his death then the Monarch being dead the authority is confirmed in the people not by any new acts of the subjects but by vertue of the former Right for all the supreme comâ—and as Dominion was in the People but the use and exercise of it was only in the temporary Monarch as in one that takes the benefit but hath not the Right But if the People after the election of a temporarie Monarch depart not from the Court before they have appointed certain times and places to convene during the time prescribed him as the Dictators in ancient times were made by the People of Rome such an one is not to be accounted a Monarch but the Prime Officer of the People and if it shall seem good the People may deprive him of his office even before that time as the People of Rome did when they conferred an equall power on Minutius Master of the horse with Quintus Fabius Maximus whom before they had made Dictator The reason whereof is that it is not to be imagined that whether Man or Counsell who hath the readiest and most immediate power to act should hold his command on such termes as not to be able actually to execuâ—e it for command is nothing else but a Right of commanding as oft as nature allowes it possible Lastly if the People having declared a temporary Monarch depart from the Court on such termes as it shall not be lawfull for them to meet without the command of the Monarch we must understand the People to be immediately dissolved and that his authority who is thus declared is absolute forasmuch as it is not in the power of all the subjects to frame the City a new unlesse he give consent who hath now alone the authority Nor matters it that he hath perhaps made any promise to assemble his Subjects on some certain times since there remains no Person now in being but at his discretion to whom the promise was made What we have spoken of these four cases of a People electing a Temporary Monarch will be more clearly explain'd by comparing them with an absolute Monarch who hath no heir apparent for the People is Lord of the subject in such a manner as there can be no Heir but whom it self doâ—h appoint Besides the spaces between the times of the subjects meeting may be fiâ—ly compar'd to those times wherein the Monarch sleepes for in either the Acts of commanding ceases the Power remaines Farthermore to dissolve the convent so as it cannot meet againe is the death of the People just as sleeping so as he can never wake more is the death of a man As therefore a King who hath no Heir going to his rest so as never to rise again i. e. dying if he commit the exercise of his Regall Authority to any one till he awake does by consequence give him the Succession the People also electing a Temporary Monarch and not reserving a power to convene delivers upto him the whole Dominion of the Country Furthermore as a King going to sleep for some season entrusts the administration of his Kingdome to some other and waking takes it again so the people having elected a Temporary Monarch and with all retaining a right to meet at a certain day and place at that day receives its supremacy again And as a King who hath committed the execution of his Authority to another himself in the mean while waking can recall this commission againe when he pleaseth so the People who during the time prescribed to the Temporary Monarch doth by Right convene may if they please deprive the Monarch of his Authority Lastly the King who commits his Authority to another while himself sleeps not being able to wake againe till he whom he entrusted give consent loses at once both his power and his life so the people who hath given the Supreme Power to a temporary Monarch in such sort as they cannot assemble without his command is absolutely dissolv'd and the power remaines with him whom they have chosen XVII If the Monarch promise ought to any one or many subjects together by consequence whereof the exercise of his power may suffer prejudice that Promise or Compact whether made by Oath or without it is null for all Compact is a conveyance of Right which by what hath been said in the fourth Article of the second Chapter requires meet and proper signes of the Will in the conveyer But he who sufficiently signifies his will of retaining the end doth also sufficiently declare that he quits not his Right to the means necessary to that end Now he who hath promis'd to part with somewhat necessary to the Supreme Power and yet retaines the Power it selfe gives sufficient tokens That he no otherwise promis'd it then so farre forth as the power might be retain'd without it Whensoever therefore it shall appear that what is promis'd cannot be perform'd without prejudice to the power the promise must be valued as not made i. e. of no effect XVIII We have seen how Subjects nature dictating have oblig'd themselves by mutuall Compacts to obey the Supreme Power We will see now by what meanes it comes to passe that they are releas'd from these bonds of obedience And first of aâ—l this happens by rejection namely if a man cast off or forsake but conveigh not the Right of his Command on some other for what is thus rejected is openly expos'd to all alike catch who catch can whence again by the Right of nature every subject may heed the preservation of himselfe according to his own judgement In the second place If the Kingdome fall into the power of the enemy so as there can no more opposition be made against them we must understand that he who before had the Supreme Authority hath now lost it For when the Subjects have done their full indeavour to prevent their falling into the enemies hands they have fulfill'd those Contracts of obedience which they made each with other and what being conâ—…uer'd they promise afterwards to avoid death they must with no lesse endeavour labour to performe Thirdly in a Monarchy for a Democraâ—y and Aristocraty cannot fail if there be no successour all the subjects are discharg'd from their obligations for no man is suppos'd to be tyed he knows not to whom for in such a case it were impossible to perform ought And by these three wayes all subjects are restor'd from their civill subjection to that liberty which all men have to all things to wit naturall and salvage for the naturall state hath the same proportion to the Civill I mean liberty to subjection which Passion hath to Reason or a Beast to a Man Furthermore each subject may lawfully be freed from his subjection by the will of him who hath the Supreme Power namely if he change his soile which may be done two wayes either by permission as he who gets license to dwell in another Country or Command as he who is Banisht
he break forth upon them So Moyses went downe unto the people and spake unto them Exod. 19. 24 25. It is farther manifestly and expresly declar'd upon occasion given by the Rebellion of Core Dathan and Abiram and the two hundred and fifty Princes of the Assembly that neither private men nor the Congregation should pretend that God had spoken by them and by Consequence that they had the right of interpreting Gods Word for they contending that God spake no lesse by them then by Moyses arguâ— thus Yee take too much upon you seeing all the Congregation are holy every one of them and the Lord is among them wherefore then lift yee up your selves above the Congregation of the Lord Numb 16. ver 3. But how God determin'd this controversie is easily understood by the 33. and 35. verses of the same Chapter where Corah Dathan and Ahiram went downe alive into the Pit and there came out fire from the Lord and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offer'd Incense Secondly that Aaron the high Priest had not this authority is manifest by the like controversie betweene him together with his Sister Miriam and Moyses For the Question was whether God spake by Moyses only or by them also that is to say whether Moyses alone or whether they also were interpreters of the Word of God For thus they said Hath the Lord indeed spoken onely by Moyses Hath he not also spoken by us Numb 12. ver 2. But God reprov'd them and made a distinction betweene Moyses and other Prophets saying If there be a Prophet among you I the Lord will make my selfâ— knowne unto him in a vision and will speake unto him in a dreame My Servant Moyses is not so c. For with him will I speake mouth to mouth even apparently and not in darke speecheâ— and the Similitude of the Lord shall he behold wherefore then were yee not afraid to speake against my Servant Moyses Ibid. ver 6 7 8. Lastly that the interpretation of the Word of God as long as Moses liv'd belong'd not to any other Prophets whatsoever is collected out of that place which we now cited concer-cerning his eminency above all others and out of naturall reason for as much as it belongs to the same Prophet who brings the Commands of God to unfold them too but there was then no other Word of God beside that which was declar'd by Moyses and out of this also that there was no other Prophet extant at that time who Prophesied to the people excepting the 70. Elders who Prophesied by the Spirit of Moyses and even that Joshuâ—h who was then Moyses his Servant his successour afterward beleev'd to be injuriously done till he know it was by Moyses his Consent which thing is manifest by Text of Scripture And the Lord came downe in a clowd c. and tooke of the spirit that was upon Moyses and gave it unto the 70. Elders Numb 11. ver 25. Now after it was told that they Prophesied Joshuah said unto Moyses Forbid them my Lord But Moyses answered Why enviest thou for my sake Seeing therefore Moyses alone was the Messenger of Gods Word and that the authority of interpreting it pertain'd neither to private men nor to the Synagogue nor to the High Priest nor to other Prophets it remaines that Moyses alone was the Interpreter of Gods Word who also had the supreme power in civill matters and that the conventions of Corah with thâ— rest of his complices against Moses and Aaron and of Aaron with his Sister against Moyses were rais'd not for the salvation of their soules but by reason of their ambition and desire of Dominion over the People XIV In Joshuahs time the interpretation of the Lawes and of the Word of God belong'd to Eleâ—zar the High Priest who was also under God their absolute King which is collected first of all out of the Covenant it selfe in which the Common-wealth of Israel is called a Priestly Kingdome or as it is recited in the 1 Pet. 2. 