that be are ordained of God and that all degrees and orders of men are from Him is as evident For God never design'd such a Parity as some men dream of A thing as contrary to Nature so to all Reason and Religion What is commonly said That all men are born Equal that Innocence knew no Superiour but God and that subjection came in with sin is speciously but very falsly alledg'd That Slavery came in with sin I grant not Civil subjection As there was at first a plain distinction and inequality between Father and Son so the different gifts of men imply it some being born with such Heroick Spirits as if design'd by God to govern others whose stronger abilities of body than of mind seem to have fitted them only for subjection This the Philosopher seems to make the ground of all Civil Government Polit. 1. And indeed without such an Inequality there could be None For every man standing in a Ring or Circle where the roundness takes away all distinction none can be before or after another Every single person shall then be a Monarch and a Subject as 't was in that Cyclopedian Anarchy describ'd by Euripides which the Levelling Doctrine does inevitably introduce as against all reason so against the very interest of the Designers themselves Against Reason as a thing utterly impracticable To reduce all men to the same pitch of Government being as unreasonable a Tyranny as was that of Procrustes who would fit all Bodies to one bed Against the interest of the Designers too who would have all equal indeed besides themselves and I may add Against Religion For Christ allows no such thing and those Higher Powers mention'd by St. Paul clearly imply a distinction And who those Higher Powers were the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same Verse declare The Powers then in being which can be understood of none but the Roman Emperours These were then the Highest Powers on Earth To these St. Peter commands subjection as to the Supream 1 Pet. 2. 13. 1 Pet. 2. 13. These as our Lord tells us did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 20. 25. 2 Cor. 1. 24. that is as the words import exercise such an absolute and supream authority over men as Masters have over their Servants and Lords over their Vassals And so far was Christ from disputing them this their just Authority Matth. 17. 27. that He not only paid them Tribute in token of his own subjection though not without the expence of a Miracle but expresly commands all his to do so 22. 21. Render unto Caesar the word there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Restore to Him his due as if it were not so much a Gift as a Debt Thus did our Lord and thus did his Apostles teach us Nor do we find that any of the Primitive Fathers taught otherwise than to own Kings as supream and depending only upon God 'T is a known saying that of Tertullian Ad Scapulam Colimus Imperatorem ut hominem à Deo secundum solo Deo minorem and that of Optatus to the like purpose Adversus Parmen lib. 3. Supra Imperatorem non est nisi Deus qui fecit Imperatorem I should be infinite if I should cite Fathers to this purpose and I think it needless it being impossible for any to produced one single passage out of the Antient Fathers to the contrary That which some object out of 1 Pet. 2. 13. 1 Pet. 2. 13. That Kings are but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Ordinance of Man signifies no more than this That Kingly Government as all other is exercised by men and design'd for the good of humane society not that it is not of a Divine Institution For the very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there recalls us to God as to its Author and in the very same Verse we find it rais'd to a divine workmanship Submit your selves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords sake Who as he is called the Ordinance of man by St. Peter so is he expresly styl'd the Ordinance of God by St. Paul Rom. 13. 2. But then secondly May not the Priest now under the Gospel claim a Superiority over Princes St. Peter sayes nothing to countenance that claim he strongly implyes the contrary in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 2. 13. but his pretended Successor will by all means have it so 2 Thess 2. 4. He who exalteth himself above all that is called God to whose Mitre all Crowns must vail and that by virtue of a Dabo tibi Claves which Keys he can easily turn into a Sword as oft as he finds occasion to imploy it against Soveraign Princes and then any pretence shall warrant the use of it Moses sayes Aquinas Comment in 1 Pet. 2. 9. Exod. 19. 6. 1 Pet. 2. 9. styles the Jews a Priestly Kingdom Exod. 19. 6. And St. Peter us Christians a Kingly Priesthood 1 Pet. 2. 9. and from thence he strongly concludes that as Judaism did stand through the Kings superiority over Priests which is more by the bye than what Bellarmine and his Associates will grant him so Christianity through the Priests superiority over Kings An argument much like that once made use of to prove the Pope to be above the Emperour because 't is said Gen. 1. 16. That God made a Greater light to rule the day and a lesser to rule the night But to this I shall oppose St. Paul's practice◠and precept His practice we have clear Acts 25. 