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
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
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