9. A Royall Priesthood which could in no wise be sayd unlesse by the institution and Covenant of the People the regall power were understood to belong to the High Priest Neither doth this repugne what hath beene said before where Moyses and not Aaren had the Kingdome under God since it is necessary that when one man institutes the forme of a future Common-wealth that one should governe the Kingdome which he institutes during his life whether it be Monarchie Aristocraty or Democraty and have all that power for the present which he is bestowing on others for the future Now that Eleazar the Priest had not onely the Priesthood but also the Soveraignty is expressely set downe in Joshuahs call to the administration for thus it is written Take thee Joshuah the Son of Nun a man in whom is the Spirit and lay thine hand upon him and set him before Eleazer the Priest and before all the Congregation and give him a charge in their sight and thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him that all the Congregation of the Children of Israel may be obedient and he shall stand before Eleazar the Priest who shall aske Counsell for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord at his word shall they goe out and at his word shall they come in and all the Children of Israel with him even all the Congregation Nâ—m 27. vâ—r 18 19 20 21. where to aske Counsell of God for whatsoever is to be done that is to interpret Gods word and in the name of God to Command in all matters belongs to Eleazar and to goe out and to come in at his word that is to say to obey belongs both to Joshuaâ— and to all the People It s to be observ'd also that that speech Part of thy glory clearely denotes that Joshuah had not a power equall with that which Moyses had In the meane time it is manifest that even in Ioshuahs time the Supreme power and authority of interpreting the word of God were both in one Person XV. After Ioshuahs death follow the times of the Iudges untill King Saul in which it is manifest that the right of the Kingdome instituted by God remained with the High Priest for the Kingdome was by Covenant Priestly that is to say Gods government by Priests and such ought it to have been untill that form with Gods consent were changed by the people themselves which was not done before that requiring a King God consented unto them and said unto Samuel Hearken unto the voyce of the people in all that they say unto thee for they have not rejected thee but they have rejected me that I should not reign over them 1. Sam. 8. 7. The supreme civill power was therefore Rightly due by Gods own institution to the High-Priest but actually that power was in the Prophets to whom being raysed by God in an extraordinary manner the Israelites a people greedy of the Prophets
whether it be a sin or not when he hath freedome to forbear it is a contempt of the Lawes and therefore by the 28. Art of the third Chapter a sin against the Law of nature Vain therefore is that same distinction of obedience into Active and Passive as if that could be expiated by penalties constituted by humane decrees which is a sinne against the Law of nature which is the Law of God or as â—…though they sinned not who sinne at their own perill Integer vitae sceâ—erisque purâ—s Non eget Mauri jaculis nec areâ— Nec venenatis gravida sagittis Fusce pharetra Sive per Syrtes iter aestuosas Sive facturus per inhospitalâ—… Caucasum vel quae loca fabulosus Lambit Hidaspis RELIGION CHAP. XV. Of the Kingdome of God by Nature I. The Proposition of the following contents II. Over whom God is said to rule by nature III. The word of God three-fold Reason Revelation Prophesie IV. The Kingdome of God two-fold Naturall and Prophetique V. The Right whereby God reigns is seated in his omnipotence VI. The same proved from Scripture VII The obligation of yeelding obedience to God proceeds from humane infirmity VIII The Lawes of God in his naturall Kingdome are those which are recited above in the 2. and 3. Chapter IX What Honour and Worship is X. Worship consists either in attributes or in actions XI And there is one sort naturall another arbitrary XII One commanded another voluntary XIII What the end or scope of worship is XIV What the naturall Laws are concerning Gods attributes XV. What the actions are whereby naturally wee doe give worship XVI In Gods naturall Kingdome the City may appoint what worship of God it pleaseth XVII God ruling by nature only the City that is to say that man or Court who under God hath the soveraign authority of the Cioy is the Interpreter of all the Lawes XVIII Certaine doubts removed XIX What Sin is in the naturall Kingdom of God and what Treason against the divine Majesty I. WEE have already in the foregoing Chapters proved both by reason and testimonies of holy Writ that the estate of nature that is to say of absolute liberty such as is theirs who neither govern nor are governed is an Anarchy or hostile state that the precepts whereby to avoyd this state are the Lawes of nature that there can be no civill government without a Soveraigne and that they who have gotten this Soveraigne command must be obey'd simply that is to say in all things which repugne not the Commandments of God There is this one thing only wanting to the complete undestanding of all civill duty that is to know which are the Laws and Commandments of God for else we cannot tell whether that which the civill power commands us be against the Lawes of God or not whence it must necessarily happen that either by too much obedience to the civill authority we become stubborne against the divine Majesty or for feare of sinning against God we runne into disobeditnce against the civill power To avoid both these rocks its necessary to know the Divine Lawes now because the knowledge of the Lawes depends on the knowledge of the Kingdome we must in what followes speak somewhat concerning the Kingdome of God II. The Lord is King the earth may be glad thereof saith the Psalmist Psal 97. v. 1. And againe the same Psalmist Psal 99. v. 1. The Lord is King be the People never so unpatient he sâ—teth betweene the Cherubins â—e the Earth never so unquiet to wit whether men will or not God is THE King over all the Earth nor is he mov'd from his Throne if there be any who deny either his existence or his providence Now although God governe all men so by his power that none can doe any thing which he would not have done yet this to speake properly and accurately is not to reigne for he is sayed to reigne who rules not by acting but speaking that is to say by precepts and threatnings And therefore we account not inanimate nor irrationall bodies for Subjects in the Kingdome of God although they be subordinate to the Divine power because they understand not the commands and threats of God nor yet the Atheists because they beleeve not that there is a God nor yet those who beleeving there is a God doe not yet beleeeve that he rules these Inferiour things for even these although they be govern'd by the power of God yet doe they not acknowledge any of his Commands nor stand in awe of his threats Those onely therefore are suppos'd to belong to Gods Kingdome who acknowledge him to be the Governour of all things and that he hath given his Commands to men and appointed punishments for the transgressours The rest we must not call Subjects but Enemies of God III. But none are said to governe by commands but they who openly declare them to those who are govern'd by them for the Commands of the Rulers are the Lawes of the Rul'd but lawes they are not if not perspicuously publisht in so much as all excuse of Ignorance may be taken away Men indeed publish their Lawes by word or voice neither can they make their will universally knowne any other way But Gods lawes are declar'd after a threefold manner first by the tacit dictates of Right reason next by immediate revelation which is suppos'd to be done either by a supernaturall voice or by a vision or drcame or divine inspiration Thirdly by the voice of one man whom God recommends to the rest as worthy of beliefe by the working of â—rue miracles Now he whole voice God thus makes use of to signifie his will unto others is called a PROPHET These three manners may be term'd the threefold word of God to wit the Rationall word the sensible word and the word of Prophecy To which answer the three nanners whereby we are said to heare God Right reasoning sense and faith Gods sensible word hath come but to few neither hath God spoken to men by Revelation except particularly to some and to diverse diversely neither have any Lawes of his Kingdome beene publisht on this manner unto any people IV. And according to the difference which is between the Rationall word and the word of Prophecy we attribute a two-fold Kingdome unto God Naturall in which he reignes by the dictates of right reason and which is universall over all who acknowledge the Divine power by reason of that rationall nature which is common to all and Propheticall in which he rules also by the word of Prophecy which is peculiar because he hath not given positive Lawes to all men but to his peculiar people and some certaine men elected by him V. God in his naturall Kingdome hath a Right to rule and to punish those who break his Lawes from his sole irresistable power for all Right over others is either from nature or from Contract How the Right of governing
increaseth Gods Honour among those who do so account of it Or if it be commanded to call God by a name which we know not what it signifies or how it can agree with this word God That also must be done for what we do for Honours sake and we know no better if it be taken for a signe of Honour it is a signe of Honour and therefore if we refuse to doe it we refuse the enlarging of Gods Honour The same judgement must be had of all the Attributes and Actions about the meerly rationall Worship of God which may be controverted and dispuâ—ed for though these kind of commands may be sometimes contrary to right reason and therefore sins in them who command them yet are they not against right reason nor sins in Subjects whose right reason in points of Controversie is that which submits its selfe to the reason of the City Lastly if that Man or Councell who hath the Supreme Power command himselfe to be Worshipt with the same Attributes and Actions where with God is to be Worshipt the question is whether we must obey There are many things which may be commonly attributed both to God and Men for even Men may be Praised and Magnified and there are many actions whereby God and Men may be Worshipt But the significations of the Attributes and Actions are onely to be regarded Those Attributes therefore whereby we signify our selves to be of an opinion that there is any man endued with a Soveraignty independent from God or that he is immortall or of inâ—inite power and the like though commanded by Princes yet must they be abstained from as also from those Actions signifying the same as Prayer to the absent to aske those things