11. Acts 25. 10 11. where he appeals to Caesar as to the highest Judge on Earth where he sayes he ought to be judged and that as 't is very observable in a matter of spiritual concern as it will plainly appear by comparing v. 19. here with the sixth Verse of Chap. 23. v. 19. Chap. 23. 6. where he tells us that Of the hope and Resurrection of the dead he was called in question This was his practice and he did no more than what he commands all men to do to be subject to the Higher Power that is to that very Roman Emperour to whom he appeals and his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Every Soul includes all whether Apostle Evangelist or Prophet in the Judgement of far better and more Authentick Interpreters than any of the Romanists a Hom. 23. in Rom. St. Chrysostom b In locum Si omnis Anima etiam vestra Quis vos excepit ab Universitate Qui tentat excipere conatur decipere Bernard ad Henr. Senones f. 1. Ep. 42. Greg. M. lib. 2. Epist ad Mauritium 72. Et ad Theodoric Reg. Fancorum lib. 9. Epist 53. Theodoret Theophylact Oecumenius and even St. Bernard too To which I shall add the practice of Gregory the Great himself a Pope but much more mannerly than his successors whose humble Addresses to Mauritius the Emperour whom he styles his Lord as also to
of the Supream Magistrate pro tempore such as were the Dictator and the Tribunes of the People without which it had been impossible for them to preserve peace and order among men This rendred them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 safe and unquestionable 'T is true indeed that there were different sorts of Kings among Heathens according to the different Qualifications of Regal power in several Kingdoms Some though restrained by Laws were yet truly Monarchs not responsible as supream though not absolute Others had the Name and Title of Kings being in effect but more specious and glorious Subjects as was Theseus to the People and the Spartan Kings to the Ephori Cornelius Nepos stiles these latter Cornel. Nepos in Agesilao Nomine magis quam Imperio Reges Titular Kings who exceeding the bounds of their Commission were some of them sentenced and Executed too by the Lacedemonians But the Question here is of Kings not restrained and fetter'd by conditional compacts and agreements but such as for the most part were left free and unbound To cite them to any Tribunal was a thing no Heathen Subjects ever did or indeed thought fit to do * Lib. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joseph Jud. Antiq. lib. 15. c. 4. Herodotus tells us that Cambyses consulting his Senate whether he might lawfully Marry his Sister was answered That they found no such Law as gave a Brother power to take his Sister to Wife But that indeed they met with one which gave their Emperour free liberty to do what he pleased When Herod was cited to appear before M. Anthony to answer for the murder of Aristobulus Anthony said openly That 't was not fit a King should be questioned for what he did as King I remember that Tully being to defend King Deiotarus before Caesar begins his Oration from the strangeness and novelty of the thing telling him that 't was so unusual a thing for a King to be accused that before that time 't was never heard of Ita est inusitatum Regem capitis reum esse ut ante hoc tempus non sit auditum Cic. Orat. pro Deiotaro So sacred were the Persons so unquestionable the Authority of Soveraign Princes over their subjects that whereas 't was held Parricide to affront natural Parents to abuse These was in Heathens account no less than sacriledge No defects in Government could render them obnoxious to Justice nor any crimes though never so enormous dethrone them They were Tuti Imperii Majestate Their Majesty was their Protection and their Character their sanctuary They were above the reach of those Laws which Themselves made Above the Censure and Penalties of them not their Guidance and Direction and since they could dispence with others for the breach of them then much more surely with Themselves who were the Authors of them Nemo unquam Principi leges scripsit Plin. Panegyr And A Te exigetur Ratio nos excusabit Obsequium sayes Pliny Tibi summum rerum judicium Dii cedêre nobis obsequii gloria relicta est M. Terent. apud Tacit. Annal. lib. 6. No Law could punish nor any call Kings to account but the Gods who as they gave them the highest Empire here so did they leave their subjects nothing but the glory of obeying them This was Pliny's and Tacitus his Divinity and much sounder no doubt than what some Christians have of late taught us who will needs Principes in ordinem redigere as Buchanan phrases it like a Pedant as he was Reduce Princes to good order by placing Tutors and Guardians over them to correct them for those imaginary faults which their own fancy mostly creates and then heightens into Crimes De jure Regni apud Scotos Edit Edinburgi 8. 