such are sines and confiscations or liberty as imprisonment bondage or our honour as all ignominious penalties Those which infer some positive evil contrary to nature are all kind of tortures whatsoever which cause pain in the body of man and all these positive punishments tend to the destruction of life either in part or in whole 4. These penalties are so to be inflicted and in such a measure and proportion as that no man may gain by doing evil 5. That though an innocent person as such cannot be justly punished yet as he is made one person with
because God hath said it That the place is not this earth we have some reason to think because our Saviour ascended into heaven and whilest he was on earth made intercession for us saying Father I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am John 17.14 And to comfort the hearts of his Disciples sad and troubled because he said he must leave them he useth these words In my Fathers house are many mansions if it were not so I would have told you I go to prepare a place for you And if I go and prepare a place for you I will come again and receive you to my self that where I am there ye may be also John 14.23 If eternal life shall be enjoyed on earth why need Christ ascend to heaven there to prepare a place for us and when he shall return from thence why will he not stay here and leave us on the earth and never trouble himself with any translation of us into any other place where he shall ever abide and we be ever with him Hell in Scripture and as we understand God in that Book to teach us is an estate directly contrary to eternal life And we believe that it is a most miserable condition of such as shall suffer eternal punishments and that in some certain place and our chiefest imployment in this life is to use all means whereby we may be freed from that condition and enjoy the contrary Concerning the particular ubi and distinct place we do not as we need not much trouble our selves To prove that both eternal rewards are to be enjoyed and eternal torments to be suffered perpetually on earth he doth most wofully wrest and abuse several places of Gods Book and with so little solidity of judgement that children may answer him And because this eternal life is prepared by God for such as are by reason of their sin in danger of hell and eternal death therefore in Scripture it s sometime called salvation and also redemption which is a freedom and deliverance from all the evil consequents and effects of sin one and the principal whereof is to be deprived of eternal bliss which consists in full communion with our God Yet the consummation of both these conditions is reserved by God for the world to come which will follow the universal resurrection The times of the Gospel in respect of the Law may be called the world to come and so some understand the words of the Apostle to the Hebrews 2.5 where we read that God hath not unto Angels subjected the world to come c. This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sometimes it s taken for the time following the resurrection and final judgement as Mark 10.39 Luke 18.30 This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Redemption is taken in another sense for the expiation of sin upon satisfaction made by Christ unto his heavenly Father as supreme Judge who accepted his death as a sufficient penalty to avert his wrath and procure his mercy for all such as should believe on him In this Chapter he hath imposed upon many places of Scripture a sense never intended and this may be evident to any that can and will examine the places according to the originals and the context And he drives at this to deprive Christ of his regal power which at the right hand of God he now doth exercise and to invest civil powers with it till such time as he hath brought Christ from heaven that he may here on earth begin his personal raign Sr. Thomas Mores Vtopia is somewhat rational this discourse is void of reason and so much the more unsufferable as the matter is so sublime and this sacred Book of God so much profaned by him CAP. VIII Of the third Part And the 39. of the Book Of the significations of the word Church in Scripture IN the former Chapter he turned heaven and hell into the earth and in this he hath transformed the Church which is a spiritual politie into a civil State and that will easily appear from his definition of this excellent and divine Society T. H. A Church is a company of men professing Christian Religion united in the person of one Soveraign at whose command they ought to assemble and without whose authority they ought not to assemble G. L. Many are the significations of the word Ecclesia in the Scriptures of the New Testament as it is applyed to Christians which he hath in part yet not fully observed Yet amongst them all from the beginning to the end of the New Testament its never found to be taken in this sense for as he hath not so he cannot alledge one place where it so signifies This definition is such as never any gave before you can read it in no Author neither can you prove it out of Scripture Only the first words seem to have something of a description but it s no perfect explication of the quiddity and nature of the Church Christian For that is a society or community of persons who believe in Jesus Christ and subject themselves unto him as their Lord and King A bare profession will not make a man a subject of this spiritual Kingdom A sincere profession of that faith which is seated and rooted in the heart comes up higher and is more fit to express the being of a Member of this Church This Church as Catholick or Universal subject unto Christ is like a similar body and therefore the parts may bear the name of the whole as the Church of Corinth the Church of Ephesus and the Church in such an house Some part of this Church is under a form of discipline to be exercised in foro exteriori as the School-men and Casuists use to speak some parts are not so happy For this is not of the Essence of a Church It s not of the being though it tends to the well-being of the same Some of these are subject unto a civil Soveraign who is a Christian some are not For as a Christian State may have Heathen or Mahumetan subjects so Christians may be under the civil power of an Heathen or Mahumetan Prince Both these therefore to be under a form of discipline and subject to a Christian civil power are but accidental and these accidents are separable and often actually separated and therefore I know no reason why they should be part of a perfect desiâ—â—tion or so much as mentioned in it This may be sufficient for to discover the vanity of the man and the absurdity of the definition Yet notwithstanding his definition be faulty I for my part do grant that Jus religionis ordinandae doth belong to all Civil Governors and powers But with limitation 1. That no Soveraign hath power to order maintain and promote any Religion but that which is instituted from heaven 2. That they must not intermeddle with it for to order it further then its ordinable by the sword which cannot reach Religion and