which God alone can give as Rain and Fair weather to offer him what God can onely accept as Oblations Holocausts or to give a Worship then which a greater cannot be given as Sacrifice for these things seeme to tend to this end that God may not be thought to rule contrary to what was supposed from the beginning but genuflection prostration or any other act of the body whatsoever may be lawfully used even in civill Worship for they may signifie an acknowledgment of the civill power onely for Divine Worship is distinguisht from civill not by the motion placing habit or gesture of the Body but by the declaration of our opinion of him whom we doe Worship as if we cast down our selves before any man with intention of declaring by that Signe that we esteeme him as God it is Divine Worship if we doe the same thing as a Signe of our acknowledgment of the civill Power it is civill Worship Neither is the Divine Worship distinguished from Civill by any action usually understood by by the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof the former marking out the Duty of Servants the latter their Destiny they are words of the same action in degree Truly it is to be done We said in the 14. Article of this Chapter That they who attributed limits to God transgrest the naturall Law concerning Gods Worship now they who worship him in an Image assigne him limits wherefore they doe that which they ought not to doe and this place seemes to contradict the former We must therefore know first that they who are constrained by Authority doe not set God any boonds but they who command them for they who worship unwillingly doe worship in very deed but they either stand or fall there where they are commanded to stand or fall by a lawfull Soveraign Secondly I say it must be done not at all times and every where but on supposition that there is no other rule of worshipping God beside the dictates of humane reason for then the will of the City stands for Reason but in the Kingdome of God by way of Covenant whether old or new where idolatry is expressely forbid though the City commands us to worship thus yet must we not do it which if he shall consider who conceived some repugnancy between this and the 14. Article will surely cease to think so any longer XIX From what hath been said may be gathered that God reigning by the way of naturall reason onely Subjects doe sinne First if they break the morall Laws which are unfolded in the second and third Chapters Secondly if they break the Lawes or commands of the City in those things which pertain to Justice Thirdly if they worship not God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly if they confesse not before men both in words and deeds that there is one God most good most great most blessed the Supreme King of the World and of all worldly Kings that is to say if they doe not worship God This fourth sinne in the naturall Kingdome of God by what hath been said in the foregoing Chapter in the second Article is the sinne of Treason against the Divine Majesty for it is a denying of the Divine Power or Atheisme for sinnes proceed here just as if we should suppose some man to be the Soveraign King who being himselfe absent should rule by his Vice-Roy against whom sure they would transgresse who should not obey his Vice-Roy in all things except he usurpt the Kingdome to himself or would give it to some other but they who should so absolutely obey him as not to admit of this exception might be said to be guilty of Treason CHAP. XVI Of the Kingdome of God under the Old Covenant I. Superstition possessing Forrain Nations God institued the true Religion by the means of Abraham II. By the Covenant between God and Adam all dispute is forbidden concerning the Commands of Surâ—ours III. The manner of the Covenant between God and Abraham IV. In that Covenant is contained an acknowledgement of God not simply but of him who appeared unto Abraham V. The Lawes unto which Abraham was tyed were no other beside those of Nature and the Law of Circumcision VI. Abraham was the Interpreter of the Word of God and of all Lawes among those that belonged to him VII Abrahams subjects could not sinne by obeying him VIII Gods Covenant with the Hebrews at Mount Sinai IX From thence Gods Government took the name of a Kingdome X. What Lawes were by God given to the Jewes XI What the Word of God is and how to be known XII What was held the written Word of God among the Jewes XIII The power of interpreting the Word of God and the supreme civill power were united in Moises while he lived XIV They were also united in the High Priest during the life of Joshuah XV. They were united too in the High Priest untill King Sâ—uls time XVI They were also united in the Kings untill the captivity XVII They were so in the High Priests after the captivity XVIII Deniall of the Divine Providence and Idolatry were the onely Treasons against the Divine Majesty among the Jewes in all things else they ought to obey
submitted themselves to be protected and judged by reason of the great esteem they had of Prophecies The Reason of this thing was because that though penalties were set and Judges appointed in the institution of Gods priestly Kingdome yet the Right of inflicting punishment depended wholly on private judgement and it belonged to a dissolute multitude and each single Person to punish or not to punish according as their private zeale should stirre them up And therefore Moyses by his own command punisht no man with death but when any man was to be put to death one or many stirred up the multitude against him or them by divine authority and saying Thus saith the Lord. Now this was conformable to the nature of Gods peculiar Kingdome For there God reignes indeed where his Lawes are obeyed not for fear of men but for fear of himselfe and truly if men were such as they should be this were an excellent state of civill government but as men are there is a coercive power in which I comprehend both right and might necessary to rule them and therefore also God from the beginning prescribed Lawes by Moyses for the future Kings Deut. 17. vers 14. and Moyses foretold this in his last words to the people saying I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt your selves and turn aside from the way that I have commanded you c. Deut. 31. 29. when therefore according to this prediction there arose another generation who knew not the Lord nor yet the works which he had done for Ispael the children of Israel did evill in the sight of the Lord and served Bâ—laam Iud. 2. 10 11. to wit they cast off Gods government that is to say that of the Priest by whom God ruled and afterward when they were overcome by their enemies and opprest with bondage they looked for Gods will not at the hands of the Priest any more but of the Prophets These therefore actually judged Israel but their obedience was rightly due to the High Priest Although therefore the Priestly Kingdome after the death of Moyses Ioshuah was without power yet was it not without Right Now that the interpretation of Gods word did belong to the same High Priest is manifest by this That God after the Tabernacle the Ark of the Covenant was consecrated spake no more in mount Sinai but in the Tabernacle of the Covenant from the propitiatory which was between the Cherubims whether it was not lawfull for any to aproach except the High Priest If therefore regard be had to the Right of the Kingdome the supreme civill power and the authority of interpreting Gods word were joyned in the High Priest If we consider the fact they were united in the Prophets who judged Israel For as Iudges they had the civill authority as Prophets they interpreted Gods word and thus every way hitherto these two powers continued inseparable XVI Kings being once constituted it s no doubt but the civill authority belonged to them for the Kingdome of God by the way of Priesthood God consenting to the request of the Israelites was ended which Hierom also marks speaking of the books of Samuel Samuel sayes he Eli being dead and Saul slain declares the old Law abolisht Furthermore the Oaths of the new Priesthood and new Soveraignty in Zadok and David do testifie that the Right whereby the Kings did rule was founded in the very concession of the People The Priest could Rightly doe whatsoever every man could rightly doe himselfe for the Israelites granted him a Right to judge of all things and to wage warre for all men in which two are contained all Right whatsoever can be conceived from man to man Our King say they shall judge us and goe out before us and fight our battails 1. Sam. 8. 20. Iudicature therefore belonged to the Kings but to judge is nothing else then by interpreting to apply the facts to the Lawes to them therefore belonged the interpretation of Lawes too and because there was no other written word of God acknowledged beside the Law of Moyses untill the Captivity the authority of interpreting Gods word did also belong to the Kings Nay forasmuch as the word of God must be taken for a Law if there had been another written word beside the Mosaicall Law seeing the interpretation of Lawes belonged to the Kings the interpretation of it must also have belonged to them When the book of Deuteronomie in which the whole Mosaicall Law was contained being a long time lost was found again the Priests indeed asked Counsell of God concerning that book but not by their own authority but by the Commandement of Iosiah and not immediately neither but by the meanes of Holda the Prophetesse whence it appears that the authority of admitting books for the word of God belonged not to the Priest neither yet followes it that that authority belonged to the Prophetesse because others did judge of the Prophets whether they were to be held for true or not for to what end did God give signes and tokens to all the People whereby the true Prophets might be discerned from the false namely the event of predictions and conformity with the Religion â—stablisht by Moyses if they might not use those marks The authority therefore of admitting books for the word of God belonged to the King thus that book of the Law was approved and received again by the authority of King Iosiah as appears by the fourth book of the Kings 22. 23. Chap. where it is reported that he gathered together all the severall degrees of his Kingdome the Elders Priests Prophets and all the people and he read in their cares all the words of the Covenant that is to say he caused that Covenant to be acknowledged for the Mosaicall Covenantâ— that is to say for the word of God and to be again received and confirmed by the Israclites The civill power therefore and the power of discerning Gods word from the word of men and of interpreting Gods word even in the dayes of the Kings was wholly belonging to themselves Prophets were sent not with authority but in the form and by the Right of Proclaimers and Preachers of whom the hearers did judge and if perhaps these were punisht who did not listen to them plainly teaching easie things it doth not thence follow that the Kings were obliged to follow all things which they in Gods name did declare were to be followed for though Iosiab the good King of Iudah were slain because he obeyed not the word of the Lord from the mouth of Neobo King of Aegypt that is to say because he rejected good Counsell though it seemed to come from an enemy yet no man I hope will say that Iosiah was by any bond either of divine or humane Lawes obliged to beleeve Pharoah Neobo King of Aegypt because he said that God had spoken to him But what some man may object against Kings that for want of learning they are seldome