1581. p. 6. By what has been said it appears That as Kingly Government was first founded in jure paterno so that Kings themselves were as absolute and uncontroulable in their Dominions as Fathers were in their Families for some thousands of years A thing ever acknowledged by Heathens and never disputed them but by Christians Bell. Jagurth Impune quidvis facere Id est Regem esse was Salust's definition of a Soveraign Prince and all Heathens admitted it who were so far from thinking it fit to punish him in his person that 't was Treasonable with them to attempt it in Effigie I need not tell you how much the Roman Laws provide for the security of their Emperours and to this purpose I might cite many of them But I forbear and shall only add a little touching that reverence and honour Heathens gave their Kings for the most part indeed too much being superstitious in this point even to excess For I find it held unlawful by the Eastern People especially for private men to gaze too much on their Prince and unsafe to venture into his presence unsent for And therefore we see Esther durst not appear before Ahasuerus till he held out his Golden Scepter to her Esther 5. 2. What esteem Heathen subjects had for their King we learn from Artabanus a Persian speaking thus for himself and the rest of his Country men Apud Xenophont 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We own it as the chiefest of those many good Laws among us to honour and adore our Prince as the lively pourtraicture of the great Preserver of all things An Expression not much differing from that of St. Peter 1 Pet. 2. 17. Fear God Honour the King I might here present you with those lofty Titles of Eternity and Divinity so frequently by the Romans bestowed upon their Emperours and the like more proper for Gods than Men I might tell you how to abuse their very statues was Sacriledge How they sware by the lives of their Princes as Joseph did by Pharaoh's Gen. 42. 16. Gen. 42. 16. per Genium Imperatoris in Tertullian Apologet. c. 32. Such Reverence did Heathens pay unto them as to so many Earthly Gods from whom they saw they derived the inestimable benefits of Peace plenty and Protection The main ground of all the Heathenish Idolatry No marvel then if Pilate who being a Judge 't is presumed could not be ignorant of these things as having been bred and trained up under the Roman discipline and so well acquainted with its Laws and Customes comparing the affronts and indignities these Jews were now offering to one whom he supposed their King with that high respect and honour he knew all other Nations and especially the Roman exprest towards theirs is here so much scandalized at the manner of their Proceedings 'T was a new thing to him to see a King brought before him by his own subjects to receive his sentence Joh. 18. 31. Take ye him and judge him according to your Law says he not Ours We have no such Law whereby to judge much less to put a Prince to death This he charges them home with and they to prevent the suspicion of so soul a crime
the lights of Israel The breath of their Nostrils The Angels of God and The Heads of the People All which speak them supream and inviolable I might also tell you what care God took to secure them from any violent attempts by restraining mens hearts as well as tongues by forbidding them not only publickly to revile Exod. 22. â—… Eccles 10. 20. but so much as to curse them in thought lest a bird of the ayre An Angel of God might tell the matter much less might the hand be lifted up against them For who can stretch forth his hand against the Lords Anointed and be guiltless says David 1 Sam. 26. 9. 1 Sam. 26. 9. If any might have done it then He to be sure as next heir to the Crown declared so by God himself and already Anointed to it and who might now have made way for himself to it by dispatching Saul who was then in his hand and Necessity and Providence our late great Pleas and Pretences might seem to have led him to it But so far was David from doing him any hurt himself that he would not suffer those whose fingers itcht to be doing and who came with a dixit Dominus in their mouths to injure him in the least would not give way to his own Passion or his Souldiers solicitation The only use he makes of it is the tryal of his Patience and the means of his Peace David might as easily have cut off Saul's head as his garment but his Coat only shall be the worse for it not his Person Like Aaron's precious Ointment he descends only to the skirts of his Cloathing nor should his garment have been maim'd for a revenge but only for a monument of his Innocency And yet as not well secured of that the least rent of that garment tears his heart worse 2 Sam. 25. 5. 2 Sam. 25. 5. Now what was it that so becalm'd and smooth'd his own and his Followers Passion but the Holy Oyle that was on Saul's head Timuit Oleum sayes Optatus Saul was the Lords Anointed That was charm enough to tye up David's hand Nor do we find that the Jewish Nation did ever pretend to bring any of their most extravagant Kings into order either by way of force or Justice but left them to stand or fall to their own Master whenever they did such things as were punishable by the Law of Moses Exod. 22. 