sin of man and merited for himself eternal power and glory and for us eternal life and all effectual means for the certain attainment thereof All the rest of his acts performed by him as King Priest and Prophet tended unto the application of his sacrifice that we by faith might be partakers of the benefit thereof This is the sum of that Doctrine of Redemption delivered clearly and more fully in several places of the Scripture especially of the New Testament Yet this Innovatour hath obscured the same several ways and determines the Kingdom of Christ to begin when the world doth end because Christ said to Pilate My Kingdom is not of this world Joh. 18.36 From whence he concludes T. H. That the Kingdom of Christ is not to begin before the general Resurrection G. L. This is a gross mistake and mis-interpretation of a place which is clear in it self For by his gloss he makes the Scripture to contradict it self Christ was then Candidatus imperii and was King when he gave this answer unto Pilate yet he began to reign and exercise his Royal power more eminently when he was set at the Right hand of the Father yet his Kingdom was not of this world that is not civil but spiritual and as Austin upon the place It was Hic non hinc in the world not of the world in the world yet not worldly but divine and far more excellent then the Kingdoms of the world This is the genuine sense of the words That Christ doth reign now and hath reigned since his ascension and sitting at the right hand of God is evident Before his Ascension he lets his Apostles know that all power in heaven and earth was given him and according unto and by vertue of that power he gave Commission to his Apostles to teach and baptize and perswade men to the obedience of his commands Mat. 28.18 19 20. He that hath an universal power in heaven and earth who makes officers and gives them power who makes Laws Institutes Sacraments and sends down the Holy Ghost must needs reign and his Kingdom is begun already We read that Christ must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet and the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death And when all things shall be subdued unto him then shall also the Son of man be subject unto him that put all things under him that God may be all in all 1 Cor. 15.25 26 28. Where first from Psal 110.1 The Apostle tels us That Christs Kingdom did Commence at the time of Christs sitting at the right hand of God 2. That with him to sit at the right hand of God is to reign 3. That he must reign by Word Sacraments Spirit Ministry till all enemies whereof death is the last be destroyed 4. That when death is destroyed he shall deliver up his Commission and kingdom in respect of this administration by Ordinances 5. That at the Resurrection this manner of reign shall end when Mr. Hobbs saith it shall begin 6. That then God shall be all in all that is reign perfectly in his Saints without any enemy without opposition without Ordinances and more immediately Before that time indeed he will not proceed to the final and universal sentence and execution of the same Yet there are many acts of government besides judgement and many acts of judgement be sides those of the general Assizes and last Sessions To make Laws reduce men to subjection appoint Officers pass sentence and execute the same in the very souls of men are acts of one that reigns as likewise to subdue enemies Sin Satan and the world to protect the Church And in this manner Christ hath reigned since his Ascension And many Millions do adore him subject themselves unto him and obey him to this day Yet with this man Christ doth not yet reign Let him read Psalm 2. throughout It began to be fulfilled upon his Resurrection and Ascension as appears out of the Acts of the Apostles and their Epistles And if he or any other shall deny the present reign of Christ they must expect with his Iron Scepter to be dasht in pieces like a Potters Vessel CAP XI Of the third Part the 42. of the Book Of Ecclesiastical Power AFter he had enthroned Civil Soveraigns cap. 40. Dethroned Christ in the former Chapter In this he takes away all power from the Church and invests the Christian civil powers with it And herein it may be a question whether his ignorance or presumption is the greater for he is highly guilty of both He that will determine the controversie concerning the power of the Church must distinguist the universal power of God the spiritual power of Christ incarnate and exalted to the Throne of glory and the power deligated from Christ unto the Church universal here on earth as subject unto Christ as Lord and Monarch and also that which every particular Independent association of Christians is trusted withal for to preserve the Society and the Ordinances of God from profanation This he hath not done and therefore little or rather nothing can be expected from him This last power of particular Churches is called the power of the keys in foro exteriori in the particular government of their several combinations for there is no supreme universal Independent judicatory on earth to which all Churches in the world are bound to appeal in this outward visible administration General Counsels can be no such thing Neither was there ever any Oecumenical Synod in proper sense since the Gospel was preached to all Nations This power of outward Discipline is challenged by the Pope by the Clergy by the people Christian and by the States civil and Soveraigns of the world And in this last party is the Author deeply engaged but upon what reason I know not except he intends to side with the strongest for such are they which bear the sword The power of ordaining Ministers preaching the Word administring the Sacraments was in the universal Church since the time of the Apostles And in every particular Church reduced to a form of outward discipline there is a power of making Canons of jurisdiction of making Officers so far as shall conduce unto the better ordination of Ministers the preservation of the purity of Doctrine and the right administration of the Sacraments least they be profaned and Christ offended by the admission of ignorant scandalous and unworthy persons There is a power also of disposing and dispensing of those goods which are given to the Church for the maintenance of Christian Religion Civil Christian States may and ought to make civil Laws to confirm the just Canons and jurisdictions of the Church And those Laws may be a fence unto it against these who shall oppose or persecute Yet when all this is done those Laws are but Civil though the object of them be Ecclesiastical matters This might suffice for to confute and make void the main body and break in pieces