able enough to interpret those books of antiquity in the which Gods word is contained and that for this cause it is not reasonable that this office should depend on their authority he may object as much against the Priests and all mortall men for they may erre and although Priests were better instructed in nature and arts then other men yet Kings are able enough to appoint such interpreters under them and so though Kings did not themselves interpret the word of God yet the office of interpreting them might depend on their authority and they who therefore refuse to yeeld up this authority to Kings because they cannot practise the office it selfe doe as much as if they should say that the authority of teaching Geometry must not depend upon Kings except they themselves were Geometricians We read that Kings have prayed for the People that they have blest the people that they have consecrated the Temple that they have commanded the Priests that they have removed Priests from their office that they have constituted others Sacrifices indeed they have not offered for that was hereditary to Aaron and his sonnes but it is manifest as in Moyses his life time so throughout all ages from King Saul to the captivity of Babylon that the Priesthood was not a Maistry but a Ministry XVII After their returne from Babylonian bondage the Covenant being renewed and sign'd the Priestly Kingdome was restor'd to the same manner it was in from the death of Ioshuah to the beginning of the Kings excepting that it is not expresly set downe that the return'd Jewes did give up the Right of Soveraignty either to Esdras by whose directions they ordred their State or to any other beside God himselfe That reformation seemes rather to be nothing else then the bare promises and vowes of every man to observe those things which were written in the booke of the Law notwithstanding perhaps not by the Peoples intention by virtue of the Covenant which they then renewed for the Covenant was the same with that which was made at Mount Sinai that same state was a Priestly Kingdome that is to say the supreme civill authority and the sacred were united in the Priests Now howsoever through the ambition of those who strove for the Priesthood and by the interposition of forraigne Princes it was so troubled till our Saviour Iesus Christs time that it cannot be understood out of the histories of those times where that authority resided yet it 's plaine that in those times the power of interpreting Gods Word was not severed from the supreme civill power XVIII Out of all this we may easily know how the â—ewes in all times â—om Abraham unto Christ were to behave themselves in the Commands of their Princes for as in Kingdomes meerly humane men must obey a subordinate Magistrate in all things excepting when his Commands containe in them some Treason so in the Kingdome of God the Iâ—weâ— were bound to obey their Princes Abraham Isaac Jacob Moyses the Priest the King every one duâ—…ng â—heir time in all things except when their commands did containe some treason against the Divine Majesty Now treason against the Divine Majesty was first the deniall of â—is divine providence for this was to deny God to be a King by nature next Idolatry or the worship not of other for there is but one God but of strange Gods that is to say a worship though of one God yet under other Titles Attributes and Rites then what were establisht by Abraham and Moyses for this was to deny the God of Abraham to be their King by Covenant made with Abraham and themselves in all other things they were to obey and if a King or Priest having the Soveraign authority had commanded somewhat else to be done which was against the Lawes that had been his sinne and not his subjects whose duty it is not to dispute but to obey the Commands of his superiours Of the Kingdome of God by the new Covenant I. The Prophesies concerning Christs Dignity II. The Prophesies coneerning his Humility and Passion III. That Jesus was THAT CHRIST IV. That the Kingdome of God by the new Covenant was not the Kingdome of Christ as Christ but as God V. That the Kingdome by the new Covenant is heavenly and shall beginne from the day of Judgment VI. That the government of Christ in this world was not a Soveraignty but Counsell or a government by the way of doctrine and perswasion VII What the promises of the new Covenant are on both parts VIII That no Lawes are added by Christ beside the institution of the Sacraments IX Repent ye be baptized keep the Commandements and the like forms of speech are not Lawes X. It pertains to the civill authority to define what the sinne of injustice is XI It pertains to the civill authority to define what conduces to the Peace and defence of the City XII It pertains to the civill authority to judge when need requires what definitions and what inferences are true XIII It belongs to the Office of Christ to teach morally not by the way of speculation but as a Law to forgive sinnes and to teach all things whereof there is no science properly so called XIV A distinction of things temporall from spirituall XV. In how many seveverall sorts the word of God may be taken XVI That all which is contained in holy Scripture belongs not to the Canon of Christian Faith XVII That the word of a lawfull Interpreter of holy Scriptures is the word of God XVIII That the authority of interpreting Scriptures is the same with that of determining controversies of Faith XIX Divers significations of a Church XX. What a Church is to which we attribute Rights Actions and the like personall Capacites XXI A Christian City is the same with a Christian Church XXII Many Cities do not constitute one Church XXIII Who are Ecclesiasticall Persons XXIV That the Election of Ecclesiasticall Persons belongs to the Church their consecration to Pastors XXV That the power of remitting the sinnes of the penitent and retaining those of the impenitent belongs to the Pastors but that of judging concerning repentance belongs to the Church XXVI What Excommunication is and on whom it cannot passe XXVII That the Interpretation of Scripture depends on the authority of the City XXVIII That a Christian city ought to interpret Scriptures by Ecclesiasticall Pastors I. THere are many cleare prophesies extaâ—…t in the old Testament concerning our Saviour Jesus Christ who was to restore the Kingdome of God by a new Covenanâ— partly foretelling his regall Dignity partly his Humility and Passion Among others concerning his Dignity these God blessing Abraham â—akes him a promise of his sonne Isaac and â—ddes And Kings of People shall be of him Gen 17. vers 15. Jacob blessing his sonne Judah The Scepter quoth be shall not depart from Judah Gen. 49. vers 10. Gâ—d to Moyses A Prophet saith he will I raise them up from
c. shall enter into the Kingdome of God and of Christ Ephes 5. ver 5. And elsewhere I charge thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ who shall judge the quick and dead at his appearing and his Kingdome c. 2 Tim. 4. ver 1. And the Lord shall deliver me from every evill worke and will preserve me unto his heavenly Kingdome ver 18. Nor is it to be marvelled at that the same Kingdome is atttibured to them both since both the Father and the Son are the same God and the new Covenant concerning Gods Kingdome is not propounded in the Name of the FATHER but in the name of the FATHER of the SON and of the HOLY-GHOST as of one God V. But the Kingdome of God for restitution whereof CHRIST was sent from God his Father takes not its beginning before his second comming to wit from the day of Judgement when he shall come in Majesty accompanied with his Angels For it is promis'd the Apostles that in the Kingdome of God they shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel Ye which have followed me in the regeneration when the Soune of man shall sit in the Throne of his glory ye also shall sit upon twelve Thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel Mat. 19. ver 28. which is not to be done till the day of judgement CHRIST therefore is not yet in the throne of his Majesty nor is that time when CHRIST was conversant here in the world call'd a Kingdome but a regeneration that is to say a renovation or restitution of the Kingdome of God and a calling of them who were hereafter to be receiv'd into his Kingdome And where it is said When the Son of man shall come in his glory and all the holy Angels with him then shall he set upon the throne of his glory and before him shall be gathered all Nations and he shall separate them one from another as a Shepheard divideth his Sheep from the Goates Mat. 25. ver 31. We may manifestly gather that there will be no locall separation of Gods Subjects from his Enemies but that they shall live mixt together untill CHRISTS second comming which is also confirm'd by the comparison of the Kingdome of heaven with wheat mingled with Darnell and with a net containing all sorts of fish But a multitude of men Enemies and Subjects living promisâ—uously together cannot properly be term'd a Kingdome Besides the Apostles when they askt our Saviour Whether he would at that time when he ascended into heaven restore the Kingdome unto Israel did openly testifie that they then when CHRIST ascended thought the Kingdome of God not to be yet come Farthermore the words of CHRIST My Kingdome is not of this world And I will not drinke c till the Kingdome of God come And God hath not sent his Son into the World to judge the World but that the World through him might be sav'd And If any man heare not my words and keepe them I judge him not for I came not to judge the World but to save the World And Man who made me a judge or divider betweene you And the very Appellation of the Kingdome of Heaven testifies as much The same thing is gathered out of the