20. By which Law though every Idolater was to dye without mercy yet where do we find that Manasses An Idolater and a cruel Tyrant to boot was ever punisht for it by the People Or where do we learn that Elias A man of a fiery spirit and zealous for his God did call down fire from Heaven to consume a wicked Ahab as he did his Captains of fifties and their Bands When David had committed Adultery which was mortal too by the Law of Moses Levit 20. 10. Levit. 20. 10. Nathan brings no Authority from the People to punish he only threatens him from God cites him to his Tribunal and David himself well knew he was to stand at no other barr Psal 51. 4. his Tibi soli peccavi secures him from man's and St. Ambrose's Comment on these words puts it out of Question Rex erat He was a King and that was his Protection Rex utique erat nullis Ipse legibus tenebatur quia liberi sunt Reges à vinculis delictorum St. Ambr. Apolog. David c. 10. But though the People had no Authority over their Prince had not the High Priest Jesuites indeed say so but without any ground at all For they cannot shew us any one single act of Jurisdiction exercised by the High Priest over the King whereas we can of the Kings over him 1 King 2. 26 27. of a Solomon on an Abiathar 2 Chron. 26. That which they urge here of Azariah's thrusting out Uzziah out of the Temple is nothing to the purpose That was no act of violence against him for burning Incense to the Lord and so seizing on the Priests Office as is pretended much less any depriving him of his Regal Authority which he enjoyed while he lived Jud. Antiq. lib. 9. c. 11. See 2 Chron. 26. 20. But as Josephus informs us an Advice or Admonition to him to depart hastily out of the Temple God having smitten him with Leprosie and all Lepers being to dwell without the Camp according to the Levitical Law Levit. 13. 46. Levit. 13. 46. 2 King 11. Nor is that other instance of Jehoiada's slaying Athalia any whit more pertinent For Jehoiada who had for some years secured Joas in the Temple from the fury of that Usurpress being Unkle and Protector to Joas in his minority did with the consent of the chief of the Realm only declare him King who was so before as by Right of succession so by Gods own special appointment 2 Chron. 23. 3. 2 Chron. 23. 3. Nor did he cause Athalia to be slain till Joas had been seated on his Royal Throne v. 11. v. 11. so that 't was not so much His as Joas's Act in whose name and by whose Authority He caused it to be done Here then was no act of the High Priests Jurisdiction over the King nor can it be made appear that ever the Sanhedrim The Highest Court of Judicature among the Jews and who had Authority to punish False Prophets with death Deut. 13. 5. did ever pretend a power of punishing Princes so After the Babylonish Captivity indeed nothing was done without their Authority Joseph Ant. Jud. lib. 14. c. 17. Then we read that Herod was cited to appear before them to answer for some misdemeanours he had committed He being but a private Person his Father Antipater alive and Hyrcanus then reigning To. 1. Annal. ad An. Christi 31. num 10. Exercitat lib. 13. c. 5. So false is it what Baronius confidently affirms That all Kings were obnoxious to the Judgement of the Sanhedrim as Casaubon shews Only this must be confest That Kingly power toward the end of the Jewish Monarchy was much restrained by the Senare so that what Aristotle sayes of the Kingdom of Lacedaemonia is applicable to that of Judaea in those times Ar. Pol. lib. 3. c. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Kings could not do all then as once they could when their Power was Absolute and when by the judgement of the best Jewish Doctors it was utterly unlawful to call them to an Account witness that saying of theirs cited out of their Talmud Rex nec judicat nec judicatur which as it was false as to the former part of it as 't is evident from 1 Sam. 8. 5. 1 Sam. 8 5. where the People desire a King that might judge them like all the Nations and what kind of Kings those were I have already shewn you so was it most true as to the latter branch of it That He
was not to be judged of any A piece of Divinity so generally owned and approved by the Jews that it became a Proverbial saying with them Nulla creatura judicat Regem sed Deus Benedictus That this was the doctrine of Moses and the Prophets made good by the example of Holy men and avowed by the ablest and soundest Jewish Doctors These Chief Priests here could not be ignorant of as men who had been trained up in the Schools of the Prophets and in all likelyhood well verst in their own Histories and Practices And therefore to avoid the force of Pilates argument they own his Reason but deny his supposition That Christ was their King We have no King but Caesar My second general Part. The second Part. 'T was impossible in so few words to express more flattery shall I say Blasphemy or Folly Here is hypocrisie in the height in owning Caesar for their King He was so indeed but sore against their wills See Deut. 17. 15. one whom Conquest had forced upon them and whom they mortally hated as an Usurper an Enemy to their Religion and Customes Nor was it possible for them to love him while they held it no better than a sinful Vassalage to stoop to a Heathen Scepter A fancy Judas Gaulonites and Saducus had put into their heads Thus they how their knee to Caesar as they did to Christ with a Hail King of the Jews proclaiming him with their mouths but not with their hearts Aut Caesar aut nullus Caesar must be their King And why not Christ was it not because there was no King in Zion did not these men look for a Messiah And was not this the proper time to expect him when according to Jacobs Prophecy Gen. 49. 