words of the Prophet Jeremiah speaking of the Kingdome of God by the new Covenant They shall teach no more every man his Neighboâ—r sayiâ—g 〈◊〉 the Lord for they shall all kâ—… me 〈◊〉 the least of them to the greatest of theâ— saith the Lord â—er â—…4 which cannot be understood of a Kingdome in this World The Kingdome of God therefore for the restoring whereof CHRIST came into the world of which the Prophets did Prophesie and of which praying wee say Thy Kingdome come if it must have Subjects locally separated from Enemies if judicature if Majesty according as hath beene foretold shall begin from that time wherein God shall separate the Sheep from the Goats wherein the Apostles shall judge the twelve Tribes of Israel wherein CHRIST shall come in Majesty and glory wherein lastly all men shall so know God that they shall not need to be taught that is to say aâ— CHRIST his second comming or the day of Judgement But if the Kingdome of God were now already restor'd no reason could be rendered why CHRIST having compleated the work for which he was sent should come againe or why we should pray Thy Kingdome come V I. Now although the Kingdome of God by CHRIST to be establisht with a new Covenant were Heavenly we must not therefore thinke that they who beleeving in CHRIST would make that Covenant were not so to be govern'd here on the Earth too as that they should persevere in their faith and obedience promsâ—'d by that Covenant For in vaine had the Kingdome of heaven beene promis'd if we were not to have been led into it but none can be led but those who are directed in the way Moyses when he had instituted the Priestly Kindome himselfe though he were no Priest yet rul'd and conducted the People all the time of their Pâ—regâ—ination untill their entrance into the promis'd Land In the same manner is it our Saviours office whom God in this thing would have like unto Moyses as he was sent from his Father so to governe the future Subjects of his heavenly Kingdome in this life that they might attaine to and enter into that although the Kingdome were not properly his but his Fathers But the government whereby CHRIST rules the faithfull ones in this life is not properly a Kingdome or Dominion but a Pastorall charge or the Right of teaching that is to say God the father gave him not a power to judge of Meâ—m and Tâ—â—m as he doth to the Kings of the Earth noâ— a Coercive power nor legislative but of shewing to the world and teaching them the way and knowledge of Salvation that is to say of Preaching and declaring what they were to doe who would enter into the Kingdome of Heaven That CHRIST had receiv'd no power from his father to judge in Questions of Meâ—m and Tâ—um that is to say in all Questions of Right among those who beleev'd noâ— those words above cited doe sufficiently declare Man who made me a judge or divider betweene you And it is confirm'd by reason for seeing CHRIST was sent to make a Covenant between God and men and no man is obâ—…'d to performe obedience before the â—…ontract be made if he should have judg'd 〈…〉 Questions of Right no man hâ—d been â—…ed to obey his sentence But that the disâ—…erning of Right was not committed to CHRIST in this world neither among the faithfull nor among infidels is apparent in this that that Right without all controversie belongs to Princes as long as it is not by God himselfe derogated from their authority But it is not derogated before the day of Judgement as appeares by the words of Saint Paul speaking of the day of Judgement Then commeth the end when
by the same reason that all the necessary means to Peace be good also and therefore that Modesty Equity Trust Humanity Mercy which we have demonstrated to be necessary to Peace are good Manners or habits that is Vertues The Law therefore in the means to Peace commands also Good Manners or the practise of Vertue And therefore it is call'd Morall XXXII But because men cannot put off this same irrationall appetite whereby they greedily prefer the present good to which by strict consequence many unfore-seenevills doe adhere before the future it happens that though all men doe agree in the commendation of the foresaid vertues yet they disagree still concerning their Nature to wit in what each of them doth consist for as oft as anothers good action displeaseth any man that action hath the name given of some neighbouring vice likewise the bad actions which please them are ever entituled to some Vertue whence it comes to passe that the same Action is prais'd by these and call'd Vertue and dispraised by those and termed vice Neither is there as yet any remedy found by Philosophers for this matter for since they could not observe the goodnesse of actions to consist in this that it was in order to Peace and the evill in this that it related to discord they built a morall Philosophy wholly estranged from the morall Law and unconstant to it self for they would have the nature of vertues seated in a certain kind of mediocrity betweene two extremes and the vices in the extremes themselves which is apparently false For to dare is commended and under the name of fortitude is taken for a vertue although it be an extreme if the cause be approved Also the quantity of a thing given whether it be great or little or between both makes not liberality but the cause of giving it Neither is it injustice if I give any man more of what is mine own then I owe him The Lawes of Nature therefore are the summe of Morall Philosophy whereof I have onely delivered such precepts in this place as appertain to the preservation of our selves against those dangers which arise from discord But there are other precepts of rationall nature from whence spring other vertues for temperance also is a precept of Reason because intemperance tends to sicknesse and death And so fortitude too that is that same faculty of resisting stoutly in present dangers and which are more hardly declined then overcome because it is a means tending to the preservation of him that resists XXXIII But those which we call the Lawes of nature since they are nothing else but certain conclusions understood by Reason of things to be done and omitted but a Law to speak properly and accurately is the speech of him who by Right commands somewhat to others to be done or omitted are not in propriety of speech Lawes as they proceed from nature yet as they are delivered by God in holy Scriptures as we shall see in the Chapter following they are most properly called by the name of Lawes for the sacred Scripture is the speech of God commanding over all things by greatest Right CHAP. IV. That the Law of Nature is a Divine Law I. THE same Law which is Naturall and Morall is also wont to be called Divine nor undeservedly as well because Reason which is the law of Nature is given by God to every man for the rule of his actions as because the precepts of living which are thence derived are the same with those which have been delivered from the divine Majesty for the LAWES of his heavenly Kingdome by our Lord Iesus Christ and his holy Prophets and Apostles What therefore by reasoning we have understood above concerning the law of nature we will endeavour to confirme the same in this Chapter by holy writ II. But first we will shew those places in which it is declared that the Divine Law is seated in right reason Psalm 37. 31 32. Theâ— mouth of the righteous will be exercised in wisdome and his tongue will be talking of Iudgement The law of God is in his heart Jerem. 31. 33. I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts Psal 19. 7. The law of the Lord is an undefiled law converting the soule ver 8. The Commandement of the Lord is pure and giveth light unto the eyes Deuteron 30. 11. This Commandement which I command thee this day it is not hidden from thee neither is it far of c. vers 14. But the word is very nigh unto thee in thy mouth and in thine heart that thou maist doe it Psal 119. 14. Give me understanding and I shall keep thy law vers 105. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my paths Proverbs 9. 10. The knowledge of the holy is understanding John 1. 1. Christ the Law-giver himselfe is called the word vers 9. The same Christ is called the true light that lighteth every man that cometh in the world All which are descriptions of right reason whose dictates we have shewed before are the lawes of nature III. But that which wee set downe for the fundamentall law of nature namely that Peace was to be sought for is also the summe of the divine law will be manifest by these places Rom. 3. 17. Righteousnesse which is the summe of the law is called the way of Peace Psal 85. 10. Righteousnesse and Peace have kissed each other Matth. 5. 9. Blessed are the Peace-makers for they shall be called the children of God And after Saint Paul in his 6. Chapter to the Hebrewes and the last verse had called Christ the Legislator of that law we treat of an High-Priest for ever after the order of Melehizedeck he addes in the following Chapter the first verse This Melchizedeck was King of Salem Priest of the most high God c. vers 2. First being by interpretation King of Righteousnesse and after that also King of Salem which is King of peace Whence it is cleare that Christ the King in his Kingdome placeth Righteousnesse and Peace together Psal 34. 13. Eschue evill and doe good seek peace and ensue it Isaiah 9. 6 7. Unto us a child is born unto us a Sonne is given and the government shall be upon bis shoulder and his name shall be called Wonderfull Counsellour the mighty God the everlasting Father the Prince of peace Isaiah 52. 7. How beautifull upon the mountaines are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings that publisheth peace that bringeth good tidings of good that publisheth salvation that saith unto Sion thy God reigneth Luke 2. 14. In the Nativity of Christ the voice of them that praised God saying Glory be to God on high and in earth peace good will towards men And Isaiah 53. 5. The Gospell is called the chastisement of our peace Isay 59. 8. Righteousnesse is called the way of Peace The way of peace they know not and there is no
him that commands the government is upheld by a double obligation from the Citizens first that which is due to their fellow citizens next that which they owe to their Prince Wherefore no subjects how many soever they be â—an with any Right despoyle him who bears the chiefe Rule of his authority even without his own consent CHAP. VII Of the three kindes of Government Democraty Aristocraty Monarchie I. That there are three kindes of Government onely Democraty Ariristocraty Monarchie II. That Oligarchy is not a diverse form of government distinct from Aristocraty nor Anarchy any Forme at all III. That a Tyranny is not a diverse state from a legitimate Monarchy IV. That there cannot be a mixt state fashioned out of these severall species V. That Democraty except there be certain times and places of meeting prefixt is dissolv'd VI. In a Democraty the intervalls of the times of meeting must be short or the administration of Government during the intervall committed to some one VII In a Democraty particulars Contract with particulars to obey the People the People is oblig'd to no man VIII By what acts Aristocraty is constituted IX In an Aristocraty the Nobles make no Compact neither are they oblig'd to any Citizen or to the whole People X. The Nobles must necessarily have their set meetings XI By what acts Monarchy is constituted XII Monarchy is by Compact oblig'd to none for the Authority it hath receiv'd XIII Monarchy is ever in the readiest capacity to exercise all those acts which are requisite to good Government XIV What kind of sin that is and what sort of men are guilty of it when the City performes not its office towards the Citizens nor the Citizens towards the City XV. A Monarch made without limitation of time hath power to elect his successor XVI Of limited Monarchs XVII A Monarch retaining his Right of Government cannot by any promise whatsoever be conceived to have parted with his Right to the meanes necessary to the exercise of his Authority XVIII How a Citizen is freed from subjection I. VVE have already spoken of a City by institution in its Genus we will now say somewhat of its species As for the difference of Cities it is taken from the difference of the Persons to whom the Supreme Power is committed this power is committed either to one Man or Councell or some one Court consisting of many men Furthermore a Councell of many men consists either of all the Citizens insomuch as every man of them hath a Right to Vote and an interest in the ordering of the greatest affaires if he will himselfe or of a part onely from whence there arise three sorts of Government The one when the Power is in a Councell where every Citizen hath a right to Vote and it is call'd a DEMOCRATY The other when it is in a Councell where not all but some part onely have their suffrages and we call it an ARISTOCRATY The third is that when the Supreme Authority rests onely in one and it is stiled a MONARCHY In the first he that governes is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The PEOPLE In the second the NOBLES In the third the MONARCH II. Now although Ancient Writers of Politiques have introduc'd three other kindes of Government opposite to these to wit Anarchy or confusion to Democraty Oligarchy that is the command of some few to Aristocracy and Tyranny to Monarchy yet are not these three distinct formes of Government but three diverse Titles given by those who were either displeas'd with that present Government or those that bare Rule For men by giving names doe usually not onely signifie the things themselves but also their own affections as love hatred anger and the like whence it happens that what one man calls a Democraty another calls an Anarchy what one counts an Aristocraty another esteemes an Oligarchie and whom one titles a King another stiles him a Tyrant so as we see these names betoken not a diverse kinde of Government but the diverse opinions of the Subjects concerning him who hath the Supreme Power For first who sees not that Anarchy is equally opposite to all the forenam'd Formes For that word signifies that there is no Government at all that is not any City But how is it possible that no City should be the species of a City Farthermore what difference is there between an Oligarchie which signifies the Command of a few or Grandâ—â—s or an Aristocraty which is that of the Prime or Chief Heads more then that men differ so among themselves that the same things seeme not good to all men whence it happens that those persons who by some are look'd on as the best are dy others esteem'd to be the worst of all men III. But men by reason of their passions will very hardly be perswaded that a Kingdome and Tyranny are not diverse kindes of Cities who though they would rather have the City subject to one then many yet doe they not beleeve it to be well govern'd unlesse it accord with their judgements But we must discover by Reason and not by Passion what the difference is between a King and a Tyrant but first they differ not in this That a Tyrant hath the greater power for greater then the Supreme cannot be granted nor in this That one hath a limited power the other not for he whose authority is limited is no King but his Subject that limits him Lastly neither differ they in their manner of acquisition for if in a Democraticall or Aristocraticall Government some one Citizen should by force possesse himself of the Supreme Power if he gain the consent of all the Citizens he becomes a legitimate Monarch if not he is an Enemy not a Tyrant They differ therefore in the sole exercise of their command insomuch as he is said to be a King who governs wel and he aâ—… Tyrant that doth otherwise The case therefore is brought to this passe That a King legitimately constituted in his Government if he seeme to his Subjects to Rule well and to their liking they afford him the appellation of a King if not they count him a Tyrant Wherefore we see a Kingdome and Tyranny are not diverse Formes of Government but one and the self-same Monarch hath the name of a King given him in point of Honour and Reverence to him and of a Tyrant in way of contumely and reproach But what we frequently finde in bookes said against Tyrants took its originall from Greek and Roman Writers whose Government was partly Democraticall and partly Aristocraticall and therefore not Tyrants onely but even Kings were odious to them IV. There are who indeed doe think it necessarily That a Supremâ— Command should be somewhere extant in a City but if it should be in any one either Man or Councell it would follow they say that all the Citizens must be slaves Avoiding this condition they imagine that there may be a certaine Form of Government
In both cases he is free from the Lawes of his former Country because he is tyed to observe those of the latter CHAP. VIII Of the Rights of Lords over their Servants I. What Lord and Servant signifie II. The distinction of Servants into such as upon trust enjoy their naturall liberty or slaves and such as serve being imprison'd or bound in fetters III. The Obligation of a Servant arises from the liberty of body allow'd bim by his Lord. IV. Servants that are bound are not by any Compacts tyed to their Lords V. Servants have no propriety in their goods against their Lord. VI. The Lord may sell his Servant or alienate him by Testament VII The Lord cannot injure his Servant VIII He that is Lord of the Lord is Lord also of his Servants IX By what means Servants are freed X. Dominion over Beasts belongs to the Rights of nature I. IN the two fore-going Chapters we have treated of an institutive or fram'd Government as being that which receives its originall from the consent of many who by Contract and Faith mutually given have oblig'd each other Now followes what may be said concerning a naturall Government which may also be call'd Acquired because it is that which is gotten by power and naturall force But we must know in the first place by what means the Right of Dominion may be gotten over the Persons of men Where such a Right is gotten there is a kind of a little Kingdome for to be a King is nothing else bâ—t to have Dominion over many Persons and thus a Great Family is a Kingdom a Little Kingdome a Family Let us return again to the state of nature and consider men as if but even now sprung out of the earth and suddainly like Mushromes come to full maturity without all kind of engagement to each other There are but three wayes only whereby one can have the Dominion over the Person of anoâ—her whereof the first is if by mutuall Contract made between themselves for Peace self-defences sake they have willingly given up themselves to the Power and Authority of some man or Councel of Men of this we have already spoken The 2d is If a man taken Prisoner in the Wars or overcome or else distrusting his own forces to avoid Death promises the Conquerour or the stronger Party his Service i. e. to do all whatsoever he shall command him in which Contract the good which the vanquisht or inferiour in strength doth receive is the grant of his life which by the Right of War in the naturall stâ—te of men he might have depriv'd him of but the good which he promises is his service and obedience By vertue therefore of this promise there is as absolute service and obedience due from the vanquisht to the vanquisher as possibly can be excepting what repugns the Divine Lawes for he who is oblig'd to obey the Commands of any man before he knowes what he will command him is simply and without any restriction tyed to the performance of all Commands whatsoever Now he that is thus tyed is call'd a SERVANT he to whom he is tyed a LORD Thirdly there is a Right acquir'd over the Person of a Man by Generation of which kind of acquisition somewhat shall be spoken in the following Chapter II. Every one that is taken in the War and hath his life spar'd him is not suppos'd to have Contracted with his Lord for every one is not trusted with so much of his naturall liberty as to be able if he desir'd it either to flie away or quit his service or contrive any mischief to his Lord. And these serve indeed but within Pâ—isons or bound within Irons and therefore they were call'd not by the common name of Servant onely but by the peculiar name of Slave even as now at this day un serviteur and un serf or un esclave have diverse significations The obligation therefore of a Servant to his Lord arisâ—th not from a simple grant of his life but from hence rather That he keeps him not bound or imprison'd for all obligation derives from Contract but where 's no trust there can be no Contract as appears by the 2. Chap. Artic. 