10. the Scepter was departed from Juda Had not malice and envy blinded their eyes they might easily have known him by all those marks their Prophets gave them of the Messiah and which were so visible on him Nor was it long before that themselves would have made him their King that they followed him in Triumph into Jerusalem with Hosanna's to this Son of David as loud as now their Crucifiges Joh. 6. 15. and is the note so soon chang'd How much better Pilate a Heathen than they who both owned him here for their King and a little after proclaimed him such by a publick Inscription on his Cross Yet Nolumus hunc is their language and by rejecting Christ what did they but renounce all hope of a deliverer This was their extream Folly and they soon smarted for it when Christ's light yoke was turned into an iron one that galled their necks to purpose when the seditious practices of the furious Zealots lured the Roman Eagles to their Carkasses according to the literal meaning of our Lords prediction Matth. 24. 28. Matth. 24. 28. Thus for their refusing Christ and choosing Caesar for their Lord 't was just with God to plague them by that Caesar That they who rejected the mild Empire of a Lamb should have a devouring Stork set over them and the Venient Romani once their Fear should at last prove their judgement Joh. 11. 48. But besides this there is a great absurdity in their answer here to Pilate an opposition implyed between Christ and Caesar They say Christ is not their King because Caesar is The Anabaptist and the Jew are here so cross that 't is strange one Amsterdam should hold them both The one sayes Christ is our King and therefore not Caesar The other Caesar is our King and therefore not Christ as if these two Christ and Caesar were incompatible 'T was this mistake that rais'd all the Plots against our Saviour This that awakened Herod's jealousie and provok't his rage when he heard of a King of the Jews But his fears were as needless as they were pernicious since He who gave all Earthly Monarchs their Crowns did not come with any design to pluck them off their heads The not well understanding a due subordination between Christs and Caesar's Kingdom is that which has spilt so much blood in the World There may be danger in contrariety but in diversity there is none 'T was a blasphemous inconsequence then in these Chief Priests Caesar is our King therefore not Christ whereas they should rather have argued thus Yea rather Caesar because Christ it being not necessary that Religion and Policy should clash nor at all impossible to Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar 's and yet not deny God the things that are God's We have had and still have such loud cryes as these among us too Of some who will have no King but Him that wears the Triple Crown all the rest must hold theirs precariously from Him Of others who are for a King Jesus owning Him indeed for their King but in as bad a sense as these here disclaim'd him The difference between these two is not very great The One would have blown up their King and the Other did actually cut off his head Their Impiety was much alike but not their Modesty The former being content to contrive his destruction in a Cave while the other had the impudence to murder him on a Scaffold A third sort of People we have seen too who were for a Monarch with these Jews but one of their own setting up For any thing rather than the True One For a Traytor and a Murderer a Barabbas instead of a Christus Domini a Bramble for a Cedar The Chief Priests of those times were mainly for such a one If they were Priests at all for 't is questionable whether many of them were nay 't is certain that some of them were not and that All of them were at best but Jeroboam's Priests of the meanest of the People We know whom these men would once have had for their King Jeroboam was to be the Man One for all Religions but the right one As good a Priest himself as they that would have set him up who carryed a Sword in one hand and a Censer in the other One that set up his Calves in opposition to the God of Israel when he saw he was not for his turn A Phocas who by the murder of his Lord aspir'd to the Diadem and he mist it narrowly the Power he had already got into his hands but God would not suffer him to enjoy the Title and not long after stript him and his ridiculous Successor of all their Theatrical Pomp making them give way to the True Caesar And blessed be God that we can truly say what these Jews here spake falsly We have Caesar for our King Let us then give him those things that belong unto Him that which our Religion commands us to pay Him And what that is is to be our third and last Enquiry The Third Part. The Doctrine and Practice of Christ his Apostles and Primitive Fathers That all Magistracy is from God we learn from Rom. 13. 1. The Powers