9. where a Compact is defin'd to be the promise of him who is trusted There is therefore a confidence and trust which accompanies the benefit of pardon'd life whereby the Lord affords him his corporall liberty so that if no obligation nor bonds of Contract had happen'd he might not onely have made his escape but also have kill'd his Lord who was the preserver of his life IV. Wherefore such kind of Servants aâ— are restrain'd by impâ—isonmâ—nt oâ—bonds are not comprehended in that definition of Servants given above because those serve not for the Contracts sake but to the end they may not suffer and therefore if they flie or kill their Lord they offend not against the Lawes of Nature for to bind any man is a plain signe that the binder supposes him that is bound not to be sufficiently tyed by any other obligation V. The Lord therefore hath no less Dominion over a Servant that is not then over one that is bound for he hath a Supreme Power over both and may say of his Servaâ—t no lesse then of another thing whether animate or inanimate This is mine whence it followes that whatsoever the Servant had before his servitude that afterwards becomes the Lords and whatsoever he hath gotten it was gotten for his Lord for he that can by Right dispose of the Person of a man may surely dispose of all those things which that Person could dispose of There is therefore nothing which the Servant may retaine as his own against the will of his Lord yet hath he by his Lords distribution a propriety and Dominion over his own goods insomuch as one Servant may keep and defend them against the invasion of his fellow Servant in the same manner as hath been shewed before that a subject hath nothing properly his owne against the will of the Supreme Authority but every subject hath a propriety against his fellow subject VI. Since therefore both the Servant himself and all that belongs to him are his Lords and by the Right of Nature every man may dispose of his owne in what manner he pleases the Lord may either sell lay to pledge or by Testament conveigh the Dominion he hath over his Servant according to his own will and pleasure VII Farthermore what hath before been demonstrated concerning subjects in an institutive Government namely that he who hath the Supreme Power can doe his subject no injury is true also concerning Servants because they have subjected their will to the will of the Lord wherefore whatsoever he doth it is done with their wills but no injury can be done to him that willeth it VIII But if it happen that the Lord either by captivity or voluntary subjection doth become a Servant or
be a woman or youth or infant provided that they be fit for affaires who are endued with the publique Offices and charges And that which is said Woe to the land whose King is a childe doth not signifie the condition of a Monarchy to be inferiour to a Popular state but contrariwise that by accident it is the grievance of a Kingdome that the King being a childe it often happens that many by ambition and power intruding themselves into publique counsels the government comes to be administred in a Democraticall manner and that thence arise those infelicities which for the most part accompany the Dominion of the People XVII But it is a manifest sign that the most absolute Monarchy is the best state of government that not onely Kings but even those Cities which are subject to the people or to Nobles give the whole command of warre to one only and that so absolute as nothing can be more wherein by the way this must be noted also that no King can give a Generall greater authority over his army then he himselfe by Right may exercise over all his subjects Monarchy therefore is the best of all governments in the Camps But what else are many Common-wealths then so many Camps strengthened with armes and men against each other whose state because not restrained by any common power howsoever an uncertain peace like a short truce may passe between them is to be accounted for the state of nature which is the state of War XVIII Lastly since it was necessary for the preservation of our selves to be subject to some Man or Councell we cannot on better condition be subject to any then one whose interest depends upon our safety and welfare and this then comes to passe when we are the inheritance of the Ruler for every man of his own accord endeavours the preservation of his inheritance But the Lands and Monies of the Subjects are not onely the Princes Treasure but their bodies and wildy minds which will be easily granted by those who consider at how great rates the Dominion of lesser Countries is valued and how much easier it is for men to procure mony then money men nor doe we readily meet with any example that shewes us when any subject without any default of his own hath by his Prince been despoiled of his life or goods through the sole licenciousnesse of his Authority XIX Hitherto we have compared a Monarchicall with a Popular State we have said nothing of Aristocracy we may conclude of this by what hath been said of those that that which is hereditary and content with the election of Magistrates which transmits its deliberations to some few and those most able which simply imitates the government of Monarchs most and the People least of all is for the Subjects both better and more lasting then the rest CHAP. XI Places and Examples of Scripture of the Rights of Government agreeable to what hath beene said before I. The beginning of institutive Government from the consent of the People II. Judicature and Wars depend on the will of Supreme Commanders III. That they who have the Chief Authority are by Right unpunishable IV. That without a Supreme Power there is no Government but Anarchy V. That from Servants and Sons there is a simple obedience due to their Lords and Parents VI. Absolute Authority proved by most evident places as well of the New as the Old Testament I. VVE have in the 6. Chapter and the 2. Article so derived the Originall of institutive or politicall Government from the consent of the Multitude that it appears they must either all consent or be esteem'd as Enemies Such was the beginning of Gods Government over the Jewes instituted by Moses If ye will obey my voice induced c. Ye shall be unto me a Kingdome of Priests c. And Moses came and called the Elders of the People c. And all the people answered and said All that the Lord hath spoken we will do Exod. 19. ver 5 6 7 8. Such also was the beginning of Moyses his power under God or of his Vicegerency And all the people saw the thunderings and lightenings and the noyse of the Trumpet c. And they said unto Moyses speak thou unto us and we will hear Exod. 20. 18 19. The like beginning also had Sauls Kingdome When yee saw that Nahash King of the children of Ammon came out against you yee said unto me nay but a King shall raign over us when the Lord your God was your King Now therefore behold the King whom yee have chosen and whom yee have desired 1 Sam. 12. 12. But the major part only consenting and not all for there were certain Sons of Belial who said How shall this man save us and they dispised him 1 Sam. 10. 27. those who did not consent were put to death as Enemies And the people said unto Samuel Who is he that said shall Saul reign over us Bring the men that we may put them to death 1 Sam. 11. 22. II. In the same 6. Chapter the 6. and 7. Articles I have shewed that all Judgment and Wars depend upon the will and pleasure of him who beares the Supreme Authority that is to say in a Monarchy on a Monarch or King and this is confirmed by the Peoples owne judgement Wee also will be like all the Nations and our King shall JUDGE us and goe out before us and fight our BATTELS 1 Sam. 〈◊〉 20. And what pertaines to Judgements and all other matters whereof there is any controversie whether they be Good or Evill is confirmed by the testimony of King Solomon Give therefore thy Servant an understanding heart to JUDGE thy People that I may discerne between GOOD and EVILL 1. Kings 3. 9. And that of Absolom There is no man deputed of the King to heare thee 2. Sam. 15. 3. III. That Kings may not be punished by their subjects as hath been shewed above in the sixth Chapter and the twelfth Article King David also confirmes who though Saul sought to stay him did notwithstanding refrain his hand from killing him and forbad Abishai saying Destroy him not for who caâ—â— stretch forth his hand against the Lords Anointed and be innocent 1 Sam. 22. v. 9. And when he had cut off the skirt of his garment The Lord forbid saith he that I should doe this thing unto my Master the Lords Anointed to stretch forth mine hand against him 1 Sam. 24. 7. And commanded the Amalekiâ—e who for his sake had slain Saul to be put to death 2 Sam. 1. 15. IV. That which is said in the 17. Chapter of Judges at the 6. verse In those dayes there was no King in Israel but every man did that which was right in his own eyes as though where there were not a Monarchy there were an Anarchy or confusion of all things may be brought as a testimony to prove the exexcellency of Monarchy above all
among their brethren like unto thee and will put my words in his mouth and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him and it shall come to passe that whosoever will not bearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name I will require it of him Deut. 18. vers 18. Isaias The Lord himselfe shall give thee a signe Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Sonne and shall call his name Emanuel Isai 7. v. 14. The same Prophet Unto us a child is born unto us a Sonne is given and the government shall he upon his shoulders and his name shall be called Wonderfull Counsellour the mighty God the Everlasting Father the Prince of Peace Isai 9. vers 9. And again There shall come forth a Rod out of the stemme of Jesse and a branch shall grow out of his roots the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him c. he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes neither reprove after the hearing of his cares but with righteousnesse shall he â—udge the poor c. and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked Isay 11. vers 1 2 3 4 5. Furthermore in the 51 52 53 54 56 60 61 62. Ch. of the same Isay there is almost nothing else contained but a description of the coming and the works of Christ Jeremias Behold the days come saith the Lord that I will make a new Covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah Jerem. 31. 31. And Baruch This is our God c. Afterward did he shew himselfe upon earth and conversed with men Baruch 3. vers 35 37. Ezekiel I will set up one Shepheard over them and he shall feed them even my Servant David And I will make with them a Covenant of Peace c. Ezek. 24. vers 2 3 25. Daniel I saw in the night visions and behold one like the Sonne of man came with the clouds of heaven and came to the antiâ—ut of dayes and they brought him near before him and there was given him Dominion and Glory and a Kingdome that all People Nations and Languages should serve him his Dominion is an everlasting Dominion c. Dan. 7. vers 13 14. Haggai Yet once it is a little while and I will shake the Heaven and the Earth and the Sea and the drye Land and I will shake all Nations and the desire of all Nations shall come Haggai 2. v. 8. Zachariah Under the type of Joshuah the High Priest I will bring forth my servant the Branch c. Zach. 3. v. 8. And again Behold the man whose name is the Branch Zach. 6. v. 12. And again Rejoyce greatly O Daughter of Sion Shout O Daughter of Jerusalem behold thy King cometh to thee he is just having salvation Zach 9. v. 9. The Jewes moved by these and other Prophesies expected Christ their King to be sent from God who should redeem them and furthermore bear rule over all Nations Yea this Prophesie had spread over the whole Roman Empire which Vespasian too though falsly interpreted in favour of his own enterprises That out of Judea should come he that should have dominion II Now the Prophesies of Christs Humility and Passion amongst others are these Isa 53. v. 4 He hath born our grieses and carried our sorrowes yet we did esteem him stricken smitten of God afflicted and by and by He was appressed he was afflicted yet he opened not his mouth He is brought as a Lamb to the slaughter and as a sheep before her Shearer is dumb so opened he not his mouth c. vers 7. And again He was cut out of the Land of the living for the transgression of my People was be stricken c. vers 8. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great and be shall divide the spoyle with the strong because he hath poured ouâ— hiâ— soule unto death and he was numbred with the transgressours and he 〈…〉 the sinne of many and made intercession for the transgressours vers 12. And that of Zachery He is lowly riding upon an Asse and upon a Cols the foale of an Asse Zach. 9. vers 9. III. In the reign of Tiâ—â—rius Caesar JESUS our Saviour a Galilâ—â—n began to preach the sonne as was supposed of Joseph declaring to the people of the Jewes that the Kingdome of God expected by them was now come and that himselfe was a King that is to say THE CHRIST Explaining the Law choosing twelve Apostles and seventy Disciples after the number of the Princes of the Tribes and seventy Elders according to the pattern of Moyses to the Ministry teaching the way of salvation by himselfe and them purging the Temple doing great signes and fulfilling all those things which the Prophets had foretold of Christ to come That this man hated of the Pharisees whose false doctrine and hypocriticall sanctity he had reproved and by their means of the People accused of unlawfull seeking for the Kingdome and crucified was the true CHRIST and King promised by God and sent from his father to renew the new Covenant between them and God both the Evangelists doe shew describing his Genealogie nativity life doctrine death and resurrection and by comparing the things which he did with those which were foretold of him all Christians doe consent to IV. Now from this That CHRIST was sent from God his Father to make a Covenant between him and the people it is manifest that though Christ were equall to his Father according to his nature yet was he inâ—erior according to the Right of the Kingdom for this office to speak properly was not that of a King but of a Vice-roy such as Moyses his Government was for the Kingdom was not his but his Fathers which CHRIST himselfe signified when he was baptized as a subject and openly profest when he taught his Disciples to pray Our Father Thy Kingdome come c. And when he said I will not drink of the blood of the grape untill that day when I shall drink it new with you in the Kingdome of my Father Mat. 26. veâ—â— 29. And Saint Paul As in Adam all die so in Christ shall all be made alive but every man in his own order Christ the first fruits afterward they that are Christs who beleeved in his coming Then cometh the end when he shall have dâ—livered up the Kingdom to Goa even his Father c. 1. Cor. 15. vers 22 23 24. The same notwithstanding is also called the Kingdome of Christ for both the Mother of the sonnes of Zeâ—â—die petitioned Christ saying Grant that these my two sonnes may fit the one on thy right hand the other on thy left in thy Kingdome Mat. 20. vers 21. And the Theef on the Cross Lord remember when me thou comest into thy Kingdom Luke 23. vers 42. And Saint Paul For this know yee that no whormonger
sometimes false either of which apart is called thinking and also beleeving both together doubting But when our reasons for which we assent to some Proposition derive not from the Proposition it selfe but from the person Propounding whom we esteeme so learned that he is not deceiv'd and we see no reason why he should deceive us our assent because it growes not from any confidence of our owne but from another mans knowledge is called Faith And by the confidence of whom we doe beleeve we are said to trust them or to trust in them By what hath been said the difference appeares first betweene Faith and Profession for that is alwaies joyn'd with inward asseâ—… this not alwayes 〈◊〉 That is an inward perswasion of the minde this an outward obedience Next betweene Faith and Opinion for this depends on our ownâ— reason that on the good esteeme we have of another Lastly betweene Faith and Knowledge for this deliberately takes a proposition broken and chewed that swallowes downe whole and entiâ—â— The explication of words whereby the matter enquir'd after is propounded is conducible to knowledge â—ay the onely way to 〈◊〉 is by deâ—… but this is prejudiciall to Faith for those things which exceede humane capacity and are propounded to beleev'd are never more evident by explication but on the contrary more obscure and harder to be credited And the same thing befalls a man who endeavours to demonstraâ—â— the mysteries of Faith by naturall reason which happens to a sick man who will needs chew before he will swallow his wholsome but biâ—…r Pillâ— whence it comes to passe that he presently brings them up againe which perhaps would otherwise if he had taken them well downe have prov'd his remedy V. We have seene therefore what it is to beleeve But what is it to beleeve in CHRIST Or what Proposition is that which is the object of our Faith in CHRIST For when we say I beleeve in CHRIST we signifie indeed Whom but not What we beleeve Now to beleeve in CHRIST is nothing else but to beleeve that JESUS IS THE CHRIST namely Hee who according to the Prophesies of Moyses and the Prophets of Israel was to come into this world to institute the Kingdome of God And this sufficiently appeares out of the words of CHRIST himselfe to Martha I am saith he the Resurrection and the life HE THAT BELEEVETH IN ME though he were dead yet he shall live and WHOSOEVER LIVETH AND BELEEVETH IN ME shall never dye Beleevest thou this She saith unto him Yea Lord I beleeve that THOU ART THE CHRIST the Soâ— of God which should come into the world John 11. ver 25 26 27. In which words we see that the question BELEEVEST THOU IN ME is expounded by the answer THOU ART THE CHRIST To beleeve in CHRIST therefore is nothing else but to beleeve JESUS HIMSELFE saying that he is THE CHRIST VI. Faith and Obedience both necessarity concurring to Salvation what kinde of Obedience that same is and to whom due hath beene shewed above in the 3. Article But now we must enâ—â—iâ—e what articles of Faith are requisite And * I say that to a Christian there is no other article of Faith requisite as necessary to Salvation but only this THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST But we must distinguish as we have already done before in the 4. Article betweene Faith and Profession A Profession therefore of more articles if they be commanded may be necessary for it is a part of our obedience due to the Lawes but we enquire not now what Obedience but what Faith is necessary to salvation And this is prov'd first out of the scope of the Evangelists which was by the description of our Saviours life to establish this one Article and we shall know that such was the scope and counsell of the Evangelists if we observe but the History it selfe Saint Matthew beginning at his Genealogy shewes that JESUS was of the linage of David borne of a Virgin Chap. 1. that He was adored by the Wise men as King of the Jewes that Herod for the same cause sought to slay him Chap. 2. That his Kingdome was Preacht both by John the Baptist and Himselfe Chap. 3 4. That He taught the Lawes not as the Scribes but as one having authority Chap. 5 6 7. That he cur'd diseases miraculously Chap. 8 9. That He sent his Apostles the Preachers of his Kingdome throughout all the parts of Judea to proclame his Kingdome Chap. 10. That He commanded the Messengers sent from John to enquire whether he were the CHRIST or not to tell him what they had seene namely the miracles which were onely competible with CHRIST Chap. 11. That he prov'd and declar'd his Kingdome to the Pharisees and others by arguments parables and signes Chap. 12. and the following Chapters to the 21. That He maintain'd himselfe to be the Christ against the Pharisees That He was saluted with the title of King when he entred into Jerusalem Chap. 21. That he forewarn'd others of false Christs and That He shewed in Parables what manner of Kingdome his should be Chap. 22 23 24 25. That He was taken and accused for this reason because He said He was a King and that a Title was written on his Crosse THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWES Chap. 26 27. Lastly that after his resurrection He told his Apostles that all power was given unto Him both in Heaven and in Earth Chap. 28. All which tends to this end That we should beleeve Jesus to be the Christ Such therefore was the Scope of Saint Matthew in describing his Gospell but such as his was such also was the rest of the Evangelists which Saint Iohn sets down expresly in the end of his Gospel These things saith He are written that ye may know that Jesus is the Christ the Sonne of the living God Iohn 29. vers 31. I say that to a Christian Although I conceive this assertion to be sufficiently proved by the following reasons yet I thought it worth my labour to make a more aâ—…ple explication of it because I perceive that being somewhat new it may possibly be distastfull to many Divines First therefore when I say this Article That Jesus is the Christ is necessary to salvation I say not that Faith onely is necessary but I require Justice also or that Obedience which is due to the Lawes of God that is to say a Will to live righteously Secondly I deny not but the profession of many Articles provided that that profession be commanded by the Church is also necessary to salvation but seeing Faith is internall Profession externall I say that the former onely is properly Faith the latter a part of Obedience insomuch as that Article alone sufficeth for inward beleefe but is 〈◊〉 sufficient for the outward profession of a Christian Laâ—â—ly even as if I â—ad said that true and inward Râ—pentance of â—innes was onely necessary to salvation yet were it not to be held